[FairfieldLife] Re: For Card -- Nokia writes its own "review" of their new phone
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > No *wonder* you still like them; they're just like the TMO. :-) > > http://theweek.com/article/index/239665/the-best-lines-from-nokias-absurdly-positive-review-of-its-own-windows-phone > Now that the next exact Pluto/Uranus EF square is only a couple of weeks away, my view is that the (mainly fundie Christian?) clowns of Goldman Sachs are about to trigger the next 1929 style stock market crash. So, I guess I'd better sell all my stock (NOK and BT), and perhaps buy them back remarkably cheaper after the Wall Street boys' trick??
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
dunno anything about Rama except what I have read here - I recall 2 things Barry said - one was an acknowledgement of Rama's faults and the other was that in spite of Rama's faults and shortcomings, Barry from time to time got from his association with Rama some good things in the way of experiences. This is the same thing that others here have said of Marshy and other teachers - so since Barry has said outright that Rama did things he shouldn't have, I have no problem with his past with Rama and his present attitude towards his experiences and time in association with him especially since it is the same attitude others have about Marshy. And for what it is worth, I do understand those who had powerful experiences with Marshy still having some appreciation of him - for all his denunciation of Marshy, Mark Landau still has admiration for his old master, fraud that he was. I understand the appreciation - and the denunciation. My old man was an emotionally abusive functional alcoholic, yet he did take good care of us financially and with the best advice he had to offer. He was manipulative (but it was clumsy since he was generally inebriated at night) - I disliked much of his behavior and still appreciated that he worked his ass off to raise 3 kids. So I get it. Personally I didn't have powerful experiences with Marshy, and therefore am left with only the denunciation. From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 8:29 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 MJ, can you really take TB seriously? Still smells Ok to you? After all, I can sorta see you being all upset over Maharishi, but with Bee, its twisted and tragic, his PURE DENIAL of Rama's criminality - his most recent Guru, and *ALL IN* cult experience. Seems to me you'd ask yourself why Bee focuses SO MUCH on Maharishi, and, like I say in my re-post below, "Too bad all we get from Barry on this asshole [Rama], is crickets." Makes ME wonder, even if you are Okey-Dokey with it... Now, I know Barry is going to counter with his sensitivity and ponderings over Rama, and his confusion over whether rape at gunpoint is a bad thang, or not, but, that aside, I am curious about how you see it. - "Barry doesn't really want to talk about Rama [Frederick Lenz] - too embarrassing, I guess." Spot on! or as Nabby says, "BINGO!" Despite his pretensions as some sort of "spiritual sociologist" (gag me with a spoon...), Barry spent far more time with Rama, spent far more of his money on him, and bought into the guy, hook, line and sinker vs. his relatively minimal, and ancient, involvement with TMO and Maharishi. Nobody is concerned about Rama's legacy, BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE ONE. He used to consider himself a great lover, by seducing his female followers with a loaded gun. Sexy, huh?? He took hundreds of thousands of dollars from his pathetic followers like Barry, to fuel his degenerate lifestyle, and finally ended his life by first trying to kill a follower, and then successfully committed suicide by drug overdose...oh, while wearing a dog collar. Yeah, wow, if I had followed Maharishi, and this dude, I'd definitely go after Maharishi as the less ethical, dishonest one. Not. Although if someone thought perms, pistols, and pleather were the height of fashion, they might just give Rama a pass - lol. All I can say is I am glad such a dissolute and criminal windbag is gone for good. Too bad all we get from Barry on this asshole, is crickets. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > Oh man, you are right, I didn't catch that! > > > > > > From: turquoiseb > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:35 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 > > >  > Great stories, nicely told. I never had anything to do with Kriyananda and > his set, or the Yogananda trip, but I *completely* get the "similar vibe to > MUM" thang, having experienced it in any number of spiritual trips. I have > nothing to add to your excellent rap except to riff off of a typo in your > post that you probably didn't notice but which set me to laughing -- > Yodananda. :-) > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > That is a funny funny post - I do love your style of writing and I laughed > > out loud when I read your quote of Bhairitu's take on FFL. > > > > One experience I have not mentioned here is that 2 years after I left MIU I > > was with a woman in Boulder (not a TM woman) and she wanted to do a > > "pilgrimage" with Swami Kriyananda at their place outside Nevada City > > called Ananda. Ann and I had taken a trip to Portland where we made friends > > with a couple who were into Kriyananda (I am still friends with them, Ann
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
MJ, can you really take TB seriously? Still smells Ok to you? After all, I can sorta see you being all upset over Maharishi, but with Bee, its twisted and tragic, his PURE DENIAL of Rama's criminality - his most recent Guru, and *ALL IN* cult experience. Seems to me you'd ask yourself why Bee focuses SO MUCH on Maharishi, and, like I say in my re-post below, "Too bad all we get from Barry on this asshole [Rama], is crickets." Makes ME wonder, even if you are Okey-Dokey with it... Now, I know Barry is going to counter with his sensitivity and ponderings over Rama, and his confusion over whether rape at gunpoint is a bad thang, or not, but, that aside, I am curious about how you see it. - "Barry doesn't really want to talk about Rama [Frederick Lenz] - too embarrassing, I guess." Spot on! or as Nabby says, "BINGO!" Despite his pretensions as some sort of "spiritual sociologist" (gag me with a spoon...), Barry spent far more time with Rama, spent far more of his money on him, and bought into the guy, hook, line and sinker vs. his relatively minimal, and ancient, involvement with TMO and Maharishi. Nobody is concerned about Rama's legacy, BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE ONE. He used to consider himself a great lover, by seducing his female followers with a loaded gun. Sexy, huh?? He took hundreds of thousands of dollars from his pathetic followers like Barry, to fuel his degenerate lifestyle, and finally ended his life by first trying to kill a follower, and then successfully committed suicide by drug overdose...oh, while wearing a dog collar. Yeah, wow, if I had followed Maharishi, and this dude, I'd definitely go after Maharishi as the less ethical, dishonest one. Not. Although if someone thought perms, pistols, and pleather were the height of fashion, they might just give Rama a pass - lol. All I can say is I am glad such a dissolute and criminal windbag is gone for good. Too bad all we get from Barry on this asshole, is crickets. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > Oh man, you are right, I didn't catch that! > > > > > > From: turquoiseb > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:35 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 > > >  > Great stories, nicely told. I never had anything to do with Kriyananda and > his set, or the Yogananda trip, but I *completely* get the "similar vibe to > MUM" thang, having experienced it in any number of spiritual trips. I have > nothing to add to your excellent rap except to riff off of a typo in your > post that you probably didn't notice but which set me to laughing -- > Yodananda. :-) > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > That is a funny funny post - I do love your style of writing and I laughed > > out loud when I read your quote of Bhairitu's take on FFL. > > > > One experience I have not mentioned here is that 2 years after I left MIU I > > was with a woman in Boulder (not a TM woman) and she wanted to do a > > "pilgrimage" with Swami Kriyananda at their place outside Nevada City > > called Ananda. Ann and I had taken a trip to Portland where we made friends > > with a couple who were into Kriyananda (I am still friends with them, Ann, > > not so much). > > > > Anyway they had this tradition of doing "pilgrimage" going to India to > > visit the places Yogananda and his guru Sri Yukteswar and his guru Lahiri > > Mahasaya had lived and taught. > > > > Well, somehow some of the descendants of Yogananda got annoyed at people > > wanting to traipse through their homes and told them to get lost - so in > > 1989, Kriyananda organized a pilgrimage of one of Yodananda's nephews and > > one other guy who was supposed to the the great-grandson of Lahiri Mahasaya > > to come to America to Ananda. > > > > What struck me after being there at Ananda for a day or two was that even > > though the techniques were different, even though they were really into > > music and chanting, the vibe there was just like it was at MIU. I was > > struck by the similarity of the way people dressed, the way they spoke, > > their polite yet aloof manner and just about everything about the Ananda > > people was just like the MIU crowd. I remember after the first meeting and > > then group meal I was sitting in the dining hall thinking that you could > > take the MIU folks and put them here and take these folks and put them at > > MIU, you would never know the difference. > > > > One funny thing I heard was the nephew of Yogananda was in his 80's and > > when he came to the US it was his first trip outside of India. When I met > > him, he was tall, thin and had a very sweet, sattvic demeanor. The people > > from Ananda who had been assigned to pick him up from the airport took him > > through San Francisco where he insisted on trying
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
Life work of The holy. On Saintly Healing Maharishi says, "That is `The department of the Almighty does it`. It is not the individual - it is the department. And it is only one way, it is not two ways. The help is not given, it is received. It is received by our ability to attune with that. And that ability develops with devotion, surrender and service. These three things - automatically one is elevated to that level. And help doesn`t come from outside, it comes from right were we are, from our own being. But those unaware of one`s own being have this mechanics to help them. And this is true for all the saints in all the times through out the world." > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > Paraphrasing Maharishi," a doctor doesn't need to be in good health to heal > > others". > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > No, are looking at and talking about something else bigger here. Primary > care providers with a degree in medicine, even Chopra, are more usually just > different trades-people compared to saints. > > > > > --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > This is a good answer, Mike. > > > > > > I wouldn't want to have to define "holy man" or "saint," so > > > I wouldn't want to say what would disqualify him (or qualify > > > him, for that matter) for being either. He wasn't a perfect > > > human being, that's for sure. It's up to the individual to > > > decide how much they want to hold his sins against him. > > > > > > > > > > Couldn't describe? Saints? Okay, if you won't stick your neck out at this > > point I will for sake of the discussion here. We all know them when we see > > them. Saints become described by their work. As spiritual people our > > saints are those particular people who can help people spiritually and who > > distinguish their life work that way. More than just doing good works and > > different from folks [think Batgap.com] just being awake authors or > > spiritual teachers out on the circuit but those being in the work of > > tangibly lending spiritual transformation by interceding with healing for > > others of the binding influences in the subtle bodies of the spiritual > > psycho-physical and emotional samskara towards helping to free people of > > the binding influences in their spiritual life on earth. Real saints, it's > > those particular enlightened who can tangibly or manifestly heal people who > > are either afflicted or ignorant in their spiritual lives. > > -Buck > > > > > > > > --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > > > > > Yeah, he's still a holy man, just not as holy as most of us thought. > > > > The Bible tells usÃÂ that all men fall short of the Glory of God. That > > > > means that all men have and will sin. Maharishi was a man, not God. The > > > > Bible also speaks of angels coming to earth and having sex with women. > > > > Veda Vyasa had sex with an unmarried woman in a boat while crossing a > > > > river, thus we have Shukadeva. Maharishi belongs on a pedestal, just > > > > not as high as we might have thought. My thoughts are that M was a very > > > > high soul on a mission and upon taking birth as a man, he did things > > > > men do. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Michael Jackson > > > > To: "mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com"; > > > > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 12:58 PM > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Serious Question > > > > > > > > ÃÂ > > > > > > > > OK, serious question here to all those who have defended Maharishi as a > > > > saint and true holy man. > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you account for the stories that several of his former skin boys > > > > have told about his sexual escapades? Mark Landau, Billy Clayton, Nedd > > > > Wynn and others have told stories that are very similar as to what who > > > > and when. > > > > > > > > Do you think they are all lying and if so why? Or do you honestly think > > > > it is alright for a true holy man who always said he was a lifelong > > > > celibate to have sex repeatedly and lie about having done so? > > > > > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Wed 06-Feb-13 00:15:02 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 02/02/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 02/09/13 00:00:00 354 messages as of (UTC) 02/06/13 00:06:31 39 Michael Jackson 27 turquoiseb 25 nablusoss1008 25 doctordumbass 25 Share Long 24 seventhray27 24 obbajeeba 20 Bhairitu 19 authfriend 17 Richard J. Williams 13 Buck 12 Ravi Chivukula 9 srijau 9 card 9 John 8 salyavin808 8 Ann 7 navashok 4 seekliberation 4 merudanda 4 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 4 Mike Dixon 4 Alex Stanley 2 laughinggull108 2 feste37 2 david 1 wgm4u 1 merlin 1 martin.quickman 1 at_man_and_brahman 1 Yifu 1 PaliGap 1 FairfieldLife 1 Dick Mays Posters: 34 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: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > From Barry: > > "As for parallels, I think mine was apt. Michael obsesses > on Maharishi and the TMO because it's an *ongoing issue*. The behavior of the TMO is an ongoing issue, such that sufficient outrage could conceivably (not "likely," just conceivably) result in improvement (parallel to politicians and banksters, as noted in my post that Barry chose to quote out of context for the purpose of misleading readers). > None of the practices and dishonesty he's upset about > have stopped; instead, they are normal, everyday policy. Just as Barry's chronic dishonesty and gratuitous attacks on his critics are his normal, everyday policy. > But there is another sense in which your stalking is > like his (apologies in advance to Michael if I'm incorrect, > none needed with regard to the Judester because everyone > here knows I'm correct)." Translation: I'm hoping Michael will take my word for what I say about Judy, because he hasn't been around long enough to realize I have no case against her if I tell the truth about her. > I may have tried early on to convince others here on FFL that > another point of view might be wise, but it didn't take long > before I learned that was a forlorn hope - for the last > several months at least I have been asking questions and > learning things both facts, personal anecdotes and opinions > that have helped me make sense of my time with TM and make > sense of TM and the TMO and Marshy in general. > > Aside from that, I do the same thing now that you say you do, > I say how I feel or what I believe and I do pose questions > sometimes to see what others believe - I have no illusions > that anyone here will change their minds. You do realize, Michael, don't you, that the folks here who support TM are in the distinct minority, and that those who are genuine TBs are in an even smaller minority? You are largely, IOW, preaching to the choir. Also, the facts, personal anecdotes, and opinions you've gathered may be new to you, but most of them aren't new to the FFL regulars. > I would like to thank to everyone who has posted here - I have > been criticized for agreeing with you Barry Only in certain respects, Michael. > and it is true that sometimes you can really cuss people out > but for me I have gained a great deal of insight from your > points of view and the stories of what you saw and did in the > TMO. The reason Barry gets so much flak here is not because of his critiques of MMY and the TMO, it's because of how he treats people, especially TMers. Those who make similar criticisms but treat others decently, with respect even in disagreement, don't engender the same reactions.
Re: [FairfieldLife] TMO and Maharishi bashing, vs. What???
I have stated clearly that I am not foolish enough to believe I can change the ideology of anyone here and am not attempting to do so. Your statement that we are not comparing Marshy to anyone else is kind of ridiculous - that's like saying if we had a real saint to compare him to, we might be justified in pointing out his enormities. It is a good thing that your mentality is not practiced in legal courts. I can see the judge now. "Well, boys you proved for a fact this feller stole millions of dollars, but since we don't have nuthin and nobody to compare him to, we gotta turn him lose. From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:42 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] TMO and Maharishi bashing, vs. What??? This has been interesting to watch - Barry, who worshiped a drug addicted rapist for years, and MJ, who has a similar history of spiritual dabbling, are dead set on their goal to make us all realize the errors of Maharishi's ways, that he wasn't perfect, or a saint. What I find interesting about all of this *interest* in Maharishi's life, is that neither one of them has any basis for comparison, whatsoever. Its not like they are comparing Maharishi to someone *better*, or even to themselves, and their actions in life. Nope, its just bash, bash, bash, because the TMO does continue on, and is getting quite successful, far more so than Bee's dead rapist "teacher". Pretty fuckin' weird. Bee wants a weird life, and he has got one.:-) As for MJ, this is a phase to grow through, and more power to him, completing the phase.
[FairfieldLife] Apaurusheya Bhasya as Explained by MMY
He stated that consciousness is the cause of the physical body. In the past, he had explained that the Rig Veda represents the collapse of the Unbounded Intelligence (the Ahh sound in Agni) into the manifest point value (the Kkk sound in Agni) which we recognize as the universe today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADkjXrJiv2A
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMO and Maharishi bashing, vs. What???
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > This has been interesting to watch - Barry, who worshiped a drug addicted > rapist for years, and MJ, who has a similar history of spiritual dabbling, > are dead set on their goal to make us all realize the errors of Maharishi's > ways, that he wasn't perfect, or a saint. > > What I find interesting about all of this *interest* in Maharishi's life, is > that neither one of them has any basis for comparison, whatsoever. Its not > like they are comparing Maharishi to someone *better*, or even to themselves, > and their actions in life. > > Nope, its just bash, bash, bash, because the TMO does continue on, and is > getting quite successful, far more so than Bee's dead rapist "teacher". > > Pretty fuckin' weird. Bee wants a weird life, and he has got one.:-) As for > MJ, this is a phase to grow through, and more power to him, completing the > phase. Spot on ! BINGO ! :-) But I don't find the Turq much weird. He's just like many (but not all) OLD folks I know, inflexible, stuck in the past, fearsome of the future and boring. Without realizing he has become irrelvant and his posts predictable and boring, ZzZ... The funny thing is that he THINKS he is a big provocateur but in reality he just keeps repeating the same old, same old - thinking that he actually are pushing some buttons whereas the truth is that he receives little more than a big YAWN in return.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A photo to make Nabby even crazier than usual :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > Two fools, reported by a third one.:-) Funny how the Dalai Llama is looking > more and more like *Walter Brennan* as he ages... Walter Brennan, is he a comedian ? When I saw this picture these two figures reminded me of two clowns :-) > MJ, if you want to get upset, you may want to upset yourself with the > medieval ideas the DL propagates, and his general uselessness as a spiritual > "leader". > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > T'would seem that TM poster boy Russell Brand has made a new friend: > > > > > > [https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/270947_348719451\ > > 868295_1507708107_n.jpg] > > > > "... I don't like formality, so Russell Brand, who is also very > > informal, was a fitting person to introduce me; thank you! Birth takes > > place without formality, as does death. If I think of myself as a > > Buddhist monk or as a Tibetan, that sets up a sort of barrier between > > me and others. In fact, I am a human being like you, who wants > > happiness and doesn't want to face suffering and problems. I speak > > to you as just one of the 7 billion human beings in the world today. > > Physically, mentally and emotionally we're the same; and we have > > the same potential for good as well as for bad..." > > ~ H.H. the Dalai Lama > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
Yup, there are lots of books out there about tantra. Mostly by spectators and full of bullshit. There are some books by real tantrics available but you really won't understand them unless you've learned tantra yourself. On 02/05/2013 10:31 AM, Share Long wrote: > Richard, very wonderful info, thanks for posting. I googled topics and got > wandering in a fascinating world. I love that idea of a gateless gate. > > Here's a website with some of Lady Yeshe's writings. > > http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/tsogyal.html > > > > From: Richard J. Williams > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 8:37 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati? > > > > > > obbajeeba: >> As if I am going to pretend talking about tantic >> activity is not arousing >> > In fact you're already a Sky Dancer from birth. > > But, until realization we think we are on a path > to the other side, and we must pass through a gate. > > If you do cross over to the other side, you will > find that there's no other side, a gateless gate, > and there was no crossing over. > > Go figure. > > "Yeshe Tsogyel, consort of Guru Padmasambhava, is > the most famous of the enlightened women of Tibet. > Women have a special place in tantra, but except > for Sky Dancer there are few writings that present > the spiritual practices and evolution of female > aspirants. Here women are in an eminent position, > and a path of practice is given for present-day > initiates to emulate. Keith Dowman has added a > commentary on the path of inner tantra, woman and > the dakini, and the Nyingma lineages." > > 'Sky Dancer' > The Secret Life And Songs Of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel > by Keith Dowman > Snow Lion, 1996 > http://tinyurl.com/bdoz7jf > > I'm just saying that just as they shouldn't > necessarily limit tantra to what they know > about it, neither should you > >>> Bharitu: I have to respectfully disagree because there are classic definitions of tantra... >>> Something tells me you two are not practicing >>> tantrics. >>> >>> A sure sign that someone is not practicing tantra >>> is that they deny the sexual origins and goals of >>> tantra. LoL! >>> >>> Everyone knows that tantra yoga began as a sex cult >>> in Gupta Age India; tantrics sought to fuse the >>> male and female aspects of the cosmos into a blissful >>> state of consciousness. There's no life without sex >>> and the combination of male and female is the path >>> to the non-dual experience. >>> >>> "The rites of Tantric cults, while often steeped in >>> symbolism, could also include group and individual >>> sex. One text advised devotees to revere the female >>> sex organ and enjoy vigorous intercourse. Candidates >>> for worship included actresses and prostitutes, as >>> well as the sisters of practitioners." >>> >>> Work cited: >>> >>> 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' >>> By William J. Broad >>> Posted on February 27, 2012 >>> http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc >>> > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
> > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > > what excuses you make for him lying about it for so long, > > and to so many? > > > > That is a really tough question. That could easily be someone's scholarly > thesis topic alone on Fairfield. How meditators have dealt with the deceit > and moral dissonance of their leadership. That became more directly > addressed in a series of posts by a range of old meditators writing on FFL > between Christmas and New Year's a month ago. It was really interesting to > read how different people resolved their relationship with the Tmo. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Could it be this? That I don't really see anyone as my leader. I like how > Ram Das says it: We're all just walking each other home. > That's how I feel about it. And since I have flaws, it doesn't bother me > that they have flaws too. > > Yes that is a point of view in a spectrum and I certainly interview plenty of meditators in the community who are here needing nothing to do with them TMo and its leaders. People dial the moral dissonance problem filter differently for themselves. A lot of people have left and some have stayed still liking it or holding their noses for their own benefit or at least to help the world in spite of everything TM. > > > > From: Buck > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 1:13 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > I'm very glad that Rajaram is a householder. > > > > Are you glad that he lied about it to pretty much > > everyone in the TM movement for many years, including > > his close friends like John Hagelin? > > > > > It makes the TMO more human somehow, more of the world > > > with all its joys and sorrows, more connected to life > > > with all its light and dark. > > > > Yeah, you say this NOW, now that it's come out that > > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > > what excuses you make for him lying about it for so long, > > and to so many? > > > > That is a really tough question. That could easily be someone's scholarly > thesis topic alone on Fairfield. How meditators have dealt with the deceit > and moral dissonance of their leadership. That became more directly > addressed in a series of posts by a range of old meditators writing on FFL > between Christmas and New Year's a month ago. It was really interesting to > read how different people resolved their relationship with the Tmo. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
It's the "pop guru" thing. Better to learn from someone who is not interested in running a big movement where you can get some good "one on one" teaching. They're harder to find but they are indeed out there. On 02/05/2013 09:35 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > Great stories, nicely told. I never had anything to do with Kriyananda > and his set, or the Yogananda trip, but I *completely* get the "similar > vibe to MUM" thang, having experienced it in any number of spiritual > trips. I have nothing to add to your excellent rap except to riff off of > a typo in your post that you probably didn't notice but which set me to > laughing -- Yodananda. :-) > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
Could it be this? That I don't really see anyone as my leader. I like how Ram Das says it: We're all just walking each other home. That's how I feel about it. And since I have flaws, it doesn't bother me that they have flaws too. From: Buck To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 1:13 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > I'm very glad that Rajaram is a householder. > > Are you glad that he lied about it to pretty much > everyone in the TM movement for many years, including > his close friends like John Hagelin? > > > It makes the TMO more human somehow, more of the world > > with all its joys and sorrows, more connected to life > > with all its light and dark. > > Yeah, you say this NOW, now that it's come out that > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > what excuses you make for him lying about it for so long, > and to so many? > That is a really tough question. That could easily be someone's scholarly thesis topic alone on Fairfield. How meditators have dealt with the deceit and moral dissonance of their leadership. That became more directly addressed in a series of posts by a range of old meditators writing on FFL between Christmas and New Year's a month ago. It was really interesting to read how different people resolved their relationship with the Tmo.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > I'm very glad that Rajaram is a householder. > > Are you glad that he lied about it to pretty much > everyone in the TM movement for many years, including > his close friends like John Hagelin? > > > It makes the TMO more human somehow, more of the world > > with all its joys and sorrows, more connected to life > > with all its light and dark. > > Yeah, you say this NOW, now that it's come out that > he is married and has been for many years. But I wonder > what excuses you make for him lying about it for so long, > and to so many? > That is a really tough question. That could easily be someone's scholarly thesis topic alone on Fairfield. How meditators have dealt with the deceit and moral dissonance of their leadership. That became more directly addressed in a series of posts by a range of old meditators writing on FFL between Christmas and New Year's a month ago. It was really interesting to read how different people resolved their relationship with the Tmo.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Not well read!?!?! I read every Rick Riordan book ever published! From: Richard J. Williams To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:42 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > salyavin808: > Yeah Michael, how dare you keep introducing uncomfortable > topics to try and work out the whole story about Marshy! > Anyone would think this was a TM discussion forum the way > you carry on... > You won't be finding out much from Barry or Michael, since they got booted out of the TMO years ago, and neither of them seem are in a cult now, or even well-read. Barry doesn't really want to talk about Rama - to embarrasing, I guess. Go figure. "Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs." > > It isn't as if there's anything we can do about it now. > > With politicians and banksters, if enough people become > > sufficiently infuriated, it could facilitate positive > > change. But Maharishi, he daid. > > And we'd all rather keep pretending the self-created myth > was true thank you very much, so quit your wallowing and > appreciate the good things we got like world peace and > perfect health... > > > And as far as politicians and banksters are concerned, > > unlike Maharishi, they haven't given us much of anything > > of value. That doesn't excuse the bad stuff he did, but > > at least with him there are two sides to the ledger. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Oh man, you are right, I didn't catch that! From: turquoiseb To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 Great stories, nicely told. I never had anything to do with Kriyananda and his set, or the Yogananda trip, but I *completely* get the "similar vibe to MUM" thang, having experienced it in any number of spiritual trips. I have nothing to add to your excellent rap except to riff off of a typo in your post that you probably didn't notice but which set me to laughing -- Yodananda. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > That is a funny funny post - I do love your style of writing and I laughed > out loud when I read your quote of Bhairitu's take on FFL. > > One experience I have not mentioned here is that 2 years after I left MIU I > was with a woman in Boulder (not a TM woman) and she wanted to do a > "pilgrimage" with Swami Kriyananda at their place outside Nevada City called > Ananda. Ann and I had taken a trip to Portland where we made friends with a > couple who were into Kriyananda (I am still friends with them, Ann, not so > much). > > Anyway they had this tradition of doing "pilgrimage" going to India to visit > the places Yogananda and his guru Sri Yukteswar and his guru Lahiri Mahasaya > had lived and taught. > > Well, somehow some of the descendants of Yogananda got annoyed at people > wanting to traipse through their homes and told them to get lost - so in > 1989, Kriyananda organized a pilgrimage of one of Yodananda's nephews and one > other guy who was supposed to the the great-grandson of Lahiri Mahasaya to > come to America to Ananda. > > What struck me after being there at Ananda for a day or two was that even > though the techniques were different, even though they were really into music > and chanting, the vibe there was just like it was at MIU. I was struck by the > similarity of the way people dressed, the way they spoke, their polite yet > aloof manner and just about everything about the Ananda people was just like > the MIU crowd. I remember after the first meeting and then group meal I was > sitting in the dining hall thinking that you could take the MIU folks and put > them here and take these folks and put them at MIU, you would never know the > difference. > > One funny thing I heard was the nephew of Yogananda was in his 80's and when > he came to the US it was his first trip outside of India. When I met him, he > was tall, thin and had a very sweet, sattvic demeanor. The people from Ananda > who had been assigned to pick him up from the airport took him through San > Francisco where he insisted on trying out a trolley car. The Ananda people > nearly crapped in their pants because he got on the back of the car and swung > himself back and forth on the pole at the back of the car - they finally got > him to come in and sit down but one of them said he nearly had a heart attack > fearing Yogananda's nephew was going to fall off the trolley and get killed > on his watch. > > That old man was pretty cool to be around - the great grandson was kind of > full of himself, but all in all it was in interesting experience. Kriyananda > had not at that point been accused of sexual improprieties and had not fled > to Italy - he told all sorts of Yogananda stories including that Yogananda > had confided to him that he (Yogananda) had been Arjuna in a previous life. > > Not that anyone cares what I think, I was not overly impressed withe the > Swami - he just seemed like a kindly old man - there wasn't any real energy > there, but you would have thought he was God incarnate from the way the > Ananda people fawned all over him. > > > > > > From: turquoiseb > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 11:19 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 > > > Â > You make good points, and I withdraw my parallel. :-) > > I think this place (FFL) is best approached as "enter- > tainment that has the capability of teaching." Like you, > I have learned from many in my time here, and as much > from those who disagreed with me as from those who > agreed. > > I'm fairly comfortable with my views of Maharishi, TM, > the TMO, and spirituality in general, but IMO *none* of > them constitute anything resembling "truth." They're > just ideas that I have. I don't so much "believe in them" > as "wear" them for a bit while toying with them. In so > doing, occasionally I throw them out onto the Internet > like spaghetti against a refrigerator; some idea-strands > stick, others don't. No big deal either way. > > I honestly don't think there is enough there there about > the whole TM experience to get emotional about or attached > to. For me, at least. But I enjoy playing with ideas about > it, as a form of amusemen
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
Richard, very wonderful info, thanks for posting. I googled topics and got wandering in a fascinating world. I love that idea of a gateless gate. Here's a website with some of Lady Yeshe's writings. http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/tsogyal.html From: Richard J. Williams To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 8:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati? obbajeeba: > As if I am going to pretend talking about tantic > activity is not arousing > In fact you're already a Sky Dancer from birth. But, until realization we think we are on a path to the other side, and we must pass through a gate. If you do cross over to the other side, you will find that there's no other side, a gateless gate, and there was no crossing over. Go figure. "Yeshe Tsogyel, consort of Guru Padmasambhava, is the most famous of the enlightened women of Tibet. Women have a special place in tantra, but except for Sky Dancer there are few writings that present the spiritual practices and evolution of female aspirants. Here women are in an eminent position, and a path of practice is given for present-day initiates to emulate. Keith Dowman has added a commentary on the path of inner tantra, woman and the dakini, and the Nyingma lineages." 'Sky Dancer' The Secret Life And Songs Of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel by Keith Dowman Snow Lion, 1996 http://tinyurl.com/bdoz7jf > > > > I'm just saying that just as they shouldn't > > > > necessarily limit tantra to what they know > > > > about it, neither should you > > > > > > Bharitu: > > > I have to respectfully disagree because there > > > are classic definitions of tantra... > > > > > Something tells me you two are not practicing > > tantrics. > > > > A sure sign that someone is not practicing tantra > > is that they deny the sexual origins and goals of > > tantra. LoL! > > > > Everyone knows that tantra yoga began as a sex cult > > in Gupta Age India; tantrics sought to fuse the > > male and female aspects of the cosmos into a blissful > > state of consciousness. There's no life without sex > > and the combination of male and female is the path > > to the non-dual experience. > > > > "The rites of Tantric cults, while often steeped in > > symbolism, could also include group and individual > > sex. One text advised devotees to revere the female > > sex organ and enjoy vigorous intercourse. Candidates > > for worship included actresses and prostitutes, as > > well as the sisters of practitioners." > > > > Work cited: > > > > 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' > > By William J. Broad > > Posted on February 27, 2012 > > http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" wrote: > > *MY* Guru is the greatest guru. > No guru is greater than *MINE*. > > When one says this it is an attempt to puff up oneself by basking in the > apparent glory of another, like having oneself photographed with celebrities. > > No one in the attempt to preserve their ego tends to say, 'My guru was the > dumbest, sleaziest bastard I have ever had the misfortune to meet'. > > All human teachers are human beings; they have what we would in ourselves > call faults. Look at how scientists have changed the world and made us so > much more comfortable; no one calls them saints. > > A teacher's wares are what we want, what they can show us to improve our > situation; that is the part we take with us. If they are successful, we move > beyond our need for them. What they are as people may or may not correspond > with what we would call enlightened. That is not what enlightenment is about. > Enlightenment is about seeing the world for what it is, ultimate reality, or > a ultimate as it is humanly possible to perceive. > > As for morality (a function of geography according to Bertrand Russell), > seeing that religious leaders, gurus, politicians all seem to fall very short > of some imagined ideal, is there any tangible evidence that enlightenment or > spiritual advancement has anything to do with morality, or can influence it > more than in just a passing shot? If this game has to do with seeing the > world as it is, how does morality fit into this and why? Why is it that gurus > and their students always seem to fall very short of imagined ideals? Look at > the lot of us here. The 'average', so to speak, of all of us here, is what > gurus have wrought. > > That, I think, would indicate we are missing something here. > Yes, Discipline. It's because you, you and you have not better attended to the group program and "The Scruples of Moral Character for Success in the Conduct of Proper Spiritual Evolution and Life". There's a scientific chart about this and the improved moral reasoning of meditators. Foremost amongst the traditional scruple cultivated by long meditation practice: To do no harm and never entertain negativity. Ahinsa, is a term meaning to do no harm (literally: the avoidance of violence hinsa). The word is derived from the Sanskrit root hims to strike; hinsa is injury or harm, a-hinsa is the opposite of this. General Rules: It is therefore expected of all who continue therein the TM-Siddhis Dome program that they should continue to evidence their desire of salvation, First: By doing no harm, by avoiding evil of every kind . . . ; Second: By . . . doing good of every possible sort, and, as far as possible, to all . . . ; Third: By attending upon all the ordinances of the Unified Field and all the policies and guidelines of the course office given by our teacher and master for proper deportment and conduct of all meditators including celebratory life. Go Thee in Peace and May the Unified Field be with You, -Buck
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMO and Maharishi bashing, vs. What???
doctordumbass: > This has been interesting to watch > BARRY DOES NOT WANT TO TALK ABOUT MMMY OR RAMA! Why can't you get that through your head? He's not interested - he only wants to talk about Judy. LoL! > - Barry, who worshiped a drug addicted rapist > for years... > "So you keep slinging that good 'ole Texas bullshit as long as you want, eh podner? All it will accomplish is that more and more people here will realize that you share the same mindset as the anticultists you quote, and that you're the same kinda Texan that George is -- all hat, no cattle." - Unc > Pretty fuckin' weird. Bee wants a weird life, > and he has got one.:-) As for MJ, this is a > phase to grow through, and more power to him, > completing the phase. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
"Barry doesn't really want to talk about Rama [Frederick Lenz] - too embarrassing, I guess." Spot on! or as Nabby says, "BINGO!" Despite his pretensions as some sort of "spiritual sociologist" (gag me with a spoon...), Barry spent far more time with Rama, spent far more of his money on him, and bought into the guy, hook, line and sinker vs. his relatively minimal, and ancient, involvement with TMO and Maharishi. Nobody is concerned about Rama's legacy, BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE ONE. He used to consider himself a great lover, by seducing his female followers with a loaded gun. Sexy, huh?? He took hundreds of thousands of dollars from his pathetic followers like Barry, to fuel his degenerate lifestyle, and finally ended his life by first trying to kill a follower, and then successfully committed suicide by drug overdose...oh, while wearing a dog collar. Yeah, wow, if I had followed Maharishi, and this dude, I'd definitely go after Maharishi as the less ethical, dishonest one. Not. Although if someone thought perms, pistols, and pleather were the height of fashion, they might just give Rama a pass - lolo. All I can say is I am glad such a dissolute and criminal windbag is gone for good. Too bad all we get from Barry on this asshole, is crickets. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" wrote: > > > > > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > > > salyavin808: > > Yeah Michael, how dare you keep introducing uncomfortable > > topics to try and work out the whole story about Marshy! > > Anyone would think this was a TM discussion forum the way > > you carry on... > > > You won't be finding out much from Barry or Michael, > since they got booted out of the TMO years ago, and > neither of them seem are in a cult now, or even > well-read. > > Barry doesn't really want to talk about Rama - to > embarrasing, I guess. Go figure. > > "Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective > thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look > for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, > not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what > contradicts one's beliefs." >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Card -- Nokia writes its own "review" of their new phone
On 02/05/2013 09:31 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote: > > "Unlike, iOS or Android, this phone doesn't have > you swiping across three to seven screens to access > or view your apps. One swipe from the home screen > take you to a long list of all application download > on to the smartphone..." > > Nokia Lumia 920 review: > http://tinyurl.com/a3p6s7s > > LOL! I think from the perspective of GUI development that people prefer screens showing their familiar app icons than a list of apps. Swiping screens seems sexier to them than lists. Nokia IS yesterday's news. Better get those Nokia Android phones out there if they want to survive.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
No, are looking at and talking about something else bigger here. Primary care providers with a degree in medicine, even Chopra, are more usually just different trades-people compared to saints. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > Paraphrasing Maharishi," a doctor doesn't need to be in good health to heal > others". > > > > > > --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > This is a good answer, Mike. > > > > I wouldn't want to have to define "holy man" or "saint," so > > I wouldn't want to say what would disqualify him (or qualify > > him, for that matter) for being either. He wasn't a perfect > > human being, that's for sure. It's up to the individual to > > decide how much they want to hold his sins against him. > > > > > > Couldn't describe? Saints? Okay, if you won't stick your neck out at this > point I will for sake of the discussion here. We all know them when we see > them. Saints become described by their work. As spiritual people our saints > are those particular people who can help people spiritually and who > distinguish their life work that way. More than just doing good works and > different from folks [think Batgap.com] just being awake authors or spiritual > teachers out on the circuit but those being in the work of tangibly lending > spiritual transformation by interceding with healing for others of the > binding influences in the subtle bodies of the spiritual psycho-physical and > emotional samskara towards helping to free people of the binding influences > in their spiritual life on earth. Real saints, it's those particular > enlightened who can tangibly or manifestly heal people who are either > afflicted or ignorant in their spiritual lives. > -Buck > > > > > --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > > > Yeah, he's still a holy man, just not as holy as most of us thought. The > > > Bible tells usÃÂ that all men fall short of the Glory of God. That means > > > that all men have and will sin. Maharishi was a man, not God. The Bible > > > also speaks of angels coming to earth and having sex with women. Veda > > > Vyasa had sex with an unmarried woman in a boat while crossing a river, > > > thus we have Shukadeva. Maharishi belongs on a pedestal, just not as high > > > as we might have thought. My thoughts are that M was a very high soul on > > > a mission and upon taking birth as a man, he did things men do. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Michael Jackson > > > To: "mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com"; > > > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 12:58 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Serious Question > > > > > > ÃÂ > > > > > > OK, serious question here to all those who have defended Maharishi as a > > > saint and true holy man. > > > > > > > > > How do you account for the stories that several of his former skin boys > > > have told about his sexual escapades? Mark Landau, Billy Clayton, Nedd > > > Wynn and others have told stories that are very similar as to what who > > > and when. > > > > > > Do you think they are all lying and if so why? Or do you honestly think > > > it is alright for a true holy man who always said he was a lifelong > > > celibate to have sex repeatedly and lie about having done so? > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
> > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > salyavin808: > Yeah Michael, how dare you keep introducing uncomfortable > topics to try and work out the whole story about Marshy! > Anyone would think this was a TM discussion forum the way > you carry on... > You won't be finding out much from Barry or Michael, since they got booted out of the TMO years ago, and neither of them seem are in a cult now, or even well-read. Barry doesn't really want to talk about Rama - to embarrasing, I guess. Go figure. "Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs." > > It isn't as if there's anything we can do about it now. > > With politicians and banksters, if enough people become > > sufficiently infuriated, it could facilitate positive > > change. But Maharishi, he daid. > > And we'd all rather keep pretending the self-created myth > was true thank you very much, so quit your wallowing and > appreciate the good things we got like world peace and > perfect health... > > > And as far as politicians and banksters are concerned, > > unlike Maharishi, they haven't given us much of anything > > of value. That doesn't excuse the bad stuff he did, but > > at least with him there are two sides to the ledger. >
[FairfieldLife] TMO and Maharishi bashing, vs. What???
This has been interesting to watch - Barry, who worshiped a drug addicted rapist for years, and MJ, who has a similar history of spiritual dabbling, are dead set on their goal to make us all realize the errors of Maharishi's ways, that he wasn't perfect, or a saint. What I find interesting about all of this *interest* in Maharishi's life, is that neither one of them has any basis for comparison, whatsoever. Its not like they are comparing Maharishi to someone *better*, or even to themselves, and their actions in life. Nope, its just bash, bash, bash, because the TMO does continue on, and is getting quite successful, far more so than Bee's dead rapist "teacher". Pretty fuckin' weird. Bee wants a weird life, and he has got one.:-) As for MJ, this is a phase to grow through, and more power to him, completing the phase.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Great stories, nicely told. I never had anything to do with Kriyananda and his set, or the Yogananda trip, but I *completely* get the "similar vibe to MUM" thang, having experienced it in any number of spiritual trips. I have nothing to add to your excellent rap except to riff off of a typo in your post that you probably didn't notice but which set me to laughing -- Yodananda. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > That is a funny funny post - I do love your style of writing and I laughed out loud when I read your quote of Bhairitu's take on FFL. > > One experience I have not mentioned here is that 2 years after I left MIU I was with a woman in Boulder (not a TM woman) and she wanted to do a "pilgrimage" with Swami Kriyananda at their place outside Nevada City called Ananda. Ann and I had taken a trip to Portland where we made friends with a couple who were into Kriyananda (I am still friends with them, Ann, not so much). > > Anyway they had this tradition of doing "pilgrimage" going to India to visit the places Yogananda and his guru Sri Yukteswar and his guru Lahiri Mahasaya had lived and taught. > > Well, somehow some of the descendants of Yogananda got annoyed at people wanting to traipse through their homes and told them to get lost - so in 1989, Kriyananda organized a pilgrimage of one of Yodananda's nephews and one other guy who was supposed to the the great-grandson of Lahiri Mahasaya to come to America to Ananda. > > What struck me after being there at Ananda for a day or two was that even though the techniques were different, even though they were really into music and chanting, the vibe there was just like it was at MIU. I was struck by the similarity of the way people dressed, the way they spoke, their polite yet aloof manner and just about everything about the Ananda people was just like the MIU crowd. I remember after the first meeting and then group meal I was sitting in the dining hall thinking that you could take the MIU folks and put them here and take these folks and put them at MIU, you would never know the difference. > > One funny thing I heard was the nephew of Yogananda was in his 80's and when he came to the US it was his first trip outside of India. When I met him, he was tall, thin and had a very sweet, sattvic demeanor. The people from Ananda who had been assigned to pick him up from the airport took him through San Francisco where he insisted on trying out a trolley car. The Ananda people nearly crapped in their pants because he got on the back of the car and swung himself back and forth on the pole at the back of the car - they finally got him to come in and sit down but one of them said he nearly had a heart attack fearing Yogananda's nephew was going to fall off the trolley and get killed on his watch. > > That old man was pretty cool to be around - the great grandson was kind of full of himself, but all in all it was in interesting experience. Kriyananda had not at that point been accused of sexual improprieties and had not fled to Italy - he told all sorts of Yogananda stories including that Yogananda had confided to him that he (Yogananda) had been Arjuna in a previous life. > > Not that anyone cares what I think, I was not overly impressed withe the Swami - he just seemed like a kindly old man - there wasn't any real energy there, but you would have thought he was God incarnate from the way the Ananda people fawned all over him. > > > > > > From: turquoiseb > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 11:19 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 > > > Â > You make good points, and I withdraw my parallel. :-) > > I think this place (FFL) is best approached as "enter- > tainment that has the capability of teaching." Like you, > I have learned from many in my time here, and as much > from those who disagreed with me as from those who > agreed. > > I'm fairly comfortable with my views of Maharishi, TM, > the TMO, and spirituality in general, but IMO *none* of > them constitute anything resembling "truth." They're > just ideas that I have. I don't so much "believe in them" > as "wear" them for a bit while toying with them. In so > doing, occasionally I throw them out onto the Internet > like spaghetti against a refrigerator; some idea-strands > stick, others don't. No big deal either way. > > I honestly don't think there is enough there there about > the whole TM experience to get emotional about or attached > to. For me, at least. But I enjoy playing with ideas about > it, as a form of amusement and as an opportunity to learn. > It's one of my weird ideas of fun. > > What many of my detractors don't seem to understand when > they cast me as a villain with a grudge against Maharishi > is that I really couldn't give a flying fuck about him. > He doesn't interest me. I'll never read a book about him, > and have trouble making it through any of his quotes when > the
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Card -- Nokia writes its own "review" of their new phone
"Unlike, iOS or Android, this phone doesn't have you swiping across three to seven screens to access or view your apps. One swipe from the home screen take you to a long list of all application download on to the smartphone..." Nokia Lumia 920 review: http://tinyurl.com/a3p6s7s
[FairfieldLife] Re: A photo to make Nabby even crazier than usual :-)
Two fools, reported by a third one.:-) Funny how the Dalai Llama is looking more and more like *Walter Brennan* as he ages... MJ, if you want to get upset, you may want to upset yourself with the medieval ideas the DL propagates, and his general uselessness as a spiritual "leader". --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > T'would seem that TM poster boy Russell Brand has made a new friend: > > > [https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/270947_348719451\ > 868295_1507708107_n.jpg] > > "... I don't like formality, so Russell Brand, who is also very > informal, was a fitting person to introduce me; thank you! Birth takes > place without formality, as does death. If I think of myself as a > Buddhist monk or as a Tibetan, that sets up a sort of barrier between > me and others. In fact, I am a human being like you, who wants > happiness and doesn't want to face suffering and problems. I speak > to you as just one of the 7 billion human beings in the world today. > Physically, mentally and emotionally we're the same; and we have > the same potential for good as well as for bad..." > ~ H.H. the Dalai Lama >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
That is a funny funny post - I do love your style of writing and I laughed out loud when I read your quote of Bhairitu's take on FFL. One experience I have not mentioned here is that 2 years after I left MIU I was with a woman in Boulder (not a TM woman) and she wanted to do a "pilgrimage" with Swami Kriyananda at their place outside Nevada City called Ananda. Ann and I had taken a trip to Portland where we made friends with a couple who were into Kriyananda (I am still friends with them, Ann, not so much). Anyway they had this tradition of doing "pilgrimage" going to India to visit the places Yogananda and his guru Sri Yukteswar and his guru Lahiri Mahasaya had lived and taught. Well, somehow some of the descendants of Yogananda got annoyed at people wanting to traipse through their homes and told them to get lost - so in 1989, Kriyananda organized a pilgrimage of one of Yodananda's nephews and one other guy who was supposed to the the great-grandson of Lahiri Mahasaya to come to America to Ananda. What struck me after being there at Ananda for a day or two was that even though the techniques were different, even though they were really into music and chanting, the vibe there was just like it was at MIU. I was struck by the similarity of the way people dressed, the way they spoke, their polite yet aloof manner and just about everything about the Ananda people was just like the MIU crowd. I remember after the first meeting and then group meal I was sitting in the dining hall thinking that you could take the MIU folks and put them here and take these folks and put them at MIU, you would never know the difference. One funny thing I heard was the nephew of Yogananda was in his 80's and when he came to the US it was his first trip outside of India. When I met him, he was tall, thin and had a very sweet, sattvic demeanor. The people from Ananda who had been assigned to pick him up from the airport took him through San Francisco where he insisted on trying out a trolley car. The Ananda people nearly crapped in their pants because he got on the back of the car and swung himself back and forth on the pole at the back of the car - they finally got him to come in and sit down but one of them said he nearly had a heart attack fearing Yogananda's nephew was going to fall off the trolley and get killed on his watch. That old man was pretty cool to be around - the great grandson was kind of full of himself, but all in all it was in interesting experience. Kriyananda had not at that point been accused of sexual improprieties and had not fled to Italy - he told all sorts of Yogananda stories including that Yogananda had confided to him that he (Yogananda) had been Arjuna in a previous life. Not that anyone cares what I think, I was not overly impressed withe the Swami - he just seemed like a kindly old man - there wasn't any real energy there, but you would have thought he was God incarnate from the way the Ananda people fawned all over him. From: turquoiseb To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 11:19 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 You make good points, and I withdraw my parallel. :-) I think this place (FFL) is best approached as "enter- tainment that has the capability of teaching." Like you, I have learned from many in my time here, and as much from those who disagreed with me as from those who agreed. I'm fairly comfortable with my views of Maharishi, TM, the TMO, and spirituality in general, but IMO *none* of them constitute anything resembling "truth." They're just ideas that I have. I don't so much "believe in them" as "wear" them for a bit while toying with them. In so doing, occasionally I throw them out onto the Internet like spaghetti against a refrigerator; some idea-strands stick, others don't. No big deal either way. I honestly don't think there is enough there there about the whole TM experience to get emotional about or attached to. For me, at least. But I enjoy playing with ideas about it, as a form of amusement and as an opportunity to learn. It's one of my weird ideas of fun. What many of my detractors don't seem to understand when they cast me as a villain with a grudge against Maharishi is that I really couldn't give a flying fuck about him. He doesn't interest me. I'll never read a book about him, and have trouble making it through any of his quotes when they are posted here. He's so much a part of my past that I really can't identify enough to get all that interested in him. But THE TM MOVEMENT, and the people who populated it, or continue to, THEY are more interesting. FFL is, as Bhairitu suggests, "the Funny Farm Lounge." It's a zoo. It's a never- ending education in the ongoing history of spiritual movements -- or cults, if you prefer -- past, present, and future. Sooner or later every quirk or weirdness I've witnessed or even heard about in
[FairfieldLife] Re: Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba
My most successful high school sport was wrestling. I was 11-1 on the JV team. I used to demolish my opponents. The only guy I couldn't beat was Doug Haywood who was varsity, and a year older. It seems he couldn't beat many other people, but he could always beat me. Soccer was not my sport either, but it certainly became more popular in the next generation or so. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > Hi Steve and thanks for telling your Mt. Shasta stories. I think you were brave to even attempt. We're lucky that you survived those forays which definitely sound scary. And I have heard that there are great beings who live there. Maybe they chose that home for a good reason. Yeah, I've been thinking it would be great to have a soccer league for older women. Soccer wasn't happening in the US when I was growing up. it looks fun. I had to make do with softball and basketball which were also fun.   > > > > > > From: seventhray27 > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 2:02 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba > > >  > I understand. They are not the most flattering stories in that they put on display what I might call a personality flaw. And I think I may have told them before at some point, but: > I admit that the idea of Ascended Masters and The Great White Brotherhood has a bit of a hold on my imagination. But not so much that I give much attention to it. And of course visiting northern California always sounds like a good idea. > To digress some: We took a family vacation there, when the kids were still a little young. I knew it was a risk, because, inspite of the fact that we visited Yosemite, Mariposa Pine Forest, Big Sur, (redwoods), and Point Lobos reserve where we saw seals, star fish anenomes, salt mounds, among other things,  the only thing the kids seem to remember from the vacation is feeding the squirrels, or chipmunks by the side of the road. > > But back to the story. I had it in my mind that a good thing to do would be to hike up to the summit of Mount Shasta. I read all about it before hand. One would need ice cleats, a pick, and other certain gear. I think what happened was that my brother in law had given me free round trip plane tickets to anywhere in the US, and I decided to go there. > Anyway, I rented all that equipment, got my permit, but realized, after I had hiked up to the staging area, that in order to make the summit, you basically had to be in marathon running shape, and had to begin your ascent a little before midnight, so that conditions would be most condusive to success. > So, I made it only a little past the staging area. > And then, for some reason, which I can't remember, I had a chance to visit Shasta again. Scaling back my expectations, I thought I would at least hike a little further. Only this time, there was snow up to the my knees or thighs, and I don't think I even made it as far as the first time. > I have many other examples, where, for some reason, I think I am capable of doing something, but don't have the physical endurance to do it. But it doesn't seem to stop me. Like trying to play inline hockey with my sons, but only being able to stay out on the rink for about 90 seconds before I need to rest. > On the other hand, I'm disappointed that my softball team disbanded a couple years ago, and I've put out feelers that I'd like to play goalie on a soccer team or inline hockey team for older people, but no one has answered my posting. >  >  > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > dear Steve, still looking forward to hearing those 2 stories about Mt. Shasta that you mentioned in thread called Awakened Awareness.àSome of us keep track of this kind of thing (-: > > > > > > > > > > From: seventhray27 > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 8:09 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba > > > > > > à> > I think my favorite part was hearing the dad talk about his son.àA goodàfriend of mine is on the Purusha program in Utter Kashi. > > His dad had a high profile here, and he also had different plans for his son which he encouraged him to follow. > > But the son decided to go "Full TMO".àI had gently tried to suggest that he only go "part TMO", but just didn't work out that way. > > It's always fun when he comes through every couple years.àWhen he does, other than his appearance, he adapts right in. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > > > Ah, Mr. Soss, thank you so much for this.ÃâàLove the LSD story.ÃâàI have Baba's picture on my desk because he is so beautiful, his smile is so beautiful.ÃâàThe photo came with a cd of Krishna Das.ÃâàRam Das is also wonderful.ÃâàGood Lord but we are fortunate peop
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
Been there, done that. Actually, I was pulling yer strings, anyone's. I am not so attached to what is not present, except my imagination, from the Moon's perspective. All talk, no play. A virgin at heart. A single goldfish in a fish bowl. A single caged Chimpanzee, throwing excrement at the onlookers. Just as lonely as all the other regular posters here on FFL. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVzCJK9DEYc --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" wrote: > > > > obbajeeba: > > As if I am going to pretend talking about tantic > > activity is not arousing > > > In fact you're already a Sky Dancer from birth. > > But, until realization we think we are on a path > to the other side, and we must pass through a gate. > > If you do cross over to the other side, you will > find that there's no other side, a gateless gate, > and there was no crossing over. > > Go figure. > > "Yeshe Tsogyel, consort of Guru Padmasambhava, is > the most famous of the enlightened women of Tibet. > Women have a special place in tantra, but except > for Sky Dancer there are few writings that present > the spiritual practices and evolution of female > aspirants. Here women are in an eminent position, > and a path of practice is given for present-day > initiates to emulate. Keith Dowman has added a > commentary on the path of inner tantra, woman and > the dakini, and the Nyingma lineages." > > 'Sky Dancer' > The Secret Life And Songs Of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel > by Keith Dowman > Snow Lion, 1996 > http://tinyurl.com/bdoz7jf > > > > > > I'm just saying that just as they shouldn't > > > > > necessarily limit tantra to what they know > > > > > about it, neither should you > > > > > > > > Bharitu: > > > > I have to respectfully disagree because there > > > > are classic definitions of tantra... > > > > > > > Something tells me you two are not practicing > > > tantrics. > > > > > > A sure sign that someone is not practicing tantra > > > is that they deny the sexual origins and goals of > > > tantra. LoL! > > > > > > Everyone knows that tantra yoga began as a sex cult > > > in Gupta Age India; tantrics sought to fuse the > > > male and female aspects of the cosmos into a blissful > > > state of consciousness. There's no life without sex > > > and the combination of male and female is the path > > > to the non-dual experience. > > > > > > "The rites of Tantric cults, while often steeped in > > > symbolism, could also include group and individual > > > sex. One text advised devotees to revere the female > > > sex organ and enjoy vigorous intercourse. Candidates > > > for worship included actresses and prostitutes, as > > > well as the sisters of practitioners." > > > > > > Work cited: > > > > > > 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' > > > By William J. Broad > > > Posted on February 27, 2012 > > > http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
You make good points, and I withdraw my parallel. :-) I think this place (FFL) is best approached as "enter- tainment that has the capability of teaching." Like you, I have learned from many in my time here, and as much from those who disagreed with me as from those who agreed. I'm fairly comfortable with my views of Maharishi, TM, the TMO, and spirituality in general, but IMO *none* of them constitute anything resembling "truth." They're just ideas that I have. I don't so much "believe in them" as "wear" them for a bit while toying with them. In so doing, occasionally I throw them out onto the Internet like spaghetti against a refrigerator; some idea-strands stick, others don't. No big deal either way. I honestly don't think there is enough there there about the whole TM experience to get emotional about or attached to. For me, at least. But I enjoy playing with ideas about it, as a form of amusement and as an opportunity to learn. It's one of my weird ideas of fun. What many of my detractors don't seem to understand when they cast me as a villain with a grudge against Maharishi is that I really couldn't give a flying fuck about him. He doesn't interest me. I'll never read a book about him, and have trouble making it through any of his quotes when they are posted here. He's so much a part of my past that I really can't identify enough to get all that interested in him. But THE TM MOVEMENT, and the people who populated it, or continue to, THEY are more interesting. FFL is, as Bhairitu suggests, "the Funny Farm Lounge." It's a zoo. It's a never- ending education in the ongoing history of spiritual movements -- or cults, if you prefer -- past, present, and future. Sooner or later every quirk or weirdness I've witnessed or even heard about in *any* spiritual group, *anywhere*, *anytime* gets acted out here on Fairfield Life. It's like a microcosm of spiritual weirdness. And, as that great philosopher Zaphod Beebelbrox said so eloquently, "Anything for a weird life." --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > From Barry: > > "As for parallels, I think mine was apt. Michael obsesses > on Maharishi and the TMO because it's an *ongoing issue*. > None of the practices and dishonesty he's upset about > have stopped; instead, they are normal, everyday policy. > But there is another sense in which your stalking is > like his (apologies in advance to Michael if I'm incorrect, > none needed with regard to the Judester because everyone > here knows I'm correct)." > > > I may have tried early on to convince others here on FFL that another point > of view might be wise, but it didn't take long before I learned that was a > forlorn hope - for the last several months at least I have been asking > questions and learning things both facts, personal anecdotes and opinions > that have helped me make sense of my time with TM and make sense of TM and > the TMO and Marshy in general. > > Aside from that, I do the same thing now that you say you do, I say how I > feel or what I believe and I do pose questions sometimes to see what others > believe - I have no illusions that anyone here will change their minds. > > I would like to thank to everyone who has posted here - I have been > criticized for agreeing with you Barry and it is true that sometimes you can > really cuss people out but for me I have gained a great deal of insight from > your points of view and the stories of what you saw and did in the TMO. > > I have gained not only from what you and Sal and Curtis have posted it but > others as well - if it weren't for Rick I might not have had my eyes opened > to M's sexual escapades - and while others excuse the behavior and even say > it made him "more human" for me it goes to credibility - I have a hard time > with believing someone is doing things in my best interest when they are > lying to my face everyday. It has been most helpful too to read much of Ravi > and Bhairitu's posts - a perspective of TM from the Indian perspective. > > > I have also gained from the exchanges with Nabby, Dr. D, seventhray and > others who have disagreed with or criticized me - it helped me see that some > people will hang on to their illusions no matter what - and I realize they > believe I am hanging on to my illusions. FFL has been very helpful for me and > at times quite amusing. So thank you everyone. > > > From: turquoiseb > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 3:09 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > (snip) > > > > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > > > > > exact s
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
hi seekliberation this reminds me of the work of Lester Levensen originator of both the Sedona Method and the Release Technique. He talks about Pride as the most difficult of all the negative emotions. Mainly because it is the one between the positive and negative states: Peace Acceptance Courageousness ___ Pride Anger Lust Fear Grief Apathy Lester's scale is based on his observation that Apathy has the least amount of life force and Pride the most. From: seekliberation To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 5:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing By saying MMY is greater than Rama, Krishna, and Buddha, you've put yourself in the same category of the 'Hare Krishnas' who once claimed there will never be a master as great as Swami Prabhupadha. I remember when I was at MIU many students would always ask why this knowledge disappeared and why it can't be easily spread to the masses. The reply, which is a direct quote from MMY, is that 'Pure Knowledge is like water that shatters on the hard rocks of ignorance'. So it's a default answer anytime someone asks. Basically, it's a very benevolent way of saying 'because people are dumbasses'. But after seeing the behaviour and actions of many people in the TMO, I'm convinced that it's not just that people are ignorant. It's also because followers of 'pure knowledge' develop a lot of narcissistic and arrogant traits that make anything they have to say seem very unattractive to anyone. It reminds me of a public speech by John Hagelin in either 1996 or 2000. He stood up in front of a crowd talking about failed government policy vs. enlightened policy. And though I agree with many ideas he expressed, what I noticed about him was something very peculiar. There was this blatantly arrogant tone in his voice and body language combined with a know-it-all attitude. When I watched that speech, I prayed to God that he never gets any significant publicity. Saturday night live and other comedians would eat someone like him alive after seeing a speech like that. It is obvious to me that the reason the NLP didn't gain much momentum, and TM isn't marketing that well is not because everyone is dumb. It's because those following the TMO/NLP/MMY the closest have so many bizarre traits that nobody will listen to them. So before we go around and say MMY is the greatest master (or whatever term you want to use), I would be cautious to see how long his influence really lasts. None of us were alive when Buddha, Krishna, or Rama were around, so we have no idea how many people were positively influenced by them. Besides, we don't really know if Krishna or Rama really existed, speculation only. But the bottom line is that Buddha, Krishna, and Rama have all given rise to many religious nuts and cults that I'm sure are far off track from the original teaching. And I don't see any indication that the TMO is on any different path than all the other nutcase cults that exist in this world. I firmly believe we are capable of screwing up the spreading of TM to the world in the same way Bhuddism and Hinduism have resulted in many screwed up cults and followers. In other words, it's not 'Pure Knowledge shattering on the hard rocks of ignorance', but perhaps its 'Followers of Pure teachings becoming unattractive and narcissistic megolamaniacs that nobody wants to listen to' that destroys the chances of spirituality expanding in this world. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > > > Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? > > > Correct, universal egos :-) >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Thank you, Barry, for once again demonstrating at length in this post your chronic dishonesty. Most of the folks who have been on FFL for awhile don't need any additional confirmation. Michael and salyavin haven't picked up on it yet, but they may eventually. If anyone's interested, I'll be happy to identify all the lies in the post I'm responding to, but those who know me and know Barry won't have any trouble doing it for themselves. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > (snip) > > > > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > > > > > exact same things that Maha did and give him a free pass for > > > > > doing what you don't tolerate in others. I understand it, but > > > > > I shore don't agree with it. > > > > > > > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > > > > > > Sorta the way *you* do when obsessing on Curtis or Vaj > > > or myself or others of your enemies? Just sayin'... :-) > > > > Allow me to obsess a little more and point out that you > > carefully, deliberately, and dishonestly failed to quote > > the part of my post that refutes your accusation: Like > > dishonest politicians and banksters, you are alive and > > kicking and being destructive. > > If what you wished to accomplish was to *demonstrate* > your obsession, and your tendency to project onto those > you dislike your *own* negative qualities, feel free. > I "allow" you. By all means, obsess away. :-) > > I never even *read* the parts of your post that I snipped, > much less deleted them "intentionally." That's something > *you* repeatedly accuse people of, because you're...uh... > insane, and you have a tendency to accuse others of the > very tactics that *you* employ. :-) > > As for parallels, I think mine was apt. Michael obsesses > on Maharishi and the TMO because it's an *ongoing issue*. > None of the practices and dishonesty he's upset about > have stopped; instead, they are normal, everyday policy. > But there is another sense in which your stalking is > like his (apologies in advance to Michael if I'm incorrect, > none needed with regard to the Judester because everyone > here knows I'm correct). > > That's the fact that it seems to *matter* to you both > very much that you are able to *convince* others to see > issues and obsessions the same way you do. You try to > *persuade* others to believe the way that you do, and > pile on to the issues you believe are issues. > > I honestly don't try to do that. I'm here just for my > own amusement. I state my opinions -- making clear that > opinions is *all* that they are -- and then allow others > to react or not react, as they see fit. I don't get drawn > into long ego-battles to establish my opinion as the > correct one or the dominant one, and I don't try to get > other people to defend an opposite position. If they > choose to do that, it's their choice; if they choose not > to, that's their choice too. Either way is fine with me. > > Compare and contrast with the Judester, whose *entire > online life* can be accurately characterized as a quest > to get other people to see things the warped way she > sees them, agree with it, and align themselves with her > in demonizing the people or orgs she believes are demons. > Michael, you have a touch of that yourself, although > not really in the same ballpark as The Corrector. She's > obsessed about *her* nemesis (moi) for over seventeen > years now, trying her best to get everyone on every forum > we've shared to think badly of me and diss me the way > they "should" according to her world view. > > What really gets her panties in a twist is that she has > *failed* in this. People still manage to interact with > me without wearing the hate-blinders she wants them to > wear; people still realize that often I point out truths > about Maharishi, King Tonytwit, TM, and the TMO, and > react to them as what they are -- mere opinions, not an > attempt to sell them anything. > > This drives her crazy. It drove her crazy when people > continued to like Curtis and Vaj and Sal Sunshine, too. > It *still* drives her crazy when people continue to like > or say positive things about Andrew Skolnick, or Mike > Doughney, or John Knapp, or John From Brazil -- all > people she's dedicated *enormous* amounts of time and > energy and hatred towards getting people to hate, too. > > What precipitated this set of attacks on MJ, from my > point of view, is that this was happening again. A few > people were reacting...uh...not negatively to Michael, > and to me, so she "ha
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba
Hi Steve and thanks for telling your Mt. Shasta stories. I think you were brave to even attempt. We're lucky that you survived those forays which definitely sound scary. And I have heard that there are great beings who live there. Maybe they chose that home for a good reason. Yeah, I've been thinking it would be great to have a soccer league for older women. Soccer wasn't happening in the US when I was growing up. it looks fun. I had to make do with softball and basketball which were also fun. From: seventhray27 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 2:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba I understand. They are not the most flattering stories in that they put on display what I might call a personality flaw. And I think I may have told them before at some point, but: I admit that the idea of Ascended Masters and The Great White Brotherhood has a bit of a hold on my imagination. But not so much that I give much attention to it. And of course visiting northern California always sounds like a good idea. To digress some: We took a family vacation there, when the kids were still a little young. I knew it was a risk, because, inspite of the fact that we visited Yosemite, Mariposa Pine Forest, Big Sur, (redwoods), and Point Lobos reserve where we saw seals, star fish anenomes, salt mounds, among other things, the only thing the kids seem to remember from the vacation is feeding the squirrels, or chipmunks by the side of the road. But back to the story. I had it in my mind that a good thing to do would be to hike up to the summit of Mount Shasta. I read all about it before hand. One would need ice cleats, a pick, and other certain gear. I think what happened was that my brother in law had given me free round trip plane tickets to anywhere in the US, and I decided to go there. Anyway, I rented all that equipment, got my permit, but realized, after I had hiked up to the staging area, that in order to make the summit, you basically had to be in marathon running shape, and had to begin your ascent a little before midnight, so that conditions would be most condusive to success. So, I made it only a little past the staging area. And then, for some reason, which I can't remember, I had a chance to visit Shasta again. Scaling back my expectations, I thought I would at least hike a little further. Only this time, there was snow up to the my knees or thighs, and I don't think I even made it as far as the first time. I have many other examples, where, for some reason, I think I am capable of doing something, but don't have the physical endurance to do it. But it doesn't seem to stop me. Like trying to play inline hockey with my sons, but only being able to stay out on the rink for about 90 seconds before I need to rest. On the other hand, I'm disappointed that my softball team disbanded a couple years ago, and I've put out feelers that I'd like to play goalie on a soccer team or inline hockey team for older people, but no one has answered my posting. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > dear Steve, still looking forward to hearing those 2 stories about Mt. Shasta > that you mentioned in thread called Awakened Awareness. Some of us keep > track of this kind of thing (-: > > > > > From: seventhray27 > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 8:09 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba > > >  > I think my favorite part was hearing the dad talk about his son. A good > friend of mine is on the Purusha program in Utter Kashi. > His dad had a high profile here, and he also had different plans for his son > which he encouraged him to follow. > But the son decided to go "Full TMO". I had gently tried to suggest that he > only go "part TMO", but just didn't work out that way. > It's always fun when he comes through every couple years. When he does, > other than his appearance, he adapts right in. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: > > > > Ah, Mr. Soss, thank you so much for this. Love the LSD story. I > > have Baba's picture on my desk because he is so beautiful, his smile is so > > beautiful. The photo came with a cd of Krishna Das. Ram Das is also > > wonderful. Good Lord but we are fortunate people. To be alive when > > such souls make themselves accessible to us. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: nablusoss1008 > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Saturday, February 2, 2013 11:30 AM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Americans meet Neem Karoli Baba > > > > > >  > > Great stories > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVlf9As9Eag > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
>From Barry: "As for parallels, I think mine was apt. Michael obsesses on Maharishi and the TMO because it's an *ongoing issue*. None of the practices and dishonesty he's upset about have stopped; instead, they are normal, everyday policy. But there is another sense in which your stalking is like his (apologies in advance to Michael if I'm incorrect, none needed with regard to the Judester because everyone here knows I'm correct)." I may have tried early on to convince others here on FFL that another point of view might be wise, but it didn't take long before I learned that was a forlorn hope - for the last several months at least I have been asking questions and learning things both facts, personal anecdotes and opinions that have helped me make sense of my time with TM and make sense of TM and the TMO and Marshy in general. Aside from that, I do the same thing now that you say you do, I say how I feel or what I believe and I do pose questions sometimes to see what others believe - I have no illusions that anyone here will change their minds. I would like to thank to everyone who has posted here - I have been criticized for agreeing with you Barry and it is true that sometimes you can really cuss people out but for me I have gained a great deal of insight from your points of view and the stories of what you saw and did in the TMO. I have gained not only from what you and Sal and Curtis have posted it but others as well - if it weren't for Rick I might not have had my eyes opened to M's sexual escapades - and while others excuse the behavior and even say it made him "more human" for me it goes to credibility - I have a hard time with believing someone is doing things in my best interest when they are lying to my face everyday. It has been most helpful too to read much of Ravi and Bhairitu's posts - a perspective of TM from the Indian perspective. I have also gained from the exchanges with Nabby, Dr. D, seventhray and others who have disagreed with or criticized me - it helped me see that some people will hang on to their illusions no matter what - and I realize they believe I am hanging on to my illusions. FFL has been very helpful for me and at times quite amusing. So thank you everyone. From: turquoiseb To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 3:09 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > (snip) > > > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > > > > exact same things that Maha did and give him a free pass for > > > > doing what you don't tolerate in others. I understand it, but > > > > I shore don't agree with it. > > > > > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > > > > Sorta the way *you* do when obsessing on Curtis or Vaj > > or myself or others of your enemies? Just sayin'... :-) > > Allow me to obsess a little more and point out that you > carefully, deliberately, and dishonestly failed to quote > the part of my post that refutes your accusation: Like > dishonest politicians and banksters, you are alive and > kicking and being destructive. If what you wished to accomplish was to *demonstrate* your obsession, and your tendency to project onto those you dislike your *own* negative qualities, feel free. I "allow" you. By all means, obsess away. :-) I never even *read* the parts of your post that I snipped, much less deleted them "intentionally." That's something *you* repeatedly accuse people of, because you're...uh... insane, and you have a tendency to accuse others of the very tactics that *you* employ. :-) As for parallels, I think mine was apt. Michael obsesses on Maharishi and the TMO because it's an *ongoing issue*. None of the practices and dishonesty he's upset about have stopped; instead, they are normal, everyday policy. But there is another sense in which your stalking is like his (apologies in advance to Michael if I'm incorrect, none needed with regard to the Judester because everyone here knows I'm correct). That's the fact that it seems to *matter* to you both very much that you are able to *convince* others to see issues and obsessions the same way you do. You try to *persuade* others to believe the way that you do, and pile on to the issues you believe are issues. I honestly don't try to do that. I'm here just for my own amusement. I state my opinions -- making clear that opinions is *all* that they are -- and then allow others to react or not react, as they see fit. I don't get drawn into long ego-battles to establish my opinion as the co
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > (snip) > > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > > > exact same things that Maha did and give him a free pass for > > > doing what you don't tolerate in others. I understand it, but > > > I shore don't agree with it. > > > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > > Yeah Michael, how dare you keep introducing uncomfortable > topics to try and work out the whole story about Marshy! > Anyone would think this was a TM discussion forum the way > you carry on. Er, "vilifying"/"wallowing in outrage" is one thing; "working out the whole story" is something else again. I'm all for the latter, but in my observation, the former tends to get in the way of the latter. > > It isn't as if there's anything we can do about it now. > > With politicians and banksters, if enough people become > > sufficiently infuriated, it could facilitate positive > > change. But Maharishi, he daid. > > And we'd all rather keep pretending the self-created myth > was true thank you very much, Speak for yourself. Vilifying TMers who are obviously and on-the-record critical of Maharishi's misbehavior just makes you look stupid. so quit your wallowing and > appreciate the good things we got like world peace and > perfect health... > > > And as far as politicians and banksters are concerned, > > unlike Maharishi, they haven't given us much of anything > > of value. That doesn't excuse the bad stuff he did, but > > at least with him there are two sides to the ledger. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
I think in terms of psychological health of some TMO members, it is probably better that TM doesn't all of a sudden blossom again like it did in the 70's. It's much like some people i've observed in life who clearly have a narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), or some other similar condition. The only thing that breaks it down is when their illusions stop being supported. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > I think one of the signposts of the lack of oomph the TMO has is the fact > that after Oprah came out in support of TM there was so far as I know no > explosion of people getting initiated. Normally whatever Oprah endorses > temporarily zooms in popularity and lots of her fans run go get it. If this > had happened, I think the TMO would have been crowing about it to high > heaven. > > > > > > From: seekliberation > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 6:42 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing > > > Â > By saying MMY is greater than Rama, Krishna, and Buddha, you've put yourself > in the same category of the 'Hare Krishnas' who once claimed there will never > be a master as great as Swami Prabhupadha. > > I remember when I was at MIU many students would always ask why this > knowledge disappeared and why it can't be easily spread to the masses. The > reply, which is a direct quote from MMY, is that 'Pure Knowledge is like > water that shatters on the hard rocks of ignorance'. So it's a default > answer anytime someone asks. Basically, it's a very benevolent way of saying > 'because people are dumbasses'. > > But after seeing the behaviour and actions of many people in the TMO, I'm > convinced that it's not just that people are ignorant. It's also because > followers of 'pure knowledge' develop a lot of narcissistic and arrogant > traits that make anything they have to say seem very unattractive to anyone. > It reminds me of a public speech by John Hagelin in either 1996 or 2000. He > stood up in front of a crowd talking about failed government policy vs. > enlightened policy. And though I agree with many ideas he expressed, what I > noticed about him was something very peculiar. There was this blatantly > arrogant tone in his voice and body language combined with a know-it-all > attitude. When I watched that speech, I prayed to God that he never gets any > significant publicity. Saturday night live and other comedians would eat > someone like him alive after seeing a speech like that. It is obvious to me > that the reason the NLP didn't gain much momentum, and TM isn't > marketing that well is not because everyone is dumb. It's because those > following the TMO/NLP/MMY the closest have so many bizarre traits that nobody > will listen to them. > > So before we go around and say MMY is the greatest master (or whatever term > you want to use), I would be cautious to see how long his influence really > lasts. None of us were alive when Buddha, Krishna, or Rama were around, so > we have no idea how many people were positively influenced by them. Besides, > we don't really know if Krishna or Rama really existed, speculation only. > But the bottom line is that Buddha, Krishna, and Rama have all given rise to > many religious nuts and cults that I'm sure are far off track from the > original teaching. And I don't see any indication that the TMO is on any > different path than all the other nutcase cults that exist in this world. I > firmly believe we are capable of screwing up the spreading of TM to the world > in the same way Bhuddism and Hinduism have resulted in many screwed up cults > and followers. > > In other words, it's not 'Pure Knowledge shattering on the hard rocks of > ignorance', but perhaps its 'Followers of Pure teachings becoming > unattractive and narcissistic megolamaniacs that nobody wants to listen to' > that destroys the chances of spirituality expanding in this world. > > seekliberation > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > > > > > Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? > > > > > > Correct, universal egos :-) > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
Good one, Mr. Soss and so happy to see that Nabby brain was not addled by recent pic of Russell and Dalai Lama whose initials btw happen to be the exact same as David Lynch. I think it's a sign (-: Anyway, also thanks for recent crop circle offering. It was beautiful. From: nablusoss1008 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:53 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
Michael Jackson: > ...it seems that those who have talked about > it (the women and the skin boys) have come > forth with some amount of detail > Not really. Not a single skin-boy actually saw MMY having sexual relations with anyone. Judith in her book doesn't give any details. >From what I've read, MMY could have been getting a foot rub that became sexual to Judith! Go figure. You make a very weak defense, Michael, of your guru, the Maharishi, not to mention trying to get off on someone ele's sex act. LoL! Apparently your program now is about the size of an ant hill in my back yard - it makes my messages to FFL in defense of Marshy look like great big mountain. Apparently Mike and I are the only defenders of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi on this entire list. Go figure. Well, I for one will not be ignored! It has NOT been established that MMY had sexual relations with anyone. You would think that at least one informant would be able to provide evidence if this were true. Without some evidence, or an believable eyewitness report, I'm just not buying it. There's nothing like the *cross-examine*, and MMY is dead. Get over it! It just doesn't make any sense. So, let's review: Are we to believe that Judith walked over to Marshy's house, in the dead of night, climbed in through the bedroom window, and had sexual relations with MMY on his bear skin rug under a painting of Guru Dev. With Nanda Kishore trying to sleep in the living room, and Ms Pittman posted at the front door? This is just outrageous! According to Nancy, you could hear a pin drop on a warm night up there on the hill in Rishikesh, India. Are you thinking that Judith could get within ten feet of the Maharishi without anyone in the whole ashram knowing about it? Secretly sneak over to MMY's house, with a flashlight to what, give MMY a sexy back rub and read the mail? A gal the size of Judith could kill a midget guru like MMY! LoL!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
I think one of the signposts of the lack of oomph the TMO has is the fact that after Oprah came out in support of TM there was so far as I know no explosion of people getting initiated. Normally whatever Oprah endorses temporarily zooms in popularity and lots of her fans run go get it. If this had happened, I think the TMO would have been crowing about it to high heaven. From: seekliberation To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 6:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing By saying MMY is greater than Rama, Krishna, and Buddha, you've put yourself in the same category of the 'Hare Krishnas' who once claimed there will never be a master as great as Swami Prabhupadha. I remember when I was at MIU many students would always ask why this knowledge disappeared and why it can't be easily spread to the masses. The reply, which is a direct quote from MMY, is that 'Pure Knowledge is like water that shatters on the hard rocks of ignorance'. So it's a default answer anytime someone asks. Basically, it's a very benevolent way of saying 'because people are dumbasses'. But after seeing the behaviour and actions of many people in the TMO, I'm convinced that it's not just that people are ignorant. It's also because followers of 'pure knowledge' develop a lot of narcissistic and arrogant traits that make anything they have to say seem very unattractive to anyone. It reminds me of a public speech by John Hagelin in either 1996 or 2000. He stood up in front of a crowd talking about failed government policy vs. enlightened policy. And though I agree with many ideas he expressed, what I noticed about him was something very peculiar. There was this blatantly arrogant tone in his voice and body language combined with a know-it-all attitude. When I watched that speech, I prayed to God that he never gets any significant publicity. Saturday night live and other comedians would eat someone like him alive after seeing a speech like that. It is obvious to me that the reason the NLP didn't gain much momentum, and TM isn't marketing that well is not because everyone is dumb. It's because those following the TMO/NLP/MMY the closest have so many bizarre traits that nobody will listen to them. So before we go around and say MMY is the greatest master (or whatever term you want to use), I would be cautious to see how long his influence really lasts. None of us were alive when Buddha, Krishna, or Rama were around, so we have no idea how many people were positively influenced by them. Besides, we don't really know if Krishna or Rama really existed, speculation only. But the bottom line is that Buddha, Krishna, and Rama have all given rise to many religious nuts and cults that I'm sure are far off track from the original teaching. And I don't see any indication that the TMO is on any different path than all the other nutcase cults that exist in this world. I firmly believe we are capable of screwing up the spreading of TM to the world in the same way Bhuddism and Hinduism have resulted in many screwed up cults and followers. In other words, it's not 'Pure Knowledge shattering on the hard rocks of ignorance', but perhaps its 'Followers of Pure teachings becoming unattractive and narcissistic megolamaniacs that nobody wants to listen to' that destroys the chances of spirituality expanding in this world. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > > > Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? > > > Correct, universal egos :-) >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
obbajeeba: > As if I am going to pretend talking about tantic > activity is not arousing > In fact you're already a Sky Dancer from birth. But, until realization we think we are on a path to the other side, and we must pass through a gate. If you do cross over to the other side, you will find that there's no other side, a gateless gate, and there was no crossing over. Go figure. "Yeshe Tsogyel, consort of Guru Padmasambhava, is the most famous of the enlightened women of Tibet. Women have a special place in tantra, but except for Sky Dancer there are few writings that present the spiritual practices and evolution of female aspirants. Here women are in an eminent position, and a path of practice is given for present-day initiates to emulate. Keith Dowman has added a commentary on the path of inner tantra, woman and the dakini, and the Nyingma lineages." 'Sky Dancer' The Secret Life And Songs Of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel by Keith Dowman Snow Lion, 1996 http://tinyurl.com/bdoz7jf > > > > I'm just saying that just as they shouldn't > > > > necessarily limit tantra to what they know > > > > about it, neither should you > > > > > > Bharitu: > > > I have to respectfully disagree because there > > > are classic definitions of tantra... > > > > > Something tells me you two are not practicing > > tantrics. > > > > A sure sign that someone is not practicing tantra > > is that they deny the sexual origins and goals of > > tantra. LoL! > > > > Everyone knows that tantra yoga began as a sex cult > > in Gupta Age India; tantrics sought to fuse the > > male and female aspects of the cosmos into a blissful > > state of consciousness. There's no life without sex > > and the combination of male and female is the path > > to the non-dual experience. > > > > "The rites of Tantric cults, while often steeped in > > symbolism, could also include group and individual > > sex. One text advised devotees to revere the female > > sex organ and enjoy vigorous intercourse. Candidates > > for worship included actresses and prostitutes, as > > well as the sisters of practitioners." > > > > Work cited: > > > > 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' > > By William J. Broad > > Posted on February 27, 2012 > > http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc > >
[FairfieldLife] OMG: Minnesota's Baby Jesus!?
http://network.yardbarker.com/nhl/article_external/minnesota_wild_image_of_the_day_mikael_granlund_is_baby_jesus/11254882
[FairfieldLife] Re: Was Guru Dev a part of the Illuminati?
Michael Jackson: > I have heard > Apparently Tantric teachings were altered a lot after the British invasion! Go figure. You will never know the secrets of tantra until you meet Shakti. LoL! > that the sexual aspects of tantra were for those > who were not ready for or too impatient to go to > the heart of the tantra practices, so the tantra > masters would give them the sex stuff to do till > the students got serious about their practice > and give up the sex and go into the deeper aspects > of tantra - true or not true? "Early in the 20th century, the founders of modern yoga worked hard to remove the Tantric stain. They devised a sanitized discipline that played down the old eroticism for a new emphasis on health and fitness." 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' By William J. Broad Posted on February 27, 2012 http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc > > > I'm just saying that just as they shouldn't > > > necessarily limit tantra to what they know > > > about it, neither should you > > > > > I have to respectfully disagree because there > > are classic definitions of tantra... > > > Something tells me you two are not practicing > tantrics. > > A sure sign that someone is not practicing tantra > is that they deny the sexual origins and goals of > tantra. LoL! > > Everyone knows that tantra yoga began as a sex cult > in Gupta Age India; tantrics sought to fuse the > male and female aspects of the cosmos into a blissful > state of consciousness. There's no life without sex > and the combination of male and female is the path > to the non-dual experience. > > "The rites of Tantric cults, while often steeped in > symbolism, could also include group and individual > sex. One text advised devotees to revere the female > sex organ and enjoy vigorous intercourse. Candidates > for worship included actresses and prostitutes, as > well as the sisters of practitioners." > > Work cited: > > 'Yoga and Sex Scandals: No Surprise Here' > By William J. Broad > Posted on February 27, 2012 > http://tinyurl.com/ct59amc >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
Paraphrasing Maharishi," a doctor doesn't need to be in good health to heal others". From: Buck To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:33 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > This is a good answer, Mike. > > I wouldn't want to have to define "holy man" or "saint," so > I wouldn't want to say what would disqualify him (or qualify > him, for that matter) for being either. He wasn't a perfect > human being, that's for sure. It's up to the individual to > decide how much they want to hold his sins against him. > > Couldn't describe? Saints? Okay, if you won't stick your neck out at this point I will for sake of the discussion here. We all know them when we see them. Saints become described by their work. As spiritual people our saints are those particular people who can help people spiritually and who distinguish their life work that way. More than just doing good works and different from folks [think Batgap.com] just being awake authors or spiritual teachers out on the circuit but those being in the work of tangibly lending spiritual transformation by interceding with healing for others of the binding influences in the subtle bodies of the spiritual psycho-physical and emotional samskara towards helping to free people of the binding influences in their spiritual life on earth. Real saints, it's those particular enlightened who can tangibly or manifestly heal people who are either afflicted or ignorant in their spiritual lives. -Buck > > --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > Yeah, he's still a holy man, just not as holy as most of us thought. The > > Bible tells us that all men fall short of the Glory of God. That means > > that all men have and will sin. Maharishi was a man, not God. The Bible > > also speaks of angels coming to earth and having sex with women. Veda Vyasa > > had sex with an unmarried woman in a boat while crossing a river, thus we > > have Shukadeva. Maharishi belongs on a pedestal, just not as high as we > > might have thought. My thoughts are that M was a very high soul on a > > mission and upon taking birth as a man, he did things men do. > > > > > > > > > > From: Michael Jackson > > To: "mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com"; > > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 12:58 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Serious Question > > > >  > > > > OK, serious question here to all those who have defended Maharishi as a > > saint and true holy man. > > > > > > How do you account for the stories that several of his former skin boys > > have told about his sexual escapades? Mark Landau, Billy Clayton, Nedd Wynn > > and others have told stories that are very similar as to what who and when. > > > > Do you think they are all lying and if so why? Or do you honestly think it > > is alright for a true holy man who always said he was a lifelong celibate > > to have sex repeatedly and lie about having done so? > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
I know that in Astrology the houses and planets that lead us to enlightenment are primarily the 8th and 12th house as well as Ketu. The planet and house associated with morality is Jupiter and the 9th house. So it would make perfect sense to me that those who exhibit traits of enlightenment aren't moral, and those who are moral aren't necessarily enlightened. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" wrote: > Why is it that gurus and their students always seem to fall very short of > imagined ideals? Look at the lot of us here. The 'average', so to speak, of > all of us here, is what gurus have wrought. > > That, I think, would indicate we are missing something here. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
Nabby, Spending any more time on a list of any people such as this, is wasted. haha (3 out of 4 ain't bad or said better here with a similar number and a bit off tune? : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml5xb4DrhZo ) I feel his...why is he singing flat? :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > > > Neither is George W. Bush, who saved the world by invading Afghanistan, and > > Iraq. > > Jimmy Buffet and his famous, "Cheese burgers in Paradise," is not listened > > either. > > Ayn Rand, no. Her skin boy, Alan Greenspan, neither. > > Geez, what a list. > > > If you were less lazy and had read the introduction you would had realized > that only deceased souls are listed. You sort of missed the whole point; the > levels listed are the point of evolution at the time of death. > > http://www.share-berlin.de/list_of_initiates.htm#LinkM > > > > > > BTW; going through the list of Initiates you will find only a few > > > > Avatars living here "lately": Ananda Mayi Ma, Gautama Buddha, Hercules, > > > > Hermes, Krishna, Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi, Shankara and Vivekananda. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
*MY* Guru is the greatest guru. No guru is greater than *MINE*. When one says this it is an attempt to puff up oneself by basking in the apparent glory of another, like having oneself photographed with celebrities. No one in the attempt to preserve their ego tends to say, 'My guru was the dumbest, sleaziest bastard I have ever had the misfortune to meet'. All human teachers are human beings; they have what we would in ourselves call faults. Look at how scientists have changed the world and made us so much more comfortable; no one calls them saints. A teacher's wares are what we want, what they can show us to improve our situation; that is the part we take with us. If they are successful, we move beyond our need for them. What they are as people may or may not correspond with what we would call enlightened. That is not what enlightenment is about. Enlightenment is about seeing the world for what it is, ultimate reality, or a ultimate as it is humanly possible to perceive. As for morality (a function of geography according to Bertrand Russell), seeing that religious leaders, gurus, politicians all seem to fall very short of some imagined ideal, is there any tangible evidence that enlightenment or spiritual advancement has anything to do with morality, or can influence it more than in just a passing shot? If this game has to do with seeing the world as it is, how does morality fit into this and why? Why is it that gurus and their students always seem to fall very short of imagined ideals? Look at the lot of us here. The 'average', so to speak, of all of us here, is what gurus have wrought. That, I think, would indicate we are missing something here.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > This is a good answer, Mike. > > I wouldn't want to have to define "holy man" or "saint," so > I wouldn't want to say what would disqualify him (or qualify > him, for that matter) for being either. He wasn't a perfect > human being, that's for sure. It's up to the individual to > decide how much they want to hold his sins against him. > > Couldn't describe? Saints? Okay, if you won't stick your neck out at this point I will for sake of the discussion here. We all know them when we see them. Saints become described by their work. As spiritual people our saints are those particular people who can help people spiritually and who distinguish their life work that way. More than just doing good works and different from folks [think Batgap.com] just being awake authors or spiritual teachers out on the circuit but those being in the work of tangibly lending spiritual transformation by interceding with healing for others of the binding influences in the subtle bodies of the spiritual psycho-physical and emotional samskara towards helping to free people of the binding influences in their spiritual life on earth. Real saints, it's those particular enlightened who can tangibly or manifestly heal people who are either afflicted or ignorant in their spiritual lives. -Buck > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > Yeah, he's still a holy man, just not as holy as most of us thought. The > > Bible tells us that all men fall short of the Glory of God. That means > > that all men have and will sin. Maharishi was a man, not God. The Bible > > also speaks of angels coming to earth and having sex with women. Veda Vyasa > > had sex with an unmarried woman in a boat while crossing a river, thus we > > have Shukadeva. Maharishi belongs on a pedestal, just not as high as we > > might have thought. My thoughts are that M was a very high soul on a > > mission and upon taking birth as a man, he did things men do. > > > > > > > > > > From: Michael Jackson > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" > > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 12:58 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Serious Question > > > >  > > > > OK, serious question here to all those who have defended Maharishi as a > > saint and true holy man. > > > > > > How do you account for the stories that several of his former skin boys > > have told about his sexual escapades? Mark Landau, Billy Clayton, Nedd Wynn > > and others have told stories that are very similar as to what who and when. > > > > Do you think they are all lying and if so why? Or do you honestly think it > > is alright for a true holy man who always said he was a lifelong celibate > > to have sex repeatedly and lie about having done so? > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
By saying MMY is greater than Rama, Krishna, and Buddha, you've put yourself in the same category of the 'Hare Krishnas' who once claimed there will never be a master as great as Swami Prabhupadha. I remember when I was at MIU many students would always ask why this knowledge disappeared and why it can't be easily spread to the masses. The reply, which is a direct quote from MMY, is that 'Pure Knowledge is like water that shatters on the hard rocks of ignorance'. So it's a default answer anytime someone asks. Basically, it's a very benevolent way of saying 'because people are dumbasses'. But after seeing the behaviour and actions of many people in the TMO, I'm convinced that it's not just that people are ignorant. It's also because followers of 'pure knowledge' develop a lot of narcissistic and arrogant traits that make anything they have to say seem very unattractive to anyone. It reminds me of a public speech by John Hagelin in either 1996 or 2000. He stood up in front of a crowd talking about failed government policy vs. enlightened policy. And though I agree with many ideas he expressed, what I noticed about him was something very peculiar. There was this blatantly arrogant tone in his voice and body language combined with a know-it-all attitude. When I watched that speech, I prayed to God that he never gets any significant publicity. Saturday night live and other comedians would eat someone like him alive after seeing a speech like that. It is obvious to me that the reason the NLP didn't gain much momentum, and TM isn't marketing that well is not because everyone is dumb. It's because those following the TMO/NLP/MMY the closest have so many bizarre traits that nobody will listen to them. So before we go around and say MMY is the greatest master (or whatever term you want to use), I would be cautious to see how long his influence really lasts. None of us were alive when Buddha, Krishna, or Rama were around, so we have no idea how many people were positively influenced by them. Besides, we don't really know if Krishna or Rama really existed, speculation only. But the bottom line is that Buddha, Krishna, and Rama have all given rise to many religious nuts and cults that I'm sure are far off track from the original teaching. And I don't see any indication that the TMO is on any different path than all the other nutcase cults that exist in this world. I firmly believe we are capable of screwing up the spreading of TM to the world in the same way Bhuddism and Hinduism have resulted in many screwed up cults and followers. In other words, it's not 'Pure Knowledge shattering on the hard rocks of ignorance', but perhaps its 'Followers of Pure teachings becoming unattractive and narcissistic megolamaniacs that nobody wants to listen to' that destroys the chances of spirituality expanding in this world. seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > > > Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? > > > Correct, universal egos :-) >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos? Correct, universal egos :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > > > there [sic] are nothing when compared to Maharishi and > > > > what he has done. > > > > > > Maharishi's mission is unique because he had the power, > > > love and dedication and was sent in a moment of human > > > history when mankind was on the verge of the big leap > > > forward. He made mankind take the jump, but not > > > singlehandedly, without the work of other Masters > > > preceding him mankind would not be ready. > > > > Stop, stop, for God's sake (hey, these guys probably > > believe in one, even if I don't) STOP! > > > > > The ludicrousness of believing that Maharishi is in > > any way important to planet Earth makes my eyes roll > > so much that I fear my optometrist is going to be > > very worried indeed. :-) > > Don't worry, if you have any difficulties I can suggest a specialist. A psychiatrist I presume ? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > (snip) > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > > exact same things that Maha did and give him a free pass for > > doing what you don't tolerate in others. I understand it, but > > I shore don't agree with it. > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. Yeah Michael, how dare you keep introducing uncomfortable topics to try and work out the whole story about Marshy! Anyone would think this was a TM discussion forum the way you carry on. > It isn't as if there's anything we can do about it now. > With politicians and banksters, if enough people become > sufficiently infuriated, it could facilitate positive > change. But Maharishi, he daid. And we'd all rather keep pretending the self-created myth was true thank you very much, so quit your wallowing and appreciate the good things we got like world peace and perfect health... > And as far as politicians and banksters are concerned, > unlike Maharishi, they haven't given us much of anything > of value. That doesn't excuse the bad stuff he did, but > at least with him there are two sides to the ledger.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > there [sic] are nothing when compared to Maharishi and > > > what he has done. > > > > Maharishi's mission is unique because he had the power, > > love and dedication and was sent in a moment of human > > history when mankind was on the verge of the big leap > > forward. He made mankind take the jump, but not > > singlehandedly, without the work of other Masters > > preceding him mankind would not be ready. > > Stop, stop, for God's sake (hey, these guys probably > believe in one, even if I don't) STOP! > > My optometrist has warned me that all the "eyerolling" > I do while reading FFL is having adverse effects on > my vision. :-) > > This really takes the cake. HOW could anyone possibly > believe this stuff, about someone so relatively insig- > nificant and Almost Forgotten Already as Maharishi? > > I think that there must be a one-for-one relationship > between the amount of fear that a person has about being > insignificant and cosmically unimportant *themselves*, > and the amount of significance and importance those > poor people project onto spiritual teachers or others > whom they identify with. In their minds, the higher the > imaginary pedestal they put Maharishi (or whatever guru > or teacher or public figure they're groupies for) on, > the higher *they* become. > > Weird stuff, if you ask me. But whatever floats their > boats. Me, I'll continue to think that he was just a > garden-variety narcissist who would never have been > remembered for much of anything by much of anyone if > it hadn't been for the Beatles. People who made them- > selves feel more significant and important by identifying > with *them* just transferred that fallacious reasoning > to Maharishi, and now make themselves feel more signif- > icant and important by identifying with him. > > And *what* exactly, are they identifying with? A guy > who made up a beginner's technique of meditation, had > some initial success with it, and then pissed it all > away with flights of fantasy, delusion, grandiosity, > and madness, leaving today's TM organization unable > to get anyone to learn TM *unless someone else pays > for it for them*, like some guvmint or the DLF. They > couldn't market TM successfully on a standalone basis > in the meditation "marketplace" if they tried. > > Some "accomplishment," for someone they consider more > important than Rama, Krishna, and Buddha (two of whom > never even existed). > > The ludicrousness of believing that Maharishi is in > any way important to planet Earth makes my eyes roll > so much that I fear my optometrist is going to be > very worried indeed. :-) Don't worry, if you have any difficulties I can suggest a specialist. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > > > Maharishi's mission is unique because he had the power, love and dedication > > and was sent in a moment of human history when mankind was on the verge of > > the big leap forward. He made mankind take the jump, but not > > singlehandedly, without the work of other Masters preceding him mankind > > would not be ready. > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > there [sic] are nothing when compared to Maharishi and > > what he has done. > > Maharishi's mission is unique because he had the power, > love and dedication and was sent in a moment of human > history when mankind was on the verge of the big leap > forward. He made mankind take the jump, but not > singlehandedly, without the work of other Masters > preceding him mankind would not be ready. Stop, stop, for God's sake (hey, these guys probably believe in one, even if I don't) STOP! My optometrist has warned me that all the "eyerolling" I do while reading FFL is having adverse effects on my vision. :-) This really takes the cake. HOW could anyone possibly believe this stuff, about someone so relatively insig- nificant and Almost Forgotten Already as Maharishi? I think that there must be a one-for-one relationship between the amount of fear that a person has about being insignificant and cosmically unimportant *themselves*, and the amount of significance and importance those poor people project onto spiritual teachers or others whom they identify with. In their minds, the higher the imaginary pedestal they put Maharishi (or whatever guru or teacher or public figure they're groupies for) on, the higher *they* become. Weird stuff, if you ask me. But whatever floats their boats. Me, I'll continue to think that he was just a garden-variety narcissist who would never have been remembered for much of anything by much of anyone if it hadn't been for the Beatles. People who made them- selves feel more significant and important by identifying with *them* just transferred that fallacious reasoning to Maharishi, and now make themselves feel more signif- icant and important by identifying with him. And *what* exactly, are they identifying with? A guy who made up a beginner's technique of meditation, had some initial success with it, and then pissed it all away with flights of fantasy, delusion, grandiosity, and madness, leaving today's TM organization unable to get anyone to learn TM *unless someone else pays for it for them*, like some guvmint or the DLF. They couldn't market TM successfully on a standalone basis in the meditation "marketplace" if they tried. Some "accomplishment," for someone they consider more important than Rama, Krishna, and Buddha (two of whom never even existed). The ludicrousness of believing that Maharishi is in any way important to planet Earth makes my eyes roll so much that I fear my optometrist is going to be very worried indeed. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@ wrote: > > > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. > > Maharishi's mission is unique because he had the power, love and dedication > and was sent in a moment of human history when mankind was on the verge of > the big leap forward. He made mankind take the jump, but not singlehandedly, > without the work of other Masters preceding him mankind would not be ready. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@... wrote: > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Let me guess.. creating the biggest spiritual egos?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Rama,Krishna, Buddha are nothing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@... wrote: > > there are nothing when compared to Maharishi and what he has done. Maharishi's mission is unique because he had the power, love and dedication and was sent in a moment of human history when mankind was on the verge of the big leap forward. He made mankind take the jump, but not singlehandedly, without the work of other Masters preceding him mankind would not be ready.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba wrote: > > Neither is George W. Bush, who saved the world by invading Afghanistan, and > Iraq. > Jimmy Buffet and his famous, "Cheese burgers in Paradise," is not listened > either. > Ayn Rand, no. Her skin boy, Alan Greenspan, neither. > Geez, what a list. If you were less lazy and had read the introduction you would had realized that only deceased souls are listed. You sort of missed the whole point; the levels listed are the point of evolution at the time of death. http://www.share-berlin.de/list_of_initiates.htm#LinkM > > > BTW; going through the list of Initiates you will find only a few Avatars > > > living here "lately": Ananda Mayi Ma, Gautama Buddha, Hercules, Hermes, > > > Krishna, Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi, Shankara and Vivekananda.
[FairfieldLife] For Card -- Nokia writes its own "review" of their new phone
No *wonder* you still like them; they're just like the TMO. :-) http://theweek.com/article/index/239665/the-best-lines-from-nokias-absurdly-positive-review-of-its-own-windows-phone
[FairfieldLife] Re: Serious Question, Part 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > (snip) > > > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > > > > exact same things that Maha did and give him a free pass for > > > > doing what you don't tolerate in others. I understand it, but > > > > I shore don't agree with it. > > > > > > What good would vilifying him do, Michael? You appear > > > to enjoy wallowing in your outrage, but you won't be > > > satisfied until everyone else is wallowing in it too. > > > > Sorta the way *you* do when obsessing on Curtis or Vaj > > or myself or others of your enemies? Just sayin'... :-) > > Allow me to obsess a little more and point out that you > carefully, deliberately, and dishonestly failed to quote > the part of my post that refutes your accusation: Like > dishonest politicians and banksters, you are alive and > kicking and being destructive. If what you wished to accomplish was to *demonstrate* your obsession, and your tendency to project onto those you dislike your *own* negative qualities, feel free. I "allow" you. By all means, obsess away. :-) I never even *read* the parts of your post that I snipped, much less deleted them "intentionally." That's something *you* repeatedly accuse people of, because you're...uh... insane, and you have a tendency to accuse others of the very tactics that *you* employ. :-) As for parallels, I think mine was apt. Michael obsesses on Maharishi and the TMO because it's an *ongoing issue*. None of the practices and dishonesty he's upset about have stopped; instead, they are normal, everyday policy. But there is another sense in which your stalking is like his (apologies in advance to Michael if I'm incorrect, none needed with regard to the Judester because everyone here knows I'm correct). That's the fact that it seems to *matter* to you both very much that you are able to *convince* others to see issues and obsessions the same way you do. You try to *persuade* others to believe the way that you do, and pile on to the issues you believe are issues. I honestly don't try to do that. I'm here just for my own amusement. I state my opinions -- making clear that opinions is *all* that they are -- and then allow others to react or not react, as they see fit. I don't get drawn into long ego-battles to establish my opinion as the correct one or the dominant one, and I don't try to get other people to defend an opposite position. If they choose to do that, it's their choice; if they choose not to, that's their choice too. Either way is fine with me. Compare and contrast with the Judester, whose *entire online life* can be accurately characterized as a quest to get other people to see things the warped way she sees them, agree with it, and align themselves with her in demonizing the people or orgs she believes are demons. Michael, you have a touch of that yourself, although not really in the same ballpark as The Corrector. She's obsessed about *her* nemesis (moi) for over seventeen years now, trying her best to get everyone on every forum we've shared to think badly of me and diss me the way they "should" according to her world view. What really gets her panties in a twist is that she has *failed* in this. People still manage to interact with me without wearing the hate-blinders she wants them to wear; people still realize that often I point out truths about Maharishi, King Tonytwit, TM, and the TMO, and react to them as what they are -- mere opinions, not an attempt to sell them anything. This drives her crazy. It drove her crazy when people continued to like Curtis and Vaj and Sal Sunshine, too. It *still* drives her crazy when people continue to like or say positive things about Andrew Skolnick, or Mike Doughney, or John Knapp, or John From Brazil -- all people she's dedicated *enormous* amounts of time and energy and hatred towards getting people to hate, too. What precipitated this set of attacks on MJ, from my point of view, is that this was happening again. A few people were reacting...uh...not negatively to Michael, and to me, so she "had" to step in to Correct Things. It's her dharma, you see -- she really does see herself as Andrew lampooned her: Judy Stein: Defender of the Faith. :-) Consider all of this, Michael. IMO, there is really no point in trying to convince TM TBs to believe anything other than the TM TB dogma they already believe. You can only express opinions, and then sit back and watch to See What Happens. Change takes time, and in matters of belief, only comes from within. Don't bother spending a lot of energy trying to convince them -- it simply cannot be done. Just state what you believe and then allow *them* to make your points for you by overreacting and going into "Kill the messenger" mo
[FairfieldLife] Re: complete cancer cure with Maharishi Ayurveda
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, srijau@... wrote: > > Ashtavaidya tradition is a unique ancient branch of Kerala Ayurveda. > Ashtavaidyas use only purely traditional methods. Ashtavaidyan E T Divakaran > Mooss is the chief physician of the Vaidyaraj Oushadha Sala of Ashtavaidyas. > He is also the advisor to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's Maharishi Ayurvedic > University, US. "Cancer is completely curable through Ayurvedic treatment in > the Ashtavaidya tradition. I have treated about 100 leukemia patients > successfully," he says. The Ashtavaidya tradition assures complete cure if > the patients start treatment early without any damaging modern therapies. > > http://health.india.com/diseases-conditions/can-cancer-be-cured-with-alternative-therapies/ > Complete nonsense. "Deepak Chopra, the apostle of Ayurveda and mind/body medicine, in his book, Quantum Healing, asks, "Why, when your body mends a broken arm, is it not considered a miracle, but when your body rids itself of cancer, it is?" Blending advanced physics with ancient Indian Ayurvedic insights, he shows that the human body is governed by a `network of intelligence' grounded in quantum reality." "But cancer mortality rate remains unchanged despite advanced surgical techniques and aggressive modern treatments." And dangerous nonsense at that, but luckily anyone who follows the regime won't be around to sue you later.
