date:20121003

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Ravi Chivukula

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:11 PM, awoelflebater wrote:

> **
>
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula 
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Marek - I think you suck, your video sucks and you are a fucking
> moron
> > totally detached from reality, fantasizing in stupid beliefs and I say
> this
> > with total positivity, total love, I don't think being moronic is your
> > shortcoming, it's just your intrinsic nature. Without morons like you, it
> > will be just a dull place and I for one am so happy that morons like you
> > exist !!!
> >
> > Love,
> > Ravi.
>
> Oh Ravi, you are one tough critic.
>
>
Sorry dear Ann, this has one of my weaknesses since childhood - inauthentic
people always bother me.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Debate 2012

2012-10-03 Thread raunchydog

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> One word: boring.  I fell asleep about 40 minutes into it and I suppose 
> everyone but political wonks did too.  Romney looked like a Mormon 
> church lady.  just put a granny dress and a wig on him and he would be 
> mistaken for one.  And he's about as dated as one too.  So 19th century 
> and such a putz.  Haven't we had enough putz Presidents?
> 
> Of course they can "tawk 'til da cows come home" about what they're 
> "gonna due" but by now we don't fall for that gag anymore.
>

Whoever prepped Obama sure didn't do him any favors. Mitt lied his ass off, and 
Obama let him get away with it. Mitt kept saying Obamacare would take $716 
Billion from Medicare and Obama failed to rebut this well documented lie. 
Obama's Iowa ads hit Mitt hard on his 47% remark. Obama didn't make a peep 
about it. Mitt implied our do nothing Congress was Obama's fault. Was Obama so 
asleep during his own presidency that he couldn't remember to say that the 
Republicans turned down every compromise he put forward? Obama's performance 
was disappointing. Romney will probably get a boost in the polls. Obama has 
some catching up to do.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Robin Carlsen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEiGS2dBbxg

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


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> Do you know the difference between the video I posted and the one you 
> did in reply?
> 
> On 10/03/2012 04:40 PM, Robin Carlsen wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mg8SyAJfaw
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cAD68ISy6k
> >>
> >> On 10/03/2012 11:44 AM, Robin Carlsen wrote:
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU98KwL_pQ8&feature=related
> >>>
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> > So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess
> > if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."
>  That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
>  and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
>  any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
>  able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
>  I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
>  anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this
>  one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce
>  Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.
> 
>  I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
>  I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
>  lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
>  of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
>  of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty
>  Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
>  "Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
>  and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked
>  my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
>  for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
>  And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty
>  much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as
>  myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
>  not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
>  to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.
> 
> > Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens
> > soap opera.
>  It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether
>  the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
>  soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did
>  for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
>  I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
>  Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.
> 
>  Despite me still being -- after all these years and
>  all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
>  romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
>  faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles
>  and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the
>  characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so,
>  I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
>  with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk
>  that.
> 
>  Their loss.
> 
> >>>
> >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi

2012-10-03 Thread Ravi Chivukula

Awesome dear Share, I'm glad you had a good time !!! I'm the blast? Sorry I
didn't get that - unless you are saying I am cool, if so I am totally cool
with that :-)

Love,
Ravi

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Share Long  wrote:

> **
>
>
> dear Ravi, just back from John Newton shindig.  Good crowd.  Powerful
> healings.  Guess what?  You ARE the blast!  love, share
>
>
>
>   --
> *From:* Ravi Chivukula 
> *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 3, 2012 4:49 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi
>
>
> Wonderful dear Share - I wish all the good luck in this entire existence
> to you !!!
>
> Though I personally only believe in myself, have always only believed in
> myself and I think all healers, Gurus, religions, gods are false, they are
> all frauds. However it's really good for entertainment, just as we watch
> movies, art, dance, drama - stimulate the heart, feel those emotions - sure
> I only like singing to my beloved but occasionally I sing Bhajans to
> fantasy divine Mother, fantasy Krishna and I really have a blast !!!
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Share Long  wrote:
>
> **
>
>  dear Ravi, it means so much to me that you love me in spite of my
> mistakes and flaws.  Maybe there will be less of those after I've worked
> with healer John Newton for the next 4 days.  Fingers crossed!  love, Share
>
>   --
> *From:* Ravi Chivukula 
> *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:19 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ann Emily Ravi
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Ravi Chivukula 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Share Long  wrote:
>
> **
>
>
>
> TO RAVI:
> Dear Ravi, as far as I can tell, you have never been the target of Robin's
> fixing mode.  So I don't think you really know what it feels like to have
> him attribute thoughts and feelings to you that you never even had.  And to
> have him do that over and over.  Perhaps then you too would be forceful
> with him.  I don't agree with you that I was brutal.
>
>
>
> Oh Dear Share - No one has any power over me, my feelings or thoughts -
> even such a notion is totally alien to me. Here's where we have to part -
> Robin is one of the most honest, truthful, sincere persons I have ever come
> across my life, he's one of the very few to earn my respect and I totally
> disagree and your choice of the words "psychological rape" is just brutal
> and violent, doesn't represent the reality of who the person Robin is. But
> this will not stop me from loving you.
>
> Love,
> Ravi.
>
>
>
> Yet I want to make sure you know I'm not denying your feelings, I wouldn't
> dare deny it and I'm sorry to hear you feel so.
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi

2012-10-03 Thread Share Long

dear Ravi, just back from John Newton shindig.  Good crowd.  Powerful 
healings.  Guess what?  You ARE the blast!  love, share






 From: Ravi Chivukula 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi
 

  
Wonderful dear Share - I wish all the good luck in this entire existence to you 
!!!

Though I personally only believe in myself, have always only believed in myself 
and I think all healers, Gurus, religions, gods are false, they are all frauds. 
However it's really good for entertainment, just as we watch movies, art, 
dance, drama - stimulate the heart, feel those emotions - sure I only like 
singing to my beloved but occasionally I sing Bhajans to fantasy divine Mother, 
fantasy Krishna and I really have a blast !!!



On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Share Long  wrote:

 
>  
>dear Ravi, it means so much to me that you love me in spite of my mistakes and 
>flaws.  Maybe there will be less of those after I've worked with healer John 
>Newton for the next 4 days.  Fingers crossed!  love, Share
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Ravi Chivukula 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:19 PM
>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ann Emily Ravi
> 
>
>  
>
>
>
>On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Ravi Chivukula  
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Share Long  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>TO RAVI:
>>>Dear Ravi, as far as I can tell, you have never been the target of Robin's 
>>>fixing mode.  So I don't think you really know what it feels like to have 
>>>him attribute thoughts and feelings to you that you never even had.  And to 
>>>have him do that over and over.  Perhaps then you too would be forceful with 
>>>him.  I don't agree with you that I was brutal.
>>> 
>>
>>
>>Oh Dear Share - No one has any power over me, my feelings or thoughts - even 
>>such a notion is totally alien to me. Here's where we have to part - Robin is 
>>one of the most honest, truthful, sincere persons I have ever come across my 
>>life, he's one of the very few to earn my respect and I totally disagree and 
>>your choice of the words "psychological rape" is just brutal and violent, 
>>doesn't represent the reality of who the person Robin is. But this will not 
>>stop me from loving you.
>>
>>
>>Love,
>>Ravi.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Yet I want to make sure you know I'm not denying your feelings, I wouldn't 
>dare deny it and I'm sorry to hear you feel so.
>
>

[FairfieldLife] The Psychological Rape of Willytex

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams



authfriend:  
> Since Share's accusation against Robin of "psychological
> rape" is being discussed here, I thought we should all 
> see exactly what it refers to...
> 
We all know how disagreeable it is to make use of the 
thinking process, so it is with much concern that I 
attempt here to report on a subject which is quite 
shocking, even to the ways of this sadhu (good fellow), 
and which describes some rather difficult terms.

Abraham, unable to produce a son by his wife Sarah, came 
to Mecca in order to have sex upon the rock with his slave 
Hagar. It is unclear from reading the Catholic Bible 
whether Abraham actualy copulated on the rock with Hagar, 
or whether Abraham inserted the rock into the vulva of 
Hagar, or all of the above and more that was kept secret. 

However, it is exactly clear that some form of sexual 
deviate behavior was being perpetrated upon Hagar by her 
master old Abraham, and that this perversion involved the 
cult of the fetish black rock of Mecca and sexual 
intercourse. 

But, it's not all clear about the birth of Abraham's 
bastard son, Ishmael, becoming the ancestor of all Arab 
peoples? 

And, that's how my mind gets raped! 

Robin - can you help me? I NEED SOME SPIRITUAL HELP!!!

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread awoelflebater



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Dear Marek - I think you suck, your video sucks and you are a fucking moron
> totally detached from reality, fantasizing in stupid beliefs and I say this
> with total positivity, total love, I don't think being moronic is your
> shortcoming, it's just your intrinsic nature. Without morons like you, it
> will be just a dull place and I for one am so happy that morons like you
> exist !!!
> 
> Love,
> Ravi.

Oh Ravi, you are one tough critic.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 3:42 PM, marekreavis wrote:
> 
> > **
> >
> >
> > I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind
> > words, too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be
> > counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll
> > continue to follow through with the idea.
> >
> > P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I
> > don't have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get
> > down to SF these days. But someday, maybe.
> >
> > ***
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment:
> > perhaps FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to
> > post no comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but
> > rather, about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that
> > isn't commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of
> > integrity, etc., or the opposite.
> > >
> > > Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if
> > there was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard
> > cavil that characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off
> > and just enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> > >
> > > Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words,
> > just simple images and music:
> > >
> > > https://vimeo.com/49951982
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams



marekreavis:
> Sounds good, Laughinggull108, I'm in. First 
> contributions tomorrow, then.
> 
You can count on the Punditster to post something
interesting tomorrow, although I don't see the
point - I've already posted thousands of threads
on Usenet. Apparently I've only got three readers,
Eric, an 'emptybill and a 'Michael Jackson'. LoL!

 
> > Just because some don't want your suggestion 
> > to be a "rule", we could still pick one day 
> > each week (I would suggest Thursdays) to post 
> > something such as what you have posted today. 
> > It would give us something to look forward to 
> > rather than these childish games that seem to 
> > be dominating the forum lately. Let's try it, 
> > shall we?
> >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Xenophaneros Anartaxius

I did place a dish in the drying rack tonight. Geomancy is fine. But human 
societies do not have a specific defined way of implementing it. It just 
evolves naturally. Having a home is fine. 

What I was saying is if *you* are the vastu, those other things are just icing 
on the cake. You can live in a cave, in an apartment facing south, in an RV, in 
a tent, and you have what all these other things superfically attempt provide, 
or are said to provide. There is no good reason that I see that any particular 
system that attempts to define how one should build a home is superior to some 
other. One does have to take into account weather, temperature etc. 

You would not build a hacienda style home in Anarctica for example, and you 
would not be able to face any wall east, west, or south if you built a home at 
the South Pole. The International Space Station is a home that has certain 
specific qualities necessary for life in orbit around the Earth. 

What I was saying is someone who has experience what is called enlightenment 
does not have to bother so much with this. For that person, that person's abode 
is whatever is going on, wherever, whenever. The best condition for living is 
to not be totally screwed up mentally, and that is internal in our mind. This 
is the reason for meditating.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Xenophaneros Anartaxius:
> > No building; no amount of attention to 
> > health will ever give you what you want 
> > in life: in the end these things will 
> > crumble, and if you are still desiring 
> > these things, you will crumble with 
> > them...
> >
> You think it's alright to wash the dishes 
> and place them on the drying rack tonight?
> 
> Maybe, we should just let the place go to
> shit if there's no reason to create a home.
> 
> It's so depressing to want to plant flowers
> in the garden! Why don't I just kill myself
> instead?
> 
> In fact, building a home and hearth is the 
> highest spiritual calling. It is Geomancy: 
> a way of serving the Earth Mother.
> 
> All traditional cultures have their own 
> system of natural geomancy. There are many 
> solutions that nature has provided in the 
> way of housing, such as cocoons, shells, 
> webs, nests and dens, which are but a few 
> examples of natural geomancy. 
> 
> Thus, geomancy is inherent and vital to 
> life survival. In human society, geomancy 
> is a part of our animal heritage and the 
> result of continuing improvement in human 
> dwelling construction.
> 
> People have always developed shelters and 
> homes in concert with nature. Tree houses, 
> caves, cliff dwellings, and commanding 
> views are some examples of universal 
> geomancy. 
> 
> Geomancy is at least half a million years 
> old, dating from early Homo Sapiens. 
> 
> Images of 'Magna Mater' dating from 30,000 
> BCE were placed in small wall recesses in 
> homes, in order to insure vitality and 
> abundance.
> 
> Geomancy can be defined as 'The skillfull 
> use of the best available knowledge in order 
> to create the *most suitable conditions* 
> for living and working' (T. Lin Yun). 
> 
> Geomancy involves the awareness of how the 
> ways of construction, orientation, and 
> placement affect our environment and thus 
> our own daily activities and relations.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] The Debate

2012-10-03 Thread Ravi Chivukula

Yes Uncleji - boring as hell and I started to feel asleep as well, finally
turned it off but had agree to with the experts - Mitt seemed to do well
and Obama looked annoyed :-)

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Bhairitu  wrote:

> **
>
>
> One word: boring. I fell asleep about 40 minutes into it and I suppose
> everyone but political wonks did too. Romney looked like a Mormon
> church lady. just put a granny dress and a wig on him and he would be
> mistaken for one. And he's about as dated as one too. So 19th century
> and such a putz. Haven't we had enough putz Presidents?
>
> Of course they can "tawk 'til da cows come home" about what they're
> "gonna due" but by now we don't fall for that gag anymore.
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams



mjackson74:
> I am astonished you aren't claiming geomancy 
> came from the Buddhists...
> 
History in India begins with the Buddha - before 
that is considered to be pre-history. So, yes, 
just about everything we know about ancient India 
we learned from the Buddhists. If it wasn't for 
the stupa relics, we wouldn't even know that the 
Buddha was a historical person that lived in 
India!

The symbol for 'OM' does not occur in the Rig Veda 
(circa 1500 BCE). OM isn't mentioned in the Rig 
because there was no written text back then 
(archaic Sanskrit) the symbol for OM was added 
much later. 

It is found mentioned in the Chandogya Upanishad, 
(udgitha), which was obviously composed after the 
historical Buddha's passing. OM is alluded to in 
Patanjali's Yoga Sutra (pranava) (circa 200 BCE), 
and in the Bhagavad Gita (circa 100 CE). 

The Gita appeared later than the great movement 
represented by the early Upanishads.

So, if OM had been known before 400 BCE, it 
would have been mentioned by the Buddha, Shakya 
the Muni. 

The symbol OM isn't really a bija mantra at all; 
bijas didn't come into use until the age of the 
tantrics (circa 100 CE). 

If you inspect the archaic Sankrit of the Rig 
Veda, you will not find the OM symbol. OM was 
addded to the text during the time of their 
arrangement by Pannini. For example, you won't 
find the bija mantra 'phat' in the Rig Veda 
either. 

So, how did we get OM? It's just the symbol of 
the Transcendent, an expression that was added 
after the age of tantrism, after the invention 
of writing. OM is the mantra of assent. It 
means yes and affirms and energizes whatever we 
say after it.

Obviously, there were no esoteric symbols in 
Sanskrit before writing! The first instance of 
writing in India occurs on the Sarnath Pillar 
erected by Asoka (circa 200 BCE). There is no 
OM symbol in the Saraswati Civilzation (circa 
2400 BCE). 

OM is a verbal expressions, not part of the 
original Gayatri Mantra. OM is not a primordial 
symbol - it is an invention of tantrics that was 
added later. OM is merely a salutation, just 
like 'Amen" is used in Hebrew. 

For example, there's no Amen expression in the 
Old Testament - it is added when the passage is 
recited, as an affirmation. 

According to Mircea Eliade, quoting the Tantras, 
tantric sadhana explains the importance of 
sexuality. Tantrics teach control of the 
temporal rhythms by disciplining respiration, 
thus escaping the domination of time. 

"The flesh, the living cosmos, and time are the 
three fundamental elements of tantric sadhana." 

Work cited:

'Yoga: Immortality and Freedom'
by Mircea Eliade
Princeton, Bollengen Foundation
Second Edition 1969
Paper: 0-691-01764-6
The standard text on Yoga; scholarly; definitive, 
by the author of 'Shamanism', 'The Myth of the 
Eternal Return', 'History of Religious Ideas', 
etc. p. 264

Reference:

'The Tantric Tradition'
Agehananda Bharati (Author)
Rider, 1970 

Other titles of interest:

'Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization'
Heinrich Robert Zimmer, Joseph Campbell
Princeton University Press, 1972

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Debate

2012-10-03 Thread John

I felt that Romney was more confident and smooth in his speech delivery.  It 
appeared President Obama was halting and tentative in his speech.  I was hoping 
he would be more robust in his position.  In the final analysis, most of the 
voters have already made up their minds.  These speeches will only convince 
those who are still sitting on the fence, which is estimated to be about 6 
percent of the electorate.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> One word: boring.  I fell asleep about 40 minutes into it and I suppose 
> everyone but political wonks did too.  Romney looked like a Mormon 
> church lady.  just put a granny dress and a wig on him and he would be 
> mistaken for one.  And he's about as dated as one too.  So 19th century 
> and such a putz.  Haven't we had enough putz Presidents?
> 
> Of course they can "tawk 'til da cows come home" about what they're 
> "gonna due" but by now we don't fall for that gag anymore.
>

[FairfieldLife] The Debate

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

One word: boring.  I fell asleep about 40 minutes into it and I suppose 
everyone but political wonks did too.  Romney looked like a Mormon 
church lady.  just put a granny dress and a wig on him and he would be 
mistaken for one.  And he's about as dated as one too.  So 19th century 
and such a putz.  Haven't we had enough putz Presidents?

Of course they can "tawk 'til da cows come home" about what they're 
"gonna due" but by now we don't fall for that gag anymore.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin

2012-10-03 Thread authfriend

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
[to Robin, who Share insists has "psychologically raped" her:]
> Wishing you all the best always,
> Share


[Share quoting Robin] 
> Robin wrote:
> I just loved your spontaneous delight in that video--and 
> it was an occasion where your experience was not mediated by
> your beliefs.

[Above I've quoted the first part of Robin's sentence, which
Share omitted, for obvious reasons.--JS]

> My reply:
> This is the kind of statement that feels like a violation
> to me.  You don't say that it seemed to you or anything like 
> that.  Just an assertion of the condition of my inner self.
> AND not about my beliefs.  I don't mind when my beliefs are
> being challenged directly.

Since Share's accusation against Robin of "psychological
rape" is being discussed here, I thought we should all see
exactly what it refers to.

Below I've quoted what initiated this conflict: the initial
remarks of Robin; Share's "grumpy" reaction, plus her
apology; then Robin's explanation of what he had actually
meant.

> Dear Share,
> Robin1: You must excuse my presumption here (because it is
> very likely I am wrong) but I must tell you that in this post
> I get to feel the most Share that is there severed (perhaps
> not consciously:)) from her philosophy. It just *seemed* to
> me that all you wrote here came out of your experience
> unmediated by any final beliefs about what is real. Like a 
> beautiful accident of Share making herself available beyond
> what would be possible were she solidly, as she almost always
> is, behind her spiritual orientation to people and reality
> (which, in the weaponry and ordnance deployed by some of us
> more irascible FFL posters, is sometimes--silently, mind you--
> denigrated as being overly positive--and therefore impotent:)).
> 
> Share1: hi Robin, yes I will excuse your presumption if you
> excuse my not going down this particular rabbit hole again.
> You know, the one about my being so positive yada yada. As
> for my being impotent, it's not been my intention to be, uh, 
> potent. So no problemo. Sigh, btw, I notice I'm feeling grumpy
> this morning. Blaming it on the sugar I ate yesterday. Somehow
> I've become very sensitive to sugar. Anyway, Robin, apologies
> for taking it out on you.
> 
> Robin2: All that I was trying to communicate--and I said I 
> was "very likely...wrong"--was the sense I had in reading
> your post to me that *I was only getting the human being
> Share Long*--and no belief system. This was my honest and 
> undeniable experience. I had to be true to that experience,
> and I thought it noteworthy; I took the chance on making this
> experience known to the person who had produced that
> experience inside of me. My approach here was the only one
> that seemed available to me--with all the qualifiers which I 
> thought would obviate the need to retaliate. :-)
> 
> I found in the assumption that I was correct: i.e. I was
> only getting the person Share here--that somehow you came
> across more powerfully and beautifully this way--But, again,
> this is only an impression I have: Perhaps in your post you
> were aware of asserting your philosophy all the same. You
> must understand me here, Share, so that you do not construe
> my post as some kind of hint to you: viz. Hey, Share: how
> about laying off the positive philosophy and just talking
> to me as the real person you are! It was not this at all;
> it was my confessing to you how your post influenced me and
> what I assumed was the cause of that influence. Nothing more
> than this, Share--no matter how it seemed. And I even take 
> responsibility for you being slightly offended by what for
> you--if I am interpreting you truthfully--was my attempt to
> be didactic. I just had a different experience of you and I
> tried to tell you what that experience was. I will suspend
> my attempt to make that experience intelligible to me, and
> just say: great post, Share. :-)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319232

Again: This is what Share has been characterizing as
"psychological rape" on Robin's part.

Share's response to "Robin2" above:

"Robin, it sounds like you're saying that you sensed you were
getting the real me and not my beliefs.  But OTOH you were
very likely wrong.  Given this assessment of me by you, I'd
prefer to suspend communication with you. Apologies if I've 
misunderstood and in that case, I hope we can work things out."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319335

Note that Share's objection was to Robin saying he was
"very likely wrong" about having gotten the real Share
and not her beliefs. This qualification from Robin--made
because he did not want to impose his interpretation on
her--was understood by Share to mean he thought he was
not getting the real Share. That's the "assessment" she
mentions in the quote immediately above.

Yet in her post today, she quotes Robin's current post to
her saying what he had said orig

[FairfieldLife] The Golden Plates

2012-10-03 Thread Buck

I was on Hill Cumorah earlier today looking for the gold plates but there 
weren't none I found.
-Buck


In A.D. 421 Moroni, the last survivor of a great civilization that had 
inhabited the Americas since about 600 B.C., buried in this hill a set of 
golden plates on which was recorded the history of his people.  In 1827 Mroni 
returned to this hill as an angel and delivered the plates to Joseph Smith, who 
translated and published them as the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus 
Christ.

[FairfieldLife] Early 'civil union' Marriage.

2012-10-03 Thread Buck

Skaneateles, 1843.

   No clergyman or magistrate would perform any weddings.  A man and a woman 
would simply announce that they considered themselves married, and they 
generally remained true to the marriage, separating only when love ceased.  
There were no cases of adultery or fornication at the community. A man and a 
woman just told everyone that they were in love and considered themselves 
married, and that was all there was to it.   
Did this decree upset the locals!

The utopian Skaneateles Community in 1843 acquired and successfully operated a 
large farm and developed small industries, but ultimately failed because of 
internal difficulties, as well as external concern about its unorthodox social 
practices. Locally it was sometimes called "No God," because of the atheistic 
views of members. The Skaneateles Community published a newspaper, the 
"Comunitist" [sic] between 1844 and 1846, when the community dissolved. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skaneateles,_New_York

Was there today visiting the old community.
-Buck

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

Do you know the difference between the video I posted and the one you 
did in reply?

On 10/03/2012 04:40 PM, Robin Carlsen wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mg8SyAJfaw
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cAD68ISy6k
>>
>> On 10/03/2012 11:44 AM, Robin Carlsen wrote:
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU98KwL_pQ8&feature=related
>>>
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess
> if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."
 That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
 and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
 any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
 able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
 I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
 anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this
 one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce
 Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.

 I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
 I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
 lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
 of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
 of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty
 Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
 "Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
 and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked
 my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
 for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
 And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty
 much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as
 myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
 not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
 to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.

> Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens
> soap opera.
 It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether
 the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
 soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did
 for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
 I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
 Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.

 Despite me still being -- after all these years and
 all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
 romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
 faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles
 and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the
 characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so,
 I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
 with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk
 that.

 Their loss.

>>>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Do's & Don'ts in Dealing with Gorillas

2012-10-03 Thread Yifu Xero

- Forwarded Message -
From: Yifu Xero 
To: Yifu Xero  
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 5:05 PM
Subject: Do's & Don'ts in Dealing with Gorillas

from CSM, page 9:

1. Don't eat or drink in front of a gorilla
2. Don't point at them with your finger
3. Don't use a flash camera
4. Don't touch
5. Don't go to the bathroom facing a gorilla
6. Don't look a gorilla in the eye.
7. Do enjoy one of the rarest sights in the natural world; there are only 270 
wild gorillas lef on earth.

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

2012-10-03 Thread FFL PostCount

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Sep 29 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Oct 06 00:00:00 2012
519 messages as of (UTC) Thu Oct 04 00:12:35 2012

43 authfriend 
43 Robin Carlsen 
40 Ravi Chivukula 
34 "Richard J. Williams" 
31 turquoiseb 
29 awoelflebater 
29 Share Long 
27 curtisdeltablues 
25 seventhray1 
24 Buck 
20 card 
17 Emily Reyn 
16 Bhairitu 
15 raunchydog 
13 Jason 
12 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
11 Michael Jackson 
 9 John 
 8 Alex Stanley 
 6 Rick Archer 
 5 feste37 
 5 emptybill 
 5 doctordumb...@rocketmail.com, UNEXPECTED_DATA_AFTER_ADDRESS@".SYNTAX-ERROR.
 5 cardemaister 
 4 maskedzebra 
 4 marekreavis 
 4 Susan 
 3 richardatrwilliamsdotus 
 3 nablusoss1008 
 3 mjackson74 
 3 lordknows888 
 3 Mike Dixon 
 2 stevelf 
 2 merlin 
 2 laughinggull108 
 2 jedi_spock 
 2 Ken Wehmann 
 2 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 1 salyavin808 
 1 pileated56 
 1 jr_esq 
 1 azgrey 
 1 wle...@aol.com
 1 Duveyoung 
 1 Dick Mays 
 1 "martin.quickman" 

Posters: 46
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread marekreavis

Hey, Edg! Long time, no write, for both of us. Put up some more Trikke videos, 
eh?

***

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
>
> I was happy just to see your name.  
> 
> You're like the control rods in a nuke reactor -- just your presence keeps 
> the loonytuners from reaching critical mass.  
> 
> Edg
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
> >
> > I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind 
> > words, too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be 
> > counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll 
> > continue to follow through with the idea.
> > 
> > P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I 
> > don't have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get 
> > down to SF these days. But someday, maybe.
> > 
> > ***
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: 
> > > perhaps FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to 
> > > post no comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, 
> > > but rather, about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else 
> > > that isn't commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack 
> > > of integrity, etc., or the opposite.
> > > 
> > > Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if 
> > > there was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard 
> > > cavil that characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day 
> > > off and just enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> > > 
> > > Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> > > simple images and music:
> > > 
> > > https://vimeo.com/49951982
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Michael Jackson

I am astonished you aren't claiming geomancy came from the Buddhists

 From: Richard J. Williams 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 7:29 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

Xenophaneros Anartaxius:
> No building; no amount of attention to 
> health will ever give you what you want 
> in life: in the end these things will 
> crumble, and if you are still desiring 
> these things, you will crumble with 
> them...
>
You think it's alright to wash the dishes 
and place them on the drying rack tonight?

Maybe, we should just let the place go to
shit if there's no reason to create a home.

It's so depressing to want to plant flowers
in the garden! Why don't I just kill myself
instead?

In fact, building a home and hearth is the 
highest spiritual calling. It is Geomancy: 
a way of serving the Earth Mother.

All traditional cultures have their own 
system of natural geomancy. There are many 
solutions that nature has provided in the 
way of housing, such as cocoons, shells, 
webs, nests and dens, which are but a few 
examples of natural geomancy. 

Thus, geomancy is inherent and vital to 
life survival. In human society, geomancy 
is a part of our animal heritage and the 
result of continuing improvement in human 
dwelling construction.

People have always developed shelters and 
homes in concert with nature. Tree houses, 
caves, cliff dwellings, and commanding 
views are some examples of universal 
geomancy. 

Geomancy is at least half a million years 
old, dating from early Homo Sapiens. 

Images of 'Magna Mater' dating from 30,000 
BCE were placed in small wall recesses in 
homes, in order to insure vitality and 
abundance.

Geomancy can be defined as 'The skillfull 
use of the best available knowledge in order 
to create the *most suitable conditions* 
for living and working' (T. Lin Yun). 

Geomancy involves the awareness of how the 
ways of construction, orientation, and 
placement affect our environment and thus 
our own daily activities and relations.

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread marekreavis

Sounds good, Laughinggull108, I'm in. First contributions tomorrow, then.

***

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Hi Marek,
> 
> Just because some don't want your suggestion to be a "rule", we could still 
> pick one day each week (I would suggest Thursdays) to post something such as 
> what you have posted today. It would give us something to look forward to 
> rather than these childish games that seem to be dominating the forum lately. 
> Let's try it, shall we?
> 
> LaughingGull
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
> >
> > I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind 
> > words, too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be 
> > counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll 
> > continue to follow through with the idea.
> > 
> > P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I 
> > don't have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get 
> > down to SF these days. But someday, maybe.
> > 
> > ***
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: 
> > > perhaps FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to 
> > > post no comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, 
> > > but rather, about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else 
> > > that isn't commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack 
> > > of integrity, etc., or the opposite.
> > > 
> > > Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if 
> > > there was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard 
> > > cavil that characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day 
> > > off and just enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> > > 
> > > Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> > > simple images and music:
> > > 
> > > https://vimeo.com/49951982
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Robin Carlsen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mg8SyAJfaw

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cAD68ISy6k
> 
> On 10/03/2012 11:44 AM, Robin Carlsen wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU98KwL_pQ8&feature=related
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >>> So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess
> >>> if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."
> >> That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
> >> and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
> >> any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
> >> able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
> >> I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
> >> anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this
> >> one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce
> >> Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.
> >>
> >> I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
> >> I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
> >> lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
> >> of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
> >> of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty
> >> Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
> >> "Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
> >> and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked
> >> my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
> >> for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
> >> And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty
> >> much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as
> >> myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
> >> not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
> >> to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.
> >>
> >>> Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens
> >>> soap opera.
> >> It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether
> >> the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
> >> soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did
> >> for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
> >> I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
> >> Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.
> >>
> >> Despite me still being -- after all these years and
> >> all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
> >> romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
> >> faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles
> >> and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the
> >> characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so,
> >> I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
> >> with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk
> >> that.
> >>
> >> Their loss.
> >>
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams



Xenophaneros Anartaxius:
> No building; no amount of attention to 
> health will ever give you what you want 
> in life: in the end these things will 
> crumble, and if you are still desiring 
> these things, you will crumble with 
> them...
>
You think it's alright to wash the dishes 
and place them on the drying rack tonight?

Maybe, we should just let the place go to
shit if there's no reason to create a home.

It's so depressing to want to plant flowers
in the garden! Why don't I just kill myself
instead?

In fact, building a home and hearth is the 
highest spiritual calling. It is Geomancy: 
a way of serving the Earth Mother.

All traditional cultures have their own 
system of natural geomancy. There are many 
solutions that nature has provided in the 
way of housing, such as cocoons, shells, 
webs, nests and dens, which are but a few 
examples of natural geomancy. 

Thus, geomancy is inherent and vital to 
life survival. In human society, geomancy 
is a part of our animal heritage and the 
result of continuing improvement in human 
dwelling construction.

People have always developed shelters and 
homes in concert with nature. Tree houses, 
caves, cliff dwellings, and commanding 
views are some examples of universal 
geomancy. 

Geomancy is at least half a million years 
old, dating from early Homo Sapiens. 

Images of 'Magna Mater' dating from 30,000 
BCE were placed in small wall recesses in 
homes, in order to insure vitality and 
abundance.

Geomancy can be defined as 'The skillfull 
use of the best available knowledge in order 
to create the *most suitable conditions* 
for living and working' (T. Lin Yun). 

Geomancy involves the awareness of how the 
ways of construction, orientation, and 
placement affect our environment and thus 
our own daily activities and relations.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Ravi Chivukula

Dear Marek - I think you suck, your video sucks and you are a fucking moron
totally detached from reality, fantasizing in stupid beliefs and I say this
with total positivity, total love, I don't think being moronic is your
shortcoming, it's just your intrinsic nature. Without morons like you, it
will be just a dull place and I for one am so happy that morons like you
exist !!!

Love,
Ravi.


On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 3:42 PM, marekreavis wrote:

> **
>
>
> I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind
> words, too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be
> counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll
> continue to follow through with the idea.
>
> P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I
> don't have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get
> down to SF these days. But someday, maybe.
>
> ***
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment:
> perhaps FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to
> post no comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but
> rather, about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that
> isn't commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of
> integrity, etc., or the opposite.
> >
> > Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if
> there was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard
> cavil that characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off
> and just enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> >
> > Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words,
> just simple images and music:
> >
> > https://vimeo.com/49951982
> >
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS [to Judy]

2012-10-03 Thread authfriend

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> >  wrote:
>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
>  wrote:
>  
> > Do you not care about what reality is asking of you as to
> > how you *should* interpret reality?
>  
>  This question which you posed to Share seems central to the way
>  in which you have been interacting with people here lately. How
>  does reality 'ask' of one, and why is there an attribute
>  connected with the asking that is called 'should'?
> >>> 
> >>> I suspect this is a manner of speaking. I further suspect
> >>> it's a manner of speaking you don't actually have any 
> >>> trouble interpreting.
> >>> 
> >>> The language does not describe some new way that Robin is
> >>> interacting with people. It's the way most of us--you
> >>> included--interact with each other most of the time here,
> >>> especially when there's a dispute or disagreement.
> >> 
> >> As the best parser on FFL, I think you parsed this differently
> >> than I did, and this has made me think about it again.
> > 
> > I didn't parse it at all, Xeno. Do you know what "parse"
> > means?
> 
> I used parse in the sense of the way a computer might parse a
> structure rather than an English teacher might parse words. I
> broke that sentence into two basic parts at the word 'you. 1)
> Does reality 'ask' anything?, and 2) is there something about
> all this that involves a 'should'?

I didn't parse it at all either way, Xeno.

> >> In general the complexity of Robin's speech, I think,
> >> obscures understanding for most people, and does not represent
> >> a useful way to teach most people about reality.
> > 
> > I suggest you read Robin's recent post "How to Know Reality's
> > Point of View":
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/321523
> > 
> > Pay particular attention to the last two paragraphs (but
> 
> Thanks for the reminder because I had not read it. I did read it now.
> 
> >> So, what is
> >> your understanding of the sentence of Robin's I quoted? Because
> >> you said 'I suspect this is a manner of speaking' in referring
> >> to the quote, I would suppose it is not entirely clear in your
> >> mind either.
> > 
> > You would suppose wrong. "Suspect" was rather obviously
> > sarcastic in context.
> 
> I suppose I missed the sarcasm mostly. I sensed it. This essay
> by Robin is a lot less opaque than most of his writing. It is 
> always the suspicion that in the end, Robin will declare that
> he alone is the arbitrator of what the ultimate reality is.

I assume that's meant to be humorous, since there's zero
basis for such a suspicion.


> > Really, Xeno, Robin has written so much on this topic, it's 
> > depressing to be asked questions about his approach that
> > you wouldn't need to ask had you simply read what he has to
> > say.
> 
> I was not asking you to explain what Robin says. I can read
> that, and I can either understand or misunderstand that. What
> I was asking is how you interpret what Robin says.

I interpret it to mean that it's good to make an effort to
come as close as we can to understanding what the reality
is of any particular situation.


> > Robin has his own formula for getting at the truth, but the
> > nature of his interactions with people here, as I suggested,
> > isn't fundamentally any different from anybody else's. With
> > a few exceptions, we're all trying to get at the truth, or
> > as close to it as possible. We don't *do* it very well a lot
> > of the time, which is why Robin wrote the "How to Know
> > Reality's Point of View" post, to describe step by step how
> > he does it.
> 
> I do not think it is as clear as you suggest. For example he
> says this reality is more powerful and necessary than any of
> us. But what is the evidence it is more powerful, or necessary?

Robin does not believe human beings are simply evolutionary
accidents; he believes the fact of our individual first-
personness is evidence that we have been intentionally
created. If that's the case, what created us would have to
be more powerful than we are, and obviously necessary for
us to exist in the first place.


> I happen, unlike some on this forum, to think Robin is
> sane, with a very intricate intellect, somewhat devious
> at times.

You keep saying this, but you've never made a good case
for any "deviousness" on his part. As far as I can see,
your argument is that because you don't understand what
he's saying, he must be trying to confuse you.


> Robin says:
> 
> 'Ultimately, in my opinion, the only philosophy which
> survives--and I believe will survive right through the
> experience of dying--is that philosophy whereby *one is
> willing to do anything in order to know and represent
> what the truth is*--but not conceptually, dogmatically;
> rather through experimental

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Duveyoung

I was happy just to see your name.  

You're like the control rods in a nuke reactor -- just your presence keeps the 
loonytuners from reaching critical mass.  

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
>
> I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind 
> words, too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be 
> counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll 
> continue to follow through with the idea.
> 
> P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I 
> don't have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get down 
> to SF these days. But someday, maybe.
> 
> ***
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
> >
> > Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps 
> > FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no 
> > comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, 
> > about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't 
> > commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, 
> > etc., or the opposite.
> > 
> > Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if 
> > there was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard 
> > cavil that characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off 
> > and just enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> > 
> > Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> > simple images and music:
> > 
> > https://vimeo.com/49951982
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams



Rick Archer:
> A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for 
> years just died of cancer. 
>
SV doesn't cause cancer. 

> That was several years after her divorce.
>
Stress causes divorce.

> Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
>
> "A new world will be lived in by the same people.
> And what they will be? They will never be sick, 
> they will never be shrouded with small things.
> There will be peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, 
> coherence unimaginable. This is Vastu living."

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread laughinggull108



Hi Marek,

Just because some don't want your suggestion to be a "rule", we could still 
pick one day each week (I would suggest Thursdays) to post something such as 
what you have posted today. It would give us something to look forward to 
rather than these childish games that seem to be dominating the forum lately. 
Let's try it, shall we?

LaughingGull

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
>
> I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind 
> words, too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be 
> counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll 
> continue to follow through with the idea.
> 
> P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I 
> don't have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get down 
> to SF these days. But someday, maybe.
> 
> ***
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
> >
> > Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps 
> > FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no 
> > comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, 
> > about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't 
> > commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, 
> > etc., or the opposite.
> > 
> > Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if 
> > there was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard 
> > cavil that characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off 
> > and just enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> > 
> > Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> > simple images and music:
> > 
> > https://vimeo.com/49951982
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Bass drum pedal?

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

On 10/03/2012 02:47 PM, card wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> On 10/02/2012 08:10 AM, card wrote:
>>> I'm gunna try playing with double bass.
>>>
>>> Does this look like a decent pedal for
>>> a dilettante like myself:
>>>
>>> http://www.thomann.de/gb/pearl_p2000c_eliminator.htm
>>>
>>>
>> Never have been much for double bass drums.  They're more a gimmick than
>> anything else.  But I sorta mastered a single pedal bounce (kinda like
>> playing a role with one hand) so a good pedal was worth it.  I spent a
>> bit of money on pedals and hi-hat stands now rusting in the garage. :-D
>>
> Do you prefer heel up or down, or perhaps both?
>
>

You can use both.  But the toe bounce is the trick.  Without any gear 
try playing patterns using both feet.  You'll be doing that anyway once 
you have the gear.

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread marekreavis

I'm glad that several people enjoyed the video and I appreciate the kind words, 
too. Certainly enforced restrictions ("stinkin' rules') would be 
counter-productive to the premise I was promoting, but as for myself, I'll 
continue to follow through with the idea.

P.S. I've never surfed Ocean Beach since it's 5 hours south of home and I don't 
have family in the Bay Area anymore and, consequently, rarely get down to SF 
these days. But someday, maybe.

***

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
>
> Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps 
> FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no 
> comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, 
> about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't 
> commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, 
> etc., or the opposite.
> 
> Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
> was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
> characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just 
> enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> 
> Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> simple images and music:
> 
> https://vimeo.com/49951982
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Talked to Buddha -he said Willy was just a name inposed uipon a ghost

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams

emptybill:
> Willy claims everything is Buddhist because he feels that way 
> he can "one up" the Hindoo-s and thus make himself look 
> superior.
>
Well, not everything is Buddhist, but certainly Buddha is the 
first historical yogin in South Asia.

> Trouble is he uses old, half-baked sources `cause he doesn't
> know better.
> 
> The foundation of Vastu in Indian architecture is detailed 
> in English in Symbolism of the Stupa by Adrian Snodgrass 
> which clearly established the roots of the stupa in the 
> Vedic fire altar
>
You got confused again - the 'mandalas' and 'mantras' mention 
in Rig Veda are not Yantras and bijas. There are no bijas in 
the Rig Veda and there was no edifice architecture in India 
before Ashoka. 

The oldest example of mandala art in South Asia is the 'swastika' 
mandala, which predates the invention of the Iranian fire altar 
and the rise of Brahmanism in India. Not everything about India 
comes from the Vedas!

"Stupas are an ancient form of mandala."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupa

A thousand years before the arrival of the Aryan-Sanskrit 
speaking people, there were indigenous traditions which had 
nothing to do with the Vedic people. Yoga and the practices 
associated with it are not found in the Vedas - all the 
Upanishads came after the historical Buddha. 

in fact, The Vedic culture was agrarian in nature and pastoral, 
charactrerized by the herding of cattle. They lived in small 
villages along rivers such as the Indus, Yamuna, Ganga, and 
Saraswati. The Vedics during this time didn't have any temples 
or architecture. The oldest example of edifice architecture in 
India is the Lomas Rishi Cave in Barabar.

> I talked to Buddha and he "said" that Willy was just a label
> conveniently applied to a mere assembly of flesh, blood and 
> pus sitting around punching keys on a keyboard.
> 
Maybe you should talk to a living Buddha. LoL!

> Nothin' but wind whistling around the corner.
>
Vastu is the worship of the Earth Mother, Sumeru.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Xenophaneros Anartaxius

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> "A new world will be lived in by the same people. And what they will be?
> They will never be sick, they will never be shrouded with small things.
> There will be peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, coherence unimaginable.
> This is Vastu living."
> 
> Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
> 
> A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for years just died of
> cancer. That was several years after her divorce.

Vastu living is Brahman Consciousness (or whatever you want to call it), you 
always face the risen sun (metaphorically speaking, because in actually you are 
the risen sun). The body dies, by whatever cause, and is of no moment. A damn 
building is not needed. No building; no amount of attention to health will ever 
give you what you want in life: in the end these things will crumble, and if 
you are still desiring these things, you will crumble with them.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS [to Judy]

2012-10-03 Thread Xenophaneros Anartaxius

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  
> wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
>>>  wrote:
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:

> Do you not care about what reality is asking of you as to
> how you *should* interpret reality?

 This question which you posed to Share seems central to the way
 in which you have been interacting with people here lately. How
 does reality 'ask' of one, and why is there an attribute
 connected with the asking that is called 'should'?
>>> 
>>> I suspect this is a manner of speaking. I further suspect
>>> it's a manner of speaking you don't actually have any 
>>> trouble interpreting.
>>> 
>>> The language does not describe some new way that Robin is
>>> interacting with people. It's the way most of us--you
>>> included--interact with each other most of the time here,
>>> especially when there's a dispute or disagreement.
>> 
>> As the best parser on FFL, I think you parsed this differently
>> than I did, and this has made me think about it again.
> 
> I didn't parse it at all, Xeno. Do you know what "parse"
> means?

I used parse in the sense of the way a computer might parse a structure rather 
than an English teacher might parse words. I broke that sentence into two basic 
parts at the word 'you. 1) Does reality 'ask' anything?, and 2) is there 
something about all this that involves a 'should'?

> 
>> In general the complexity of Robin's speech, I think,
>> obscures understanding for most people, and does not represent
>> a useful way to teach most people about reality.
> 
> I suggest you read Robin's recent post "How to Know Reality's
> Point of View":
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/321523
> 
> Pay particular attention to the last two paragraphs (but

Thanks for the reminder because I had not read it. I did read it now.

>> So, what is
>> your understanding of the sentence of Robin's I quoted? Because
>> you said 'I suspect this is a manner of speaking' in referring
>> to the quote, I would suppose it is not entirely clear in your
>> mind either.
> 
> You would suppose wrong. "Suspect" was rather obviously
> sarcastic in context.

I suppose I missed the sarcasm mostly. I sensed it. This essay by Robin is a 
lot less opaque than most of his writing. It is always the suspicion that in 
the end, Robin will declare that he alone is the arbitrator of what the 
ultimate reality is. Fortunately, for myself, I can do that too.
> 
> Then read the paragraph of mine that followed.
> 
> Really, Xeno, Robin has written so much on this topic, it's 
> depressing to be asked questions about his approach that
> you wouldn't need to ask had you simply read what he has to
> say.

I was not asking you to explain what Robin says. I can read that, and I can 
either understand or misunderstand that. What I was asking is how you interpret 
what Robin says. While you seem to defend his point of view, whatever that is, 
you do not seem to wish to reveal your own understanding of what he says, that 
is how it is relevant to your own experience. This is not for the purpose of 
investigating whether you understand 'the correct way' what he says, or to 
prove you 'wrong'. I am just curious how what he says works for you. If you 
cannot restate what he says in your own words, as it relates to you and your 
experiences, then what you are doing here does not seem to have much relevance 
because you do not 'own' the material. 

Now in my case, I tend to disagree with what Robin says. And I do not claim to 
clearly understand what Robin says. Curtis certainly disagrees as he wrote such 
in response to that post, feeling Robin's post was a sieve of logical missteps. 
However I am not Curtis - he is capable on his own - and I did find the tract 
Robin wrote interesting, but as I said I do not agree with it. The main 
question I would have here is if reality has a point of view, and the only way 
we experience things is through our senses, mind, and consciousness, how can 
that point of view of reality be a third party, independent of our subjective 
experience? The only way to do that, it would seem would be to be so 
transparent that the individuated point of view of the human body and mind do 
not interfere with reality. That is practically a definition of unity, or the 
Eastern way of enlightenment, which Robin rejects.

> Robin has his own formula for getting at the truth, but the
> nature of his interactions with people here, as I suggested,
> isn't fundamentally any different from anybody else's. With
> a few exceptions, we're all trying to get at the truth, or
> as close to it as possible. We don't *do* it very well a lot
> of the time, which is why Robin wrote the "How to Know
> Reality's Point of View" post, to describe step by

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin

2012-10-03 Thread awoelflebater



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Ann, you are so sweet to me. Â Innocent? Â Curtis would not agree with you 
> there. Â 

Yes, Emily you are innocent in your natural instinct to be true in what you 
write about yourself and your perceptions of others. When you post it always 
seems to come out without impediment. It emerges just exactly as it started in 
the deeper parts of yourself, not picking up too much debris as it makes its 
way outward. I find it infinitely refreshing.
> 
> Also, I am reviewing the past two weeks right now (a lot to get through). 
> Â You were on fire, m'dear. Â I appreciated what you said about your dogs...I 
> am learning the whole schedule thing and have to get more schedule-oriented 
> with my Jack Russell - she is running the show here.Â 

Of course she is, they don't call them "Jack Russell Terrorists" for nothing. I 
prefer a more accommodating dog, one who lets me boss them around and who 
slather me with devotion. Our border collie does her own thing though but she 
is very sweet and "sings" to us, very vocal.
All three of our dogs sleep in our bedroom, not on our bed, but it is a great 
feeling of being part of a pack and a bonus is that none of them snore.  
> 
> 
> 
>  From: awoelflebater 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 8:30 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin
>  
> 
> Â  
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > Lord Knows,ÃÂ it is the easiest thing in the world to condemn with 
> > self-righteous indignation. ÃÂ By refusing to accept the concept that 
> > change is possible in a human being, you will never be able to see the 
> > change when and if it occurs. ÃÂ Most don't have the courage to change or 
> > acknowledge their faults/flaws/bad behaviors/harm they've rendered on 
> > others. ÃÂ Most spend their entire lives justifying their actions to 
> > bolster their denial about themselves. ÃÂ 
> > 
> > You are projecting your own experience from the past and applying it to 
> > today's Robin. ÃÂ You aren't buying a single thing Robin has said re: the 
> > work he's done over the past 25 years or his current approach towards 
> > himself and others, that is clear. ÃÂ I am going to agree with you that 
> > his style can be perceived as reminiscent of his past MO, in terms of how 
> > he presents at times. ÃÂ 
> > 
> > Robin is a brilliant man, you will agree. ÃÂ Among many things you are 
> > viewing with tunnel vision,ÃÂ you have also completely failed to notice, 
> > IMO, some of the simplest things. ÃÂ For example, how much he has in fact 
> > adjusted his language and approach in his posts since he returned after his 
> > most recent long absence to make them more accessible to participants on 
> > FFL. I have paid close attention to this, actually, and there has been a 
> > lot of change both in the energy and content. ÃÂ Does he not have a right 
> > to converse also, or would you just sentence him to solitary confinement 
> > for the rest of his days. ÃÂ Is he this dangerous a presence on FFL? ÃÂ 
> > 
> > We are lucky to have Robin here, IMO. ÃÂ And you have been lurking as 
> > well, which is interesting. ÃÂ Don't just look for scenes that support 
> > your experience from the past. ÃÂ Try releasing Robin from his guru cloak 
> > and objectively reading him; try to get a glimpse of the larger person. 
> > ÃÂ Read past semantics and style and recognize your triggers. ÃÂ (Or 
> > don't - I'm basically giving myself advice at this point - blah, blah, 
> > blah.)ÃÂ 
> > 
> > Stay and let's see how far Robin gets in achieving anything close to 
> > "brutal..." with anyone here as part of a confrontation. ÃÂ So far, 
> > that's a complete non-starter. Can you imagine a better place for such a 
> > man that you describe than FFL? ÃÂ 
> > 
> > You have been through the wringer with Robin, this is clear. ÃÂ Why are 
> > you here? ÃÂ To monitor his actions and continue to warn members of his 
> > wiles? ÃÂ So what if he uses his own "truth-o-meter"? - don't you have one 
> > too? ÃÂ "I may be foolish, but I am not a fool," as the saying goes. ÃÂ 
> 
> Christ woman, you already wrote the post I was planning to. You were faster 
> and, dare I say, more adept than I could have been. You covered everything I 
> was going to. Got any more of those intellectual/spiritual steroids you 
> scored while on holiday? I clearly could use some.
> Lord Knows, lend an ear to Emily, she is unbiased, open, innocent and really, 
> really smart. She is something else too - she is not out to hurt anyone, not 
> intentionally.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: lordknows888 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 1:10 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin
> > 
> > 
> > ÃÂ  
> > YES! YES! YES!ÃÂ 
> > 
> > I know from my experience of being i

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread turquoiseb

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > "A new world will be lived in by the same people. And 
> > what they will be? They will never be sick, they will 
> > never be shrouded with small things. There will be 
> > peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, coherence 
> > unimaginable. This is Vastu living."
> > 
> > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
> > 
> > A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for 
> > years just died of cancer. That was several years 
> > after her divorce.
> 
> 
> I just read about a murderer in the newspaper, and 
> guess what ? He was breastfed as a child !

Yeah, but from South-facing breasts.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi

2012-10-03 Thread Ravi Chivukula

Wonderful dear Share - I wish all the good luck in this entire existence to
you !!!

Though I personally only believe in myself, have always only believed in
myself and I think all healers, Gurus, religions, gods are false, they are
all frauds. However it's really good for entertainment, just as we watch
movies, art, dance, drama - stimulate the heart, feel those emotions - sure
I only like singing to my beloved but occasionally I sing Bhajans to
fantasy divine Mother, fantasy Krishna and I really have a blast !!!


On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Share Long  wrote:

> **
>
>
> dear Ravi, it means so much to me that you love me in spite of my mistakes
> and flaws.  Maybe there will be less of those after I've worked with healer
> John Newton for the next 4 days.  Fingers crossed!  love, Share
>
>   --
> *From:* Ravi Chivukula 
> *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:19 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ann Emily Ravi
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Ravi Chivukula 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Share Long  wrote:
>
> **
>
>
>
> TO RAVI:
> Dear Ravi, as far as I can tell, you have never been the target of Robin's
> fixing mode.  So I don't think you really know what it feels like to have
> him attribute thoughts and feelings to you that you never even had.  And to
> have him do that over and over.  Perhaps then you too would be forceful
> with him.  I don't agree with you that I was brutal.
>
>
>
> Oh Dear Share - No one has any power over me, my feelings or thoughts -
> even such a notion is totally alien to me. Here's where we have to part -
> Robin is one of the most honest, truthful, sincere persons I have ever come
> across my life, he's one of the very few to earn my respect and I totally
> disagree and your choice of the words "psychological rape" is just brutal
> and violent, doesn't represent the reality of who the person Robin is. But
> this will not stop me from loving you.
>
> Love,
> Ravi.
>
>
>
> Yet I want to make sure you know I'm not denying your feelings, I wouldn't
> dare deny it and I'm sorry to hear you feel so.
>
>
>   
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bass drum pedal?

2012-10-03 Thread card



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2012 08:10 AM, card wrote:
> > I'm gunna try playing with double bass.
> >
> > Does this look like a decent pedal for
> > a dilettante like myself:
> >
> > http://www.thomann.de/gb/pearl_p2000c_eliminator.htm
> >
> >
> 
> Never have been much for double bass drums.  They're more a gimmick than 
> anything else.  But I sorta mastered a single pedal bounce (kinda like 
> playing a role with one hand) so a good pedal was worth it.  I spent a 
> bit of money on pedals and hi-hat stands now rusting in the garage. :-D
>

Do you prefer heel up or down, or perhaps both?

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi

2012-10-03 Thread awoelflebater



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> dear Ravi, it means so much to me that you love me in spite of my mistakes 
> and flaws.Â  Maybe there will be less of those after I've worked with healer 
> John Newton for the next 4 days.Â  Fingers crossed!Â  love, Share

I like your optimism. If only life could be that easy. Let me know if it is a 
success because I might have to sign up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Ravi Chivukula 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ann Emily Ravi
>  
> 
> Â  
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > 
> >>Â  
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>TO RAVI:
> >>Dear Ravi, as far as I can tell, you have never been the target of Robin's 
> >>fixing mode.Â  So I don't think you really know what it feels like to have 
> >>him attribute thoughts and feelings to you that you never even had.Â  And 
> >>to have him do that over and over.Â  Perhaps then you too would be forceful 
> >>with him.Â  I don't agree with you that I was brutal.
> >>Â 
> >
> >
> >Oh Dear Share - No one has any power over me, my feelings or thoughts - even 
> >such a notion is totally alien to me. Here's where we have to part - Robin 
> >is one of the most honest, truthful, sincere persons I have ever come across 
> >my life, he's one of the very few to earn my respect and I totally disagree 
> >and your choice of the words "psychological rape" is just brutal and 
> >violent, doesn't represent the reality of who the person Robin is. But this 
> >will not stop me from loving you.
> >
> >
> >Love,
> >Ravi.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> Yet I want to make sure you know I'm not denying your feelings, I wouldn't 
> dare deny it and I'm sorry to hear you feel so.
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Rick Archer

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of nablusoss1008
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 3:25 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

 

  



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> "A new world will be lived in by the same people. And what they will be?
> They will never be sick, they will never be shrouded with small things.
> There will be peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, coherence
unimaginable.
> This is Vastu living."
> 
> Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
> 
> A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for years just died of
> cancer. That was several years after her divorce.

I just read about a murderer in the newspaper, and guess what ? He was
breastfed as a child !

Read Maharishi's quote again: "They will never be sick, etc."

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread nablusoss1008



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
>
> Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps 
> FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no 
> comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, 
> about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't 
> commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, 
> etc., or the opposite.
> 
> Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
> was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
> characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just 
> enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> 
> Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> simple images and music:
> 
> https://vimeo.com/49951982


Good idea, but impossible. Very nice video BTW, thanks for posting !

Re: [FairfieldLife] A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Emily Reyn

Thank you Marek, that was uplifting.  I would go for your suggestion as a 
temporary experiment, but ultimately, I agree with Bhairitu.  I once suggested 
FFL only communicate in videos as a conversation mode for a time - that didn't 
go anywhere, and I understand why.    

I think your video has inspired me to reply to Curtis, which negates your 
suggestion in the short-term as it is to him personally, on FFL.  Curtis, if 
you are reading, look for my response tomorrow under the topic of "smoothing 
things out."  Out for today, but this was lovely.  



 From: marekreavis 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 11:45 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] A Suggestion
 

  
Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps FFL 
could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no comments 
about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, about an 
idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't commentary on 
any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, etc., or the 
opposite.

Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just enjoy 
what people are interested in and write about.

Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
simple images and music:

https://vimeo.com/49951982

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread nablusoss1008



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> "A new world will be lived in by the same people. And what they will be?
> They will never be sick, they will never be shrouded with small things.
> There will be peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, coherence unimaginable.
> This is Vastu living."
> 
> Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
> 
> A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for years just died of
> cancer. That was several years after her divorce.


I just read about a murderer in the newspaper, and guess what ? He was 
breastfed as a child !

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread jr_esq

Marek,

That was a cool video.  Keep it up!  You should surf at Ocean Beach in San 
Francisco, CA.  I walk by the seashore there and watch the surfers and 
windsurfers too.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis"  wrote:
>
> Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps 
> FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no 
> comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, 
> about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't 
> commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, 
> etc., or the opposite.
> 
> Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
> was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
> characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just 
> enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
> 
> Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> simple images and music:
> 
> https://vimeo.com/49951982
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

On 10/03/2012 11:45 AM, marekreavis wrote:
> Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps 
> FFL could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no 
> comments about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, 
> about an idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't 
> commentary on any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, 
> etc., or the opposite.
>
> Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
> was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
> characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just 
> enjoy what people are interested in and write about.
>
> Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
> simple images and music:
>
> https://vimeo.com/49951982
>
>

One thing we don't need is more stinkin' rules here  so I would say no 
to such as designation anyway.  I think what we are seeing is an "angst" 
that is developing not just on FFL but globally because of the world 
situation.  I see it on other forums too.  It is sort of a global 
consciousness that effects people who aren't yet at the "line on water" 
stage. ;-)

But then I do plenty of other subjects, movie reviews and political news 
here so not so much of an issue for me.

[FairfieldLife] MAHARISHI MAHESH YOGI - Schätze

2012-10-03 Thread Rick Archer

This site contains a quite remarkable collection of photos of Maharishi,
arranged by date, along with some audios, videos, and transcribed talks.
What's great about the photos is that most of them are dated, at least to
the year, and where known, location is given.  Just click on the highlighted
link and then choose a tab to get to the photos, etc.

 

 

http://mmy.klemke.de/

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread Share Long

Okey dokey thanks for warning.  I'll watch out for the Taxi.  But I haven't 
seen you do so about someone's inner reality (-:

 From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:21 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:

> TO XENO
> I don't mind Robin saying that reality is asking something and there is a 
> should involved.Â  What I mind is his saying that he is the one who has THE 
> accurate take on that.Â  Even about someone's inner reality.Â  Someone he's 
> never even met in person!

Hey Share. I took that quote out of context and asked Robin that question 
because he had used something similar with me, and I found it curious, the way 
he refers to reality. Judy made a comment on the post I made, and I sent a 
response to her. Nothing from Robin as of this moment. Yes he does have that 
take that he is the one to arbitrate what reality is. But I do the same thing! 
So watch out for me as well.

Re: [FairfieldLife] A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread Share Long

Wow!  The trailer is wonderful and...

...simply your reappearance here Marek is a sign to me that, dare I say it, 
something good is happening.  

Thanks for gracing us with your attention.  Hope all are well and happy in your 
world.  Share




 From: marekreavis 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 1:45 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] A Suggestion
 

  
Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps FFL 
could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no comments 
about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, about an 
idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't commentary on 
any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, etc., or the 
opposite.

Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just enjoy 
what people are interested in and write about.

Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
simple images and music:

https://vimeo.com/49951982

[FairfieldLife] Re: Talked to Buddha

2012-10-03 Thread richardatrwilliamsdotus



> > You're the guy that collected all the mantras 
> > for thirty years.
> >
mjackson74:
> I got three you idiot...
>
So, you got three Buddhist mantras, but in TM you
get only one mantra. Go figure.

> and you are the only one in the world I know of 
> who believes the TM mantras came from the 
> Buddhists.
> 
and you are the only one in the world I know of 
who believes he talked to the dead Buddha. LOL!

> > > > I have no problem with vastu, I object to Maharishi 
> > > > co-opting old Indian knowledge to take advantage of 
> > > > people.
> > > > 
> > > So, you're thinking that MMY 'co-opted' the TM bija
> > > mantras, yet you love all of your bijas? You're not
> > > even making any sense. It has already been established
> > > where the bija mantras used in TM came from. You're
> > > just bactracking all over the place. What, exactly is
> > > your point?
> > >
> mjackson74:
> > My point is that you apparently have an unhealthy 
> > obsession about mantras - I said nothing about mantras, 
> >
> You're not even making any sense anymore. You're the 
> guy that collected all the mantras for thirty years. LoL!
> 
> Author: mjackson75
> Subject: Fightin' about Mantras
> Newsgroup: Yahoo! FairfieldLife
> Date: September 27, 2012 5:52 pm
> 321245
> > I did not nor do I think that M co-opted the mantras - 
> > I was talking about vastu.
> >
> Maharishi 'Sthapatya Veda" is 'Maharishi' vastu 
> archtecture based on Buddhist edifice architecture. 
> 
> Go figure.
> www.maharishivastu.org/
> Tantric practices, such as bija mantra, yantra, vastu, 
> yoga, are Buddhistic.
> 'TM - Not just another tantric, alchemical sect!'
> http://tinyurl.com/9ucnro8
>
> "Wherever Buddhism has flourished, it has left its visible 
> traces in the form of monuments which have their origin 
> in the tumuli of prehistoric times. These tumuli were 
> massive structures in the form of hemispheres, cones, 
> pyramids, and similar plain, stereometrical bodies which 
> contained the remains of heroes, saints, kings, or other 
> great personalities.
>
> In India the more or less hemispheric form, as we know 
> it from the first Buddhist stupas or caityas, has been the 
> prevalent type of such monuments. They were erected 
> for great rulers (chakkavarti) in pre-Buddhist times is." 
> Shakymuni mentions in his conversation with Ananda
> that "At the four crossroads they erect a cairn to the 
> king of kings (Digha Nikya XVI, 5).
> Read more:
>
> 'Psycho-cosmic Symbolism of the Buddhist Stupa'
> by Lama Anagarika Govinda
> Dharma Publishing, 1976

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cAD68ISy6k

On 10/03/2012 11:44 AM, Robin Carlsen wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU98KwL_pQ8&feature=related
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>>> So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess
>>> if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."
>> That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
>> and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
>> any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
>> able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
>> I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
>> anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this
>> one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce
>> Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.
>>
>> I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
>> I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
>> lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
>> of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
>> of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty
>> Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
>> "Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
>> and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked
>> my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
>> for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
>> And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty
>> much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as
>> myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
>> not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
>> to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.
>>
>>> Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens
>>> soap opera.
>> It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether
>> the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
>> soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did
>> for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
>> I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
>> Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.
>>
>> Despite me still being -- after all these years and
>> all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
>> romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
>> faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles
>> and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the
>> characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so,
>> I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
>> with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk
>> that.
>>
>> Their loss.
>>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Army of Lov...er..Drivers!

2012-10-03 Thread card


http://m.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2012/10/nokias-army-drivers-are-secretly-making-awesome-maps/57568/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUyt3oTNI90

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

On 10/03/2012 11:22 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess
>> if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."
> That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
> and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
> any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
> able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
> I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
> anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this
> one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce
> Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.

And Jeff Daniels plus Emily Blunt and Piper Perabo.  Though not based on 
a Philip K Dick story it plays like one.  I see it doesn't release in 
the Netherlands until the 29th ... of November.

> I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
> I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
> lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
> of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
> of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty
> Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
> "Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
> and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked
> my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
> for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
> And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty
> much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as
> myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
> not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
> to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.

I did catch the pilot of "666 Park Avenue" which appears to be ABC's 
attempt at doing something like "American Horror Story".  But I'm 
getting spoiled and it has to be a damn good story line for me to watch 
something with any more than 6-8 episodes.  Seems that writers run out 
of ideas beyond that or are telling a story in slow motion.

"Sound of My Voice" will be available at Redbox on the 30th and possibly 
on Netflix as some of these films are also getting releases there so I 
have to watch the web sites that try to provide advance notice of NF 
releases such as this one:
http://instantwatcher.com/upcoming_titles



>> Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens
>> soap opera.
> It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether
> the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
> soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did
> for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
> I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
> Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.
>
> Despite me still being -- after all these years and
> all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
> romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
> faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles
> and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the
> characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so,
> I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
> with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk
> that.
>
> Their loss.
>
>
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Michael Jackson

Not that I find people in dementia funny, since I am witnessing it in someone I 
know right now, but man, the Jivan mukta Jive! I had to laugh!

 From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 2:34 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson  wrote:
>
> I can understand how some of the people like the folks 
> that post on the TM Free Blog are so very angryÂ  - its 
> sometimes hard to believe he poured all this stuff out 
> to keep people connected to him and make money - although 
> after watching some of his last videos (just watched the 
> one where he talks about the south facing entrance in a 
> home creating all sorts of problems) I am still convinced 
> he had dementia, the moderate stages - I have seen it in 
> family members and he has the signs - I think at a certain 
> point the people around him took over and used him as a 
> figure head.

That's interesting. There is a plot for a novel in that.

I haven't seen any of the videos of his last "performances,"
but the public recounting of his last days certain suggests
dementia. I mean, there hasn't been quite as good a staging
of "King Lear" since...uh...since...well, since Shakespeare's
original "King Lear." 

Dude should have taken up ballroom dancing. That's been
proven to stave off dementia. Do it in a big hall with a 
South-facing entrance and you're home free. Heck, he'd
have gotten so into it that he would have copyrighted
it and sold it as Maharishi Mambo™ or the Jivanmukti
Jive™ or the Samaveda Samba™ or the Vedic Valtz™.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] A Suggestion

2012-10-03 Thread marekreavis

Just as a suggestion, and perhaps an interesting little experiment: perhaps FFL 
could designate one day of the week where everyone agrees to post no comments 
about any other poster, whether positive or negative, but rather, about an 
idea, or a place, or an experience, or anything else that isn't commentary on 
any other poster's shortcomings, failings, lack of integrity, etc., or the 
opposite.

Many folks here *do* post about things other than other posters, but if there 
was one day of the week when everyone agreed to forgo the standard cavil that 
characterizes the bulk of postings, we could all take a day off and just enjoy 
what people are interested in and write about.

Here's a 4-minute video that is my contribution for today: no words, just 
simple images and music:

https://vimeo.com/49951982

[FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Robin Carlsen

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU98KwL_pQ8&feature=related

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess 
> > if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."
> 
> That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
> and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
> any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
> able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
> I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
> anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this 
> one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce 
> Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.
> 
> I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
> I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
> lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
> of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
> of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty 
> Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
> "Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
> and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked 
> my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
> for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
> And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty 
> much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as 
> myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
> not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
> to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.
> 
> > Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens 
> > soap opera.  
> 
> It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether 
> the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
> soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did 
> for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
> I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
> Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.
> 
> Despite me still being -- after all these years and
> all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
> romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
> faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles 
> and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the 
> characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so, 
> I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
> with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk 
> that. 
> 
> Their loss.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread turquoiseb

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson  wrote:
>
> I can understand how some of the people like the folks 
> that post on the TM Free Blog are so very angryÂ  - its 
> sometimes hard to believe he poured all this stuff out 
> to keep people connected to him and make money - although 
> after watching some of his last videos (just watched the 
> one where he talks about the south facing entrance in a 
> home creating all sorts of problems) I am still convinced 
> he had dementia, the moderate stages - I have seen it in 
> family members and he has the signs - I think at a certain 
> point the people around him took over and used him as a 
> figure head.

That's interesting. There is a plot for a novel in that.

I haven't seen any of the videos of his last "performances,"
but the public recounting of his last days certain suggests
dementia. I mean, there hasn't been quite as good a staging
of "King Lear" since...uh...since...well, since Shakespeare's
original "King Lear." 

Dude should have taken up ballroom dancing. That's been
proven to stave off dementia. Do it in a big hall with a 
South-facing entrance and you're home free. Heck, he'd
have gotten so into it that he would have copyrighted
it and sold it as Maharishi Mambo or the Jivanmukti
Jive or the Samaveda Samba or the Vedic Valtz.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread authfriend

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > > > with Curtis.
> > > 
> > > Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > > > Robin.
> > > 
> > > M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I
> > > express an opinion about Robin's post, it will influence
> > > Share's opinion about it.
> > 
> > Let's see, now, would that be the same condescending
> > assumption you and Barry keep making about those who
> > happen to share my opinions?
> 
> M: No it isn't and I've explained why it is different to
> you one too many times.

You have done no such thing. It's *precisely* the same
assumption:

"I agree that Judy has set the agenda for this angle and I
have to give credit for her forceful personality that so
many have taken up this perspective. (And yes I know it is
possible that everyone just came to this conclusion
independently, but I don't find this as likely.)"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/302040

> > > What you are doing here is imagining something to
> > > shame me for: wanting Share to disagree with Robin.
> > 
> > I don't think I'm imagining it, Curtis. Not after your
> > attempt to turn me against Robin back in March. (Not
> > to mention your flat-out lie that I hadn't quoted him
> > after that attempt.)
> 
> M: I was not attempting that.

That's *precisely* what you were doing.

> I already explained what I was doing.

You did indeed. You began, in fact, by telling Barry:

"She might quote him a bit less if she knew his perspective
on her!"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/305867

> It did shut you down to my satisfaction.  That was my goal
> and I got it.

Lie on top of lie. You claimed (see above) you were trying
to get me to stop quoting Robin. You did not. I continued
to quote him over the next four weeks, in exactly the same
manner I had been doing that had so freaked you out.

You left FFL a week after the last time I quoted him to
you, but by that time you had backed out of our disputes,
so there was no need for me to do it again that final
week you were here.

It's all on the record, Curtis.

> > > And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I couldn't
> > > care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her
> > > being compliant with mine.
> > 
> > You've just disarmed yourself of that particular weapon
> > as you've been using it against me.
> 
> M: Whatever.  We are talking past each other mostly anyway.

That's what you do when you've backed yourself into a
corner, you try to talk your way past what you said to
put yourself there. I'm not letting you do that.

> > > She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle
> > > her hair.
> > 
> > She isn't as grown up as she thinks, but that's another
> > story.
> 
> M: You have a limitless supply of condescension don't you?

You're wearing that one out by using it to characterize
any negative comment. And it was lame to begin with.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread turquoiseb

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess 
> if you'll like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."

That's sort of a low hurdle. :-) I saw your mini-review,
and thank you for providing it, but I just didn't have
any comments, not having seen it. It hasn't become avail-
able either on screens or on eyepatch channels here yet.
I like Joseph Gordon-Levitt a lot, and tend to watch
anything he's in, so I'm waiting impatiently for this 
one. I also have a soft spot in my heart for Bruce 
Willis, so I'll be hoping for the best in him as well.

I haven't seen much lately to tell you about, because
I've been (pleasantly) nose-down in either work or play
lately. I haven't even had a chance to catch up on some
of my fave returning TV shows (except for "Dexter," which
of course is a "don't miss") and only one of my Guilty 
Pleasure series, which include "Once Upon A Time" and
"Revenge" and "Haven." Saw the season opener of "Homeland"
and enjoyed it. I haven't seen any movies that knocked 
my socks off enough to review them here, but I have hopes
for Woody Allen's newest "To Rome With Love," and "Jay
And Bob Get Old: Tea Bagging In The UK," which is pretty 
much a "don't miss" for a Kevin Smith fanboy such as 
myself. Still looking forward to "Samsara," which I have
not been able to track down yet, and to "Cloud Atlas,"
to see whether it's a glorious mess or just glorious.

> Of course I've already weighed in on the drama queens 
> soap opera.  

It's kinda embarrassing, isn't it? One wonders whether 
the actors who had to play characters like this on TV
soap operas ever got so embarrassed by what they did 
for a living that they had to quit? H...now that
I think of it, that's exactly what Salma Hayek did.
Probably some others who got their start in soaps, too.

Despite me still being -- after all these years and
all these experiences along the Way -- more of a hopeful
romantic than a hopeless one, I don't think I have much
faith in these FFL actors' ability to drop their roles 
and take on meatier parts. They've kinda become the 
characters they play. If the makeup ever came off, so, 
I suspect, would everything they cherish and identify
with about their selves, and who they are. Can't risk 
that. 

Their loss.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Talked to Buddha -he said Willy was just a name inposed uipon a ghost

2012-10-03 Thread emptybill

Jack

Don't take him seriously. Willy is just a corpse-guarding ghost,
like the shriek of a strong wind on a cold day.

Corpse-guarding ghost is the title given in Chan Buddhist circles for
the unfindable 'I' - you know, the one that seems to exist while a
thought is present but can't be traced once thoughts cease.

Willy claims everything is Buddhist because he feels that way he can
"one up" the Hindoo-s and thus make himself look superior.
Trouble is he uses old, half-baked sources `cause he doesn't
know better.

The foundation of Vastu in Indian architecture is detailed in English in
Symbolism of the Stupa by Adrian Snodgrass which clearly established the
roots of the stupa in the Vedic fire altar and the internalization of
that sacrifice (antar-yagya) as found in the Upanishads and then ported
over to Buddhist yoga and architecture. You can purchase the book on
Amazon or view parts of the text with a Google search.

And yep me too.

I talked to Buddha and he "said" that Willy was just a label
conveniently applied to a mere assembly of flesh, blood and pus sitting
around punching keys on a keyboard.

Nothin' but wind whistling around the corner.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
 wrote:
>
>
>
> mjackson74:
> > ...you mean that unless I believe and speak to things
> > that can be historically proven, then no assertions
> > of mine will be believed?
> >
> No, I mean telling fibs about talking to dead people
> like the Buddha is all we need to know in order to cast
> doubt on any assertions you make about anything,
> historical or otherwise.
>
> Now back to Judy, Robin, Curtis, and Barry. LoL!
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Talked to Buddha

2012-10-03 Thread Michael Jackson

I got three you idiot and you are the only one in the world I know of who 
believes the TM mantras came from the Buddhists

 From: Richard J. Williams 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:28 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Talked to Buddha

> > > I have no problem with vastu, I object to Maharishi 
> > > co-opting old Indian knowledge to take advantage of 
> > > people.
> > > 
> > So, you're thinking that MMY 'co-opted' the TM bija
> > mantras, yet you love all of your bijas? You're not
> > even making any sense. It has already been established
> > where the bija mantras used in TM came from. You're
> > just bactracking all over the place. What, exactly is
> > your point?
> >
mjackson74:
> My point is that you apparently have an unhealthy 
> obsession about mantras - I said nothing about mantras, 
>
You're not even making any sense anymore. You're the 
guy that collected all the mantras for thirty years. LoL!
Author: mjackson75
Subject: Fightin' about Mantras
Newsgroup: Yahoo! FairfieldLife
Date: September 27, 2012 5:52 pm
321245
> I did not nor do I think that M co-opted the mantras - 
> I was talking about vastu.
>
Maharishi 'Sthapatya Veda" is 'Maharishi' vastu 
archtecture based on Buddhist edifice architecture. 

Go figure.
www.maharishivastu.org/
Tantric practices, such as bija mantra, yantra, vastu, 
yoga, are Buddhistic.
'TM - Not just another tantric, alchemical sect!'
http://tinyurl.com/9ucnro8
"Wherever Buddhism has flourished, it has left its visible 
traces in the form of monuments which have their origin 
in the tumuli of prehistoric times. These tumuli were 
massive structures in the form of hemispheres, cones, 
pyramids, and similar plain, stereometrical bodies which 
contained the remains of heroes, saints, kings, or other 
great personalities.
In India the more or less hemispheric form, as we know 
it from the first Buddhist stupas or caityas, has been the 
prevalent type of such monuments. They were erected 
for great rulers (chakkavarti) in pre-Buddhist times is." 
Shakymuni mentions in his conversation with Ananda
that "At the four crossroads they erect a cairn to the 
king of kings (Digha Nikya XVI, 5).
Read more:
'Psycho-cosmic Symbolism of the Buddhist Stupa'
by Lama Anagarika Govinda
Dharma Publishing, 1976

Re: [FairfieldLife] Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Michael Jackson

I can understand how some of the people like the folks that post on the TM Free 
Blog are so very angry  - its sometimes hard to believe he poured all this 
stuff out to keep people connected to him and make money - although after 
watching some of his last videos (just watched the one where he talks about the 
south facing entrance in a home creating all sorts of problems) I am still 
convinced he had dementia, the moderate stages - I have seen it in family 
members and he has the signs - I think at a certain point the people around him 
took over and used him as a figure head.





 From: Rick Archer 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 11:57 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga
 

  
"A new world will be lived in by the same people. And what they will be? They 
will never be sick, they will never be shrouded with small things. There will 
be peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, coherence unimaginable. This is Vastu 
living.”
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for years just died of cancer. 
That was several years after her divorce.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread feste37



The best poem in Songs of Experience, by far. 

Thanks for all the poems! I find Wallace Stevens, one of your favorites, often 
too opaque, but this is one of his that I do like, and can be appreciated even 
by people who are not poetry fans:

The House Was Quiet and the World Was Calm

The house was quiet and the world was calm.
The reader became the book; and summer night

Was like the conscious being of the book.
The house was quiet and the world was calm.

The words were spoken as if there was no book,
Except that the reader leaned above the page,

Wanted to lean, wanted much most to be
The scholar to whom the book is true, to whom

The summer night is like a perfection of thought.
The house was quiet because it had to be.

The quiet was part of the meaning, part of the mind:
The access of perfection to the page.

And the world was calm. The truth in a calm world,
In which there is no other meaning, itself

Is calm, itself is summer and night, itself
Is the reader leaning late and reading there.

-- Wallace Stevens


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> The Sick Rose
> 
> O Rose thou art sick. 
> The invisible worm, 
> That flies in the night 
> In the howling storm: 
> 
> Has found out thy bed
> Of crimson joy:
> And his dark secret love
> Does thy life destroy.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > > with Curtis.
> > 
> > Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > > Robin.
> > 
> > M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I express an opinion 
> > about Robin's post, it will influence Share's opinion about it.
> > 
> > Maybe what we both noticed in Robin's piece was really how it came off to 
> > people not dedicated to ignoring the obvious.
> > 
> > For people without your condescending assumptions about Share, it isn't 
> > much of a stretch to think that she might not agree with Robin's 
> > condescending take on her. 
> > 
> > Even without my encouragement. 
> > 
> > What you are doing here is imagining something to shame me for: wanting 
> > Share to disagree with Robin.  And Share was right, even if I wanted it, 
> > which I couldn't care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her 
> > being compliant with mine.
> > 
> > She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hey Judy how about acknowledging that you got a detail wrong
> > > > when you said I had replied to 2 questions and I had actually
> > > > replied to 3?
> > > 
> > > Hey, Share, how about acknowledging all those mistakes
> > > (not trivial ones) you made in that exchange we had a
> > > couple of weeks ago?
> > > 
> > > Let me suggest to you that demanding that others
> > > acknowledge things in your posts is not your best
> > > approach, given your own habits of response. It looks
> > > too much like inadvertent irony.
> > > 
> > > (Also, if you're going to comment on many posts in
> > > one post, please at least have the courtesy to
> > > identify the posts by post number or URL so they can
> > > be looked up easily.)
> > > 
> > > I did acknowledge your third question. Take another
> > > look at my post.
> > > 
> > > I also pointed out that you didn't answer one of Ann's
> > > about whether what was taking place was a feud, or
> > > something else. You excused yourself from answering
> > > her four other questions by claiming she was asking
> > > them of herself, which didn't make much sense since
> > > she had directed all her questions at you; but you
> > > couldn't even use that excuse for the one about whether
> > > there was a feud.
> > > 
> > > No response from you here. How about acknowledging
> > > that?
> > > 
> > > > Another detail you got wrong is about the Hatfields and McCoys.
> > > > It was I not Ann who introduced this reference.
> > > 
> > > You are correct on that one.
> > > 
> > > > I asked you for the wiki url as a joke.
> > > 
> > > Yes, a little sarcasm on my part.
> > > 
> > > > And thirdly, I said that I didn't understand Robin and
> > > > that is what I meant.
> > > >
> > > > It's also true that I would understand him less as the
> > > > amount of his words increased.
> > > 
> > > You didn't say that. You said he was "less understanding
> > > to me as the number of words increases."
> > > 
> > > That was a non sequitur in context, both because we were
> > > talking about your understanding him, not him being
> > > understanding to you; and because what you hadn't
> > > understood was a pretty short paragraph.
> > > 
> > > > Replying to other posts from Mon; all times noted are Central time:
> > > > 
> > > > Mon 5:04 pm
> > > > I've never felt Curtis trying to make me compliant.
> > > 
> > > Oh, I

Re: [FairfieldLife] Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Bhairitu

On 10/03/2012 01:27 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> Yesterday, while people here were earnestly arguing
> about...uh...whatever it is they feel compelled to endlessly argue
> about, Turq was partying down with the Leidenites. This was my first
> experience of Leidens Ontzet, the two-day party thrown every year on
> October 2nd and 3rd to commemorate this small city kicking the butts of
> the largest and most powerful nation in the world. Who knew that I'd
> chosen to live in a city with a history of not only revolutionary
> guerrilla action, but *successful* revolutionary guerrilla action.
>
> True, the action took place 457 years ago, but still, credit where
> credit is due. Leiden was the site of a revolution that broke the back
> of the Spanish rule of their country. It seems that the King of Spain
> somehow "inherited" the whole of the Netherlands, and set about trying
> to rule them as harshly as he did other colonies. Most of the Dutch
> rolled over and collaborated with their new rulers, but a few provinces
> and cities rebelled, Leiden foremost among them. The Duke of Alba set
> siege to the city in October 1573, and continued it in 1574,
> unsuccessfully. But the most powerful army in the world was still
> advancing on the city with its far greater number of troops, and the
> ships bearing relief armies of rebels couldn't get close enough to the
> city to help. So, using Dutch ingenuity and their experience with dikes
> (those are the things that keep water where it's supposed to be, not the
> other thing you're thinking of), flooded the lands around Leiden and
> allowed the rebel ships to land. The Spanish took note and ran. There
> was much rejoicing in Leiden, followed by mass consumption of a dish
> called hutspot, a carrot and onion stew that I can attest probably
> tasted no better back then that it does today. But still, they'd kicked
> the butts of the Spanish, and that was worth celebrating.
>
> They still celebrate today. The whole town is on vacation, and most of
> the squares are filled with large carnival rides, tents selling things,
> beer stands, and places serving free hutspot. Music is pretty much
> everywhere -- on stages, on the streets, and in every club, restaurant,
> and bar. Suffice it to say I partied hearty with the Leidenites,
> stumbling home way early this morning.
>
> I considered catching up on FFL, but then realized that I already knew
> what I'd find, so I didn't bother. Instead I posted a cute graphic that
> I'd found on Digg, and got some sleep. Now, having awakened, showered,
> and coffeed, I glanced over the lists of posts from yesterday and
> realized that my early morning intuition that I was going to find
> nothing new was correct.
>
> Since I'll probably be partying down a bit more today, I reiterate my
> description of what FFL has become, and my challenge to the people
> who've made it that way. I think that the problem is that there are
> several people on this forum who, narcissistic and needy to a fault,
> constantly feel the need to troll for attention. The trouble is that
> they HAVE NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO SAY. They are neither smart enough nor
> intelligent enough to capture the attention they seek by posting
> something interesting about spirituality, ideas, or even what's going on
> in their lives (possibly because...duh...nothing is). So instead they
> just rag non-stop on the people who have written them off as
> uninteresting and not *worthy* of their attention, trying desperately to
> get them to respond to them.
>
> My suspicion, having glanced at the evidence of this quickly and not
> bothered to click on a single one of the actual posts, is that they
> failed yesterday, as they have so often in the past. When oh when are
> they going to realize that most people are TIRED of their constant
> bickering and petty caviling and say something else, something worth
> reading?
>
> Oh. Wait.
>
> That would presume that they actually HAD something to say, wouldn't it?
>
> Never mind.

So you missed my "Looper" micro review?  I won't try to guess if you'll 
like it but you might like it better than "Prometheus."   Of course I've 
already weighed in on the drama queens soap opera.  Hard to make much 
sense of it and their cult leader thinks I'm a "slovenly misanthrope".  
Shows how little he knows about me.  Saying that the country is "dumbed 
down" is not being a misanthrope, it's being a news reporter. :-D

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread Robin Carlsen



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > > with Curtis.
> > 
> > Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > > Robin.
> > 
> > M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I
> > express an opinion about Robin's post, it will influence
> > Share's opinion about it.
> 
> Let's see, now, would that be the same condescending
> assumption you and Barry keep making about those who
> happen to share my opinions?
> 
> 
> > What you are doing here is imagining something to
> > shame me for: wanting Share to disagree with Robin.
> 
> I don't think I'm imagining it, Curtis. Not after your
> attempt to turn me against Robin back in March. (Not
> to mention your flat-out lie that I hadn't quoted him
> after that attempt.)
> 
> > And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I couldn't
> > care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her
> > being compliant with mine.
> 
> You've just disarmed yourself of that particular weapon
> as you've been using it against me.
> 
> > She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.
> 
> She isn't as grown up as she thinks, but that's another story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdAXjMj6mfU&feature=fvwrel

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread curtisdeltablues

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > > with Curtis.
> > 
> > Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > > Robin.
> > 
> > M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I
> > express an opinion about Robin's post, it will influence
> > Share's opinion about it.
> 
> Let's see, now, would that be the same condescending
> assumption you and Barry keep making about those who
> happen to share my opinions?

M: No it isn't and I've explained why it is different to you one too many 
times.  

> 
> 
> > What you are doing here is imagining something to
> > shame me for: wanting Share to disagree with Robin.
> 
> I don't think I'm imagining it, Curtis. Not after your
> attempt to turn me against Robin back in March. (Not
> to mention your flat-out lie that I hadn't quoted him
> after that attempt.)

M: I was not attempting that.  I already explained what I was doing.
It did shut you down to my satisfaction.  That was my goal and I got it.

> 
> > And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I couldn't
> > care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her
> > being compliant with mine.
> 
> You've just disarmed yourself of that particular weapon
> as you've been using it against me.

M: Whatever.  We are talking past each other mostly anyway.

> 
> > She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.
> 
> She isn't as grown up as she thinks, but that's another story.


M: You have a limitless supply of condescension don't you?


>

[FairfieldLife] Down the rabbit hole with Robin, Judy, Curtis and Share

2012-10-03 Thread richardatrwilliamsdotus



> > She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to 
> > tousle her hair...
> >
Robin Carlsen:
> The Sick Rose
> 
> O Rose thou art sick. 
> The invisible worm, 
> That flies in the night 
> In the howling storm: 
> 
> Has found out thy bed
> Of crimson joy:
> And his dark secret love
> Does thy life destroy.
> 
Finally, a pundit that knows how to post formated 
text on a newsgroup!

[FairfieldLife] Re: How to Know Reality's Point of View

2012-10-03 Thread curtisdeltablues

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> How to Know Reality's Point of View
> 
> There is a notion of life that many posters on FFL have never considered once 
> they are engaged in argument, insult, and acrimony. And what is that notion 
> of life?

M: Maybe we have or we think of it differently.  Let's see what he's got.

> 
> Well, for me, it seems very empirical and experimental. It is this: truth is 
> an objective thing; it can defend itself. No matter what is in 
> dispute--Raunchy's honour being slandered, the matter of Sal's sincerity and 
> intention with regard to Jennifer, the accusation of three women on FFL being 
> C's, the TM credentials of Vaj--it doesn't matter what the topic is: there is 
> a single principle which I believe almost every poster misses--at least 
> consciously.

M: This is a mish-mosh of logical levels.  He is collaging together the idea of 
"truth" as an objective thing and then gives all subjective opinion examples 
that no system of epistemology would or should combine with the concept of 
objective truth.  But he will try...

> 
> Let me put it this way: I contend that the reality out of which we came, 
> exist, live, and choose--the very identity of ourselves as distinct persons 
> utterly unique in our experience of being the me we are--an experience that 
> no one will have ever except us--I contend that since that reality was smart 
> enough to bring us into existence with this complex thing called free will, 
> that THIS REALITY, IN ANY DISPUTE ON FFL, HAS A POINT OF VIEW. Now since this 
> reality is more powerful and necessary than any of us are, it must mean that 
> the point of view of reality is where the truth lies.

M: Again the collage.  He is mixing up the definition of a God here with our 
personal existence by his oblique reference to something smart enough to "bring 
us into existence with this complex thing called free will."  Leaving for now 
the neurological data that seems to say that free will is an illusion, I will 
focus on his personification of the concept of a "reality" that can be 
personified to having a POV.  Even if this assumption were true, it would not 
preclude the necessity for one of us to claim to know what that was.  Anyone?  
Only Robin?  OK let's see if he can make his case.

> 
> The unconscious assumption of most posters on FFL is: NO ONE CAN KNOW WHAT 
> REALITY'S POINT OF VIEW IS. So we just go it alone, determined to uphold our 
> own first person perspective (that's for you, PaliGap) regardless of the 
> Platonic notion of the Form of the Good--or whatever we want to call what is 
> metaphysically ultimate: why there is something rather than nothing.

M:  This is now approaching word salad.  He has introduced the concept of 
reality having a POV and is now building assumptions on top of that.  Plato's 
ideas have been modified through years of philosophy and one of the first ideas 
to get the boot was his assumptions about the forms having an ontological 
reality.  They are a good starting point for a more advanced lecture on 
linguistic philosophy because philosophers discovered that we cannot discuss 
concepts without first understanding the limits of our language itself.  So a 
phrase like "Why there is something rather than nothing" can be seen as an 
inappropriate use of language outside the realm of advanced physics.  When 
laymen use this phrase they are usually trying to smuggle in a bunch of 
assumptions about a version of God.

R:> But here is where I believe something so critical is being overlooked: If 
reality created us,>

M: No need to assume this.  By not using the term God here I suspect Robin is 
trying to avoid assumptions about his argument.  The problem is he is using 
"reality" as an obvious substitute for the things the definitions of most gods 
claim to have done, created us.  There is an alternative which is the primacy 
of material existence itself without the need for any creator. It assumes less.

R:why should it not have some desire to let us know WHAT IT (SHE) THINKS?>

M: Equally valid along this line of personification, why can't he have hair and 
a beard and occasionally feels his serpent uncoiling in his naughty parts when 
a particularly hot angel flies by in their Victoria Secret wings. (You pick 
your angels, I'll pick mine.)

R: I like to think of reality in the feminine gender. And if reality does in 
fact have some point of view THERE MUST BE SOME WAY THAT SHE MAKES IT POSSIBLE 
TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT THAT POINT OF VIEW IS. What possibly could be the 
method--applied by ourselves--to somehow, however faintly, make contact with 
the point of view of Lady Reality?

M: Ok so you have taken the field of epistemology and thrown it away for 
literature and art.  I love art.  But you don't get to make the claims that 
philosophy makes, or at least you don't get to use language that seems to imply 
you are using a rigorous philosophical method when you are reall

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread authfriend

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > with Curtis.
> 
> Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > Robin.
> 
> M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I
> express an opinion about Robin's post, it will influence
> Share's opinion about it.

Let's see, now, would that be the same condescending
assumption you and Barry keep making about those who
happen to share my opinions?

> What you are doing here is imagining something to
> shame me for: wanting Share to disagree with Robin.

I don't think I'm imagining it, Curtis. Not after your
attempt to turn me against Robin back in March. (Not
to mention your flat-out lie that I hadn't quoted him
after that attempt.)

> And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I couldn't
> care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her
> being compliant with mine.

You've just disarmed yourself of that particular weapon
as you've been using it against me.

> She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.

She isn't as grown up as she thinks, but that's another story.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin

2012-10-03 Thread Emily Reyn

Ann, you are so sweet to me.  Innocent?  Curtis would not agree with you there. 
 

Also, I am reviewing the past two weeks right now (a lot to get through).  You 
were on fire, m'dear.  I appreciated what you said about your dogs...I am 
learning the whole schedule thing and have to get more schedule-oriented with 
my Jack Russell - she is running the show here. 



 From: awoelflebater 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 8:30 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin
 

  


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Lord Knows,Â it is the easiest thing in the world to condemn with 
> self-righteous indignation. Â By refusing to accept the concept that change 
> is possible in a human being, you will never be able to see the change when 
> and if it occurs. Â Most don't have the courage to change or acknowledge 
> their faults/flaws/bad behaviors/harm they've rendered on others. Â Most 
> spend their entire lives justifying their actions to bolster their denial 
> about themselves. Â 
> 
> You are projecting your own experience from the past and applying it to 
> today's Robin. Â You aren't buying a single thing Robin has said re: the work 
> he's done over the past 25 years or his current approach towards himself and 
> others, that is clear. Â I am going to agree with you that his style can be 
> perceived as reminiscent of his past MO, in terms of how he presents at 
> times. Â 
> 
> Robin is a brilliant man, you will agree. Â Among many things you are viewing 
> with tunnel vision,Â you have also completely failed to notice, IMO, some of 
> the simplest things. Â For example, how much he has in fact adjusted his 
> language and approach in his posts since he returned after his most recent 
> long absence to make them more accessible to participants on FFL. I have paid 
> close attention to this, actually, and there has been a lot of change both in 
> the energy and content. Â Does he not have a right to converse also, or would 
> you just sentence him to solitary confinement for the rest of his days. Â Is 
> he this dangerous a presence on FFL? Â 
> 
> We are lucky to have Robin here, IMO. Â And you have been lurking as well, 
> which is interesting. Â Don't just look for scenes that support your 
> experience from the past. Â Try releasing Robin from his guru cloak and 
> objectively reading him; try to get a glimpse of the larger person. Â Read 
> past semantics and style and recognize your triggers. Â (Or don't - I'm 
> basically giving myself advice at this point - blah, blah, blah.)Â 
> 
> Stay and let's see how far Robin gets in achieving anything close to 
> "brutal..." with anyone here as part of a confrontation. Â So far, that's 
> a complete non-starter. Can you imagine a better place for such a man that 
> you describe than FFL? Â 
> 
> You have been through the wringer with Robin, this is clear. Â Why are you 
> here? Â To monitor his actions and continue to warn members of his wiles? 
> Â So what if he uses his own "truth-o-meter"? - don't you have one too? Â "I 
> may be foolish, but I am not a fool," as the saying goes. Â 

Christ woman, you already wrote the post I was planning to. You were faster 
and, dare I say, more adept than I could have been. You covered everything I 
was going to. Got any more of those intellectual/spiritual steroids you scored 
while on holiday? I clearly could use some.
Lord Knows, lend an ear to Emily, she is unbiased, open, innocent and really, 
really smart. She is something else too - she is not out to hurt anyone, not 
intentionally.
> 
> 
> 
>  From: lordknows888 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 1:10 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin
> 
> 
> Â  
> YES! YES! YES!Â 
> 
> I know from my experience of being in Robin's cult that what Share and Curtis 
> found objectionable in Robin's post to Share carried the unmistakeable feel 
> and energy of just the very beginning of what in the days's of the cult would 
> have been a Â very gentle warm up to a confrontation.Â In the cult this then 
> would have easily lead into Â a full confrontation, which meant psychological 
> rape essentially, absolutely brutal
> psychological rape. If you could see a video tape of one of these 
> confrontations I don't believe there would be Â a single person on FFL that 
> would disagree with that term as being too extreme. So in this case with 
> Share I would say it was just the warm up, but to me it had that same 
> essential feel and energy moving in that direction. Robin's presumption Â is 
> that he has Â the right to confront someone because he believes he is able to 
> discern the deepest truth in each moment of an interaction with someone and 
> therefore has the right to confront someone who does not have his depth of 
> insight. Call it the divine right of the guru, and you get this service

[FairfieldLife] Re: Talked to Buddha

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams


> > > I have no problem with vastu, I object to Maharishi
> > > co-opting old Indian knowledge to take advantage of
> > > people.
> > >
> > So, you're thinking that MMY 'co-opted' the TM bija
> > mantras, yet you love all of your bijas? You're not
> > even making any sense. It has already been established
> > where the bija mantras used in TM came from. You're
> > just bactracking all over the place. What, exactly is
> > your point?
> >
mjackson74:
> My point is that you apparently have an unhealthy
> obsession about mantras - I said nothing about mantras,
>
You're not even making any sense anymore. You're the
guy that collected all the mantras for thirty years. LoL!

Author: mjackson75
Subject: Fightin' about Mantras
Newsgroup: Yahoo! FairfieldLife
Date: September 27, 2012 5:52 pm
321245 

> I did not nor do I think that M co-opted the mantras -
> I was talking about vastu.
>
Maharishi 'Sthapatya Veda" is 'Maharishi' vastu
archtecture based on Buddhist edifice architecture.

Go figure.

www.maharishivastu.org/ 

Tantric practices, such as bija mantra, yantra, vastu,
yoga, are Buddhistic.

'TM - Not just another tantric, alchemical sect!'
http://tinyurl.com/9ucnro8 

"Wherever Buddhism has flourished, it has left its visible
traces in the form of monuments which have their origin
in the tumuli of prehistoric times. These tumuli were
massive structures in the form of hemispheres, cones,
pyramids, and similar plain, stereometrical bodies which
contained the remains of heroes, saints, kings, or other
great personalities.

In India the more or less hemispheric form, as we know
it from the first Buddhist stupas or caityas, has been the
prevalent type of such monuments. They were erected
for great rulers (chakkavarti) in pre-Buddhist times is."

Shakymuni mentions in his conversation with Ananda
that "At the four crossroads they erect a cairn to the
king of kings (Digha Nikya XVI, 5).

Read more:

'Psycho-cosmic Symbolism of the Buddhist Stupa'
by Lama Anagarika Govinda
Dharma Publishing, 1976

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread Robin Carlsen

The Sick Rose

O Rose thou art sick. 
The invisible worm, 
That flies in the night 
In the howling storm: 

Has found out thy bed
Of crimson joy:
And his dark secret love
Does thy life destroy.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > with Curtis.
> 
> Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > Robin.
> 
> M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I express an opinion 
> about Robin's post, it will influence Share's opinion about it.
> 
> Maybe what we both noticed in Robin's piece was really how it came off to 
> people not dedicated to ignoring the obvious.
> 
> For people without your condescending assumptions about Share, it isn't much 
> of a stretch to think that she might not agree with Robin's condescending 
> take on her. 
> 
> Even without my encouragement. 
> 
> What you are doing here is imagining something to shame me for: wanting Share 
> to disagree with Robin.  And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I 
> couldn't care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her being 
> compliant with mine.
> 
> She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey Judy how about acknowledging that you got a detail wrong
> > > when you said I had replied to 2 questions and I had actually
> > > replied to 3?
> > 
> > Hey, Share, how about acknowledging all those mistakes
> > (not trivial ones) you made in that exchange we had a
> > couple of weeks ago?
> > 
> > Let me suggest to you that demanding that others
> > acknowledge things in your posts is not your best
> > approach, given your own habits of response. It looks
> > too much like inadvertent irony.
> > 
> > (Also, if you're going to comment on many posts in
> > one post, please at least have the courtesy to
> > identify the posts by post number or URL so they can
> > be looked up easily.)
> > 
> > I did acknowledge your third question. Take another
> > look at my post.
> > 
> > I also pointed out that you didn't answer one of Ann's
> > about whether what was taking place was a feud, or
> > something else. You excused yourself from answering
> > her four other questions by claiming she was asking
> > them of herself, which didn't make much sense since
> > she had directed all her questions at you; but you
> > couldn't even use that excuse for the one about whether
> > there was a feud.
> > 
> > No response from you here. How about acknowledging
> > that?
> > 
> > > Another detail you got wrong is about the Hatfields and McCoys.
> > > It was I not Ann who introduced this reference.
> > 
> > You are correct on that one.
> > 
> > > I asked you for the wiki url as a joke.
> > 
> > Yes, a little sarcasm on my part.
> > 
> > > And thirdly, I said that I didn't understand Robin and
> > > that is what I meant.
> > >
> > > It's also true that I would understand him less as the
> > > amount of his words increased.
> > 
> > You didn't say that. You said he was "less understanding
> > to me as the number of words increases."
> > 
> > That was a non sequitur in context, both because we were
> > talking about your understanding him, not him being
> > understanding to you; and because what you hadn't
> > understood was a pretty short paragraph.
> > 
> > > Replying to other posts from Mon; all times noted are Central time:
> > > 
> > > Mon 5:04 pm
> > > I've never felt Curtis trying to make me compliant.
> > 
> > Oh, I believe you. Of course, I never said he was.
> > 
> > > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > with Curtis.
> > 
> > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > Robin.
> > 
> > > Mon 6:43 pm
> > > 
> > > Everyone here, including you does what you accuse Curtis
> > > of. Defending friends and criticizing enemies.
> > 
> > Of course they do. Now see if you can figure out what my
> > point was. You may need to actually read what I wrote.
> > 
> > > And actually I've not seen you criticize friends, as you
> > > purport to do
> > 
> > You may well not have. Can you think of a reason why that
> > might not be very good evidence that I haven't?
> > 
> > > , not even those who can be over the top sometimes.
> > 
> > Obviously that's a meaningless claim without specific
> > examples that everyone would agree were "over the top"
> > and thus deserving of criticism.
> > 
> > > Mon 8:33 pm
> > > IF the statement I made about psychological rape says
> > > everything about me, THEN I'd say the following statement,
> > > especially the "needed to be stepped on" part, says
> > > everything about you: "Sal is small potatoes, just a nasty,
> > > unpleasant, not-too-bright little person who needed to be
> > > stepped on from time to time when she got above herself."
> > 
> > Sorry, Share, that do

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: powerful healing to Raunchy

2012-10-03 Thread Share Long

thanks, Raunchy.  Hey tonight's free for newcomers.  300 W. Lowe at 7.  But I 
bet you're going to hear Jim Hightower.  Have a great time at that or whatever 
you're up to.  BTW, I'm not sure I'd call John's work fun.  Even though he has 
a great sense of humor.  VERY purifying!  And on top of semi annual Dome 
cleaning!  Yikes!  I'm hanging on to my seatbelt!  Hope you and your Mom and 
aunt are well and happy.  My Mom finally got through her WHOLE MRI yesterday.  
But they had to drug her up big time.  She's still groggy today.  Thanks for 
writing too Share



 From: raunchydog 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 8:54 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: powerful healing with John Newton
 

  
Good luck, Share. Have fun. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> dear FFL, if I'm messed up yet not beyond reach, then this is the man who can 
> help straighten me out.  I just found out from a friend that he's back in 
> town.  Perfect timing.  
> 
> 
> John Newton trained with Howard Wills, author of the forgiveness prayers and 
> himself trained in the Kahuna tradition.  I understand that Howard who lives 
> in Hawaii is currently working in LA.  With a friend of a friend who says 
> that Howard's prayers cured him of hep C.  
> 
> 
> John was here twice last spring right after the time I joined FFL.  He not 
> only helped me but also my Dad, Mom and sister.  Them via long distance.  He 
> can work with people on the phone and I've even felt his healing energy in 
> his emails.  He's also a TM sidha.
> 
> I plan on working with John as much as I can over the next four days.  
> Hopefully healing will extend to all of us.  This is powerful work. 
> 
> Share
> 
> PS  I will reply to Robin and Emily and Xeno and Ravi and others as soon as I 
> can and as best as I can.  I wish I had more time to devote to my replies but 
> sometimes the rest of my life gobbles up the hours.  Especially the next 4 
> days I will hold you all gently in my heart.   
>

[FairfieldLife] Living in vastu buildings in sat-yuga

2012-10-03 Thread Rick Archer

"A new world will be lived in by the same people. And what they will be?
They will never be sick, they will never be shrouded with small things.
There will be peace unbounded, prosperity unlimited, coherence unimaginable.
This is Vastu living."

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

A long-time Fairfield resident who lived in SV for years just died of
cancer. That was several years after her divorce.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread Robin Carlsen

TO HIS CONSCIENCE.
by Robert Herrick


CAN I not sin, but thou wilt be 
My private protonotary ? 
Can I not woo thee to pass by 
A short and sweet iniquity ? 
I'll cast a mist and cloud upon 
My delicate transgression 
So utter dark as that no eye 
Shall see the hugg'd impiety ; 
Gifts blind the wise, and bribes do please 
And wind all other witnesses ; 
And wilt not thou with gold be ti'd 
To lay thy pen and ink aside ? 
That in the mirk and tongueless night 
Wanton I may, and thou not write ? 
It will not be.   And therefore, now, 
For times to come I'll make this vow, 
>From aberrations to live free ; 
So I'll not fear the Judge or thee. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > with Curtis.
> 
> Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > Robin.
> 
> M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I express an opinion 
> about Robin's post, it will influence Share's opinion about it.
> 
> Maybe what we both noticed in Robin's piece was really how it came off to 
> people not dedicated to ignoring the obvious.
> 
> For people without your condescending assumptions about Share, it isn't much 
> of a stretch to think that she might not agree with Robin's condescending 
> take on her. 
> 
> Even without my encouragement. 
> 
> What you are doing here is imagining something to shame me for: wanting Share 
> to disagree with Robin.  And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I 
> couldn't care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her being 
> compliant with mine.
> 
> She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey Judy how about acknowledging that you got a detail wrong
> > > when you said I had replied to 2 questions and I had actually
> > > replied to 3?
> > 
> > Hey, Share, how about acknowledging all those mistakes
> > (not trivial ones) you made in that exchange we had a
> > couple of weeks ago?
> > 
> > Let me suggest to you that demanding that others
> > acknowledge things in your posts is not your best
> > approach, given your own habits of response. It looks
> > too much like inadvertent irony.
> > 
> > (Also, if you're going to comment on many posts in
> > one post, please at least have the courtesy to
> > identify the posts by post number or URL so they can
> > be looked up easily.)
> > 
> > I did acknowledge your third question. Take another
> > look at my post.
> > 
> > I also pointed out that you didn't answer one of Ann's
> > about whether what was taking place was a feud, or
> > something else. You excused yourself from answering
> > her four other questions by claiming she was asking
> > them of herself, which didn't make much sense since
> > she had directed all her questions at you; but you
> > couldn't even use that excuse for the one about whether
> > there was a feud.
> > 
> > No response from you here. How about acknowledging
> > that?
> > 
> > > Another detail you got wrong is about the Hatfields and McCoys.
> > > It was I not Ann who introduced this reference.
> > 
> > You are correct on that one.
> > 
> > > I asked you for the wiki url as a joke.
> > 
> > Yes, a little sarcasm on my part.
> > 
> > > And thirdly, I said that I didn't understand Robin and
> > > that is what I meant.
> > >
> > > It's also true that I would understand him less as the
> > > amount of his words increased.
> > 
> > You didn't say that. You said he was "less understanding
> > to me as the number of words increases."
> > 
> > That was a non sequitur in context, both because we were
> > talking about your understanding him, not him being
> > understanding to you; and because what you hadn't
> > understood was a pretty short paragraph.
> > 
> > > Replying to other posts from Mon; all times noted are Central time:
> > > 
> > > Mon 5:04 pm
> > > I've never felt Curtis trying to make me compliant.
> > 
> > Oh, I believe you. Of course, I never said he was.
> > 
> > > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > > with Curtis.
> > 
> > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> > Robin.
> > 
> > > Mon 6:43 pm
> > > 
> > > Everyone here, including you does what you accuse Curtis
> > > of. Defending friends and criticizing enemies.
> > 
> > Of course they do. Now see if you can figure out what my
> > point was. You may need to actually read what I wrote.
> > 
> > > And actually I've not seen you criticize friends, as you
> > > purport to do
> > 
> > You may well not have. Can you think of a reason why that
> > might not be very good evidence that I haven't?
> > 
> > > , not even those who can be over the top sometimes.
> > 
> > Obviously that's a meaningless claim without specific
> > examples that everyone would agree were "over the top"
> > and thu

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread curtisdeltablues


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

Share:> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > with Curtis.

Judy: > It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> Robin.

M: Again we have the condescending assumption that if I express an opinion 
about Robin's post, it will influence Share's opinion about it.

Maybe what we both noticed in Robin's piece was really how it came off to 
people not dedicated to ignoring the obvious.

For people without your condescending assumptions about Share, it isn't much of 
a stretch to think that she might not agree with Robin's condescending take on 
her. 

Even without my encouragement. 

What you are doing here is imagining something to shame me for: wanting Share 
to disagree with Robin.  And Share was right, even if I wanted it, which I 
couldn't care less about, her disagreement with Robin is not her being 
compliant with mine.

She is all grown up now and doesn't need you to tousle her hair.








>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Hey Judy how about acknowledging that you got a detail wrong
> > when you said I had replied to 2 questions and I had actually
> > replied to 3?
> 
> Hey, Share, how about acknowledging all those mistakes
> (not trivial ones) you made in that exchange we had a
> couple of weeks ago?
> 
> Let me suggest to you that demanding that others
> acknowledge things in your posts is not your best
> approach, given your own habits of response. It looks
> too much like inadvertent irony.
> 
> (Also, if you're going to comment on many posts in
> one post, please at least have the courtesy to
> identify the posts by post number or URL so they can
> be looked up easily.)
> 
> I did acknowledge your third question. Take another
> look at my post.
> 
> I also pointed out that you didn't answer one of Ann's
> about whether what was taking place was a feud, or
> something else. You excused yourself from answering
> her four other questions by claiming she was asking
> them of herself, which didn't make much sense since
> she had directed all her questions at you; but you
> couldn't even use that excuse for the one about whether
> there was a feud.
> 
> No response from you here. How about acknowledging
> that?
> 
> > Another detail you got wrong is about the Hatfields and McCoys.
> > It was I not Ann who introduced this reference.
> 
> You are correct on that one.
> 
> > I asked you for the wiki url as a joke.
> 
> Yes, a little sarcasm on my part.
> 
> > And thirdly, I said that I didn't understand Robin and
> > that is what I meant.
> >
> > It's also true that I would understand him less as the
> > amount of his words increased.
> 
> You didn't say that. You said he was "less understanding
> to me as the number of words increases."
> 
> That was a non sequitur in context, both because we were
> talking about your understanding him, not him being
> understanding to you; and because what you hadn't
> understood was a pretty short paragraph.
> 
> > Replying to other posts from Mon; all times noted are Central time:
> > 
> > Mon 5:04 pm
> > I've never felt Curtis trying to make me compliant.
> 
> Oh, I believe you. Of course, I never said he was.
> 
> > AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> > with Curtis.
> 
> It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
> Robin.
> 
> > Mon 6:43 pm
> > 
> > Everyone here, including you does what you accuse Curtis
> > of. Defending friends and criticizing enemies.
> 
> Of course they do. Now see if you can figure out what my
> point was. You may need to actually read what I wrote.
> 
> > And actually I've not seen you criticize friends, as you
> > purport to do
> 
> You may well not have. Can you think of a reason why that
> might not be very good evidence that I haven't?
> 
> > , not even those who can be over the top sometimes.
> 
> Obviously that's a meaningless claim without specific
> examples that everyone would agree were "over the top"
> and thus deserving of criticism.
> 
> > Mon 8:33 pm
> > IF the statement I made about psychological rape says
> > everything about me, THEN I'd say the following statement,
> > especially the "needed to be stepped on" part, says
> > everything about you: "Sal is small potatoes, just a nasty,
> > unpleasant, not-too-bright little person who needed to be
> > stepped on from time to time when she got above herself."
> 
> Sorry, Share, that doesn't fly. Those two statements are 
> not even remotely equivalent.
> 
> > Mon 9:11 AND 9:35 pm
> > You accuse Curtis of exactly what you did!  Butt in when
> > Robin and I were trying to work out something delicate.
> > Very delicate interpersonal negotiations is how you describe
> > it the 9:35 post.
> >
> > Where was that understanding when it was really needed
> > during the Russian flash mob upset?!
> 
> BIG difference, Share. Curtis was trying to disrupt
> those negotiations and turn you against Robin; I was
> trying to ge

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi

2012-10-03 Thread Share Long

dear Ravi, it means so much to me that you love me in spite of my mistakes and 
flaws.  Maybe there will be less of those after I've worked with healer John 
Newton for the next 4 days.  Fingers crossed!  love, Share




 From: Ravi Chivukula 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ann Emily Ravi
 

  



On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Ravi Chivukula  
wrote:


>
>
>On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Share Long  wrote:
>
> 
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>TO RAVI:
>>Dear Ravi, as far as I can tell, you have never been the target of Robin's 
>>fixing mode.  So I don't think you really know what it feels like to have him 
>>attribute thoughts and feelings to you that you never even had.  And to have 
>>him do that over and over.  Perhaps then you too would be forceful with him.  
>>I don't agree with you that I was brutal.
>> 
>
>
>Oh Dear Share - No one has any power over me, my feelings or thoughts - even 
>such a notion is totally alien to me. Here's where we have to part - Robin is 
>one of the most honest, truthful, sincere persons I have ever come across my 
>life, he's one of the very few to earn my respect and I totally disagree and 
>your choice of the words "psychological rape" is just brutal and violent, 
>doesn't represent the reality of who the person Robin is. But this will not 
>stop me from loving you.
>
>
>Love,
>Ravi.
>
>


Yet I want to make sure you know I'm not denying your feelings, I wouldn't dare 
deny it and I'm sorry to hear you feel so.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS [to Judy]

2012-10-03 Thread authfriend

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> >  wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Do you not care about what reality is asking of you as to
> >>> how you *should* interpret reality?
> >> 
> >> This question which you posed to Share seems central to the way
> >> in which you have been interacting with people here lately. How
> >> does reality 'ask' of one, and why is there an attribute
> >> connected with the asking that is called 'should'?
> > 
> > I suspect this is a manner of speaking. I further suspect
> > it's a manner of speaking you don't actually have any 
> > trouble interpreting.
> > 
> > The language does not describe some new way that Robin is
> > interacting with people. It's the way most of us--you
> > included--interact with each other most of the time here,
> > especially when there's a dispute or disagreement.
> 
> As the best parser on FFL, I think you parsed this differently
> than I did, and this has made me think about it again.

I didn't parse it at all, Xeno. Do you know what "parse"
means?

> In general the complexity of Robin's speech, I think,
> obscures understanding for most people, and does not represent
> a useful way to teach most people about reality.

I suggest you read Robin's recent post "How to Know Reality's
Point of View":

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/321523

Pay particular attention to the last two paragraphs (but
make sure to read the rest carefully).

 So, what is
> your understanding of the sentence of Robin's I quoted? Because
> you said 'I suspect this is a manner of speaking' in referring
> to the quote, I would suppose it is not entirely clear in your
> mind either.

You would suppose wrong. "Suspect" was rather obviously
sarcastic in context.

Then read the paragraph of mine that followed.

Really, Xeno, Robin has written so much on this topic, it's 
depressing to be asked questions about his approach that
you wouldn't need to ask had you simply read what he has to
say.

Robin has his own formula for getting at the truth, but the
nature of his interactions with people here, as I suggested,
isn't fundamentally any different from anybody else's. With
a few exceptions, we're all trying to get at the truth, or
as close to it as possible. We don't *do* it very well a lot
of the time, which is why Robin wrote the "How to Know
Reality's Point of View" post, to describe step by step how
he does it.

You don't have to adopt his notion of reality as a feminine
entity yearning to have us understand her to make use of
his method, but it seems to me to be a useful way to think
about what it is you're doing when you want to get a read
on reality.

[FairfieldLife] Fwd: A Jewish Boycott

2012-10-03 Thread WLeed3



 
  

 From: fuller...@aol.com
To: wle...@aol.com
Sent: 10/3/2012 11:01:14 A.M.  Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Fwd: A Jewish Boycott





-Original  Message-
From: Louis Bieronski 
To:  alias123 
Sent: Mon, Oct 1, 2012 12:13  pm
Subject: FW: A Jewish Boycott






> Subject: Fw: A Jewish  Boycott

> 
> A Jewish Boycott 
> 
> Quite interesting…  
> 
> A short time ago, Iran 's Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Ali  Khomeini 
> urged the Muslim World to boycott anything and everything  that 
originates 
> with the Jewish people. 
> 
> In  response, Meyer M. Treinkman, a pharmacist, out of the kindness of 
his  
> heart, offered to assist them in their boycott as follows: 
>  
> "Any Muslim who has Syphilis must not be cured by Salvarsan  discovered 
by 
> a Jew, Dr. Ehrlich. He should not even try to find out  whether he has 
> Syphilis, because the Wasserman Test is the discovery  of a Jew. If a 
> Muslim suspects that he has Gonorrhea, he must not  seek diagnosis, 
because 
> he will be using the method of a Jew named  Neissner. 
> 
> "A Muslim who has heart disease must not use  Digitalis, a discovery by a 
> Jew, Ludwig Traube. 
> 
>  Should he suffer with a toothache, he must not use Novocain, a discovery 
 
> of the Jews, Widal and Weil. 
> 
> If a Muslim has  Diabetes, he must not use Insulin, the result of 
research 
> by  Minkowsky, a Jew. 
> If one has a headache, he must shun Pyramidon and  Antypyrin, due to the 
> Jews, Spiro and Ellege. 
> 
>  Muslims with convulsions must put up with them because it was a Jew, 
Oscar  
> Leibreich, who proposed the use of Chloral Hydrate. 
> 
>  Arabs must do likewise with their psychic ailments because Freud, father 
 
> of psychoanalysis, was a Jew. 
> 
> Should a Muslim child  get Diphtheria, he must refrain from the "Schick" 
> reaction, which was  invented by the Jew, Bella Schick. 
> 
> "Muslims should be ready  to die in great numbers and must not permit 
> treatment of ear and  brain damage, work of Jewish Nobel Prize winner, 
> Robert Baram.  
> 
> They should continue to die or remain crippled by Infantile  Paralysis 
> because the discoverer of the anti-polio vaccine is a Jew,  Jonas Salk. 
> 
> "Muslims must refuse to use Streptomycin and  continue to die of 
> Tuberculosis because a Jew, Zalman Waxman,  invented the wonder drug 
> against this killing disease. 
>  
> Muslim doctors must discard all discoveries and improvements by  
> dermatologist Judas Sehn Benedict, or the lung specialist, Frawnkel,  and 
> of many other world renowned Jewish scientists and medical  experts. 
> 
> "In short, good and loyal Muslims properly and  fittingly should remain 
> afflicted with Syphilis, Gonorrhea, Heart  Disease, Headaches, Typhus, 
> Diabetes, Mental Disorders, Polio  Convulsions and Tuberculosis and be 
> proud to obey the Islamic  boycott." 
> 
> Oh, and by the way, don't call for a doctor on  your cell phone because 
the 
> cell phone was invented in Israel by a  Jewish engineer. 
> 
> Meanwhile I ask, what medical contributions  to the world have the 
Muslims 
> made?" 
> 
> The Global  Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000; that is 
ONE 
>  BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world's population. 
>  
> They have received the following Nobel Prizes: 
> 
>  Literature: 
> 1988 - Najib Mahfooz 
> 
> Peace: 
>  1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat 
> 1990 - Elias James Corey 
> 1994  - Yaser Arafat: 
> 1999 - Ahmed Zewai 
> 
> Economics:  
> (zero) 
> 
> Physics: 
> (zero) 
> 
>  Medicine: 
> 1960 - Peter Brian Medawar 
> 1998 - Ferid Mourad  
> 
> TOTAL: 7 SEVEN 
> 
> The Global Jewish  population is approximately 14,000,000; about 0.02% of 
> the world's  population. 
> 
> They have received the following Nobel Prizes:  
> 
> Literature: 
> 1910 - Paul Heyse 
> 1927 - Henri  Bergson 
> 1958 - Boris Pasternak 
> 1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon  
> 1966 - Nelly Sachs 
> 1976 - Saul Bellow 
> 1978 - Isaac  Bashevis Singer 
> 1981 - Elias Canetti 
> 1987 - Joseph Brodsky  
> 1991 - Nadine Gordimer World 
> 
> Peace: 
> 1911 -  Alfred Fried 
> 1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser 
> 1968 - Rene  Cassin 
> 1973 - Henry Kissinger 
> 1978 - Menachem Begin 
>  1986 - Elie Wiesel 
> 1994 - Shimon Peres 
> 1994 - Yitzhak Rabin  
> 
> Physics: 
> 1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer 
> 1906 -  Henri Moissan 
> 1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson 
> 1908 - Gabriel  Lippmann 
> 1910 - Otto Wallach 
> 1915 - Richard Willstaetter  
> 1918 - Fritz Haber 
> 1921 - Albert Einstein 
> 1922 -  Niels Bohr 
> 1925 - James Franck 
> 1925 - Gustav Hertz 
>  1943 - Gustav Stern 
> 1943 - George Charles de Hevesy 
> 1944 -  Isidor Issac Rabi 
> 1952 - Felix Bloch 
> 1954 - Max Born  
> 1958 - Igor Tamm 
> 1959 - Emilio Segre 
> 1960 - Donald  A. Glaser 
> 1961 - Robert Hofstadter 
> 1961 - Melvin Calvin  
> 1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau 
> 1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz  
> 1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman 
> 1965 - Julian Schwinger  
> 1969 - Murray Gell

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Judy Raunchy Xeno

2012-10-03 Thread authfriend

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Hey Judy how about acknowledging that you got a detail wrong
> when you said I had replied to 2 questions and I had actually
> replied to 3?

Hey, Share, how about acknowledging all those mistakes
(not trivial ones) you made in that exchange we had a
couple of weeks ago?

Let me suggest to you that demanding that others
acknowledge things in your posts is not your best
approach, given your own habits of response. It looks
too much like inadvertent irony.

(Also, if you're going to comment on many posts in
one post, please at least have the courtesy to
identify the posts by post number or URL so they can
be looked up easily.)

I did acknowledge your third question. Take another
look at my post.

I also pointed out that you didn't answer one of Ann's
about whether what was taking place was a feud, or
something else. You excused yourself from answering
her four other questions by claiming she was asking
them of herself, which didn't make much sense since
she had directed all her questions at you; but you
couldn't even use that excuse for the one about whether
there was a feud.

No response from you here. How about acknowledging
that?

> Another detail you got wrong is about the Hatfields and McCoys.
> It was I not Ann who introduced this reference.

You are correct on that one.

> I asked you for the wiki url as a joke.

Yes, a little sarcasm on my part.

> And thirdly, I said that I didn't understand Robin and
> that is what I meant.
>
> It's also true that I would understand him less as the
> amount of his words increased.

You didn't say that. You said he was "less understanding
to me as the number of words increases."

That was a non sequitur in context, both because we were
talking about your understanding him, not him being
understanding to you; and because what you hadn't
understood was a pretty short paragraph.

> Replying to other posts from Mon; all times noted are Central time:
> 
> Mon 5:04 pm
> I've never felt Curtis trying to make me compliant.

Oh, I believe you. Of course, I never said he was.

> AND disagreeing with Robin does not equal being compliant
> with Curtis.

It does if what Curtis wants is for you to disagree with
Robin.

> Mon 6:43 pm
> 
> Everyone here, including you does what you accuse Curtis
> of. Defending friends and criticizing enemies.

Of course they do. Now see if you can figure out what my
point was. You may need to actually read what I wrote.

> And actually I've not seen you criticize friends, as you
> purport to do

You may well not have. Can you think of a reason why that
might not be very good evidence that I haven't?

> , not even those who can be over the top sometimes.

Obviously that's a meaningless claim without specific
examples that everyone would agree were "over the top"
and thus deserving of criticism.

> Mon 8:33 pm
> IF the statement I made about psychological rape says
> everything about me, THEN I'd say the following statement,
> especially the "needed to be stepped on" part, says
> everything about you: "Sal is small potatoes, just a nasty,
> unpleasant, not-too-bright little person who needed to be
> stepped on from time to time when she got above herself."

Sorry, Share, that doesn't fly. Those two statements are 
not even remotely equivalent.

> Mon 9:11 AND 9:35 pm
> You accuse Curtis of exactly what you did!  Butt in when
> Robin and I were trying to work out something delicate.
> Very delicate interpersonal negotiations is how you describe
> it the 9:35 post.
>
> Where was that understanding when it was really needed
> during the Russian flash mob upset?!

BIG difference, Share. Curtis was trying to disrupt
those negotiations and turn you against Robin; I was
trying to get you to be more understanding of Robin.
Which do you think would be more likely to help bring
about a resolution between you?

Yet you've objected to *my* butting in but not to
Curtis butting in. You're as bad a hypocrite as he is.

> Tuesday 12:52 am
> I did not discuss psychological rape with anyone before I
> wrote it. Neither friends nor family nor counselor nor poster.

Well, I can't prove otherwise.

> Everything that I said about my state at the time of Russian
> flash mob post was true.

I.e.:

(1) that you were just grumpy from eating sugar
(2) that you hadn't been hurt or insulted
(3) that you didn't consider Robin to have been cruel or hurtful
(4) that he psychologically raped you

All four are true, that's what you're saying?

Share, I'm sorry, but that just isn't sane.

> What has altered my perception of Robin over time is how he
> handled the upset between us.

He handled it like the kind, honest, straightforward, and
loving man that he is. All the twisting and hatred has
occurred on your side.

Just as with Lord Knows, the real psychological rapist
here is not Robin but YOU.

> And I'm not talking about lack of communication skills here.
> I'm talking about continuing to complicate matters in more
> wa

Re: [FairfieldLife] PFOA and hypertension!

2012-10-03 Thread Mike Dixon

Uh-oh! I smell a new Maharishi product coming. Maharishi Vedic Carpets! Vedic 
carpets, hand made, by only the finest Vedic artisans, using only natural 
organic dyes and fibers, free of any man made chemicals and completely in tune 
with nature.

 From: cardemaister 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 4:31 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] PFOA and hypertension!

Researchers recently identified a troubling `trend' of heart attack associated 
with a man-made chemical that has been found to be present in blood of an 
estimated 98% of all Americans.

Those with the highest concentrations had, of course, the highest risk of high 
blood pressure and other very deadly diseases, though.

A common household chemical found in packaging, non-stick cookware, and carpet 
has been found in the blood of almost every single person tested recently in a 
study looking at potential effects.

The chemical, called perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, is a substance that is 
used in most every corner of most American houses and in almost every single 
room from flooring to paint to food wrappers.

The study, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, showed that adults 
with the highest concentrations of PFOA also suffered more frequently from high 
blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and peripheral artery disease (PAD).

While researchers were quick to dismiss any links as `coincidental,' they did 
note that those with the highest levels of PFOA were more than 75% more likely 
to have PAD.

Many other lifestyle factors are cautioned as contributing as well, say the 
authors, but they also conclude there is enough evidence to merit further 
testing.

[FairfieldLife] Re: powerful healing with John Newton

2012-10-03 Thread raunchydog

Good luck, Share. Have fun. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> dear FFL, if I'm messed up yet not beyond reach, then this is the man who can 
> help straighten me out.  I just found out from a friend that he's back in 
> town.  Perfect timing.  
> 
> 
> John Newton trained with Howard Wills, author of the forgiveness prayers and 
> himself trained in the Kahuna tradition.  I understand that Howard who lives 
> in Hawaii is currently working in LA.  With a friend of a friend who says 
> that Howard's prayers cured him of hep C.  
> 
> 
> John was here twice last spring right after the time I joined FFL.  He not 
> only helped me but also my Dad, Mom and sister.  Them via long distance.  He 
> can work with people on the phone and I've even felt his healing energy in 
> his emails.  He's also a TM sidha.
> 
> I plan on working with John as much as I can over the next four days.  
> Hopefully healing will extend to all of us.  This is powerful work. 
> 
> Share
> 
> PS  I will reply to Robin and Emily and Xeno and Ravi and others as soon as I 
> can and as best as I can.  I wish I had more time to devote to my replies but 
> sometimes the rest of my life gobbles up the hours.  Especially the next 4 
> days I will hold you all gently in my heart.   
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread Richard J. Williams



turquoisrb:
> I think that the problem is that there are
> several people on this forum who, narcissistic 
> and needy to a fault, constantly feel the need 
> to troll for attention.
>
You're probably thinking of Judy, Robin, and
Curtis - it looks like they hijacked the whole
forum yesterday and somehow pulled in the poor
Share, with some other yakking by the Dog and
Ann thrown in, to make one of the most boring
and infantile forums I've read in over ten 
years, and it's really difficult to top the
triviality over on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy! 

LoL!

> The trouble is that they HAVE NOTHING 
> WHATSOEVER TO SAY.
>
We finally have something we can agree on! Hey,
maybe we're on the same path.

> When oh when are they going to realize that 
> most people are TIRED of their constant
> bickering and petty caviling and say something 
> else, something worth reading?
> 
Yeah, dialog was so low around here yesterday 
that I posted replies to some dude calling 
himself 'Michael Jackson', obviously another 
troll with some ancient TMO status claims. 

Total waste of time, but at least the thread is 
there if anyone coming here wants to talk about 
'vastu'. 

Jeeezus, you can't even get these gals to talk 
about home decorating!

Go figure.

Hey, Rick - don't even bother to shut it down.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Philosophy and artificial intelligence.

2012-10-03 Thread Xenophaneros Anartaxius

Here is a link to the complete essay in the online magazine Aeon: the Guardian 
article is abridged.

http://www.aeonmagazine.com/being-human/david-deutsch-artificial-intelligence/

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
>  Fascinating article by physicist and quantmu computing pioneer David
> Deutsch. Philosophy will be the key that unlocks artificial intelligence
> AI is achievable, but it will take more than computer science and
> neuroscience to develop machines that think like people...
>

[FairfieldLife] powerful healing with John Newton [1 Attachment]

2012-10-03 Thread Share Long

dear FFL, if I'm messed up yet not beyond reach, then this is the man who can 
help straighten me out.  I just found out from a friend that he's back in 
town.  Perfect timing.  


John Newton trained with Howard Wills, author of the forgiveness prayers and 
himself trained in the Kahuna tradition.  I understand that Howard who lives in 
Hawaii is currently working in LA.  With a friend of a friend who says that 
Howard's prayers cured him of hep C.  


John was here twice last spring right after the time I joined FFL.  He not only 
helped me but also my Dad, Mom and sister.  Them via long distance.  He can 
work with people on the phone and I've even felt his healing energy in his 
emails.  He's also a TM sidha.

I plan on working with John as much as I can over the next four days.  
Hopefully healing will extend to all of us.  This is powerful work. 

Share

PS  I will reply to Robin and Emily and Xeno and Ravi and others as soon as I 
can and as best as I can.  I wish I had more time to devote to my replies but 
sometimes the rest of my life gobbles up the hours.  Especially the next 4 days 
I will hold you all gently in my heart.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Philosophy and artificial intelligence.

2012-10-03 Thread card



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "card"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > "The idea is to evaluate how we can make game bots, which are nonplayer
> > characters (NPCs) controlled by AI algorithms, appear as human as
> > possible," said Risto Miikkulainen, professor of computer science in the
> > College of  Natural Sciences.
> 
> In Sweden, there's a saying: En finne igen!

Pronounce ~ ee-yen [sic!]


 ([Oh no,] a Finn, again!)
> 
> ROFLOL!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Philosophy and artificial intelligence.

2012-10-03 Thread card



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> 
> "The idea is to evaluate how we can make game bots, which are nonplayer
> characters (NPCs) controlled by AI algorithms, appear as human as
> possible," said Risto Miikkulainen, professor of computer science in the
> College of  Natural Sciences.

In Sweden, there's a saying: En finne igen! ([Oh no,] a Finn, again!)

ROFLOL!

[FairfieldLife] PFOA and hypertension!

2012-10-03 Thread cardemaister


Researchers recently identified a troubling `trend' of heart attack associated 
with a man-made chemical that has been found to be present in blood of an 
estimated 98% of all Americans.

Those with the highest concentrations had, of course, the highest risk of high 
blood pressure and other very deadly diseases, though.

A common household chemical found in packaging, non-stick cookware, and carpet 
has been found in the blood of almost every single person tested recently in a 
study looking at potential effects.

The chemical, called perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, is a substance that is 
used in most every corner of most American houses and in almost every single 
room from flooring to paint to food wrappers.

The study, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, showed that adults 
with the highest concentrations of PFOA also suffered more frequently from high 
blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and peripheral artery disease (PAD).

While researchers were quick to dismiss any links as `coincidental,' they did 
note that those with the highest levels of PFOA were more than 75% more likely 
to have PAD.

Many other lifestyle factors are cautioned as contributing as well, say the 
authors, but they also conclude there is enough evidence to merit further 
testing.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Philosophy and artificial intelligence.

2012-10-03 Thread turquoiseb

Just as a timely aside, t'would seem that the Turing Test has already
been achieved. Video game-playing bots are now more human than humans
are. I particularly found interesting the fact that in the attempt to
make machine intelligence more closely resemble the behavior of humans,
they had to teach the machines how to hold grudges. See highlighted
section below.

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-artificially-intelligent-game-bots-turing.h\
tml

Artificially intelligent game bots pass the Turing test on Turing's
centenary
An artificially intelligent virtual gamer created by computer scientists
at The University of Texas at Austin has won the BotPrize by convincing
a panel of judges that it was more human-like than half the humans it
competed against.

The competition was sponsored by 2K Games and was set inside the virtual
world of "Unreal Tournament 2004," a first-person shooter video game.
The winners were announced this month at the IEEE Conference on
Computational Intelligence and Games.

"The idea is to evaluate how we can make game bots, which are nonplayer
characters (NPCs) controlled by AI algorithms, appear as human as
possible," said Risto Miikkulainen, professor of computer science in the
College of  Natural Sciences. Miikkulainen created the bot, called the
UT^2 game bot, with doctoral students Jacob Schrum and Igor Karpov.

The bots face off in a tournament against one another and about an equal
number of humans, with each player trying to score points by eliminating
its opponents. Each player also has a "judging gun" in addition to its
usual complement of weapons. That gun is used to tag opponents as human
or bot.

The bot that is scored as most human-like by the human judges is named
the winner. UT^2, which won a warm-up competition last month, shared the
honors with MirrorBot, which was programmed by Romanian computer
scientist Mihai Polceanu.

The winning bots both achieved a humanness rating of 52 percent. Human
players received an average humanness rating of only 40 percent. The two
winning teams will split the $7,000 first prize.

The victory comes 100 years after the birth of mathematician and
computer scientist Alan Turing, whose "Turing test" stands as one of the
foundational definitions of what constitutes true machine intelligence.
Turing argued that we will never be able to see inside a machine's
hypothetical consciousness, so the best measure of machine sentience is
whether it can fool us into believing it is human.

"When this 'Turing test for game bots' competition was started, the goal
was 50 percent humanness," said Miikkulainen. "It took us five years to
get there, but that level was finally reached last week, and it's not a
fluke."

The complex gameplay and 3-D environments of "Unreal Tournament 2004"
require that bots mimic humans in a number of ways, including moving
around in 3-D space, engaging in chaotic combat against multiple
opponents and reasoning about the best strategy at any given point in
the game. Even displays of distinctively human irrational behavior can,
in some cases, be emulated.

"People tend to tenaciously pursue specific opponents without regard for
optimality," said Schrum. "When humans have a grudge, they'll chase
after an enemy even when it's not in their interests. We can mimic that
behavior."

In order to most convincingly mimic as much of the range of human
behavior as possible, the team takes a two-pronged approach. Some
behavior is modeled directly on previously observed human behavior,
while the central battle behaviors are developed through a process
called neuroevolution, which runs artificially intelligent neural
networks through a survival-of-the-fittest gauntlet that is modeled on
the biological process of evolution.

Networks that thrive in a given environment are kept, and the less fit
are thrown away. The holes in the population are filled by copies of the
fit ones and by their "offspring," which are created by randomly
modifying (mutating) the survivors. The simulation is run for as many
generations as are necessary for networks to emerge that have evolved
the desired behavior.

"In the case of the BotPrize," said Schrum, "a great deal of the
challenge is in defining what 'human-like' is, and then setting
constraints upon the neural networks so that they evolve toward that
behavior.

"If we just set the goal as eliminating one's enemies, a bot will evolve
toward having perfect aim, which is not very human-like. So we impose
constraints on the bot's aim, such that rapid movements and long
distances decrease accuracy. By evolving for good performance under such
behavioral constraints, the bot's skill is optimized within human
limitations, resulting in behavior that is good but still human-like."
Miikkulainen said that methods developed for the BotPrize competition
should eventually be useful not just in developing games that are more
entertaining, but also in cre

[FairfieldLife] Philosophy and artificial intelligence.

2012-10-03 Thread salyavin808

 Fascinating article by physicist and quantmu computing pioneer David
Deutsch. Philosophy will be the key that unlocks artificial intelligence
AI is achievable, but it will take more than computer science and
neuroscience to develop machines that think like people

*  [Human brain]
The defining attribute of an intelligent being, whether human or
machine, is creativity.To state that the human brain has
capabilities that are, in some respects, far superior to those of all
other known objects in the cosmos would be uncontroversial. The brain is
the only kind of object capable of understanding that the cosmos is even
there, or why there are infinitely many prime numbers, or that apples
fall because of the curvature of space-time, or that obeying its own
inborn instincts can be morally wrong, or that it itself exists. Nor are
its unique abilities confined to such cerebral matters. The cold,
physical fact is that it is the only kind of object that can propel
itself into space and back without harm, or predict and prevent a meteor
strike on itself, or cool objects to a billionth of a degree above
absolute zero, or detect others of its kind across galactic distances.
But no brain on Earth is yet close to knowing what brains do in order to
achieve any of that functionality. The enterprise of achieving it
artificially  the field of "artificial general intelligence" or AGI
 has made no progress whatever during the entire six decades of its
existence.

Despite this long record of failure, AGI must be possible. That is
because of a deep property of the laws of physics, namely the
universality of computation. It entails that everything that the laws of
physics require physical objects to do can, in principle, be emulated in
arbitrarily fine detail by some program on a general-purpose computer,
provided it is given enough time and memory.

So why has the field not progressed? In my view it is because, as an
unknown sage once remarked, "it ain't what we don't know that causes
trouble, it's what we know that just ain't so." I cannot think of any
other significant field of knowledge where the prevailing wisdom, not
only in society at large but among experts, is so beset with entrenched,
overlapping, fundamental errors. Yet it has also been one of the most
self-confident fields in prophesying that it will soon achieve the
ultimate breakthrough.

In 1950, Alan Turing expected that by the year 2000, "one will be able
to speak of machines thinking without expecting to be contradicted." In
1968, Arthur C Clarke expected it by 2001. Yet today, in 2012, no one is
any better at programming an AGI than Turing himself would have been.

This does not surprise the dwindling band of opponents of the very
possibility of AGI. But the other camp (the AGI-imminent one) recognises
that this history of failure cries out to be explained  or, at
least, to be rationalised away.

The very term "AGI" is an example of one such rationalisation, for the
field used to be called "AI"  artificial intelligence. But AI was
gradually appropriated to describe all sorts of unrelated computer
programs such as game players, search engines and chatbots, until the G
for "general" was added to make it possible to refer to the real thing
again, but now with the implication that an AGI is just a smarter
species of chatbot.

Another class of rationalisation runs along the general lines of: AGI
isn't that great anyway; existing software is already as smart or
smarter, but in a non-human way, and we are too vain or too culturally
biased to give it due credit. This gets some traction because it invokes
the persistently popular irrationality of cultural relativism, and also
the related trope: "we humans pride ourselves on being the paragon of
animals, but that pride is misplaced because they, too, have language,
tools  And self-awareness." Remember the significance attributed to
the computer system in the Terminator films, Skynet, becoming
"self-aware"?

That's just another philosophical misconception, sufficient in itself to
block any viable approach to AGI. The fact is that present-day software
developers could straightforwardly program a computer to have
"self-awareness" in the behavioural sense  for example, to pass the
"mirror test" of being able to use a mirror to infer facts about itself
 if they wanted to. As far as I am aware, no one has done so,
presumably because it is a fairly useless ability as well as a trivial
one.

Perhaps the reason self-awareness has its undeserved reputation for
being connected with AGI is that, thanks to Gödel's theorem and
various controversies in formal logic in the 20th century,
self-reference of any kind has acquired a reputation for woo-woo
mystery. And so has consciousness. And for consciousness we have the
problem of ambiguous terminology again: the term has a huge range of
meanings. At one end of the scale there is the philosophical problem of
the nature of subjective sensations ("qualia"), which is intimately

[FairfieldLife] Just found these 3 Ramana photos

2012-10-03 Thread martin.quickman

enjoy ! 
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sathya-Sai-Memories-Children-Of-Light/484873548198639

[FairfieldLife] Party Down Time in Leiden

2012-10-03 Thread turquoiseb

Yesterday, while people here were earnestly arguing
about...uh...whatever it is they feel compelled to endlessly argue
about, Turq was partying down with the Leidenites. This was my first
experience of Leidens Ontzet, the two-day party thrown every year on
October 2nd and 3rd to commemorate this small city kicking the butts of
the largest and most powerful nation in the world. Who knew that I'd
chosen to live in a city with a history of not only revolutionary
guerrilla action, but *successful* revolutionary guerrilla action.

True, the action took place 457 years ago, but still, credit where
credit is due. Leiden was the site of a revolution that broke the back
of the Spanish rule of their country. It seems that the King of Spain
somehow "inherited" the whole of the Netherlands, and set about trying
to rule them as harshly as he did other colonies. Most of the Dutch
rolled over and collaborated with their new rulers, but a few provinces
and cities rebelled, Leiden foremost among them. The Duke of Alba set
siege to the city in October 1573, and continued it in 1574,
unsuccessfully. But the most powerful army in the world was still
advancing on the city with its far greater number of troops, and the
ships bearing relief armies of rebels couldn't get close enough to the
city to help. So, using Dutch ingenuity and their experience with dikes
(those are the things that keep water where it's supposed to be, not the
other thing you're thinking of), flooded the lands around Leiden and
allowed the rebel ships to land. The Spanish took note and ran. There
was much rejoicing in Leiden, followed by mass consumption of a dish
called hutspot, a carrot and onion stew that I can attest probably
tasted no better back then that it does today. But still, they'd kicked
the butts of the Spanish, and that was worth celebrating.

They still celebrate today. The whole town is on vacation, and most of
the squares are filled with large carnival rides, tents selling things,
beer stands, and places serving free hutspot. Music is pretty much
everywhere -- on stages, on the streets, and in every club, restaurant,
and bar. Suffice it to say I partied hearty with the Leidenites,
stumbling home way early this morning.

I considered catching up on FFL, but then realized that I already knew
what I'd find, so I didn't bother. Instead I posted a cute graphic that
I'd found on Digg, and got some sleep. Now, having awakened, showered,
and coffeed, I glanced over the lists of posts from yesterday and
realized that my early morning intuition that I was going to find
nothing new was correct.

Since I'll probably be partying down a bit more today, I reiterate my
description of what FFL has become, and my challenge to the people
who've made it that way. I think that the problem is that there are
several people on this forum who, narcissistic and needy to a fault,
constantly feel the need to troll for attention. The trouble is that
they HAVE NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO SAY. They are neither smart enough nor
intelligent enough to capture the attention they seek by posting
something interesting about spirituality, ideas, or even what's going on
in their lives (possibly because...duh...nothing is). So instead they
just rag non-stop on the people who have written them off as
uninteresting and not *worthy* of their attention, trying desperately to
get them to respond to them.

My suspicion, having glanced at the evidence of this quickly and not
bothered to click on a single one of the actual posts, is that they
failed yesterday, as they have so often in the past. When oh when are
they going to realize that most people are TIRED of their constant
bickering and petty caviling and say something else, something worth
reading?

Oh. Wait.

That would presume that they actually HAD something to say, wouldn't it?

Never mind.

[FairfieldLife] Hitler Finds Out About Apple's new iOS6 Maps

2012-10-03 Thread card


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkDz4wMI9J8

92 matches

Mail list logo