[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernha...@... wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Just as an example of the kinds of breaks we cut to people based upon the idea that we should cut them those breaks because they are holy, the person who considered homo- sexuality an abomination is the same guy who had only one strong love relationship in his entire life, with another man. This relationship was so strong and so over- whelming that when the other man died, the person who considered homosexuality an abom- ination reputedly dived into the river he was being buried in and tried to accompany the coffin to the bottom of the river. He then dedicated the rest of his life to the memory of this other man, with photos of him everywhere, giving long, loving talks about his amazing qualities. He trained his own followers to basically worship the other man as he did and bow down to him and revere him as a near-god. But there's nothing gay there, right? Just sayin'... I am NOT suggesting that Maharishi's love for Guru Dev was of the gay variety, merely that the *same* people who see a little some- thing light in the loafers with, say, Batman and Robin and their relationship don't see anything even the *least* bit gay in suppos- edly spiritual relationships in which one man basically becomes devoted to another man to the level of obsession. Many of them don't see this even when the men in question write long rants about the evil nature of women and characterize them as temptresses whose only purpose is to lure otherwise spiritual men away from the path. They don't see it even when the men in ques- tion spend their lives treating women as second-class citizens and don't allow them into their physical presence. Somehow, this behavior becomes something other than fear of women and latent homo- sexuality when it's in a spiritual context. Curious, eh?
[FairfieldLife] Some countries still have a pair of cojones on them
The Bush Six to Be Indicted by Scott Horton from http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-13/the-bush-six-to-be-indicted/ Spanish prosecutors will seek criminal charges against Alberto Gonzales and five high-ranking Bush administration officials for sanctioning torture at Guantánamo. Spanish prosecutors have decided to press forward with a criminal investigation targeting former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and five top associates over their role in the torture of five Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo, several reliable sources close to the investigation have told The Daily Beast. Their decision is expected to be announced on Tuesday before the Spanish central criminal court, the Audencia Nacional, in Madrid. But the decision is likely to raise concerns with the human-rights community on other points: They will seek to have the case referred to a different judge. Both Washington and Madrid appear determined not to allow the pending criminal investigation to get in the way of improved relations. The six defendantsin addition to Gonzales, Federal Appeals Court Judge and former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, University of California law professor and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, former Defense Department general counsel and current Chevron lawyer William J. Haynes II, Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff David Addington, and former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feithare accused of having given the green light to the torture and mistreatment of prisoners held in U.S. detention in the war on terror. The case arises in the context of a pending proceeding before the court involving terrorism charges against five Spaniards formerly held at Guantánamo. A group of human-rights lawyers originally filed a criminal complaint asking the court to look at the possibility of charges against the six American lawyers. Baltasar Garzón Real, the investigating judge, accepted the complaint and referred it to Spanish prosecutors for a view as to whether they would accept the case and press it forward. The evidence provided was more than sufficient to justify a more comprehensive investigation, one of the lawyers associated with the prosecution stated. But prosecutors will also ask that Judge Garzón, an internationally known figure due to his management of the case against former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and other high-profile cases, step aside. The case originally came to Garzón because he presided over efforts to bring terrorism charges against the five Spaniards previously held at Guantánamo. Spanish prosecutors consider it awkward for the same judge to have both the case against former U.S. officials based on the possible torture of the five Spaniards at Guantánamo and the case against those very same Spaniards. A source close to the prosecution also noted that there was concern about the reaction to the case in some parts of the U.S. media, where it had been viewed, incorrectly, as a sort of personal frolic of Judge Garzón. Instead, the prosecutors will ask Garzón to transfer the case to Judge Ismail Moreno, who is currently handling an investigation into kidnapping charges surrounding the CIA's use of facilities as a safe harbor in connection with the seizure of Khalid el-Masri, a German greengrocer who was seized and held at various CIA blacksites for about half a year as a result of mistaken identity. The decision on the transfer will be up to Judge Garzón in the first instance, and he is expected to make a quick ruling. If he denies the request, it may be appealed. Judge Garzón's name grabs headlines in Spain today less because of his involvement in the Gonzales torture case than because of his supervision of the Gürtel affair, in which leading figures of the conservative Partido Popular in Madrid and Valencia are now under investigation or indictment on suspicions of corruptly awarding public-works contracts. Garzón is also the nation's leading counterterrorism judge, responsible for hundreds of investigations targeting Basque terrorist groups, as well as a major recent effort to identify and root out al Qaeda affiliates operating in the Spanish enclaves of North Africa. Announcement of the prosecutor's decision was delayed until after the Easter holiday in order not to interfere with a series of meetings between President Barack Obama and Spanish Prime Minister José Zapatero. However, contrary to a claim contained in an editorial on April 8 in the Wall Street Journal, the Obama State Department has been in steady contact with the Spanish government about the case. Shortly after the case was filed on March 17, chief prosecutor Javier Zaragoza was invited to the U.S. embassy in Madrid to brief members of the embassy staff about the matter. A person in attendance at the meeting described the process as correct and formal. The Spanish prosecutors
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Just as an example of the kinds of breaks we cut to people based upon the idea that we should cut them those breaks because they are holy, the person who considered homo- sexuality an abomination is the same guy who had only one strong love relationship in his entire life, with another man. This relationship was so strong and so over- whelming that when the other man died, the person who considered homosexuality an abom- ination reputedly dived into the river he was being buried in and tried to accompany the coffin to the bottom of the river. He then dedicated the rest of his life to the memory of this other man, with photos of him everywhere, giving long, loving talks about his amazing qualities. He trained his own followers to basically worship the other man as he did and bow down to him and revere him as a near-god. But there's nothing gay there, right? Just sayin'... I am NOT suggesting that Maharishi's love for Guru Dev was of the gay variety, merely that the *same* people who see a little some- thing light in the loafers with, say, Batman and Robin and their relationship don't see anything even the *least* bit gay in suppos- edly spiritual relationships in which one man basically becomes devoted to another man to the level of obsession. Many of them don't see this even when the men in question write long rants about the evil nature of women and characterize them as temptresses whose only purpose is to lure otherwise spiritual men away from the path. They don't see it even when the men in ques- tion spend their lives treating women as second-class citizens and don't allow them into their physical presence. Somehow, this behavior becomes something other than fear of women and latent homo- sexuality when it's in a spiritual context. Curious, eh? It all depends on what energy is activated... Whether you believe in the system of 'Chakras' or not, We all can identify with feeling of the 'Heart'... Feelings of will in the gut, fear and ambition. Feeling of pleasure in the sexual regions, feeling of creative play. Feelings of feeling comfortable, feeling 'at home' when we are grounded or not. Feelings of speaking the truth, or hiding something, lieing. Feeling of 'seeing' spiritually from the soul. When someone is wanting to not concentrate so much on pleasure, then one would not want to put much attention on things that would tempt one. Our culture is completely based on temptations. In India, things were not so materialistic, so it was more natural there, to strive for things, not of the flesh. I can feel love and closeness to another man, but won't have sex with him. It just doesn't feel right... It feels like I would have to give into lust, pure lust. People on a spiritual path, attempt to avoid, lust for lusts sake. Now, this also applies to heterosexual relationsips. Most are based on lust. A few transcend that through time, but not many. This is the way it is. R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
Imagine this lecturer giving us an analysis of the TMO. It would be about as far left on his spectrum as you could get. An extreme oligarchy with Bevan as de-facto ruler and Nader as puppet figurehead, and the Rajas obediently following the command of a small clique centered around Bevan, though Hagelin Nader do try to exert a moderating influence. The TMO is facism in a petri dish, it has most of the characteristics of facsism but neutered by the mellowing influence of TM. You can prod it, poke it and analyze it without being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night to be shot. If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@... wrote: Imagine this lecturer giving us an analysis of the TMO. It would be about as far left on his spectrum as you could get. An extreme oligarchy with Bevan as de-facto ruler and Nader as puppet figurehead, and the Rajas obediently following the command of a small clique centered around Bevan, though Hagelin Nader do try to exert a moderating influence. The TMO is facism in a petri dish, it has most of the characteristics of facsism but neutered by the mellowing influence of TM. You can prod it, poke it and analyze it without being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night to be shot. If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out. Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. It is interesting to note, that on day of the announcement that Maharishi had passed, was on the day that Barack Obama sailed on 'Super Tuesday'... The torch had been passed... R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Beautifull Photos from the Brahmasthan of India
Nice, but it's not really $200 million worth of buildings is it? My guess is that the current emphasis on showing pictures and videos from India is a way to distract donors from the fact that most of the money sent to India in the last 20 years has gone missing. I know that Harris is trying to get the Indian finances back under control and that they took out a court injunction to freeze various accounts on the day after Maharishi's funeral. But a better way to do it would be to have a full disclosure of all the financial dealings of the last 20 years, and if it comes to it put some people behind bars.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Happiness is relative
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: In Finland, Sweden and Denmark, traditions include egg painting and small children dressed as witches collecting candy door-to-door, in exchange for decorated pussy willows. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter Hugo wrote: Nah, easter is a pagan festival of spring rebirth and fertility. The early christians moved their festival over it to stop all that dancing round maypoles and general friskiness. Can you cite any evidence that Easter is a 'pagan festival of spring rebirth', Hugo? From what I've read, Easter is part of the Jewish Passover rite. Yeah, it's obvious. Bunny rabbits, eggs. Come on it's got nothing to do with resurrection its all fertility. And as for maypoles! http://www.religioustolerance.org/easter1.htm http://www.holidays.net/easter/story.htm
[FairfieldLife] Re: Miracle star seen worldwide
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@... wrote: Okay, I'm going to check this out tonight. Nabs, they say its due west a few hours after sunset? Is that correct? And, by the way, I will get checked before searching for the star ;-) --- On Mon, 4/13/09, nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Miracle star seen worldwide To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, April 13, 2009, 8:15 AM http://tinyurl.com/dytpyw I don't know where it is seen in the USA at the moment, but in Europe it's the brightest star, should be very difficult to find.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Lightness of Spirit'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Of course no one has a 100% one dosha constitution. If you were 100% pitta you would just be a flame and would have burned out by now. You're vakriti is more likely very vata and bouncing off the ceiling not the foam on the floor. ;-) Everyone has all the doshas, but a few people have one that is so dominant the others are difficult to find. But you are right, offcourse they are there.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Miracle star seen worldwide
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Okay, I'm going to check this out tonight. Nabs, they say its due west a few hours after sunset? Is that correct? And, by the way, I will get checked before searching for the star ;-) --- On Mon, 4/13/09, nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Miracle star seen worldwide To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, April 13, 2009, 8:15 AM http://tinyurl.com/dytpyw I don't know where it is seen in the USA at the moment, but in Europe it's the brightest star, should be very difficult to find. Should n o t be difficult to find...
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernha...@... wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Homosexuality was discussed on a course I was on and the teacher said the official TM position was that being gay was due to stress, and in an enlightened society it therefore wouldn't occur. Stress can mean anything to someone steeped in SCI, but they were quick to point out that it's the way the world is and the gays aren't to blame(!) Seems to imply that they thought it wasn't a stress picked up in this life or that they weren't really thinking at all. Sounded to me like a way to hedge your bets and (hopefully) avoid offending anyone. This must mean that the gay guys I knew on purusha wouldn't ever get enlightenened, according to the prevailing view, until they had transcended their sexuality. The path is indeed long and winding!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@... wrote: Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. It is interesting to note, that on day of the announcement that Maharishi had passed, was on the day that Barack Obama sailed on 'Super Tuesday'... The torch had been passed... R.G. People re-incarnating from previous lives as Nazis? This kind of analysis is a complete waste of time, a very poor substitute for careful thinking. It presupposes that some people are inherently evil, but it fact research has shown that in the right circumstances pretty much everyone can be persuaded to do bad things. It's true that some people do find it easier than others to take on the role of camp komandant and get a kick out of ordering people around even to the point of having them done away with. But it's very much the nature of the collective morality of the group that allows that to happen. Most evil things aren't done by evil people, they're mostly done by clerks and minor functionaries, minuted by committee, stamped and approved by the relevant authorities. I think a more correct way of seeing things is to notice that as soon as a group of people develop the notion that their cause is so right that everyday ethics and simple compassion can be abandoned then they start down the road to unpleasant extremism. It's something that has been played out so many times in the course of history there's almost a standard script with established roles in the play. North Korea, the Bush administration, medieval Catholicism, the Taleban, Zionism, Nazism, Russian Communism, or the milder and more contained present structure of the TMO. They all share the idea that their cause is so right that it's OK to trample on the heads of other people. The thing to watch out for is any sign of harshness in the way a group deals with its members or dissenters. That seems to be pretty much diagnostic of the disease, and it's a symptom the TMO certainly has. But the underlying cause is lack of humility. These things aren't due to Demi-Gods who need to clear up samsaras. It's just a plain consequence of how human nature works in groups. Recent history, and certainly most the 20th century has been about learning how to recognize and deal with this unpleasant facet of human society. It's interesting to note that countries that have recently escaped from that kind of thing are quicker to recognise it and react against it than countries who never really been through it. I.e. the reaction of the Berlin audience to Schiffgens or the Spanish courts taking on the legal brains behind the Bush policy of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Or even more mildly, Goran (from ex-Yugoslavia) taking on John Konhaus. Any group with a devoted following of people who believe their cause is right and who have a strong leader who will allow no disaggreement will end up in trouble. There's no need to use demi-gods to explain things. I shouldn't have used the word 'demi-god'... My point was, that if some people were traumatized in different ways, during the Nazi Era, then you could see how the experience might effect them in this life-time. For example, some people feel victimized, others feel superior and 'entitled. This is all I meant. R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. It is interesting to note, that on day of the announcement that Maharishi had passed, was on the day that Barack Obama sailed on 'Super Tuesday'... The torch had been passed... R.G. People re-incarnating from previous lives as Nazis? This kind of analysis is a complete waste of time, a very poor substitute for careful thinking. It presupposes that some people are inherently evil, but it fact research has shown that in the right circumstances pretty much everyone can be persuaded to do bad things. It's true that some people do find it easier than others to take on the role of camp komandant and get a kick out of ordering people around even to the point of having them done away with. But it's very much the nature of the collective morality of the group that allows that to happen. Most evil things aren't done by evil people, they're mostly done by clerks and minor functionaries, minuted by committee, stamped and approved by the relevant authorities. I think a more correct way of seeing things is to notice that as soon as a group of people develop the notion that their cause is so right that everyday ethics and simple compassion can be abandoned then they start down the road to unpleasant extremism. It's something that has been played out so many times in the course of history there's almost a standard script with established roles in the play. North Korea, the Bush administration, medieval Catholicism, the Taleban, Zionism, Nazism, Russian Communism, or the milder and more contained present structure of the TMO. They all share the idea that their cause is so right that it's OK to trample on the heads of other people. The thing to watch out for is any sign of harshness in the way a group deals with its members or dissenters. That seems to be pretty much diagnostic of the disease, and it's a symptom the TMO certainly has. But the underlying cause is lack of humility. These things aren't due to Demi-Gods who need to clear up samsaras. It's just a plain consequence of how human nature works in groups. Recent history, and certainly most the 20th century has been about learning how to recognize and deal with this unpleasant facet of human society. It's interesting to note that countries that have recently escaped from that kind of thing are quicker to recognise it and react against it than countries who never really been through it. I.e. the reaction of the Berlin audience to Schiffgens or the Spanish courts taking on the legal brains behind the Bush policy of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Or even more mildly, Goran (from ex-Yugoslavia) taking on John Konhaus. Any group with a devoted following of people who believe their cause is right and who have a strong leader who will allow no disaggreement will end up in trouble. There's no need to use demi-gods to explain things.
[FairfieldLife] 'Feel the Passion/Creating Unity Consciousness'
Here is a technique, which can be used to negate differences and create Unity. Focus on the Passion. In deep meditation, notice how passion is the same, when viewed from it's own level In stillness, feel the Iranian's passion for nukes. Feel the Israel's passion to survive.. Feel the Palestinians passion to survive. Feel the Dems passion for Obama. Feel Maharishi's passion for Guru Dev. Feel the prisoners passion to get free. Feel the passion, in every circumstance as the same. After feeling how all passion on it's own level is the same. Feel compassion for how passion is misused to defend and divide. R.G.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:54 AM, Robert wrote: Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. Seeded meditation does not remove samskaras, let alone strong samskaras; it merely plants nicer seeds to (hopefully) drown out the weeds.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: Imagine this lecturer giving us an analysis of the TMO. It would be about as far left on his spectrum as you could get. An extreme oligarchy with Bevan as de-facto ruler and Nader as puppet figurehead, and the Rajas obediently following the command of a small clique centered around Bevan, though Hagelin Nader do try to exert a moderating influence. Can't argue with this. The TMO is facism in a petri dish, it has most of the characteristics of facsism but neutered by the mellowing influence of TM. You can prod it, poke it and analyze it without being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night to be shot. I would characterize it more as a royal society with overtones of fascism, very similar to the society portrayed in the new American TV series Kings. The difference there is that the King really does have the power to have you dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night and shot, and does just that. And so far, there is no hereditary inher- itance of the Kingship. If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out. You mean like the barbed wire around the pundit compound in Fairfield? :-) Why do they need barbed wire? Perhaps that is because of the fundies in town or some other deranged person(s), who might be motivated in a passionate way, to do harm to a peaceful visitor from India. Safety First! It's a shame Fairfield, Iowa, USA...still has this dilemma. R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:54 AM, Robert wrote: Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. Seeded meditation does not remove samskaras, let alone strong samskaras; it merely plants nicer seeds to (hopefully) drown out the weeds. What do you feel would: Remove samskaras, especially 'strong' samskaras? R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Homosexuality was discussed on a course I was on and the teacher said the official TM position was that being gay was due to stress, and in an enlightened society it therefore wouldn't occur. Stress can mean anything to someone steeped in SCI, but they were quick to point out that it's the way the world is and the gays aren't to blame(!) Seems to imply that they thought it wasn't a stress picked up in this life or that they weren't really thinking at all. Sounded to me like a way to hedge your bets and (hopefully) avoid offending anyone. This must mean that the gay guys I knew on purusha wouldn't ever get enlightenened, according to the prevailing view, until they had transcended their sexuality. The path is indeed long and winding! The Clintonian way: Don't Ask, Don't Tell...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Some countries still have a pair of cojones on them
How embarrassing can you get? Our government, not Spain, should be the one bringing charges against Bush's former officials. But that presents an interesting dilemma for Obama. The same guys responsible for crafting the Military Commissions Act, which allowed enhanced interrogation techniques also handed Obama the unitary power of the executive. Recently, Obama not only signaled his intention to use this power, but extend it by claiming state secrets on anything damn thing he pleases. Remember when he voted to pass FISA to protect the telecommunication industry from ever having to testify in court (Hillary voted against it) and the Senate didn't even need his vote to pass it? Do you remember when he promised to make it right when he became president? Well, LOL, ANYTHING related to FISA and the ability of the government to invade your privacy is now full steam ahead. It's worse than Bush. Last night I watched MSNBC's Obama toady, Rachel Maddow, become a puddle of disappointment in her interview with Michael Isikoff about the fight brewing between the DOJ and U.S. intel officials over the release of the release of Bush-era interrogation memos and Obama's apparent heel dragging to restore habeas corpus. Obama made a big deal about it on the campaign trail but now there are the continuing efforts by the Obama DOJ to put forward the same legal arguments used by the Bush administration to deny trials to prisoners kept at Bagram, Afghanistan. Obama closed Gitmo, great, but he is now open for business at Bagram, even further from scrutiny where he can continue Bush's program of extraordinary rendition. Snatch anyone from anywhere at anytime, and lock them up indefinitely without any charges and forget about restoring habeas corpus. Thursday, April 16, will be a decisive moment for the Obama administration and another test of his promise for transparency in government: Brennan is a former senior CIA official who was once considered by Obama for agency director but withdrew his name late last year after public criticism that he was too close to past officials involved in Bush administration decisions. Brennan, who now oversees intelligence issues at the National Security Council, argued that release of the memos could embarrass foreign intelligence services who cooperated with the CIA, either by participating in overseas extraordinary renditions of high-level detainees or housing them in overseas black site prisons. Brennan succeeded in persuading CIA Director Leon Panetta to become engaged in his efforts to block release, according to the senior official. Their joint arguments stalled plans to declassify the memos even though White House counsel Gregory Craig had already signed off on Holder's recommendation that they should be disclosed, according to an official and another government source familiar with the debate. No final decision has been made, and it is likely Obama will have to resolve the matter, according to the sources who spoke to NEWSWEEK. The continued internal debate explains the Justice Department's decision late Thursday to ask a federal judge for another two-week delay (until April 16) to file a final response in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union seeking the release of the memos. The ACLU agreed to the two-week delay only after Justice officials represented that high-level Government officials will consider for possible release the three 2005 memos as well as another Aug. 1, 2002, memo on torture, that has long been sought by congressional committees and members of Congress, according to a motion filed by Justice lawyers with U.S. Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in New York, who is overseeing the case. Read more: http://www.newsweek.com/id/192314
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@... wrote: Imagine this lecturer giving us an analysis of the TMO. It would be about as far left on his spectrum as you could get. An extreme oligarchy with Bevan as de-facto ruler and Nader as puppet figurehead, and the Rajas obediently following the command of a small clique centered around Bevan, though Hagelin Nader do try to exert a moderating influence. Can't argue with this. The TMO is facism in a petri dish, it has most of the characteristics of facsism but neutered by the mellowing influence of TM. You can prod it, poke it and analyze it without being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night to be shot. I would characterize it more as a royal society with overtones of fascism, very similar to the society portrayed in the new American TV series Kings. The difference there is that the King really does have the power to have you dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night and shot, and does just that. And so far, there is no hereditary inher- itance of the Kingship. If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out. You mean like the barbed wire around the pundit compound in Fairfield? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out. You mean like the barbed wire around the pundit compound in Fairfield? :-) Why do they need barbed wire? Perhaps that is because of the fundies in town or some other deranged person(s), who might be motivated in a passionate way, to do harm to a peaceful visitor from India. Safety First! It's a shame Fairfield, Iowa, USA...still has this dilemma. Thank you for providing another example of how completely wrong I was yesterday to suggest that there might just be a them vs. us mentality associated with TM True Believerism. :-) Robert, this has been discussed here before. It's pretty clear that the fences were built to keep the pundits in, not anyone else out. Why some people within the TMO obviously felt that the fences were necessary is another question, one that has not been adequately answered. Has it occurred to you that your rationali- zation for the presence of the fences doesn't place much faith in the power of the ME? Or did I miss the part of Maharishi's talks on invincibility in which he mentioned the use of barbed wire? :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
At any rate accusation of child abuse and sexual misconduct were rife at NOIDA. - Original Message - From: Robert babajii...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 6:40 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Homosexuality was discussed on a course I was on and the teacher said the official TM position was that being gay was due to stress, and in an enlightened society it therefore wouldn't occur. Stress can mean anything to someone steeped in SCI, but they were quick to point out that it's the way the world is and the gays aren't to blame(!) Seems to imply that they thought it wasn't a stress picked up in this life or that they weren't really thinking at all. Sounded to me like a way to hedge your bets and (hopefully) avoid offending anyone. This must mean that the gay guys I knew on purusha wouldn't ever get enlightenened, according to the prevailing view, until they had transcended their sexuality. The path is indeed long and winding! The Clintonian way: Don't Ask, Don't Tell... 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: 900 Pandits
You miss the point. My point was really that - does it matter what sort of personal ethics ones pundits have? As far as the outcome of theor yajna? - Original Message - From: sparaig lengli...@cox.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 8:58 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kirk kirk_bernha...@... wrote: Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Not to be a punk or anything, but how amny celibate male religious types of ALL persuasions, including Japanese Zen Buddhists, do you think indulge in that kind of thing? THe rationale for the Japanese is that its relations with WOMEN that are a no-no not relations with men, and it was traditional for the Zen monastaries to room the accolytes across the hall from teh senior monks for easier access. Of course, Tibetan Buddhists, and Indian Hindu monks would NEVER indulge in that kind of abhorrent goings on... just the Japanese Zen types and the Catholic types, but not Tibetan or Hindu, nosireee. L. 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: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
On Apr 14, 2009, at 7:35 AM, Robert wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:54 AM, Robert wrote: Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. Seeded meditation does not remove samskaras, let alone strong samskaras; it merely plants nicer seeds to (hopefully) drown out the weeds. What do you feel would: Remove samskaras, especially 'strong' samskaras? Asamprajnata-samadhi is the smashan (the burning ground) of the samskaras in the yoga tradition.
[FairfieldLife] The Role Of Paranoia And Persecution In The Creation Of Religion
Having rapped a little yesterday about the relationship between True Believerism and self pity, I'm going to extend that today by speculating about the possible role of the us vs. them mentality and its accom- panying paranoia and fear of persecution in the creation of religion. So shoot me. Or join in, if the discussion interests you. A quick glance at the major religions on planet Earth shows an almost one-to-one relationship between the sects or cults that grew into major religions and persecution. Christianity is a no-brainer; we all know about the lions in the Colusseum and the crucifictions and all that. Much of the Old Testament is a history of the persecution of the Jews by their neighbors and by competing religions or belief systems. Islam would probably never have become a major religion if Mohammed had not been forced to take up arms to defend his country from invasion and perceived persecution of the faithful. In India, Hindus have been warring against invading religious and social groups since pretty much Vedic Day One. Even Buddhists suffered persecution, largely at the hands of Hindus, until the Hindus finally figured out that it was smarter to co-opt Buddha by calling him one of the incarnations of Vishnu than it was to try to demonize him and his followers. :-) In more modern times, think the Protestant Reformation. My point is simply that if you look at history, the real or imagined fear of persecution seems intertwined with a group of people with a shared belief system coalescing into a religion. And WHY might that be? Duh. Persecution builds FAITH. If you fear -- or actually experience -- people trying to either talk you out of the things you believe in or burn you at the stake for believing in them, that tends to *bolster* the faith. It *reinforces* the sense of elitism or us vs. them in the True Believer. One of the reasons groups *create* a sense of identification with the group and us vs. them in the first place is because it tends to enhance faith. The more that the follower identifies with the group, the stronger their faith tends to become. Now add actual *persecution* to this (or the threat of it, or the imagined threat of it), and the faith is even more bolstered. True Believers start to think about defending the faith, because it is under attack. They start thinking in terms of being spiritual warriors, fighting against the enemies of the faith. In extreme cases, they start to think of martyrdom, and of making the ultimate sacrifice for the faith. And in such extreme cases, WHO is it who are named the saints of the religion? Duh. The ones who make the ultimate sacrifice. Defending the faith and martyrdom for the faith are actually pedestal- ized and presented to the other faithful as the highest path. I'm just rappin' about this to start a conver- sation, if anyone is interested. I'm not trying to sell you anything or say anything that isn't OBVIOUS to anyone who has studied the history of religion. I just think that it's a good thing to keep in mind whenever the subject turns to True Believerism and the various paranoias that we sometimes see associated with it. It's NOT that they are unique to TM or the TMO. They are IMO part and parcel of almost ALL spiritual movements that are starting to make the transition from minor sect to religion.
[FairfieldLife] If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be? Take a pick and justify it. Advaitan? Buddhist? TMer? Christian? Jewish? Hindu? Taoist? Or? What I'm trying to get at with this question is the identifying of which ism comes closest to one's best fit -- emotionally, intellectually, socially. I don't find it to be a trivial question for me. I may have an intellectual cynicism that tosses all systems out with the bath water, but emotionally, I resonate with the feel of some systems far more easily than others. Socially, being raised as an American, I have built in a certain automatic resonance with those systems that have been presented to me by Media as American, as opposed to the way Media has presented non-Christian systems. And these various approaches to this question seem to each be able to hold their ground in my inner debate. I like Lutheranism as my calling card if I'm to fit in general society such that I'm not immediately pegged as totally out there. I could be safely invisible, and the other aspects of my presentation to society in general would not be skewed by knee-jerks. When I was a TM TB, this was not the case. I like Buddhism emotionally speaking because compassion is its middle name, and if ever I had a prevailing emotion, it's the feeling that others are in the same lifeboat I'm in. But, Buddism is a long hard slog to me when I consider its many processes that, to my way of thinking, MUST be overseen by someone who's already got the tee shirt, or, like a TMer who doesn't get checked, one's practice might easily get off track and one drifts from being a Buddhist. And, I am not a person to bend a knee to the mind of another these days. I was for Maharishi, but the sting of that failure still throbs. I think the TMO kicked the wind out of my heart -- commitment to another system just doesn't seem like it's in the cards for me. I like Advaita, intellectually -- it seems to have the best explanations for how I can escape attachment by bringing me to clarity about Identity and identification. But, the adherents of Advaita leave me cold with how they look down their noses at, say, well, compassion. Yes, ultimately, even compassion is a drug, but if I ever got enlightened, I sure would wish that compassion was an easily available process of the mind I witness. You? Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
Most evil things aren't done by evil people, they're mostly done by clerks and minor functionaries, minuted by committee, stamped and approved by the relevant authorities. Well said, Guy, and important to realize. ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@... wrote: Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. It is interesting to note, that on day of the announcement that Maharishi had passed, was on the day that Barack Obama sailed on 'Super Tuesday'... The torch had been passed... R.G. People re-incarnating from previous lives as Nazis? This kind of analysis is a complete waste of time, a very poor substitute for careful thinking. It presupposes that some people are inherently evil, but it fact research has shown that in the right circumstances pretty much everyone can be persuaded to do bad things. It's true that some people do find it easier than others to take on the role of camp komandant and get a kick out of ordering people around even to the point of having them done away with. But it's very much the nature of the collective morality of the group that allows that to happen. Most evil things aren't done by evil people, they're mostly done by clerks and minor functionaries, minuted by committee, stamped and approved by the relevant authorities. I think a more correct way of seeing things is to notice that as soon as a group of people develop the notion that their cause is so right that everyday ethics and simple compassion can be abandoned then they start down the road to unpleasant extremism. It's something that has been played out so many times in the course of history there's almost a standard script with established roles in the play. North Korea, the Bush administration, medieval Catholicism, the Taleban, Zionism, Nazism, Russian Communism, or the milder and more contained present structure of the TMO. They all share the idea that their cause is so right that it's OK to trample on the heads of other people. The thing to watch out for is any sign of harshness in the way a group deals with its members or dissenters. That seems to be pretty much diagnostic of the disease, and it's a symptom the TMO certainly has. But the underlying cause is lack of humility. These things aren't due to Demi-Gods who need to clear up samsaras. It's just a plain consequence of how human nature works in groups. Recent history, and certainly most the 20th century has been about learning how to recognize and deal with this unpleasant facet of human society. It's interesting to note that countries that have recently escaped from that kind of thing are quicker to recognise it and react against it than countries who never really been through it. I.e. the reaction of the Berlin audience to Schiffgens or the Spanish courts taking on the legal brains behind the Bush policy of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Or even more mildly, Goran (from ex-Yugoslavia) taking on John Konhaus. Any group with a devoted following of people who believe their cause is right and who have a strong leader who will allow no disaggreement will end up in trouble. There's no need to use demi-gods to explain things.
[FairfieldLife] Susan Boyle
Arhata gave us a link to this, but I had to do so also. If you haven't seen the latest viral youtube hit, grab a hanky and click this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY Frankly, I've cried several times considering Susan Boyle's life. Yeah, I'm crying for me, but click the link and see if there's not a Susan Boyle inside you too that leaps on the stage with her and RESONATES. Who doesn't feel that one's whole lifetime longs for a moment to sing like Susan? Okay, Curtis, Marek, Ruth -- not these folks whose lifestyles plainly show that they are dancing with their hearts. But it seems to me most of the rest of us FFLers are, like Susan, ripening within as we await a chance spotlight to fall upon us for fifteen minutes. So nice when someone gets to the stage, and WHAM, proves that greatness is there -- where no one was looking. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be? Take a pick and justify it. Advaitan? Buddhist? TMer? Christian? Jewish? Hindu? Taoist? Or? What I'm trying to get at with this question is the identifying of which ism comes closest to one's best fit -- emotionally, intellectually, socially. I don't find it to be a trivial question for me. Sorry, but I find it a trivial question. I personally believe that identifying with ANY group to the point that you are talking about is contrary to the spiritual process. I'm not trying to sell this belief to you or to anyone else, but that IS what I believe. I am definitely NOT a Buddhist. I am NOT a Taoist. I am NOT a shamanistic occultist. I enjoy and appreciate and honor aspects of all three studies, but I do not box myself in by identifying with them. Hell, Edg, I reject the first of Buddha's Four Noble Truths, Life is suffering. Can I do that and still identify with being called a Buddhist? For other people, if they swing that way, I have no problem with them identifying with some -ism to the point of considering them- selves an -ist of that ilk. Me, it just doesn't float my boat. I reserve the right to float like a butterfly, sting like a bee spiritually. So about the most I can say in reply to your question that preserves the spirit of it is to second the thoughts of my man Bruce Cockburn (himself a strong Christian): If there is an '-ism' on this planet that we should all oppose, it is fundamentalism. Even identifying with any of the above -ism's is too fundamentalist for me. I also hope NEVER to aspire to being a True Believer, in ANYTHING. The essence of belief, to me, is being able to change it at any moment, based on the latest information and my latest perceptions. Look at the FFL Home Page. Bertrand Russell said it best: What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
Marek, You see the clerks every day. When someone is convicted and sentenced to years in prison for, say, marijuana possession, do the clerks, the ballifs, the judges, the DAs all seem to be mere functionaries, or are the, like, yeah we got another criminal off the streets? It seems to me the Nazi clerks had to be committed to antisemitism, but, surely, half the processors of America's legal system have dabbled in pot, and it must be a challenge to put someone in a cell for a crime they've also committed but not yet been caught doing. Is this taking a psychic toll on them? Do they feel like Nazi guards who are saying, I'm only following orders? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis reavisma...@... wrote: Most evil things aren't done by evil people, they're mostly done by clerks and minor functionaries, minuted by committee, stamped and approved by the relevant authorities. Well said, Guy, and important to realize. ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: Perhaps many have been reincarnated from the previous period... The Samsaras of the Nazi Era, are being worked out in the TMO. Maharishi attracted to him, the ones with the most need in this area, to release the strong Samsaras, so that the consciousness of the earth could be 'once and for all', rid of these demi-gods. It is interesting to note, that on day of the announcement that Maharishi had passed, was on the day that Barack Obama sailed on 'Super Tuesday'... The torch had been passed... R.G. People re-incarnating from previous lives as Nazis? This kind of analysis is a complete waste of time, a very poor substitute for careful thinking. It presupposes that some people are inherently evil, but it fact research has shown that in the right circumstances pretty much everyone can be persuaded to do bad things. It's true that some people do find it easier than others to take on the role of camp komandant and get a kick out of ordering people around even to the point of having them done away with. But it's very much the nature of the collective morality of the group that allows that to happen. Most evil things aren't done by evil people, they're mostly done by clerks and minor functionaries, minuted by committee, stamped and approved by the relevant authorities. I think a more correct way of seeing things is to notice that as soon as a group of people develop the notion that their cause is so right that everyday ethics and simple compassion can be abandoned then they start down the road to unpleasant extremism. It's something that has been played out so many times in the course of history there's almost a standard script with established roles in the play. North Korea, the Bush administration, medieval Catholicism, the Taleban, Zionism, Nazism, Russian Communism, or the milder and more contained present structure of the TMO. They all share the idea that their cause is so right that it's OK to trample on the heads of other people. The thing to watch out for is any sign of harshness in the way a group deals with its members or dissenters. That seems to be pretty much diagnostic of the disease, and it's a symptom the TMO certainly has. But the underlying cause is lack of humility. These things aren't due to Demi-Gods who need to clear up samsaras. It's just a plain consequence of how human nature works in groups. Recent history, and certainly most the 20th century has been about learning how to recognize and deal with this unpleasant facet of human society. It's interesting to note that countries that have recently escaped from that kind of thing are quicker to recognise it and react against it than countries who never really been through it. I.e. the reaction of the Berlin audience to Schiffgens or the Spanish courts taking on the legal brains behind the Bush policy of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Or even more mildly, Goran (from ex-Yugoslavia) taking on John Konhaus. Any group with a devoted following of people who believe their cause is right and who have a strong leader who will allow no disaggreement will end up in trouble. There's no need to use demi-gods to explain things.
[FairfieldLife] Videos on Sri Vidya by a pupil of Guru Dev
Videos of Sri Swami Rama, student of Guru Dev (Swami Brahmananda Saraswati) on Sri Vidya and the Yoga Sutras: http://youtube.com/swamiramahimalayas LINK
Re: [FairfieldLife] If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
On Apr 14, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Duveyoung wrote: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be? Take a pick and justify it. Advaitan? Buddhist? TMer? Christian? Jewish? Hindu? Taoist? As a great yogi once said: Don't get trapped in limits, don't belong to a school (of thought, practice, etc.).
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
TurquoiseB wrote: I am definitely NOT a Buddhist... From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: The Disappearing Of Aran A. Mous Newsgroups: alt.dreams.castaneda Date: March, 12, 2003 I'm a Buddhist.
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
Duveyoung wrote: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be? I believe in life; what it does to you and what you do back.
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: I am definitely NOT a Buddhist... From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: The Disappearing Of Aran A. Mous Newsgroups: alt.dreams.castaneda Date: March, 12, 2003 I'm a Buddhist. Things change. Back in 2003, possibly I thought of myself as a Buddhist. Don't things ever change for you, Willy? I mean, at one point in time you would have probably said, I am a human being, and look how *that* changed. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 guyfawkes91@ wrote: Imagine this lecturer giving us an analysis of the TMO. It would be about as far left on his spectrum as you could get. An extreme oligarchy with Bevan as de-facto ruler and Nader as puppet figurehead, and the Rajas obediently following the command of a small clique centered around Bevan, though Hagelin Nader do try to exert a moderating influence. Can't argue with this. The TMO is facism in a petri dish, it has most of the characteristics of facsism but neutered by the mellowing influence of TM. You can prod it, poke it and analyze it without being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night to be shot. I would characterize it more as a royal society with overtones of fascism, very similar to the society portrayed in the new American TV series Kings. The difference there is that the King really does have the power to have you dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night and shot, and does just that. And so far, there is no hereditary inher- itance of the Kingship. If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out. You mean like the barbed wire around the pundit compound in Fairfield? :-) Why do they need barbed wire? Perhaps that is because of the fundies in town or some other deranged person(s), who might be motivated in a passionate way, to do harm to a peaceful visitor from India. Safety First! It's a shame Fairfield, Iowa, USA...still has this dilemma. R.G. Has nothing whatsoever to do with fundies, the fence is to keep the pundits in. they do not want the pundits talking with anyone about their circumstances and situation.
[FairfieldLife] The spiritual art of Mahadevi
By Doug Walker (Canadian), who lives in FF: http://www.artofmahadevi.com/index.asp Read http://www.artofmahadevi.com/story.asp if you're interested.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's high schools?
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of guyfawkes91 Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 2:47 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools? Imagine this lecturer giving us an analysis of the TMO. It would be about as far left on his spectrum as you could get. An extreme oligarchy with Bevan as de-facto ruler and Nader as puppet figurehead, and the Rajas obediently following the command of a small clique centered around Bevan, though Hagelin Nader do try to exert a moderating influence. The TMO is facism in a petri dish, it has most of the characteristics of facsism but neutered by the mellowing influence of TM. You can prod it, poke it and analyze it without being dragged out of your bed in the middle of the night to be shot. If the global country was a real country with borders it would be one of those countries that have border guards to keep people in not to keep people out. Maybe not, as the TMO has a track record of kicking people out if they show the slightest interest in other countries.
[FairfieldLife] Krishna Das - Advertisement
From a friend: For those of you in Fairfield, or those who like to know what's going on here from time-to-time, here's a wonderful event for tonight! Monday night (the 13th at 8:00pm) is the night - for the Krishna Das kirtan at the Sondhiem Center. If you havent got your ticket, there is still time! Box office hrs. are 12 - 5 pm at the Sondhiem - or you can go to iowatix.com, click on 'Sondhiem' on the left, and buy your ticket online. This promises to be a fantastic event! And, it is my hope that we can be the first 'non fundraiser' event to fill our new theater! Wouldn't that be cool ... to chant with 500 of our friends and neighbors... Last July Krishna Das even said that he and his band never sounded so good as they did in the Sondhiem theater! Let's pack the place and give kirtan (call and response chanting) a whole 'new meaning'! Feel free to send this to your freinds, talk it up, and I'll see you Monday night.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Lightness of Spirit'
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kirk Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:41 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Lightness of Spirit' Home run, Kirk. Next time you're feeling down on yourself, remember that you're not only a master chef, but you're a great writer. Typical immature narcissism spewing forth as rage and inability to consider other's views or feelings. I suggest early negative relationships from both parents and siblings. None of which have ever been worked through so that they are repeated here with all others. Meditation can be used as a mask for ones feelings while at the same time it makes those feelings even more appparent. TM alone though cannot work out our maladaptive tendencies without further psycho/physical discovery. It's too bad that TM doesn't consider any other type of system as being beneficial. Maharishi is much to blame for this as he thought all therapy outside of his tradition like 'shooting in the dark. Ironic then that steady TMers often come across as loose cannons, shooting through fog. I feel pity for Nab, but IMO that doesn't let him off the hook for being a messy mind. He obviously needs help. I believe that most people here can easily ascertain that. Many here need help. Without naming names, a few here are patently OCD. The day in which we decide to proactively seek a method for bettering ourselves is the day we could be said to be following the path of Dharma. Until then we are merely footballs getting kicked around by happenstance. TM alone is not a cure for samskara. Because we still live in karma. We need to learn every method to develop. Openness to ourselves and inner honesty is a sign of maturity. But narcissism may betray us by giving us a sense of rightness about our negative conditioning. Moreover, a person needs to learn to not act from negativity but from compassion. A system which just applies to the retreat setting will not necessarily carry over into activity. The way to figure out our intention is to question from where the motive for any action stems. Simply put, does the action stem from warmth or coldness? From pain or pleasure? From seeking to benefit others, or from inner rage at them. Of course we get all twisted by our own minds until we cannot even read our own feelings any longer. A habitual liar will not any longer be able to tell the truth, to others, nor to themselves. Therefore what is really needed is the sense of questing for unadulterated truth. If a seeker doesn't have that thirst for truth then they cannot ever find it in anything. And they certainly will not come across as being serious about their quest. Most likely they will be led astray by any person of charisma. - Original Message - From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com mailto:curtisdeltablues%40yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:15 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Lightness of Spirit' --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: Regarding my own insults they are the result of my 100% Pitta constitution which simply can't stand commoners, hypocrites and fellows devoid of even the most basic intelligence. But mellowness is on the rise :-) I can understand why you want to believe this, as if it gets you off the hook for your behavior here. But I believe the reality is much simpler. You just don't come across as a thoughtful person. In my life I have never found that arrogance, like the kind you display here, is hiding anything interesting. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: The stories about Saint Teresa of Avilla are just that, stories. To take them as literal facts is insulting to our intelligence today. Oh, please Curtis. Do not use our and intelligence based on your limited understanding of just about anything. There is no our intelligence based on your level; that's an insult. On miracles and such, is it safe to say anything can't be so because it is not in our experience or belief? Quite, that seems to be the case. Or not even within the range of the deranged intuition of the particular individual. On insults and such, I would think that long time seekers would have a level of equanimity and mellowness that would make this quite rare. It's not rare on FFL, quite the contrary. Regarding my own insults they are the result of my 100% Pitta constitution which simply can't stand
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Role Of Paranoia And Persecution In The Creation Of Religion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip I'm just rappin' about this to start a conver- sation, if anyone is interested. I'm not trying to sell you anything or say anything that isn't OBVIOUS to anyone who has studied the history of religion. I just think that it's a good thing to keep in mind whenever the subject turns to True Believerism and the various paranoias that we sometimes see associated with it. It's NOT that they are unique to TM or the TMO. They are IMO part and parcel of almost ALL spiritual movements that are starting to make the transition from minor sect to religion. Just out of curiosity, do you think committed TMers in the early days of the movement, while it was still a minor sect and before it had begun to encounter opposition, were any less certain about TM's ability to facilitate enlightenment and save the world?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Role Of Paranoia And Persecution In The Creation Of Religion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip I'm just rappin' about this to start a conver- sation, if anyone is interested. I'm not trying to sell you anything or say anything that isn't OBVIOUS to anyone who has studied the history of religion. I just think that it's a good thing to keep in mind whenever the subject turns to True Believerism and the various paranoias that we sometimes see associated with it. It's NOT that they are unique to TM or the TMO. They are IMO part and parcel of almost ALL spiritual movements that are starting to make the transition from minor sect to religion. Just out of curiosity, do you think committed TMers in the early days of the movement, while it was still a minor sect and before it had begun to encounter opposition, were any less certain about TM's ability to facilitate enlightenment and save the world? Not less certain at all. I was just as certain then as I am now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The spiritual art of Mahadevi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: By Doug Walker (Canadian), who lives in FF: http://www.artofmahadevi.com/index.asp Read http://www.artofmahadevi.com/story.asp if you're interested. I knew Doug. Seemed like a decent guy. And I love art and people doing art late in life. I'm practically an evangelist for it. So what's my beef? All the PT Barnum hype that surrounds a guy enjoying the beginning stages of learning to paint. This inner Mother Divine angle is a shortcut to doing something profound on a canvass after mastering his craft. And that takes years and is really hard. But with his imagination in full swing during a meditation, now beginner art is being pawned off as more than that. Divinely inspired art that transcends it humble technique. Meanwhile back in the studio painters toil for years to attempt to bring a canvass to life. When you stand in front of a master's work it speaks to you for real, without the Goddess angle trying to elevate it. This is what art is about, and it doesn't come easily. Real beauty in any field of art takes time, lots of time. What I always hated about the Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil in order to play guitar as well as he did myth, is that it shortchanges his hard work. It turns the labor of guitar mastery into magic. A quick fix instead of hours of finger numbing effort. I hope Doug lives long enough to advance his painting to a level of beauty and accomplishment that doesn't need this sales package. I've seen this before in long term meditators who have be grandiose about something that is beautiful but mundane, like taking up a hobby late in life. It has to be something connected with some profound inner experience with the people around them enabling their fantasy. Oh yeah, and I didn't miss the fact that with this magic angle, a beginning painter is able to sell his beginner paintings for money. Money that no one would give an artist at his level. Why would someone pay good money for a beginners painting? Cuz he imagined something vividly in meditation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: This was a great rap Turq. The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. I remember how Yogananda's highest desire was to spoon with his master all night. He was absolutely giddy as he wrote about how wonderful it was when his master fulfilled his wish to spend the night with him in his bed. By trying to elevate these relationships to some cosmic level we are denying their humanity. Any time humans find love with each other it is a beautiful thing. I think it would help our society advance from his primitive oppression of gay people to admit the obvious when we see it, instead of trying to make up a story. I know that this insinuation is gunna be met with a lot of flack and I don't really care to parse words about what either of these pairs of men actually did together. That cheapens it. But both of these couples express the same kind of love I have for women. And there really is nothing wrong with that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Just as an example of the kinds of breaks we cut to people based upon the idea that we should cut them those breaks because they are holy, the person who considered homo- sexuality an abomination is the same guy who had only one strong love relationship in his entire life, with another man. This relationship was so strong and so over- whelming that when the other man died, the person who considered homosexuality an abom- ination reputedly dived into the river he was being buried in and tried to accompany the coffin to the bottom of the river. He then dedicated the rest of his life to the memory of this other man, with photos of him everywhere, giving long, loving talks about his amazing qualities. He trained his own followers to basically worship the other man as he did and bow down to him and revere him as a near-god. But there's nothing gay there, right? Just sayin'... I am NOT suggesting that Maharishi's love for Guru Dev was of the gay variety, merely that the *same* people who see a little some- thing light in the loafers with, say, Batman and Robin and their relationship don't see anything even the *least* bit gay in suppos- edly spiritual relationships in which one man basically becomes devoted to another man to the level of obsession. Many of them don't see this even when the men in question write long rants about the evil nature of women and characterize them as temptresses whose only purpose is to lure otherwise spiritual men away from the path. They don't see it even when the men in ques- tion spend their lives treating women as second-class citizens and don't allow them into their physical presence. Somehow, this behavior becomes something other than fear of women and latent homo- sexuality when it's in a spiritual context. Curious, eh?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
You see the clerks every day. When someone is convicted and sentenced to years in prison for, say, marijuana possession, do the clerks, the ballifs, the judges, the DAs all seem to be mere functionaries, or are the, like, yeah we got another criminal off the streets? It seems to me the Nazi clerks had to be committed to antisemitism, but, surely, half the processors of America's legal system have dabbled in pot, and it must be a challenge to put someone in a cell for a crime they've also committed but not yet been caught doing. Is this taking a psychic toll on them? Do they feel like Nazi guards who are saying, I'm only following orders? You'd be genuinely surprised. Probably the most horrific thing about the Nazis was that most of the terrible things were done by perfectly ordinary people of the sort that you'd meet in the local church or market. Nazi clerks were not committed to antisemitism, it was a job with regular pay and good promotion prospects. The Milgram experiment (look it up) demonstrated that people find it very hard to go against authority. Recent research has confirmed this and recent experience from all around the world is much the same. Evil isn't done by evil people it's done by ordinary people who find themselves in the grip of evil philosophies/ideals/isms or whatever. Most of the people you meet going about your everyday life would easily slip into the role of concentration camp guards if the collective morality became so twisted that it seemed like a good job with prospects. The example of what US soldiers got up to in Iraq confirms that. You only have to look at how people in the TMO behave towards dissenters or even long time devotees like Farouk Anklesaria to see how any ism where people believe they have the one true way and that noble ends justify questionable means will twist people's morality. Even if people are meditating and intent on creating peace the idea ours is the one true way, we have a right of dominion over other people is so poisonous that it will tend to encourage people to do very bad things. E.g. John Konhaus and others like him. That is why people have to be on their guard against this sort of thing, it can sneak up without people being aware of what's happening. Until locking people away for life for growing pot or imprisoning people without trial because they have a threatening beard and a copy of the koran seems like an obvious thing to do. It should be part of everyone's education to read up on the history and psychology of Nazism and similar isms so they know how to spot the warning signs. In this respect the TMO makes a good educational example, how a group of mild mannered well meaning people can under the influence of the belief that they have the one true way can collectively consent to be terrorised in the name of the greater good. And how people regulary practising a technique that's supposed to make you friendly with everyone can end up with some of them hating people and seeking out dissenters to be punished. The idea we are the chosen ones is always utterly evil. But for some people, it offers a secure job with a chance for promotion.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: This was a great rap Turq. The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. I remember how Yogananda's highest desire was to spoon with his master all night. He was absolutely giddy as he wrote about how wonderful it was when his master fulfilled his wish to spend the night with him in his bed. By trying to elevate these relationships to some cosmic level we are denying their humanity. Any time humans find love with each other it is a beautiful thing. I think it would help our society advance from his primitive oppression of gay people to admit the obvious when we see it, instead of trying to make up a story. I know that this insinuation is gunna be met with a lot of flack and I don't really care to parse words about what either of these pairs of men actually did together. That cheapens it. But both of these couples express the same kind of love I have for women. And there really is nothing wrong with that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's high schools?
Maybe not, as the TMO has a track record of kicking people out if they show the slightest interest in other countries. Which is, in its own mellow toned down way, a variant on dragging people out of bed in the middle of the night and having them shot. It gets rid of trouble makers and makes sure everyone else lives in fear of what might happen to them if they dare question authority. It also means that people can earn points by snitching on their neighbors, which is a tried and trusted technique from authoritarian regimes everywhere. If you want to get rid of someone, maybe they short changed you or were flirting with your wife, you can report them to the authorities for being a spy or sabotaging the plan or has been seen talking to dissidents. I'll bet there are cases where people in Fairfield have been booted out on the say so of someone trying to earn merit marks with the TM authorities.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Role Of Paranoia And Persecution In The Creation Of Religion
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip I'm just rappin' about this to start a conver- sation, if anyone is interested. I'm not trying to sell you anything or say anything that isn't OBVIOUS to anyone who has studied the history of religion. I just think that it's a good thing to keep in mind whenever the subject turns to True Believerism and the various paranoias that we sometimes see associated with it. It's NOT that they are unique to TM or the TMO. They are IMO part and parcel of almost ALL spiritual movements that are starting to make the transition from minor sect to religion. Just out of curiosity, do you think committed TMers in the early days of the movement, while it was still a minor sect and before it had begun to encounter opposition, were any less certain about TM's ability to facilitate enlightenment and save the world? in the early and mid 70s there were many of us committed tm teachers who felt tm could help facilitate enlightenment and help improve the world by creating more fully developed individuals, but we did not see tm as the only way or freak out if tmers did some other practice or thought for themselves, or think that saving the world came from mystical woo woo rays emanating from hopping butts or chanting hindu priests or living in ugly east facing homes.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is this lecture being taught in today's highschools?
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:39 AM, boo_lives wrote: Has nothing whatsoever to do with fundies, the fence is to keep the pundits in. they do not want the pundits talking with anyone about their circumstances and situation. And possibly TB. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Krishna Das - Advertisement
On Apr 14, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Rick Archer wrote: From a friend: For those of you in Fairfield, or those who like to know what's going on here from time-to-time, here's a wonderful event for tonight! Monday night (the 13th at 8:00pm) is the night - for the Krishna Das kirtan at the Sondhiem Center. If you havent got your ticket, there is still time! Box office hrs. are 12 - 5 pm at the Sondhiem - or you can go to iowatix.com, click on 'Sondhiem' on the left, and buy your ticket online. This promises to be a fantastic event! And, it is my hope that we can be the first 'non fundraiser' event to fill our new theater! Wouldn't that be cool ... to chant with 500 of our friends and neighbors... Last July Krishna Das even said that he and his band never sounded so good as they did in the Sondhiem theater! Let's pack the place and give kirtan (call and response chanting) a whole 'new meaning'! Feel free to send this to your freinds, talk it up, and I'll see you Monday night. Typical TMer-style competence-- sends it out the day after. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. Sure I have but it never resulted in me desiring to sleep in their bed with them or to talk about him in the over-the-top terms that Maharishi uses. And for idiotic, I'll give you the assumption that religiously repressed gay men never sleep with women. Especially in the use and discard style that his accusers reported. And using characters from scriptures is bogus because it doesn't offer the kind of detail we would need to know to determine if there was a gay aspect to it. Look at Plato's dialogues to see how there was not always a very clear line historically. To believe that his complete attraction and devotion to Guru Dev which he himself describes as love at first sight (before he knew his personality enough to be in love with that) requires a whole set of beliefs that I don't share. The fact is that neither of us know the nature of their relationship, we are both guessing from what we have heard from him. So you call it your way and I'll call it my way. In either case his stance on homosexuals was abhorrent with or without the hypocrisy added. But I'll tell you as a man, whenever a man has started a friendship quickly with me based on must meeting me, and if they ever start using the kind of term of endearment Maharishi uses about his feelings for Guru Dev, they turned out to be a gay attraction. My close male friends, some who have been my close friends for decades never express themselves in that way. It has nothing to do with how much we care about each other, it is a straight version of friendship and it really isn't hard for a man to know the difference. I love you man is a lot different from I love love you man. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: This was a great rap Turq. The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. I remember how Yogananda's highest desire was to spoon with his master all night. He was absolutely giddy as he wrote about how wonderful it was when his master fulfilled his wish to spend the night with him in his bed. By trying to elevate these relationships to some cosmic level we are denying their humanity. Any time humans find love with each other it is a beautiful thing. I think it would help our society advance from his primitive oppression of gay people to admit the obvious when we see it, instead of trying to make up a story. I know that this insinuation is gunna be met with a lot of flack and I don't really care to parse words about what either of these pairs of men actually did together. That cheapens it. But both of these couples express the same kind of love I have for women. And there really is nothing wrong with that.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The spiritual art of Mahadevi
On Apr 14, 2009, at 11:19 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I knew Doug. Seemed like a decent guy. And I love art and people doing art late in life. I'm practically an evangelist for it. So what's my beef? All the PT Barnum hype that surrounds a guy enjoying the beginning stages of learning to paint. This inner Mother Divine angle is a shortcut to doing something profound on a canvass after mastering his craft. And that takes years and is really hard. But with his imagination in full swing during a meditation, now beginner art is being pawned off as more than that. Divinely inspired art that transcends it humble technique. Meanwhile back in the studio painters toil for years to attempt to bring a canvass to life. When you stand in front of a master's work it speaks to you for real, without the Goddess angle trying to elevate it. This is what art is about, and it doesn't come easily. Real beauty in any field of art takes time, lots of time. Curtis, while I have nothing but respect for anyone willing to toil for years, as you put it so well, to turn out something on canvas, I'm wondering what the difference is between this art--art with an agenda, I guess you could call it-- and any other kind of propaganda. What I always hated about the Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil in order to play guitar as well as he did myth, is that it shortchanges his hard work. It turns the labor of guitar mastery into magic. A quick fix instead of hours of finger numbing effort. Another great point. Not to mention, if he did sell his soul, he got seriously ripped off... didn't he die at something like 30? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: I am definitely NOT a Buddhist... From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: The Disappearing Of Aran A. Mous Newsgroups: alt.dreams.castaneda Date: March, 12, 2003 I'm a Buddhist. On FFL we mostly know him as a liar.
[FairfieldLife] head stands and Maharishi dictums
Does anyone remember what Maharishi said about doing yoga headstands? I can't remember whether I heard him say something about it or someone who SAID that Maharishi said this or that. But it was something to the effect: stay away from doing head stands because it takes expert practise to do it right and if you don't do it right, it can be damaging. The above, of course, is a paraphrase on my part and I'm going completely on memory. Does anyone remember anything else he may have said?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The spiritual art of Mahadevi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote:snip Curtis, while I have nothing but respect for anyone willing to toil for years, as you put it so well, to turn out something on canvas, I'm wondering what the difference is between this art--art with an agenda, I guess you could call it-- and any other kind of propaganda. I don't know much about painting but from what I can tell from the examples he is producing what is termed Folk Art with often lacks the kind of perspective techniques that come with training. And folk art has it place and some of it can be really beautiful. But I agree that the agenda aspect is the troubling part for me. A lot of self proclaimed mystics pulled this one. It allows them to product-ize their spirituality and sell it in pieces. And I don't doubt that Doug actually believes all this. He has good reason to, there are payoffs on many levels. Sure beats having some a-hole like me coming into his studio and saying Keep up the good work. I can't wait to see what you produce beyond the beginner level! What I always hated about the Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil in order to play guitar as well as he did myth, is that it shortchanges his hard work. It turns the labor of guitar mastery into magic. A quick fix instead of hours of finger numbing effort. Another great point. Not to mention, if he did sell his soul, he got seriously ripped off... didn't he die at something like 30? 27. 29 recorded sides and the world still reverberates with his artistic achievements! Not too shabby in return for something imaginary! Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: But I'll tell you as a man, whenever a man has started a friendship quickly with me based on just meeting me, and if they ever start using the kind of term of endearment Maharishi uses about his feelings for Guru Dev, they turned out to be a gay attraction. My close male friends, some who have been my close friends for decades never express themselves in that way. It has nothing to do with how much we care about each other, it is a straight version of friendship and it really isn't hard for a man to know the difference. I love you man is a lot different from I love love you man. Curtis, I would say that what you are describing is more an appropriate version of friendship than a straight one. The reason I say this is that I have had a number of fairly close gay friends. Some of them were fellow Rama students with me, a few of them are current friends here in Sitges. Their gaydar is without flaw; they took one look at me and knew that I was straight, and so anything gay was off the table. And almost immediately they shifted into an appropriate level of banter and friend- ship that would fit the extent to which we knew each other. As we got to know each other better, that sense of appropriateness never wavered. I was never the least bit uncomfortable with them, and they have told me that they are never the least bit uncom- fortable with me. We're just friends. What seems inappropriate to me in Maharishi's relationship with Guru Dev is that fawning bhakti thing. Yeah, yeah...I know that there is a whole tradition of that in India, and that one gets brownie points in spiritual traditions for *how* fawning one can be and *how* flowery the language one can think up to describe one's teacher is, but *really*...is all that shit NECESSARY? At various times I have respected the spiritual teachers I've worked with, but I never felt the need to describe them the way that Maharishi described Guru Dev, or that some of the more bhaktied-out TM TBs on this forum have described him. Like Nabby referring to Maharishi by capi- talizing He. Like the ones who droned on and on when he died about Him being in some heaven higher than the gods. I'm sorry, but that is *learned* behavior, and IMO not completely appropriate behavior. It's a social thing, something that is perpetuated and encouraged by groups, or by the teachers them- selves. It's often a form of spiritual one- upsmanship. I've actually seen people *punished* in the TMO (by looks of stern disapproval, if not by denying them access to MMY in the future) for not being fawning and bhaktied-out ENOUGH. He set the standard for how one was supposed to think about and talk about one's spiritual teacher in the way in which he talked about Guru Dev. And he clearly expected to be talked about and related to the same way. And God help you if you didn't. I just don't think it's necessary. I can hang out and laugh and have fun with my gay guy friends without wanting to get into their pants. And I can study with and fully respect a spir- itual teacher without *sounding like* I want to get into his pants.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The spiritual art of Mahadevi
On Apr 14, 2009, at 12:19 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What I always hated about the Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil in order to play guitar as well as he did myth, is that it shortchanges his hard work. It turns the labor of guitar mastery into magic. A quick fix instead of hours of finger numbing effort. Rather than imagining it referred to the imaginary Judeo-Christian devil, perhaps the story is just a way the ignorant would parse that Johnson had some connection with Baron Samedi, Lord of the Crossroads and voudoun. Many people are inspired by their God, why not RJ being inspired or mounted by a Loa?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: I just don't think it's necessary. I can hang out and laugh and have fun with my gay guy friends without wanting to get into their pants. snip To have missed having gay friends is punishment for homophobia! If you want to watch your gaydar meter redline hang out with Nandkashore and listen to him talk about Maharishi. And if you take a good look at Maharishi's preference for skin boys you see a common physical theme. And I can study with and fully respect a spir- itual teacher without *sounding like* I want to get into his pants. That totally cracked me up! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: But I'll tell you as a man, whenever a man has started a friendship quickly with me based on just meeting me, and if they ever start using the kind of term of endearment Maharishi uses about his feelings for Guru Dev, they turned out to be a gay attraction. My close male friends, some who have been my close friends for decades never express themselves in that way. It has nothing to do with how much we care about each other, it is a straight version of friendship and it really isn't hard for a man to know the difference. I love you man is a lot different from I love love you man. Curtis, I would say that what you are describing is more an appropriate version of friendship than a straight one. The reason I say this is that I have had a number of fairly close gay friends. Some of them were fellow Rama students with me, a few of them are current friends here in Sitges. Their gaydar is without flaw; they took one look at me and knew that I was straight, and so anything gay was off the table. And almost immediately they shifted into an appropriate level of banter and friend- ship that would fit the extent to which we knew each other. As we got to know each other better, that sense of appropriateness never wavered. I was never the least bit uncomfortable with them, and they have told me that they are never the least bit uncom- fortable with me. We're just friends. What seems inappropriate to me in Maharishi's relationship with Guru Dev is that fawning bhakti thing. Yeah, yeah...I know that there is a whole tradition of that in India, and that one gets brownie points in spiritual traditions for *how* fawning one can be and *how* flowery the language one can think up to describe one's teacher is, but *really*...is all that shit NECESSARY? At various times I have respected the spiritual teachers I've worked with, but I never felt the need to describe them the way that Maharishi described Guru Dev, or that some of the more bhaktied-out TM TBs on this forum have described him. Like Nabby referring to Maharishi by capi- talizing He. Like the ones who droned on and on when he died about Him being in some heaven higher than the gods. I'm sorry, but that is *learned* behavior, and IMO not completely appropriate behavior. It's a social thing, something that is perpetuated and encouraged by groups, or by the teachers them- selves. It's often a form of spiritual one- upsmanship. I've actually seen people *punished* in the TMO (by looks of stern disapproval, if not by denying them access to MMY in the future) for not being fawning and bhaktied-out ENOUGH. He set the standard for how one was supposed to think about and talk about one's spiritual teacher in the way in which he talked about Guru Dev. And he clearly expected to be talked about and related to the same way. And God help you if you didn't. I just don't think it's necessary. I can hang out and laugh and have fun with my gay guy friends without wanting to get into their pants. And I can study with and fully respect a spir- itual teacher without *sounding like* I want to get into his pants.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The spiritual art of Mahadevi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Apr 14, 2009, at 12:19 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: What I always hated about the Robert Johnson sold his soul to the devil in order to play guitar as well as he did myth, is that it shortchanges his hard work. It turns the labor of guitar mastery into magic. A quick fix instead of hours of finger numbing effort. Rather than imagining it referred to the imaginary Judeo-Christian devil, perhaps the story is just a way the ignorant would parse that Johnson had some connection with Baron Samedi, Lord of the Crossroads and voudoun. Many people are inspired by their God, why not RJ being inspired or mounted by a Loa? I've read that interpretation too but I think it is over-analyzed. We know the historical root of this rumor, it was Son House in the 60's revival. Since Tommy Johnson was the one who actually used this marketing hype, not Robert, I think it is easier just to conclude that Son was confused and it added punch to his story about Robert being bad at guitar, disappearing for up to 2 years, and then being good at it. But the poetry of your description is appealing to me and does help trace the root of this myth which did exist. mounted by a Loa? Nice addition to our gay discussion!
[FairfieldLife] Re: head stands and Maharishi dictums
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Does anyone remember what Maharishi said about doing yoga headstands? I can't remember whether I heard him say something about it or someone who SAID that Maharishi said this or that. But it was something to the effect: stay away from doing head stands because it takes expert practise to do it right and if you don't do it right, it can be damaging. The above, of course, is a paraphrase on my part and I'm going completely on memory. Does anyone remember anything else he may have said? We already know from sports medicine that putting that kind of inappropriate weight on your neck vertebrae is a bad idea, don't we? Not to mention that much blood flow pressure in the brain. I'm really glad he put an end to me doing it. I had been doing headstands since I was a kid and look how I turned out. (Beat you to the joke Curtis haters!)
Re: [FairfieldLife] head stands and Maharishi dictums
I personally heard him say don't do it. Too much pressure. Better to do half shoulder stand, most of the benefit without the danger. --- On Tue, 4/14/09, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net wrote: From: shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net Subject: [FairfieldLife] head stands and Maharishi dictums To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 5:37 PM Does anyone remember what Maharishi said about doing yoga headstands? I can't remember whether I heard him say something about it or someone who SAID that Maharishi said this or that. But it was something to the effect: stay away from doing head stands because it takes expert practise to do it right and if you don't do it right, it can be damaging. The above, of course, is a paraphrase on my part and I'm going completely on memory. Does anyone remember anything else he may have said?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: Both Plus. Descriptions of activities from my gay Purusha buddy was beyond fears. Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Abhorrent because the Purusha were supposed to be celibate, or abhorrent because the goings-on were homosexual? Years ago I dated a lady TM teacher who had been on staff at MIU. We spoke once over veggies and tofu (yuk!) about whether or not TM would !cure! homosexuality. She told me that there was a significant amount of gay men working on staff at MIU (woman seem to really pick up on this and can't let it go, even to this day). She also told me about massive amounts of corruption, lots of people pocketing MIU money. This would have been around the 1970s. Now my understanding was that Maharishi considered homosexuality an abomination. Homosexuality was discussed on a course I was on and the teacher said the official TM position was that being gay was due to stress, and in an enlightened society it therefore wouldn't occur. Stress can mean anything to someone steeped in SCI, but they were quick to point out that it's the way the world is and the gays aren't to blame(!) Seems to imply that they thought it wasn't a stress picked up in this life or that they weren't really thinking at all. Sounded to me like a way to hedge your bets and (hopefully) avoid offending anyone. This must mean that the gay guys I knew on purusha wouldn't ever get enlightenened, according to the prevailing view, until they had transcended their sexuality. The path is indeed long and winding! Can't speak to all homosexual behavior, but it IS established that male mammals tend to turn homosexual in high-stress situations. And I've known flaming queers who were happily married heterosexual men until their wives died in tragic accidents, whereupon they flipped orientation AND personality and came out of the closet in an aggressive way complete with flaming mannerisms that were never there before. In my own experience, there was a period in my life where I had extreme illness/fever, and was totally obsessed with my male friends at the same time I dealt with it by reminding myself of the stress factor, didn't indulge my obsession, and once my physical health improved, the obsession went away. Was I temporarily gay, or merely stressed out? Am I in the closet now because I didn't act out what I considered to be a fever-induced tendency? Who judges these things? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kirk kirk_bernha...@... wrote: You miss the point. My point was really that - does it matter what sort of personal ethics ones pundits have? As far as the outcome of theor yajna? - Original Message - From: sparaig lengli...@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 8:58 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kirk kirk_bernhardt@ wrote: Not to be a punk or anything but how many of them do you all think fuck each other? After I quit Purusha I learned of many abhorrent goings on. Not to be a punk or anything, but how amny celibate male religious types of ALL persuasions, including Japanese Zen Buddhists, do you think indulge in that kind of thing? THe rationale for the Japanese is that its relations with WOMEN that are a no-no not relations with men, and it was traditional for the Zen monastaries to room the accolytes across the hall from teh senior monks for easier access. Of course, Tibetan Buddhists, and Indian Hindu monks would NEVER indulge in that kind of abhorrent goings on... just the Japanese Zen types and the Catholic types, but not Tibetan or Hindu, nosireee. What is the personal ethics in this situation? Are you saying that the gay pundits (assuming there are any) are de facto unethical? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
I am definitely NOT a Buddhist... I'm a Buddhist. TurquoiseB wrote: Things change. Back in 2003, possibly I thought of myself as a Buddhist. Don't things ever change for you, Willy? I mean, at one point in time you would have probably said, I am a human being, and look how *that* changed. It doesn't sound like you've changed much since 2003. You're still calling me 'Willy' when I've told you at least a dozen times that my name is Richard J. Williams. But, it doesn't bother me much - if you want to insist on dehumanizing me by calling me by my email address - if that makes it easier to insult me. But you're not even making any sense. You've changed from being the leader of a Hindu cult religion, to being a leader in the Rama Lenz cult religion, to being a sex-magic tantrist, to what, being a dualistic materialist? That's progress? You've been in and out of cults for most of your adult life. Now I guess you're in denial. One thing hasn't changed - you're still posting on the internet from cafes. It's been what, thirteen years since you made your first attempt as an informant? From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Re: Gnosis + Knowledge Newsgroups: alt.religion.gnostic Date: October 12, 2003 Because you don't know where I'm coming from in these discussions, I should back- track a little and fill you in, Ok? I am essentially of the buddhist persuasion, and as such believe neither in a first creation nor a Creator...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
Nablo parley vous - On FFL we mostly know him as a liar. ---Don't speak for eveyone. Barry, I find, is a great contributor here who often makes me proud to be part of this group due to his spoofing us. My ego is thereby stroked. Trollers, or semi-trollers, here, I find, often contribute nothing, or even make me embarrased to be part of this group. What I find hardest to understand is how so many spiritual accolytes disrespect one another thus often disproving their spiritual growth altogether. It's like heroin addicts dissing alcoholics. And vice versa. The very fact of abuse in each case shows each person to actually be in the same boat as the other. One who fights another must be at least similar enough to potentially make a connection with another. Thus one fighting the right must be at least close to the right in order to see and fight it. One on 'the right' may even think they are far left, but that's not true. Someone far left and someone far right will not ever make any connection to fight as they will have no means of communication and no sense of hope to do so. Thus Barry and Judy are necessarily more common to each other than they would wish to be perceived. Or else they wouldn't have any basis for their strange love/hate affair.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
What is the personal ethics in this situation? Are you saying that the gay pundits (assuming there are any) are de facto unethical? Lawson If they are brahmachari then yes.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
Who judges these things? Lawson Such personal choices are judged by oneself. But I applaud you for being so self aware.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. Sure I have but it never resulted in me desiring to sleep in their bed with them or to talk about him in the over-the-top terms that Maharishi uses. And because *you* haven't had the kind of relationship that led you to talk about the other guy in over-the-top terms (sleeping in the same bed was Yogananda, I believe, not MMY), therefore that's the standard? And for idiotic, I'll give you the assumption that religiously repressed gay men never sleep with women. Especially in the use and discard style that his accusers reported. I wasn't making that assumption. See if you can figure out why I mentioned it. And using characters from scriptures is bogus because it doesn't offer the kind of detail we would need to know to determine if there was a gay aspect to it. This is a whole 'nother topic, but there is in fact a good deal of textual evidence that David/Jonathan and Ruth/Naomi had very deep but straight friendships that were recognized as such by the biblical writers. Look at Plato's dialogues to see how there was not always a very clear line historically. To believe that his complete attraction and devotion to Guru Dev which he himself describes as love at first sight (before he knew his personality enough to be in love with that) requires a whole set of beliefs that I don't share. Such as? The fact is that neither of us know the nature of their relationship, we are both guessing from what we have heard from him. So you call it your way and I'll call it my way. Might want to reread your recent post on how we know what we think we know, which concludes: It is the ability to notice the quality of evidence that I consider 'being thoughtful.' Which way you lean after that seems to be more a of an emotional rather than an intellectual issue. In the post I was responding to, you wrote: The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. Can only be characterized as sounds like a lot more than a guess to me. In either case his stance on homosexuals was abhorrent with or without the hypocrisy added. Granted. But you felt you just *had* to add the hypocrisy charge. His homophobia didn't reflect badly enough on him to suit you, even on top of (you should excuse the expression) his fooling around with women. But I'll tell you as a man, whenever a man has started a friendship quickly with me based on must meeting me Again the assumption that *your* experience and behavior are the standard, even given the marked cultural and contextual differences. , and if they ever start using the kind of term of endearment Maharishi uses about his feelings for Guru Dev, they turned out to be a gay attraction. My close male friends, some who have been my close friends for decades never express themselves in that way. It has nothing to do with how much we care about each other, it is a straight version of friendship and it really isn't hard for a man to know the difference. I love you man is a lot different from I love love you man.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. Sure I have but it never resulted in me desiring to sleep in their bed with them or to talk about him in the over-the-top terms that Maharishi uses. And because *you* haven't had the kind of relationship that led you to talk about the other guy in over-the-top terms (sleeping in the same bed was Yogananda, I believe, not MMY), therefore that's the standard? This is a personal judgment about someone's personal life. Whose standard would you recommend I go with? And for idiotic, I'll give you the assumption that religiously repressed gay men never sleep with women. Especially in the use and discard style that his accusers reported. I wasn't making that assumption. See if you can figure out why I mentioned it. If you didn't consider it to be counter evidence to his having a gay relationship with Guru Dev then I have no idea. And using characters from scriptures is bogus because it doesn't offer the kind of detail we would need to know to determine if there was a gay aspect to it. This is a whole 'nother topic, but there is in fact a good deal of textual evidence that David/Jonathan and Ruth/Naomi had very deep but straight friendships that were recognized as such by the biblical writers. I'm not sure we can be confident of how cultures so far away handled this situation. There is always society's official stand and then what actually happens. That was my point. Look at Plato's dialogues to see how there was not always a very clear line historically. To believe that his complete attraction and devotion to Guru Dev which he himself describes as love at first sight (before he knew his personality enough to be in love with that) requires a whole set of beliefs that I don't share. Such as? That it was a spiritual love at first sight which is how he pitches it rather than the more common personal love at first sight. The fact is that neither of us know the nature of their relationship, we are both guessing from what we have heard from him. So you call it your way and I'll call it my way. Might want to reread your recent post on how we know what we think we know, which concludes: It is the ability to notice the quality of evidence that I consider 'being thoughtful.' Which way you lean after that seems to be more a of an emotional rather than an intellectual issue. Thanks for reading. In the post I was responding to, you wrote: The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. Can only be characterized as sounds like a lot more than a guess to me. I don't know why you think this is a contradiction. We are all compelled by our own reasoning, both intellectual and as a feeling. It IS more than a guess for me, it is my opinion which could be completely wrong. But as I said, we evaluate what we can from the evidence and then go with our complete feeling. If you had hung around Nandkashore a bit you might know better why I am guessing in this direction. In either case his stance on homosexuals was abhorrent with or without the hypocrisy added. Granted. But you felt you just *had* to add the hypocrisy charge. Because I believe it is true and it is so common among religious fundamentalists who are anti gay to be hypocrites. His homophobia didn't reflect badly enough on him to suit you, even on top of (you should excuse the expression) his fooling around with women. I don't know why you are trying to shame me for offering my opinion. I am not keeping score on how many bad things I write about him. For me his being gay is not the issue, it IS the hypocrisy of how he treated gays in the movement with lines like they might as well not even meditate. I had gay friends in the movement an this teaching tormented them. I hold him accountable for that. But I'll tell you as a man, whenever a man has started a friendship
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM, authfriend jst...@panix.com wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans Judy, how long were human beans around? Did they predate human beings? Were they edible?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM, authfriend jst...@panix.com wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. Judy, just consider the source. Only Barry would stretch a life of devotion to one's guru as a homosexual relationship. Only Barry would be sick enough to grasp at every possible straw in his perpetual attempt to denigrate TM and Maharishi. Sane people who didn't like their experience would, after a couple of decades of mean mouthing, tire and find something else to be a true disbeliever of.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip And because *you* haven't had the kind of relationship that led you to talk about the other guy in over-the-top terms (sleeping in the same bed was Yogananda, I believe, not MMY), therefore that's the standard? This is a personal judgment about someone's personal life. Whose standard would you recommend I go with? Curtis, I lose respect for your much-(self-)touted reasoning skills by the day. You talk a wonderful game in the abstract, but when it gets down to cases, your noble principles go straight out the window, most strikingly where anything concerning MMY or Guru Dev is concerned. There's no point in trying to explain to you what's wrong with the above comment or any of the other absurdities in your response. It's just too depressing. Just a guess doesn't contradict can only be characterized as?? Give me a BREAK. snip
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM, authfriend jst...@... wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. Judy, just consider the source. Only Barry would stretch a life of devotion to one's guru as a homosexual relationship. Only Barry would be sick enough to grasp at every possible straw in his perpetual attempt to denigrate TM and Maharishi. Sane people who didn't like their experience would, after a couple of decades of mean mouthing, tire and find something else to be a true disbeliever of. I wouldn't even bother to address Barry on this point. I was responding to *Curtis*, who is blessed with superior reasoning skills and has rid himself of all emotional undercurrents that might affect his logical conclusions (just ask him).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:20 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: I've been to India and have Indian close friends. Of course it is my own experiences with this culture and its customs that are a part of my opinion. So I draw my personal opinion for personal experiences. So are you, we just have come to different conclusions. I've been to India a few times but have spent a lot of time in the Middle East. I've gotten used to walking down the street hand in hand with another guy and swapping spit with him. Being straight, this of course first made me very, very uncomfortable to the extreme, but I'm a good actor so I never let on. This sort of show of affection is common in many parts of the world between men and between women. I remember that my mother used to walk down the street hand in hand with her friends and I suspect that her father and mother walked arm in arm down the street in old country.
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
I'm a Buddhist. Nabby wrote: On FFL we mostly know him as a liar. Well, yes, Nabby, but that's not saying much since everyone tells lies. I've even caught Judy lying on several occasions. Judy said that Bush lied, but offered no evidence. Then, when I said that Kerry lied, she blew her top, even though I cited numerous sources to prove my point. Then, Judy said I posted deliberate lies, when she knew perfectly well that I never intended to do such a thing. So, Judy is a liar too. John Manning and Barry Wright have posted some of the biggest whoppers on the internet! So, if we know Judy, Barry, and John as 'liars' on FFL, it's just normal conversation. It's just that Barry can't seem to resist lying, even when he knows better. Barry has become the poster child for liars about the Marshy and the TMO. He and John Knapp really suck as cult exit counselors. In a recent study it was found that in normal conversation people lie almost every second. Everything people say is a lie, simply because the truth cannot be put into words. From: Judy Stein Subject: Re: For Uncle Tantra about DHMO Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: March 20, 2004 Barry simply cannot stop himself from lying, even when he knows there isn't the slightest chance of his fooling anybody...
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip And because *you* haven't had the kind of relationship that led you to talk about the other guy in over-the-top terms (sleeping in the same bed was Yogananda, I believe, not MMY), therefore that's the standard? This is a personal judgment about someone's personal life. Whose standard would you recommend I go with? Curtis, I lose respect for your much-(self-)touted reasoning skills by the day. You talk a wonderful game in the abstract, but when it gets down to cases, your noble principles go straight out the window, most strikingly where anything concerning MMY or Guru Dev is concerned. So I should just make the assumption that they didn't have a gay relationship, would that show superior skills of reasoning? There's no point in trying to explain to you what's wrong with the above comment or any of the other absurdities in your response. Now who is blowing their own horn about their superior reasoning ability? It's just too depressing. You might want to have that checked. Hearing different opinions from your own shouldn't be depressing. Just a guess By me. I'm the poster. I am not speaking for all humanity. doesn't contradict can only be characterized as?? Give me a BREAK. It was my reasoned guess. What do you think your opinion is based on? This is a personal unknowable issue. I am expressing my opinion. snip
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: I wouldn't even bother to address Barry on this point. I was responding to *Curtis*, who is blessed with superior reasoning skills and has rid himself of all emotional undercurrents that might affect his logical conclusions (just ask him). Yeah, it is my hidden resentment that makes me believe Maharishi was in love love with Guru Dev. It couldn't be based on what he said about his feelings for the guy. And don't think I haven't noticed that you have not weighted in with an opinion on this. As usual you have gotten distracted with personal insults to the people here when discussing Maharishi. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Male-male (and female-female) bonding (cosmic or mundane) that has nothing to do with sexual attraction has been around as long as human beans (or at least as long as the Hebrew Bible--e.g., David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi). MMY's views on homosexuality were objectionable in the extreme, but to accuse him of hypocrisy on the basis of his relationship with Guru Dev is so idiotic as to defy comment (especially given the flak about his purported relationships with women). If you've never had an intense but wholly platonic friendship with another man, Curtis, you've missed something that's part of the human experience. Judy, just consider the source. Only Barry would stretch a life of devotion to one's guru as a homosexual relationship. Only Barry would be sick enough to grasp at every possible straw in his perpetual attempt to denigrate TM and Maharishi. Sane people who didn't like their experience would, after a couple of decades of mean mouthing, tire and find something else to be a true disbeliever of. I wouldn't even bother to address Barry on this point. I was responding to *Curtis*, who is blessed with superior reasoning skills and has rid himself of all emotional undercurrents that might affect his logical conclusions (just ask him).
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: Judy, just consider the source. Only Barry would stretch a life of devotion to one's guru as a homosexual relationship. Only Barry would be sick enough to grasp at every possible straw in his perpetual attempt to denigrate TM and Maharishi. Some might suggest that someone who gets his buttons pushed this strongly just by someone reminding him of the simple facts of his teacher's lifelong obsession with another man might be feeling this button-pushed because it suggests reasons he's uncomfortable with for his own obsession with that teacher. In other words, are you more concerned about someone looking at Maharishi's love for a man without the polite spiritual trappings, or your own love of Maharishi, without the same spiritual trappings? T'would seem that the only thing that makes people crazier than suggesting that Maharishi was human enough to spring the occasional boner for a woman is to suggest that he might have been human enough to spring the occasional boner for a man.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal l.shad...@... wrote: On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 3:20 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: I've been to India and have Indian close friends. Of course it is my own experiences with this culture and its customs that are a part of my opinion. So I draw my personal opinion for personal experiences. So are you, we just have come to different conclusions. I've been to India a few times but have spent a lot of time in the Middle East. I've gotten used to walking down the street hand in hand with another guy and swapping spit with him. Wait a second. Kissing a man with tongue IS gay behavior. As far as the hand holding or walking arm in arm goes, I have done this with monks and never felt anything gay about it. I don't have perfect gaydar but you can usually tell what is in play. Being straight, this of course first made me very, very uncomfortable to the extreme, but I'm a good actor so I never let on. This sort of show of affection is common in many parts of the world between men and between women. I remember that my mother used to walk down the street hand in hand with her friends and I suspect that her father and mother walked arm in arm down the street in old country.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
TurquoiseB wrote: Some might suggest that someone who gets his buttons pushed this strongly just by someone reminding him of the simple facts of his teacher's lifelong obsession with another man might be feeling this button-pushed because it suggests reasons he's uncomfortable with for his own obsession with that teacher... From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Open Letter To Willytex Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: August 6, 2003 Willy, since fucking prairie dogs or whatever you do with your time doesn't seem to fill enough of it lately, and you've been going out of your way to associate me with Rama and thus with a big, bad cult figure, I figure I should explain a couple of things...
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: T'would seem that the only thing that makes people crazier than suggesting that Maharishi was human enough to spring the occasional boner for a woman is to suggest that he might have been human enough to spring the occasional boner for a man. I have laughed out loud so many times with this topic today. Thanks Turq! The idea that such a relationship denigrates Maharishi is some way is very revealing. The assumption is that if it were true it would lesson Maharishi somehow says a lot. But being free enough to consider it as a possibility is actually more respectful of Maharishi the man. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal L.Shaddai@ wrote: Judy, just consider the source. Only Barry would stretch a life of devotion to one's guru as a homosexual relationship. Only Barry would be sick enough to grasp at every possible straw in his perpetual attempt to denigrate TM and Maharishi. Some might suggest that someone who gets his buttons pushed this strongly just by someone reminding him of the simple facts of his teacher's lifelong obsession with another man might be feeling this button-pushed because it suggests reasons he's uncomfortable with for his own obsession with that teacher. In other words, are you more concerned about someone looking at Maharishi's love for a man without the polite spiritual trappings, or your own love of Maharishi, without the same spiritual trappings? T'would seem that the only thing that makes people crazier than suggesting that Maharishi was human enough to spring the occasional boner for a woman is to suggest that he might have been human enough to spring the occasional boner for a man.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
Curtis wrote: Wait a second. Kissing a man with tongue IS gay behavior... Kissing a man 'with tongue' for a gay man simply means 'hello' and 'how are you doing?' Now, if it was a straight man doing that, then I'd worry, Curtis. : )
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: And because *you* haven't had the kind of relationship that led you to talk about the other guy in over-the-top terms (sleeping in the same bed was Yogananda, I believe, not MMY), therefore that's the standard? The Turq is now as low as it gets, even within his own standards. What we see is that after the huge success of the concert with Paul and Ringo for the David Lynch Foundation the Turq, and other TM-haters, have become increasingly desperate. That they would resort to this kind of arguments is really sad. And quite telling for their desperation.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Richard J. Williams willy...@yahoo.com wrote: Curtis wrote: Wait a second. Kissing a man with tongue IS gay behavior... Kissing a man 'with tongue' for a gay man simply means 'hello' and 'how are you doing?' Now, if it was a straight man doing that, then I'd worry, Curtis. : ) Where I come from, swapping spit means anything objectionable that two guys would do together with their mouths. And where I come from homosexuality is anathema. I meant to convey something beyond a mere peck on the cheek. I'm talking a big, slobbering kiss. The first time I received a kiss like that from a guy was from one of my workers (aka electrical men). He was not gay, I am not gay and it was not a gay thing. It was a sign that I made the grade in the electrical men's eyes. Of course that all fell apart very quickly when I said to one of the Copts that I really enjoyed going to church with him on Sunday. The guy who kissed me asked me if I was Christian. I said of course I'm Christian. The whole bloody country is Christian (actually a rough Arabic translation of that). Suddenly all the Muslims fell on the floor and whaled. The next day he gave me a little statue of Marium. I accepted it. Then the Copts took me to task for accepting profane objects. I got all of my men together and told them that we needed peace in the Middle East and it oughta start with us. A while later I saw Copt and Muslim walking home hand in hand. Well, I accomplished something. You see, the sidhis do work.
[FairfieldLife] The Dark Night Of The Soul
As a poetic take on this whole discussion about love among spiritual men stripped of its spiritual trappings, might I remind FFLers of one of the greatest classics of devotional love in the history of spiritual poetry? That is St. John of the Cross' magnificent poem The Dark Night Of The Soul. Its beauty has inspired seekers since it was written in the 16th century. It has been discussed and debated from many angles, most of them stressing the symbolic nature of St. John's tale of secret moments of stolen love in the shadows of a Spanish monastery. Most spiritual people tend to interpret the poem as metaphor, the lover met in secret being really God, and the union between the two lovers so beautifully captured by St. John a mystical union of man and God. Of all the translations of this poem, I prefer the one done by Loreena McKennitt, to transform it into music. She retained in her version the possibility of interpreting the poem as metaphor, but by stressing the sensuality of the metaphors she *also* clear made possible the fact that the poem could be *literal*, the simple story of St. John himself sneaking out of the monastery at night for an assignation with a more worldly lover. Because Loreena is a woman, when she sings Within my pounding heart / which kept itself entirely for him, it allows us to see the poem in a new light, as possibly a love song for a woman, not just a love song for God. But the most fascinating thing is that the poem was written by a man, and the use of him was in the original poem. And, given what we know of the actual life of San Juan de la Cruz, it is far more likely that if he was really writing in a Godly fashion about an earthly love affair, he was writing about meeting another monk under the stars, not a woman. For your entertainment and pondering, the song (in a live video performance) and the lyrics: The Dark Night Of The Soul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MclLF473XtA Upon a darkened night the flame of love was burning in my breast And by a lantern bright I fled my house while all in quiet rest Shrouded by the night and by the secret stair I quickly fled The veil concealed my eyes while all my house lay quiet as the dead Chorus Oh night thou was my guide oh night more loving than the rising sun Oh night that joined the lover to the beloved one transforming each of them into the other Upon that misty night in secrecy, beyond such mortal sight Without a guide or light than that which burned so deeply in my heart That fire t'was led me on and shone more bright than of the midday sun To where he waited still it was a place where no one else could come Chorus Within my pounding heart which kept itself entirely for him He fell into his sleep beneath the cedars all my love I gave And by the fortress walls the wind would brush his hair against his brow And with its smoothest hand caressed my every sense it would allow Chorus I lost myself to him and laid my face upon my lovers breast And care and grief grew dim as in the mornings mist became the light There they dimmed amongst the lilies fair There they dimmed amongst the lilies fair There they dimmed amongst the lilies fair
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: I'm a Buddhist. Nabby wrote: On FFL we mostly know him as a liar. It's just that Barry can't seem to resist lying, even when he knows better. Barry has become the poster child for liars about the Marshy and the TMO. He and John Knapp really suck as cult exit counselors. Hehe. In my opinion they suck north, west, south and east. The rescent success of the TMO have made them go bananas since it reminds them of the personal mistakes they did in their lives. Now oldish, their desparation takes even more perverse turns.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
On Apr 14, 2009, at 5:06 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: I wouldn't even bother to address Barry on this point. I was responding to *Curtis*, who is blessed with superior reasoning skills and has rid himself of all emotional undercurrents that might affect his logical conclusions (just ask him). Yeah, it is my hidden resentment that makes me believe Maharishi was in love love with Guru Dev. It couldn't be based on what he said about his feelings for the guy. And don't think I haven't noticed that you have not weighted in with an opinion on this. As usual you have gotten distracted with personal insults to the people here when discussing Maharishi. It's interesting, this question 'was the Maharishi Gay' (or was the Maharishi Bi). I often wondered if he was Gay or Bi. However, after the facts came out on his sexual relationship with females I thought 'Oh well, I guess he's not gay'. But since then I've wondered, could that have been a screen? The conclusion I came to is the androgynous aspect of atman/brahman and bhakti-oriented individuals is such that it seems, to us as westerners, that because they are both effeminate in speech and in their actions, they seem stereotypically Gay. If disciples of his don't achieve that neutral equanimity and sameness of Brahman, they can also feign androgyny. Perfect examples of this would be Bevan Morris and more recently John Hagelin who sound, frankly, like posturing Vedic castratos to me. It just doesn't feel genuine. Then there's also the encouragement towards bliss addiction, and that drippy Vedic sentimentality and fabricated devotionalism which also can come across as Gay. The odd thing is, there are many aspects of Gay culture and alternative sexuality that are quite at home in India. They are recognized as part of the plan. I suspect the invasion of India by the British Raj and their imposition of Judeo-Christian mores has affected that original understanding and appreciation of Gays as the Tratriya Prakithi, the Third Nature.
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willy...@... wrote: From: Judy Stein Subject: Re: For Uncle Tantra about DHMO Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: March 20, 2004 Barry simply cannot stop himself from lying, even when he knows there isn't the slightest chance of his fooling anybody... Bingo. But he does manange to fool some fools. Curtis comes to mind; he always buyes into whatever is the new Barry fantasy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: T'would seem that the only thing that makes people crazier than suggesting that Maharishi was human enough to spring the occasional boner for a woman is to suggest that he might have been human enough to spring the occasional boner for a man. I have laughed out loud so many times with this topic today. Thanks Turq! Thanks for getting it enough to laugh. The idea that such a relationship denigrates Maharishi is some way is very revealing. The assumption is that if it were true it would lessen Maharishi somehow says a lot. But being free enough to consider it as a possibility is actually more respectful of Maharishi the man. I completely agree. Please see my post on The Dark Night Of The Soul. Assume that San Juan de la Cruz' poem was originally about a sexual union with another man. Does that somehow denigrate or lessen the fact that it is ALSO one of the most beautiful poems about union with God ever written?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
Nab wrote: The Turq is now as low as it gets, even within his own standards. Maybe so, but I'd like to suggest John Manning for the top honors: From: John Manning Subject: According to witnesses Newsgroups: alt.religion.mormon Date: November 21, 2000 According to witnesses just like Joe Smith had witnesses - we now have video taped accounts of witnesses confirming Gordon B. Hinckley's sensual activities with young boys and prostitutes. His wife, with another observer, caught Joe porking another woman in the barn...
[FairfieldLife] Re: If you had to be a true believer, which one would you be?
Barry simply cannot stop himself from lying, even when he knows there isn't the slightest chance of his fooling anybody... Vaj wrote: Bingo. But he does manange to fool some fools. From: John Manning Subject: Tex's problem with lying Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: July 24, 2002 Your surly, arrogant, abject contempt for *your* critics and critics of Maharishi and his TM organization - is an explicit example of what I have written in characterization of such. Also, your copying and pasting of others' material to support your own inability to speak for yourself, is loudly apparent as a need to justify your own spiritual inadequacy...
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: T'would seem that the only thing that makes people crazier than suggesting that Maharishi was human enough to spring the occasional boner for a woman is to suggest that he might have been human enough to spring the occasional boner for a man. I have laughed out loud so many times with this topic today. Thanks Turq! The idea that such a relationship denigrates Maharishi is some way is very revealing. The assumption is that if it were true it would lesson Maharishi somehow says a lot. Yeah, Curtis, tell us what it says, since you and Barry are the ones who are using it to denigrate MMY. But being free enough to consider it as a possibility is actually more respectful of Maharishi the man. Right, this is so respectful of MMY the man: The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. Doesn't lessen MMY one bit, nosireebob. Furthest thing from your mind, right, Curtis? And you're accusing *him* of hypocrisy?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
TurquoiseB wrote: Thanks for getting it enough to laugh. Yeah, lets hear a big laugh!!! Bogumils are derived from Paulicans, Paulicans from Manicheans, Manicheans from Gnostics. Thus Cathars are derived from Gnostics. Moggers can understand this simple fact, 'cletantra' can't. - Klaus Schilling
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. Doesn't lessen MMY one bit, nosireebob. Furthest thing from your mind, right, Curtis? So you are still missing the point? It is the hypocrisy of his position on gayness that I am criticizing. Not that he might be gay. You remind me of my cats Judy. When I point my finger at a treat, they look at my finger. And you missed Turq's point also. He wasn't even going as far as I was in speculation. He was commenting on their over the top expressions of love for each other while denying that to men who may feel the same way but also physically. Speculating on their relationship is just another chance for you express rancor to me personally isn't it Judy? You aren't even following the actual topic we are discussing. And you're accusing *him* of hypocrisy? Yes I was. He, with his devotion to Guru Dev, out of anyone should understand how men can love each other, and should stay off their case. Neither you nor I know what that included. And you're accusing *him* of hypocrisy? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: T'would seem that the only thing that makes people crazier than suggesting that Maharishi was human enough to spring the occasional boner for a woman is to suggest that he might have been human enough to spring the occasional boner for a man. I have laughed out loud so many times with this topic today. Thanks Turq! The idea that such a relationship denigrates Maharishi is some way is very revealing. The assumption is that if it were true it would lesson Maharishi somehow says a lot. Yeah, Curtis, tell us what it says, since you and Barry are the ones who are using it to denigrate MMY. But being free enough to consider it as a possibility is actually more respectful of Maharishi the man. Right, this is so respectful of MMY the man: The absurdity of a man like Maharishi sticking to his fundamentalist anti-gay religious oppression when his relationship with Guru Dev can only be characterized as love between men is so absurd and hurtful to gay men everywhere. Doesn't lessen MMY one bit, nosireebob. Furthest thing from your mind, right, Curtis? And you're accusing *him* of hypocrisy?
[FairfieldLife] Viewing the world through desperate-colored glasses
Nabby rails on about how desperate Curtis and I are. Judy claims we're distraught. I Am The Eternal calls me sick. And yet, when you examine it, *they* are the ones who are melting down and acting out lately, and over WHAT? The fact that Curtis and I have been discussing Maharishi Mahesh Yogi AS IF HE WERE A MAN. THAT is what has them so uptight. All I did originally, while stating clearly that I was *not* suggesting that MMY had a gay relationship with Guru Dev (and I do not believe that he did, in the sense that he ever acted upon it), was look at the story of his life the way a normal person would look at ANY man's life who had spent that life in the pursuit of a clearly overwhelming love for another man. Curtis did the same. From my point of view, we did so fairly dis- passionately. To us, IT WOULDN'T MATTER if MMY and Guru Dev were gay and acted upon it or not. Neither of us has any stake in seeing Maharishi any particular way. To us, he was JUST A MAN. And *think* about that. If he really was enlightened, as many of you believe, he was JUST A MAN who became enlightened. In my view that is BETTER than if he were some special being who only got enlightened because he was special. Same with Christ or the Buddha or any other spiritual figure in history. Where is the payoff in considering these people special or more than human? If they were, and you're not, that sorta means that you can't achieve what they did, because you're NOT special like they were. But if they were JUST MEN, and achieved what they did *anyway*, then SO CAN YOU. Basically, the way I see it, all these TBs are melting down for two reasons. The first is because we're talking about sex as if it were normal to have sex. Many of these people are so uptight that they don't believe that. But the second reason is that we are talking about Maharishi the way we would talk about any other man on the planet, as if he weren't in any way special. We're cutting him no special breaks for being holy. AND THAT MAKES THEM CRAZY. Well, I hope that they *enjoy* being crazy, because I for one am not going to stop talk- ing about him as if he were JUST A MAN. That's all he was.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
curtisdeltablues wrote:it IS the hypocrisy of how he [MMY]treated gays in the movement with lines like they might as well not even meditate. I had gay friends in the movement an this teaching tormented them. I hold him accountable for that. Curtis, Man you've been in the thick of it what with Pencil-J and Richard J. stomping around with jack boots in a strawberry patch. In your quote above, I'm guessing that you knew that any gay person who stayed with the movement despite Maharishi's known disdain was responsible for any further abuse he was subjected to if he remained in the TMO. That was my big mistake: not getting out when I knew a moral line had be crossed by my own standards. I should have at least screamed about it from the back of the room, ya know?...and gotten kicked out and been honorable to that extent at least. It was my decision -- many times -- to be in some sort of scientific denial, i.e. I could see if things changed...take in more data...see if the course office ever treated anyone as a human being, or, say, found an usher who didn't save seats up front for his friends, or, if ever Bevan could lose a single pound. Like that I thought I could afford to hang around and let TM purify the ranks. Not being gay, to my shame, I was not triggered THEN about Maharishi's stance, but now I see it as a clear sign, a sign that is not unlike his cursing all of Britain, etc. Let's say it plainly: Maharishi could be one mother fucking bastard and was often, and yet all of us gave him wiggle room of cosmic proportions. Consider what anyone's opinion of Obama would be if he were to be caught on tape being homophobic. Instantly, his constituency would be riled into reformation. His vaunted image would be trashed, but Maharishi was caught like this time and time again -- starting with how he treated women, yet all of us dug deep and came up with the rationalizations to purify his actions. I think my sin of not seeing what abuse is heaped upon others is equal to the sin of homophobia, so it's hard to toss a stone at Maharishi who was obviously raised like anyone and was a product of his culture. His homophobia was innocent compared to my knowing something was wrong and doing nothing about it. My hair is going to be messy for the rest of the day -- no way am I looking in a mirror right now. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: 900 Pandits
I have also heard other than what you suggest, some one else mentioned here that Maharishi had some real flamers as close assistants at times.I have never heard that Maharishi was ever on tape saying anything like this. h--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: curtisdeltablues wrote:it IS the hypocrisy of how he [MMY]treated gays in the movement with lines like they might as well not even meditate. I had gay friends in the movement an this teaching tormented them. I hold him accountable for that. Curtis, Man you've been in the thick of it what with Pencil-J and Richard J. stomping around with jack boots in a strawberry patch. In your quote above, I'm guessing that you knew that any gay person who stayed with the movement despite Maharishi's known disdain was responsible for any further abuse he was subjected to if he remained in the TMO. That was my big mistake: not getting out when I knew a moral line had be crossed by my own standards. I should have at least screamed about it from the back of the room, ya know?...and gotten kicked out and been honorable to that extent at least. It was my decision -- many times -- to be in some sort of scientific denial, i.e. I could see if things changed...take in more data...see if the course office ever treated anyone as a human being, or, say, found an usher who didn't save seats up front for his friends, or, if ever Bevan could lose a single pound. Like that I thought I could afford to hang around and let TM purify the ranks. Not being gay, to my shame, I was not triggered THEN about Maharishi's stance, but now I see it as a clear sign, a sign that is not unlike his cursing all of Britain, etc. Let's say it plainly: Maharishi could be one mother fucking bastard and was often, and yet all of us gave him wiggle room of cosmic proportions. Consider what anyone's opinion of Obama would be if he were to be caught on tape being homophobic. Instantly, his constituency would be riled into reformation. His vaunted image would be trashed, but Maharishi was caught like this time and time again -- starting with how he treated women, yet all of us dug deep and came up with the rationalizations to purify his actions. I think my sin of not seeing what abuse is heaped upon others is equal to the sin of homophobia, so it's hard to toss a stone at Maharishi who was obviously raised like anyone and was a product of his culture. His homophobia was innocent compared to my knowing something was wrong and doing nothing about it. My hair is going to be messy for the rest of the day -- no way am I looking in a mirror right now. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: True Believerism As Self Pity
it was just drivel directed towards a red herring --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: true believers don't post here, they don't waste time on negative people or think that debating with them is a productive use their prescious time on this earth true believers don't feel any need to convert you, they are not obliged to save your soul true beleivers only need 1 in 100 for more than enough to change the world for the better... Thank you for explaining True Believerism to us. Boy, I sure got that us vs. them thing wrong...there's not a bit of it in your explanation. :-) :-) :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Vanquish your self-pity right now, don Juan demanded. Vanquish the idea that you are hurt and what do you have as the irreducible residue? - Carlos Castaneda, from The Active Side of Infinity Much has been written about the phenomenon of True Believerism. This will be just one more thing written about it, and no more definitive than any other. But it's a POV on the subject I haven't seen a lot, so maybe it'll be a new thing written about it, and spark some new ideas. Maybe not. I want to examine True Believerism in Castanedan terms, as an exercise in self pity. In my humble opinion, the compulsive defense of a belief system, or the symbol of that belief system in the person of its creator/teacher, or of the group that espouses that belief system is almost always just dripping with self pity. It's a way of saying, Poor me. Poor me. They are attacking my beliefs. Poor me. They are lying about me. Poor me. They are misrepresenting what our teacher said. Why not skip all the rest and just say what's really on your mind and what you're really feeling -- Poor me. True Believerism is based, in most cases, on the perceived (and often carefully cultivated over decades) distinction between us and them. Whatever the specific complaint or whine, its bottom line is almost always, *They* are trying to do harm to *us*. *Without* that distinction between us and them, there is really nothing to complain or whine about. If it were only two individuals expressing their own POVs or opinions, on the basis of equality, there would be nothing to whine about. But to the True Believer, there can NEVER be any true equality between one of us and one of them. Their very them-ness means that they are UNEQUAL. They don't 'know' the things that we know. They are 'threatened' by the things that we 'know.' And they are trying to harm us by saying things that they 'know' are not true, because we have said the opposite. And what we say is the truth. Poor us. They are trying to portray themselves as our equals, when we know that isn't true, because they are part of the 'them-group' not the 'us-group.' Interestingly enough, True Believers are often unable to tell that such whining is whining, and when people laugh at them for saying it, they perceive THAT as another attack. And so the para- noia and the Poor me whining escalate along with their self importance. Self-importance is self pity masquerading as something else. Self pity is the real enemy and the source of man's misery. - Carlos Castaneda, from The Power Of Silence Self pity is its own reward; the effect of its cause is to reinforce and perpetuate the self. There is a way beyond self pity, and coinci- dentally it was proposed by the same guy who taught that there is a way beyond suffering: Look how he abused me and beat me, how he threw me down and robbed me. Live with such thoughts and you live in hate. Look how he abused me and beat me, how he threw me down and robbed me. Abandon such thoughts and you live in love. - Buddha, from the Dhammapada
[FairfieldLife] Susan Boyle - Britains Got Talent 2009
In this week's Britain's Got Talent, a very unassuming Susan Boyle, self-described as unemployed, never been kissed, and living with a cat named Pebbles, got on the stage to sing. The audience could not have expected less, or been more surprised. From The Times: As soon as she begins singing I Dream A Dream, from the musical Les Misérables, however, everyone in the auditorium falls silent, before erupting into a standing ovation. Afterwards Morgan said: Without doubt that was the biggest surprise I've had in three years of this show. When you stood there with that cheeky grin everyone was laughing at you. No one is laughing now. That was stunning. I'm reeling from shock. Andrew Llinares, executive producer for TalkbackThames, the programme maker, said: She was a complete revelation. Everyone was cynical about her. She's a woman who's grown up in a tiny little village and has never got married. I think the expectation was that she wasn't going to be any good. But that's what's sensational about the show. No one saw it coming. Ms. Boyle is from the small village of Blackburn, West Lothian, Scotland, a few miles from Edinburgh, a small town that's on the map now. READ MORE: http://tinyurl.com/cht8t6 http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article6069597.ece SEE VIDEO: http://tinyurl.com/c49rgl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY UPDATE: http://tinyurl.com/cpf98w http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2009/04/12/brtain-s-got-talent-singing-sensation-susan-sang-to-escape-the-bullies-115875-21272894/ I was born with a disability and that made me a target for bullies. I was called names because of my fuzzy hair and because I struggled in class. I told the teachers, but because it was more verbal than physical I could never prove anything. But words often hurt more than cuts and bruises and the scars are still there. However, Susan has proved such a smash hit on Britain's Got Talent that supremo Simon Cowell has held talks with her about signing for his Sony BMG record label. And she believes her TV success is the perfect answer to the childhood tormentors who made her life hell in Bathgate, West Lothian.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Apr 11 00:00:00 2009 End Date (UTC): Sat Apr 18 00:00:00 2009 472 messages as of (UTC) Wed Apr 15 00:02:56 2009 46 authfriend jst...@panix.com 34 TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com 25 nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 25 Robert babajii...@yahoo.com 23 curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com 22 Kirk kirk_bernha...@cox.net 21 grate.swan no_re...@yahoogroups.com 18 Richard J. Williams willy...@yahoo.com 17 raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com 16 Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net 14 I am the eternal l.shad...@gmail.com 14 do.rflex do.rf...@yahoo.com 13 ruthsimplicity no_re...@yahoogroups.com 13 Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com 12 Arhata Osho arhatafreespe...@yahoo.com 11 sparaig lengli...@cox.net 11 satvadude108 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 10 Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@lisco.com 9 shempmcgurk shempmcg...@netscape.net 9 geezerfreak geezerfr...@yahoo.com 9 bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com 9 Nelson nelsonriddle2...@yahoo.com 8 Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com 8 Hugo richardhughes...@hotmail.com 8 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 7 Marek Reavis reavisma...@sbcglobal.net 6 guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@yahoo.com 6 enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@yahoogroups.com 6 Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com 5 arhatafreespe...@yahoo.com 5 Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net 4 BillyG. wg...@yahoo.com 3 michael vedamer...@yahoo.de 3 boo_lives boo_li...@yahoo.com 3 min.pige min.p...@yahoo.com 2 yateendrajee mcint...@scn.org 2 shukra69 shukr...@yahoo.ca 2 pranamoocher bh...@hotmail.com 2 cardemaister no_re...@yahoogroups.com 2 Tom azg...@yahoo.com 2 Peter drpetersutp...@yahoo.com 2 Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 1 lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net 1 billy jim emptyb...@yahoo.com 1 wle...@aol.com 1 Richard M compost...@yahoo.co.uk 1 Dick Mays dickm...@lisco.com Posters: 47 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
