[FairfieldLife] RE: Check It Out

[awoelflebater]

Look at these bats in the womb:
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 This is a fetal horse.

[FairfieldLife] Check It Out

[awoelflebater]

This is a fetal horse.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Great Country Classics

[Richard Williams]

Merl Haggard

[image: Inline image 2]

We saw Merle Haggard and Kris Kristofferson at the Wells Fargo Center,
Santa Rosa, CA located at 50 Mark West Springs Road, on Apr 2, 2009. My
daughter lives in Santa Rosa and is a big country music fan. He has played
Austin on several occasions.

Live in Austin,Texas October 30, 1985
http://youtu.be/GDPoQa1Ptt0

Live - Austin City Limits, 1978
http://youtu.be/UwHzkyPZHKg

[image: Inline image 1]

Merle Haggard Fender Signature Telecaster

"Haggard has endorsed Fender guitars and has a Custom Artist signature
model Telecaster. The guitar is a modified Telecaster Thinline with
laminated top of figured maple, set neck with deep carved heel, birdseye
maple fingerboard with 22 jumbo frets, ivoroid pickguard and binding, gold
hardware, abalone Tuff Dog Tele peghead inlay, 2-Colour Sunburst finish and
a pair of Fender Texas Special Tele single-coil pickups with custom-wired
4-way pickup switching. He also plays six string acoustic models. In 2001,
C.F. Martin & Company introduced a limited edition Merle Haggard Signature
Edition 000-28SMH acoustic guitar available with or without
factory-installed electronics."

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merle_Haggard

'The Encyclopedia of Country Music'
by Paul Kingsburyand Vince Gill
Oxford University Press, 1998


On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:48 PM,  wrote:

>
>
> One of my favourite country classics (bear in mind I'm British so American
> country has an exotic element that would be lost on Yanks) is Merle
> Haggard's Okie from Muskogee. First time I heard it I took it straight as
> a conservative Yank protesting about the permissive hippie culture. The
> second time I heard it I thought what an idiot I'd been - it was
> *obviously* a satire taking the mickey out of straight-laced country fans.
> Later I realised that what makes the song so appealing is precisely its
> ambiguity. It isn't offering a neat resolution but leaves you understanding
> that life isn't interested in accommodate our preconceived notions.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

http://www.nelson-atkins.org/
 http://www.nelson-atkins.org/ http://www.nelson-atkins.org/
 
 http://www.unitytemple.com/healing/hmedit.asp 
http://www.unitytemple.com/healing/hmedit.asp
 
http://www.martydybiczphd.com/Pages/MeditationSchedule.aspx 
http://www.martydybiczphd.com/Pages/MeditationSchedule.aspx 

[FairfieldLife] Popular Music Greats

[Richard Williams]

Fleetwood Mac

Fleetwood Mac is one of the greatest popular music bands of all time. We
saw this performance of Fleetwood Mac on June 4, 2013 at the American
Airlines Center in Dallas.

[image: Inline image 3]

This is just an AWESOME live performance by Fleetwood Mac - World Turning.
This is one of the best live versions ever done of this song! We play this
song from the CD version when we are demonstrating our high-end Yamaha
stereo system in the barn. This version originally aired on April 8, 1976
on the The Midnight Special:

World Turning - Live 1976
http://youtu.be/rcsYa6jFRoY

Watch these other classic live performances:

Go Your Own Way - 1997 -
http://youtu.be/p8Ojjn35kP8

Rhiannon - Stevie Nicks 1976
http://youtu.be/wgmRb3MlpHQ

Over My Head - Christine McVie
http://youtu.be/U3p-AHX0ml0

[image: Inline image 4]

"Fleetwood Mac's second album after the incorporation of Buckingham and
Nicks, 1977's Rumours, produced four U.S. Top 10 singles (including Nicks'
song "Dreams"), and remained at No.1 on the American albums chart for 31
weeks, as well as reaching the top spot in various countries around the
world. To date the album has sold over 45 million copies worldwide, making
it the 4th highest selling album of all time."

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleetwood_Mac

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[s3raphita]

Re "People take words much too literally":

 

 That's my view. I think the original founders of the world religions were 
talking about a change in consciousness. They had an insight (ie "in - sight"). 
The unwashed masses take the words as a description of the objective world "out 
there". As the everyday world out there doesn't match the founders' 
descriptions they are then forced to imagine a "supernatural" world were those 
words would apply.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Richard Williams]

Share:
> What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by
> our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate!
>
Well, it looks like it's settled then: MJ and the TurqoiseB were the real
True Believers, whose religion was TM -  - the only apostates left on the
forum. It looks like nobody else on FFL ever considered TM to be their
religion. You can't be apostate from something you don't believe in. Go
figure.


On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Share Long  wrote:

>
>
> Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say
> that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all
> of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each
> of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording
> for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I
> believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it.
>
> I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea
> that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes
> me apostate!
>
>
>
>
>   On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" <
> authfri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>  *And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself?*
>
> *If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me.*
>
> << Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with
> Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are
> defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. >>
>
>
>
>   On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, "authfriend@..." 
> wrote:
>
>  *I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm
> astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board.
> As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to
> send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight.*
>
> *I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an
> aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says.*
>
> *The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is
> apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining
> from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing
> industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about.*
>
> << Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that
> people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief
> and I doubt that Jesus taught it.
>
> I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat
> on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that
> some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! >>
>
>
>
>   On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfriend@..." 
> wrote:
>
>  Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words
> is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently 
> healthy.
> You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one
> shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least
> no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of
> course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective;
> otherwise we wouldn't need redemption).
>
>
> << Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between
> guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates
> feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>
>
>
>
>   On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..." 
> wrote:
>
>  It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the
> sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was
> something wrong with what you did.
>
> And anyway, the sense that there's *nothing* wrong with you is
> delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done
> anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction.
> Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you
> did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all,
> ever.
>
> My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the
> dictionary) mean--by "shame."
>
> Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary
> psychology and I agree with your last sentence.
>
>
>   On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..." 
> wrote:
>
>  *That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an
> arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. **My
> dictionary says shame is:*
>
> *"a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or
> impropriety"*
>
> *I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done
> something wrong, there's something wrong with you.*
>
>
> << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and
> to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Religion that doesn't take itself deadly seriously

[s3raphita]

"Marriage is for women the commonest mode of livelihood, and the total amount 
of undesired sex endured by women is probably greater in marriage than in 
prostitution." - Bertrand Russell
 

 The human race has emerged from prehistory and has developed its culture for 
millennia but we're still confused about sex. I mean what could be simpler? Boy 
meets girl. Then . . . well you know what. 
 Why is something as elementary and essential as the attraction between the 
sexes still a battlefield and the source of constant disputes (the "War of the 
Sexes")? I've sometimes wondered if the problem is "equality" - the idea that 
men and women must be regarded as equal in all respects. If we allow ourselves 
to generalise, men do *seem* to be more promiscuous than women; women do *seem* 
to be looking for a permanent partner. (Proof? Gay males have far more partners 
and far more sex than straight men. Lesbians have far less sex than any other 
group. Heterosexuals lie between those two figures.) This difference was 
recognised in the Victorian period when a marriage between a man and woman was 
assumed to be permanent (and divorces were regarded as scandalous) but at the 
same time there was an army of prostitutes to satisfy the novelty-seeking 
desires of the male population. I don't have an answer to the discrepancy - I 
just think we should look at the issue with wide-open eyes. Maybe it is just a 
result of women having being controlled by men for centuries; men who had their 
supremacy recognised by law. Now that that patriarchy is breaking down the 
differences between the sexual habits of men and women *may* vanish completely. 
But I certainly don't rule out the idea that such differences are rooted in 
biology.
 There are some wonderful ironies here. Is putting women on a pedestal (as 
happened in the 19th century with the "cult of the lady" an acknowledgment of 
women's superiority (or at least equality) or is it a cunning (probably 
subconscious) put down?
 I've quoted Malcolm Muggeridge twice before on FFL. Here it is again: "It's 
impossible to string together three consecutive sentences about sex without 
making a complete hypocrite of yourself." This post must make me guilty as 
charged. One thing is for sure: the sexual utopia envisaged by the sixties 
revolutionaries has failed to materialise. On the other hand the days when a 
woman could die from "sexual hysteria" (it really did happen - see Ruskin's 
infatuation with Rose La Touche) are long gone!


 
 Reply

[FairfieldLife] RE: Religion that doesn't take itself deadly seriously

[s3raphita]

"Marriage is for women the commonest mode of livelihood, and the total amount 
of undesired sex endured by women is probably greater in marriage than in 
prostitution." - Bertrand Russell
 

 The human race has emerged from prehistory and has developed its culture for 
millennia but we're still confused about sex. I mean what could be simpler? Boy 
meets girl. Then . . . well you know what. 
 Why is something as elementary and essential as the attraction between the 
sexes still a battlefield and the source of constant disputes (the "War of the 
Sexes")? I've sometimes wondered if the problem is "equality" - the idea that 
men and women must be regarded as equal in all respects. If we allow ourselves 
to generalise, men do *seem* to be more promiscuous than women; women do *seem* 
to be looking for a permanent partner. (Proof? Gay males have far more partners 
and far more sex than straight men. Lesbians have far less sex than any other 
group. Heterosexuals lie between those two figures. This difference was 
recognised in the Victorian period when a marriage between a man and woman was 
assumed to be permanent (and divorces were regarded as scandalous) but at the 
same time there was an army of prostitutes to satisfy the novelty-seeking 
desires of the male population. I don't have an answer to the discrepancy - I 
just think we should look at the issue with wide-open eyes. Maybe it is just a 
result of women having being controlled by men for centuries; men who had their 
supremacy recognised by law. Now that that patriarchy is breaking down the 
differences between the sexual habits of men and women *may* vanish completely. 
But I certainly don't rule out the idea that such differences are rooted in 
biology.
 There are some wonderful ironies here. Is putting women on a pedestal (as 
happened in the 19th century with the "cult of the lady" an acknowledgment of 
women's superiority (or at least equality) or is it a cunning (probably 
subconscious) put down?
 I've quoted Malcolm Muggeridge twice before on FFL. Here it is again: "It's 
impossible to string together three consecutive sentences about sex without 
making a complete hypocrite of yourself." This post must make me guilty as 
charged. One thing is for sure: the sexual utopia envisaged by the sixties 
revolutionaries has failed to materialise. On the other hand the days when a 
woman could die from "sexual hysteria" (it really did happen - see Ruskin's 
infatuation with Rose La Touche) are long gone!

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy Happy 12 January

[Michael Jackson]

Keep on believing in your illusions Buck - what you don't take into account is 
the song you are singing is the very same one the TMO has sung since M lied 
about creating world peace with TMSP group practice - and as to the so called 
proven science, if it really had been, the world would have taken it up 
already. The only scientists who believe in this crap are the ones who no 
longer practice science but practice TM voodoo instead since they work for the 
TMO

On Sat, 1/18/14, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com  wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy  Happy 12 January
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 10:35 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Nope, MJ.  You are thinking wrong about
 this.  MMY was evidently quite correct about this.
  What is missing are the numbers meditating.  We
 just need the numbers.  The science is now correct and
 as prudent science-based public policy we just need more
 people practicing transcending meditation, in groups.
  I still am enormously concerned about you and your
 spiritual welfare out there in the world.  There must
 be a group meditation that we could get you to that you
 could like that is nearby you.-Buck  
  
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 wrote:
 
 "Right from
 the beginning of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even
 a small number of the world's population practicing his
 Transcendental Meditation technique could neutralize the
 stress being built up in the world consciousness, thus
 averting conflicts and wars."
 
 
 
 Evidently a miserable failure, gauging by the numbers of
 wars going on about the globe at the moment. 
 
 
 
  On Sat, 1/18/14,Buck> wrote:
 
 
 
  Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy  Happy 12 January
 
  To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
  Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 9:51 PM
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
  
 

 
  
 
  
 
  
 

 

 
Right from the beginning
 
  of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even a small
 
  number of the
 
  world's population practicing his Transcendental
 
  Meditation technique
 
  could neutralize the stress being built up in the world
 
  consciousness, thus averting conflicts and
 
  wars. 
 
  
 
  
 
  In 1974
 
  these predictions were
 
  validated by scientific studies showing that in cities
 where
 
  one
 
  percent of the population learned the transcendental
 
  Meditation
 
  technique there was a sudden decrease in crime
 
  rates.
 
  
 
  By
 
  1974 more than one million people
 
  throughout the world had learned the practice of
 
  Transcendental
 
  Meditation and were experiencing higher states of
 
  consciousness. 
 
  With this, world consciousness was already becoming
 
  increasingly
 
  purified.  Furthermore, people everywhere were
 experiencing
 
  the
 
  practical benefits of the development of higher states of
 
  consciousness in all aspects of their daily life,
 including
 
  greater
 
  happiness, peace, and harmony.  A growing body of
 scientific
 
  research
 
  was validating the beneficial effects this practice had on
 
  all levels
 
  of mind, body, and behavior of the individual.
 
  
 
  It
 
  was at this time that research scientists discovered that
 in
 
  cities
 
  where one percent of the population was practicing
 
  Transcendental
 
  Meditation, the cities' crime rates decreased.  As
 more
 
  and more
 
  cities rose to one percent of the population practicing
 
  Transcendental Meditation, scientific research found that
 
  not only
 
  did crime decrease, but accidents, sickness, and other
 
  negative
 
  trends also decreased, and positivity increased.  Research
 
  scientists
 
  named this phenomenon the Maharishi Effect in honor of
 
  Maharishi.
 
  
 
  With this formula,
 
  Maharishi realized that it was now easily practical to
 
  produce
 
  positive trends in all cities throughout the world.  With
 
  this
 
  inspiration, Maharishi envisioned a new age dawning for
 
  mankind.  On
 
  12 January 1975, he inaugurated the dawn of the Age of
 
  Enlightenment
 
  proclaiming, “Through the window of science I see the
 dawn
 
  of the
 
  Age of Enlightenment.”
 
  
 
  This is the time of the
 
  dawn of the Age of Enlightenment.  I am only giving
 
  expression to the
 
  phenomenon that is taking place.
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  One percent of the
 
  people in any country can herald the dawn of a new age for
 
  the whole
 
  nation by devoting only fifteen minutes of their time
 twice
 
  a day.
 
  
 
  It is in the hands of a
 
  few individuals in every country today to change the
 
  direction of
 
  time and guide the destiny of their nation for all
 harmony,
 
  happiness, and progress.
 
  It is my joy to invite
 
  everyone to come in the light of the knowl

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[dhamiltony2k5]

Empty,  In their Unity Temple on the Plaza complex in the Kansas City area do 
they have open silent group transcending non-denominal meditation time, 
something like Quiet Time meditations?  Do you need a badge to sit meditating 
with the group if you happen to be visiting Kansas City?  I'd like to go to the 
Nelson art museum in KC and then have a place to go meditate. . 
 -Buck 
 

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

 Not a cult but rather a church. Most Christian don't consider it Christian 
because it isn't the exclusionary type with which they identity.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

But you don't seem able to see that while the language is different, it's the 
same fundamental idea. Redemption for Christians is the Beatific Vision, being 
at one with God forever. We are not born in that state; we are defective in 
that respect. You weren't born in the state of full realization of your 
fundamental unity with the divine, so you are defective in that respect. 
Something is missing. Obviously in both cases it's a core defect--how could 
unity with the Divine not be the core quality of a human being?
 

 People take words much too literally instead of looking at the principles 
behind them.
 

 << Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say 
that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of 
creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these 
wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various 
reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer 
to how Jesus would express it.

I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that 
we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me 
apostate! >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself?
 

 If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me.
 
 << Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with 
Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by 
nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm astonished 
you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if 
we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem 
us and make us acceptable in God's sight.
 

 I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, 
a reminder that this is what Christianity says.
 

 The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, 
BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had 
been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important 
enough for a pope to be concerned about.
 

 << Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people 
are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt 
that Jesus taught it. 

 
I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on 
Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope 
made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).
 

 << Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between 
guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling 
that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.
 

 And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.
 

 My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."
 
 Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary 
psychology and I agree with your last sentence.
 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an 
arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary 
says shame is:
 

 "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"

 

 I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.
 

 << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo sh

[FairfieldLife] RE: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

Noteworthy in their comparative leadership succession is that both groups, Lenz 
and TM, like other modern spiritual movements went on to be in the hands of 
'boards' in succession from their charismatic founder-leaders. 
http://globalpeaceproject.net/about-us/the-foundation/brahmananda-saraswati-foundatio-board-of-directors/
 
http://globalpeaceproject.net/about-us/the-foundation/brahmananda-saraswati-foundatio-board-of-directors/
 
  “It is a common assumption among social scientific observers of new religions 
(populary termed "cults") that the period immediately following the death of 
the founder/leader of a group is critical, a period that generally leads to 
major disruption and often fatal consequences for the group itself. This widely 
held assumption is not so much a finding derived from the observation of the 
phenomenon in specific situations as it is a conclusion drawn from early 
definitions of the term "cult" and lists of the characteristics of cults. 
According to the traditional wisdom in the field, among the most important 
characteristics of a cult (and the one most relevant to understanding the role 
of the founder) is that its leadership is invested in the person of a 
"charismatic" individual. That assumption ties cults to Max Weber's classic 
discussion of charismatic leaders.” 
 
 


 "Weber, in an oft quoted passage, defined charisma as a certain quality of an 
individual personality, by virtue of which [s/]he is set apart from ordinary 
[people] and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least 
specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not 
accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as 
exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a 
leader." 1
 

 “In simple terms, the average founder of a new religion, especially one that 
shows some success during the first generation, is obviously an important 
factor in the growth and development of his/her movement. The movement is 
initially an extension of the founder's ideas, dreams, and emotional makeup. 
The leader may be valued as a teacher and/or venerated as a cosmic being, or 
even divine entity. However, once the founder articulates the group's teachings 
and practices, they exist independently of him/her and can and do develop a 
life of their own. Once the follower experiences the truth of the religion, 
that experience also exists independently. Once a single spokesperson for the 
founder arises, the possibility of transmitting the truth of the religion 
independently of the founder has been posited. If a leader has developed a 
religious vision with the depth to gain a significant following during his/her 
lifetime, it will be a religion in which the role of the individual who created 
the religion, however important, will be but one element, not the overwhelming 
reality.”
 

 
 "Just as the confirmation of a prophecy rarely alters the direction of a 
group(10), so the death of the founder rarely proves fatal or leads to drastic 
alteration with the groups' life. But what does happen when the founder dies? 
Generally the same thing that happens in other types of organizations, that is, 
very simply, power passes to new leadership with more or less smoothness 
depending upon the extent and thoroughness of the preparation that has been 
made ahead of time."
 

 Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions
 J. Gordon Melton
 When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements
 By Timothy Miller 
260 pages
 

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

.turquoiseb wrote:
 

 .Buck wrote:

 

 

 >

 > Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for diffe

[FairfieldLife] RE: Great Country Classics

[s3raphita]

One of my favourite country classics (bear in mind I'm British so American 
country has an exotic element that would be lost on Yanks) is Merle Haggard's 
Okie from Muskogee. First time I heard it I took it straight as a conservative 
Yank protesting about the permissive hippie culture. The second time I heard it 
I thought what an idiot I'd been - it was *obviously* a satire taking the 
mickey out of straight-laced country fans. Later I realised that what makes the 
song so appealing is precisely its ambiguity. It isn't offering a neat 
resolution but leaves you understanding that life isn't interested in 
accommodating our preconceived notions.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc&feature=player_embedded 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc&feature=player_embedded

[FairfieldLife] RE: Great Country Classics

[s3raphita]

One of my favourite country classics (bear in mind I'm British so American 
country has an exotic element that would be lost on Yanks) is Merle Haggard's 
Okie from Muskogee. First time I heard it I took it straight as a conservative 
Yank protesting about the permissive hippie culture. The second time I heard it 
I thought what an idiot I'd been - it was *obviously* a satire taking the 
mickey out of straight-laced country fans. Later I realised that what makes the 
song so appealing is precisely its ambiguity. It isn't offering a neat 
resolution but leaves you understanding that life isn't interested in 
accommodating our preconceived notions.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc

[FairfieldLife] RE: Great Country Classics

[s3raphita]

One of my favourite country classics (bear in mind I'm British so American 
country has an exotic element that would be lost on Yanks) is Merle Haggard's 
Okie from Muskogee. First time I heard it I took it straight as a conservative 
Yank protesting about the permissive hippie culture. The second time I heard it 
I thought what an idiot I'd been - it was *obviously* a satire taking the 
mickey out of straight-laced country fans. Later I realised that what makes the 
song so appealing is precisely its ambiguity. It isn't offering a neat 
resolution but leaves you understanding that life isn't interested in 
accommodate our preconceived notions.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb41WPXYlQc

[FairfieldLife] RE: The latest from Russell

[s3raphita]

I sympathise with Russell Brand's campaign to convince people not to vote as I 
have zero sympathy with any mainstream political party. I suspect though that a 
better plan is for those of us who are alienated from the political process to 
vote for fringe parties (communist, fascist, libertarian) or maverick 
independents. (It doesn't matter which - they have no chance of gaining power!)
 Under Brand's plan a party could gain power with just 40 per cent of the votes 
cast. Under my strategy a party could gain power but their share of the vote 
could be 35 or 30 per cent. It then becomes even more obvious that they don't 
represent the majority and so their program lacks legitimacy. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I 
need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of 
creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these 
wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various 
reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer 
to how Jesus would express it.

I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that 
we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me 
apostate!





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself?

If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me.


<< Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with 
Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by 
nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. >>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm astonished 
you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if 
we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem 
us and make us acceptable in God's sight.

I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a 
reminder that this is what Christianity says.

The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, 
BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had 
been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important 
enough for a pope to be concerned about.

<< Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people 
are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt 
that Jesus taught it. 


I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on 
Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope 
made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! >>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).



<< Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt 
which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that 
one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.

And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.

My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."


Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology 
and I agree with your last sentence.




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an arbitrary 
distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame 
is:

"a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"


I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.



<< emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
>
  
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.


And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 

[FairfieldLife] The Art of Amour-cortois: Eros, Jois and Mahäsukha in Tantra and the Troubadours

[emptybill]

By Bishnu Charan Dash 
Now available on Scribd

 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/123957003/BISHNU-CHARAN-DASH-THE-ART-OF-AMOUR-CORTOIS-EROS-JOIS-AND-MAHASUKHA-IN-TANTRA-AND-THE-TROUBADOURS
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/123957003/BISHNU-CHARAN-DASH-THE-ART-OF-AMOUR-CORTOIS-EROS-JOIS-AND-MAHASUKHA-IN-TANTRA-AND-THE-TROUBADOURS

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For all romantics out there

[Richard Williams]

For all you romantics out there - B.J. Thomas - Hooked on a Feeling

[image: Inline image 1]

Hooked on a Feeling - Original version, vinyl
http://youtu.be/Wqt_iZBvtCo

Greatest Hits Medley
http://youtu.be/iKsC7ocz6no

"I can't stop this feelin' deep inside of me
Girl, you just don't realize what you do to me
When ya hold me in your arms so tight
You let me know everything's all right

I-I-I, I'm hooked on a feelin'
High on believin' that you're in love with me

Lips are sweet as candy, the taste stays on my mind
Girl, you keep me thirsty for another cup of wine
I got it bad for you girl, but I don't need a cure
I'll just stay addicted and hope I can endure

All the good love when we're all alone
Keep it up, girl, yeah ya turn me on

I-I-I, I'm hooked on a feelin'
High on believin' that you're in love with me

All the good love when we're all alone
Keep it up, girl, yeah ya turn me on

I-I-I, I'm hooked on a feelin'
I'm high on believin' that you're in love with me."


On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Richard Williams wrote:

> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> There are lots of worse things than getting stuck on a deserted island
> with a beautiful woman like this!
>
> Huey Lewis & The News - Happy To Be Stuck With You
> http://youtu.be/-8b0IKQxx2k
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Richard Williams 
> wrote:
>
>> [image: Inline image 1]
>>
>> Elvis Presley - Are You Lonesome Tonight?
>> http://youtu.be/_cS5aCozhcA
>>
>> The first time I heard Elvis was in 1953 in Abilene, Texas when I was
>> about four years old. My mother took me to the Paramount theater and let me
>> sit up front with her - she was about eighteen at the time. Later, when I
>> was fifteen I started buying his records including this one I bought in
>> 1960. Me and my first girlfriend used to listen to these Elvis songs all
>> the time after school. At one time, I owned about a dozen Elvis albums on
>> vinyl, since all sold. Now, I have a 2-CD set - The Essential Elvis
>> Presley, RCA B000KX0HVY.
>>
>> This song, one of my favorites, is a very romantic song - a real
>> tear-jerker!
>>
>> Read more:
>>
>> Last Train to Memphis: The Rise of Elvis Presley
>> by Peter Guralnick
>> Little, Brown and Company, 1995
>>
>> Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley
>> by Peter Guralnick
>> Little, Brown and Company, 1999
>>
>> Music by Lou Handman and lyrics by Roy Turk. It was written in 1926, and
>> first published in 1927.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Are_You_Lonesome_Tonight
>>
>> "Are you lonesome tonight,
>>  do you miss me tonight?
>> Are you sorry we drifted apart?
>> Does your memory stray to a brighter sunny day
>> When I kissed you and called you sweetheart?
>> Do the chairs in your parlor seem empty and bare?
>> Do you gaze at your doorstep and picture me there?
>> Is your heart filled with pain, shall I come back again?
>> Tell me dear, are you lonesome tonight?
>>
>> I wonder if you're lonesome tonight
>> You know someone said that the world's a stage
>> And each must play a part.
>> Fate had me playing in love you as my sweet heart.
>> Act one was when we met, I loved you at first glance
>> You read your line so cleverly and never missed a cue
>> Then came act two, you seemed to change and you acted strange
>> And why I'll never know.
>>
>> Honey, you lied when you said you loved me
>> And I had no cause to doubt you.
>> But I'd rather go on hearing your lies
>> Than go on living without you.
>> Now the stage is bare and I'm standing there
>> With emptiness all around
>> And if you won't come back to me
>> Then make them bring the curtain down.
>>
>> Is your heart filled with pain, shall I come back again?
>> Tell me dear, are you lonesome tonight?"
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 8:15 AM, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard Williams wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Very romantic dancing song!
>>>
>>> Speaking of romantic songs, here's one that has a cool story behind it.
>>> Back when I used to live in L.A., there was a bar out in North Malibu that
>>> I used to go to often to listen to a band called Billy and the Beaters.
>>> They were without question the most FUN band in L.A. to see and dance to, a
>>> modern version of the old Ray Charles band, with a horn section and great
>>> players. And Billy himself was just the best -- great guy, great voice,
>>> great songwriter, and fun.
>>>
>>> Anyway, he and his band were known around L.A., but their only album was
>>> long out of print and they were just gettin' by on club dates, and then a
>>> TV producer caught their act, loved it, and decided that one of Billy's
>>> songs would be perfect as the soundtrack behind key romantic moments
>>> between Michael J. Fox and Tracy Pollan on the TV show "Family Ties."
>>>
>>> The song, and the album it was on, had been out of print for several
>>> years. But after the broadcast of the show fans were clamoring for it so
>>> much that Rhin

[FairfieldLife] Attack of the Neak Ta

[authfriend]

Very intriguing op-ed piece in the NYTimes about guardian nature spirits known 
as neak ta invading garment factories in Cambodia, upbraiding the managers, and 
causing the young women workers to swoon en masse, crippling production until 
the spirits are appeased. This has all been taken with the utmost seriousness 
and has actually helped improve the conditions of the workers; the government 
does not tolerate large-scale collective bargaining, but there isn't much it 
can do about the neak ta except to do as they ask. 
 

 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/18/opinion/workers-of-the-world-faint.html 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/18/opinion/workers-of-the-world-faint.html?hp&rref=opinion

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

Not a cult but rather a church. Most Christian don't consider it Christian 
because it isn't the exclusionary type with which they identity.

[FairfieldLife] RE: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

 “It is a common assumption among social scientific observers of new religions 
(populary termed "cults") that the period immediately following the death of 
the founder/leader of a group is critical, a period that generally leads to 
major disruption and often fatal consequences for the group itself. This widely 
held assumption is not so much a finding derived from the observation of the 
phenomenon in specific situations as it is a conclusion drawn from early 
definitions of the term "cult" and lists of the characteristics of cults. 
According to the traditional wisdom in the field, among the most important 
characteristics of a cult (and the one most relevant to understanding the role 
of the founder) is that its leadership is invested in the person of a 
"charismatic" individual. That assumption ties cults to Max Weber's classic 
discussion of charismatic leaders.” 
 
 


 "Weber, in an oft quoted passage, defined charisma as a certain quality of an 
individual personality, by virtue of which [s/]he is set apart from ordinary 
[people] and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least 
specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not 
accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as 
exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a 
leader." 1
 

 “In simple terms, the average founder of a new religion, especially one that 
shows some success during the first generation, is obviously an important 
factor in the growth and development of his/her movement. The movement is 
initially an extension of the founder's ideas, dreams, and emotional makeup. 
The leader may be valued as a teacher and/or venerated as a cosmic being, or 
even divine entity. However, once the founder articulates the group's teachings 
and practices, they exist independently of him/her and can and do develop a 
life of their own. Once the follower experiences the truth of the religion, 
that experience also exists independently. Once a single spokesperson for the 
founder arises, the possibility of transmitting the truth of the religion 
independently of the founder has been posited. If a leader has developed a 
religious vision with the depth to gain a significant following during his/her 
lifetime, it will be a religion in which the role of the individual who created 
the religion, however important, will be but one element, not the overwhelming 
reality.”
 

 
 "Just as the confirmation of a prophecy rarely alters the direction of a 
group(10), so the death of the founder rarely proves fatal or leads to drastic 
alteration with the groups' life. But what does happen when the founder dies? 
Generally the same thing that happens in other types of organizations, that is, 
very simply, power passes to new leadership with more or less smoothness 
depending upon the extent and thoroughness of the preparation that has been 
made ahead of time."
 

 Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions
 J. Gordon Melton
 When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements
 By Timothy Miller 
260 pages
 

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

.turquoiseb wrote:
 

 .Buck wrote:

 

 

 >

 > Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for different folks. 

 > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of 
 > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? 

As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a 
few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," 
even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to 
do with them, other than to 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[dhamiltony2k5]

Wow, I just googled,  Unity Temple on the Plaza.
 I want to come see this as 'field' study of communal groups.  Is it a cult?
 There was a Unity Church here in Fairfield for a while but it seemed that it 
fell in to a parting of ways between spiritual meditators here and ideological 
stick in the mud orthodox kind of Unity people from Kansas.  There is some 
story there. 
 -Buck in the Dome 
 

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

 I live in the City of Unity. I did a number of residence courses at Unity 
Village - back in the old days. Unity Village is a fabulous facility but now 
there are a number of other  Unity facilities - such as Unity Temple on the 
Plaza and Unity Church of Overland Park.

 

 Unity Temple on the Plaza is full of meditation groups and classes - 
Vipassana, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana, Dzogchen ... all because they have a 
Buddhist Center there. This also is where Khachab Rinpoche teaches Dzogchen 
twice a year when he comes into town.. 

 

 Unity Church of Overland Park is a few blocks away from my residence. I even 
live next to a Unity minister. So they are pretty much everywhere. Each Unity 
facility has specialized in a particular part of the spiritual marketplace so 
their appeal has been well thought out. 

 

 
 
 

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

 There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that 
we are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is 
the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of 
Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in 
some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be 
revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much 
sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your 
benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it 
may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more 
abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on.
 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] Post Count Sun 19-Jan-14 00:15:05 UTC

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): 01/18/14 00:00:00
End Date (UTC): 01/25/14 00:00:00
106 messages as of (UTC) 01/19/14 00:13:57

 19 authfriend
 15 Share Long 
 11 Richard Williams 
 10 emptybill
 10 dhamiltony2k5
  8 awoelflebater
  7 nablusoss1008 
  5 jr_esq
  5 Michael Jackson 
  5 Bhairitu 
  4 TurquoiseB 
  2 s3raphita
  2 Jason 
  1 steve.sundur
  1 doctordumbass
  1 anartaxius
Posters: 16
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 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: What I Did Today

[Richard Williams]

Today, we went to this place:

[image: Inline image 2]


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Richard Williams wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *> I read through this post, bemused by it, but I didn't notice > until
> I'd gotten almost all the way to the end of it that part > of my mind was
> still saying, "What's a car?"  :-)>*
> You probably don't even need a car over there - in fact, it would be a
> problem. Over, here a car is just another tool for most people. Without
> one, I'd be dead in the water. Some people who are rich probably drive cars
> just for fun and pleasure, like my neighbor, who doesn't drive these cars
> much - there just for shows.
>
>
> I inherited the Eldorado from Mom. She bought it new off the show room
> floor and it's been garaged it's whole life. She still had a driver's
> license at age 86, but hadn't driven in about ten years. So, one day I just
> took it - I'm using it for highway driving. I put some new tires on it and
> a new disc brakes.
>
>
> You can't get anything these days for a car like that - maybe $1500. The
> AC still works and it has cruise control. Also, it has a kick-ass Delco
> Bose sound system with CD player inside. Sweet!
>
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:54 AM, TurquoiseB  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote:
>> >
>> > noozguru et al, small country, flat land. And no snow or ice on the
>> roads and bike paths!
>>
>>
>> *Ahem. Only pussies leave their bikes at home when it snows. *
>> * 
>> **https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMv3OB6XHvQ
>> *
>>
>> > On Sunday, December 29, 2013 11:11 AM, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote:
>> >
>> > Small country, flat land.
>> >
>> > On 12/29/2013 07:43 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>> >
>> > >Uh oh. I think I've achieved one of those milestones along the path to
>> "You know you're in danger of becoming Dutch when..." consciousness.
>> > >
>> > >I read through this post, bemused by it, but I
>> > didn't notice until I'd gotten almost all the way to
>> > the end of it that part of my mind was still saying,
>> > "What's a car?"  :-)
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/04/09/learning-from-the-netherlands-about-bikes/
>>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>  
>>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[awoelflebater]

 

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

 LSD still comes in tabs? 
 

 How would you know that?
 

 Empty always asking the really important questions...
 

 Perhaps you read about it on MSLSD.
 

 (disclaimer for the NSA snoops: I don't know nothin' bout nothin')

 

 

 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

I live in the City of Unity. I did a number of residence courses at Unity 
Village - back in the old days. Unity Village is a fabulous facility but now 
there are a number of other  Unity facilities - such as Unity Temple on the 
Plaza and Unity Church of Overland Park.

 

 Unity Temple on the Plaza is full of meditation groups and classes - 
Vipassana, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana, Dzogchen ... all because they have a 
Buddhist Center there. This also is where Khachab Rinpoche teaches Dzogchen 
twice a year when he comes into town.. 

 

 Unity Church of Overland Park is a few blocks away from my residence. I even 
live next to a Unity minister. So they are pretty much everywhere. Each Unity 
facility has specialized in a particular part of the spiritual marketplace so 
their appeal has been well thought out. 

 

 
 
 

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

 There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that 
we are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is 
the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of 
Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in 
some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be 
revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much 
sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your 
benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it 
may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more 
abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on.
 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself?
 

 If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me.
 
 << Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with 
Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by 
nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm astonished 
you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if 
we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem 
us and make us acceptable in God's sight.
 

 I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, 
a reminder that this is what Christianity says.
 

 The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, 
BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had 
been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important 
enough for a pope to be concerned about.
 

 << Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people 
are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt 
that Jesus taught it. 

 
I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on 
Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope 
made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).
 

 << Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between 
guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling 
that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.
 

 And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.
 

 My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."
 
 Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary 
psychology and I agree with your last sentence.
 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an 
arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary 
says shame is:
 

 "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"

 

 I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.
 

 << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
 
   Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.

 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

"Weber, in an oft quoted passage, defined charisma as a certain quality of an 
individual personality, by virtue of which [s/]he is set apart from ordinary 
[people] and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least 
specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not 
accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as 
exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a 
leader." 1"
 

 “In simple terms, the average founder of a new religion, especially one that 
shows some success during the first generation, is obviously an important 
factor in the growth and development of his/her movement. The movement is 
initially an extension of the founder's ideas, dreams, and emotional makeup. 
The leader may be valued as a teacher and/or venerated as a cosmic being, or 
even divine entity. However, once the founder articulates the group's teachings 
and practices, they exist independently of him/her and can and do develop a 
life of their own. Once the follower experiences the truth of the religion, 
that experience also exists independently. Once a single spokesperson for the 
founder arises, the possibility of transmitting the truth of the religion 
independently of the founder has been posited. If a leader has developed a 
religious vision with the depth to gain a significant following during his/her 
lifetime, it will be a religion in which the role of the individual who created 
the religion, however important, will be but one element, not the overwhelming 
reality.”
 

 
 "Just as the confirmation of a prophecy rarely alters the direction of a 
group(10), so the death of the founder rarely proves fatal or leads to drastic 
alteration with the groups' life. But what does happen when the founder dies? 
Generally the same thing that happens in other types of organizations, that is, 
very simply, power passes to new leadership with more or less smoothness 
depending upon the extent and thoroughness of the preparation that has been 
made ahead of time."
 

 Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions
 J. Gordon Melton
 When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements
 By Timothy Miller 
260 pages
 

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

.turquoiseb wrote:
 

 .Buck wrote:

 

 

 >

 > Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for different folks. 

 > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of 
 > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? 

As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a 
few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," 
even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to 
do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I 
wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind 
of fun I felt like hanging around. 

 > Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his 
 > teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward 
 > with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not 
 > planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in 
 > some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? 
 > Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some 
 > of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. 

All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and 
thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. 

He left *NO* successors. He lef

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy Happy 12 January

[dhamiltony2k5]

Nope, MJ.  You are thinking wrong about this.  MMY was evidently quite correct 
about this.  What is missing are the numbers meditating.  We just need the 
numbers.  The science is now correct and as prudent science-based public policy 
we just need more people practicing transcending meditation, in groups.  I 
still am enormously concerned about you and your spiritual welfare out there in 
the world.  There must be a group meditation that we could get you to that you 
could like that is nearby you.
 -Buck
 

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

 "Right from the beginning of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even a 
small number of the world's population practicing his Transcendental Meditation 
technique could neutralize the stress being built up in the world 
consciousness, thus averting conflicts and wars."
 
 Evidently a miserable failure, gauging by the numbers of wars going on about 
the globe at the moment. 
 
 On Sat, 1/18/14,Buck> wrote:
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy Happy 12 January
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 9:51 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Right from the beginning
 of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even a small
 number of the
 world's population practicing his Transcendental
 Meditation technique
 could neutralize the stress being built up in the world
 consciousness, thus averting conflicts and
 wars. 
 
 
 In 1974
 these predictions were
 validated by scientific studies showing that in cities where
 one
 percent of the population learned the transcendental
 Meditation
 technique there was a sudden decrease in crime
 rates.
 
 By
 1974 more than one million people
 throughout the world had learned the practice of
 Transcendental
 Meditation and were experiencing higher states of
 consciousness. 
 With this, world consciousness was already becoming
 increasingly
 purified. Furthermore, people everywhere were experiencing
 the
 practical benefits of the development of higher states of
 consciousness in all aspects of their daily life, including
 greater
 happiness, peace, and harmony. A growing body of scientific
 research
 was validating the beneficial effects this practice had on
 all levels
 of mind, body, and behavior of the individual.
 
 It
 was at this time that research scientists discovered that in
 cities
 where one percent of the population was practicing
 Transcendental
 Meditation, the cities' crime rates decreased. As more
 and more
 cities rose to one percent of the population practicing
 Transcendental Meditation, scientific research found that
 not only
 did crime decrease, but accidents, sickness, and other
 negative
 trends also decreased, and positivity increased. Research
 scientists
 named this phenomenon the Maharishi Effect in honor of
 Maharishi.
 
 With this formula,
 Maharishi realized that it was now easily practical to
 produce
 positive trends in all cities throughout the world. With
 this
 inspiration, Maharishi envisioned a new age dawning for
 mankind. On
 12 January 1975, he inaugurated the dawn of the Age of
 Enlightenment
 proclaiming, “Through the window of science I see the dawn
 of the
 Age of Enlightenment.”
 
 This is the time of the
 dawn of the Age of Enlightenment. I am only giving
 expression to the
 phenomenon that is taking place.
 
 
 
 One percent of the
 people in any country can herald the dawn of a new age for
 the whole
 nation by devoting only fifteen minutes of their time twice
 a day.
 
 It is in the hands of a
 few individuals in every country today to change the
 direction of
 time and guide the destiny of their nation for all harmony,
 happiness, and progress.
 It is my joy to invite
 everyone to come in the light of the knowledge and
 experience that
 the Science of Creative Intelligence provides and enjoy
 participating
 in this global awakening to herald the Age of
 Enlightenment.
 
 
 
 -Maharishi
 
 
 
 12 January
 1975 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[anartaxius]

There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that we 
are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is the 
Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of 
Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in 
some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be 
revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much 
sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your 
benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it 
may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more 
abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on.
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm astonished 
you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if 
we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem 
us and make us acceptable in God's sight.
 

 I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, 
a reminder that this is what Christianity says.
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with 
Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by 
nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that.





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm astonished 
you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if 
we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem 
us and make us acceptable in God's sight.

I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a 
reminder that this is what Christianity says.

The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, 
BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had 
been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important 
enough for a pope to be concerned about.

<< Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people 
are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt 
that Jesus taught it. 


I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on 
Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope 
made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! >>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).



<< Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt 
which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that 
one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.

And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.

My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."


Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology 
and I agree with your last sentence.




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an arbitrary 
distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame 
is:

"a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"


I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.



<< emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
>
  
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.


And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[Share Long]

John, I agree that there's a lot to the story that's not being reported. It's 
interesting that the other nuns were surprised. It makes the details even more 
puzzling. 





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:03 PM, "jr_...@yahoo.com"  
wrote:
 
  
Share,

There's more to this story that's left unsaid, IMO.  She could be protecting 
the identity of the father, whomever it may be.  Also, it would be difficult 
for her to stay in the convent and care for the baby herself.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

The Dancing Fool - by Kilgore Trout

 

 A flying saucer creature named Zog arrived on Earth to explain how wars could 
be prevented and how cancer could be cured. He brought the information from 
Margo, a planet where the natives conversed by means of farts and tap dancing.
 
Zog landed at night in Connecticut. He had no sooner touched down than he saw a 
house on fire. He rushed into the house, farting and tap dancing, warning the 
people about the terrible danger they were in. The head of the house brained 
Zog with a golf club.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy Happy 12 January

[Michael Jackson]

"Right from the beginning of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even a 
small number of the world's population practicing his Transcendental Meditation 
technique could neutralize the stress being built up in the world 
consciousness, thus averting conflicts and wars."

Evidently a miserable failure, gauging by the numbers of wars going on about 
the globe at the moment. 

On Sat, 1/18/14, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com  wrote:

 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Happy  Happy 12 January
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 9:51 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Right from the beginning
 of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even a small
 number of the
 world's population practicing his Transcendental
 Meditation technique
 could neutralize the stress being built up in the world
 consciousness, thus averting conflicts and
 wars. 
 
 
 In 1974
 these predictions were
 validated by scientific studies showing that in cities where
 one
 percent of the population learned the transcendental
 Meditation
 technique there was a sudden decrease in crime
 rates.
 
 By
 1974 more than one million people
 throughout the world had learned the practice of
 Transcendental
 Meditation and were experiencing higher states of
 consciousness. 
 With this, world consciousness was already becoming
 increasingly
 purified.  Furthermore, people everywhere were experiencing
 the
 practical benefits of the development of higher states of
 consciousness in all aspects of their daily life, including
 greater
 happiness, peace, and harmony.  A growing body of scientific
 research
 was validating the beneficial effects this practice had on
 all levels
 of mind, body, and behavior of the individual.
 
 It
 was at this time that research scientists discovered that in
 cities
 where one percent of the population was practicing
 Transcendental
 Meditation, the cities' crime rates decreased.  As more
 and more
 cities rose to one percent of the population practicing
 Transcendental Meditation, scientific research found that
 not only
 did crime decrease, but accidents, sickness, and other
 negative
 trends also decreased, and positivity increased.  Research
 scientists
 named this phenomenon the Maharishi Effect in honor of
 Maharishi.
 
 With this formula,
 Maharishi realized that it was now easily practical to
 produce
 positive trends in all cities throughout the world.  With
 this
 inspiration, Maharishi envisioned a new age dawning for
 mankind.  On
 12 January 1975, he inaugurated the dawn of the Age of
 Enlightenment
 proclaiming, “Through the window of science I see the dawn
 of the
 Age of Enlightenment.”
 
 This is the time of the
 dawn of the Age of Enlightenment.  I am only giving
 expression to the
 phenomenon that is taking place.
 
 
 
 One percent of the
 people in any country can herald the dawn of a new age for
 the whole
 nation by devoting only fifteen minutes of their time twice
 a day.
 
 It is in the hands of a
 few individuals in every country today to change the
 direction of
 time and guide the destiny of their nation for all harmony,
 happiness, and progress.
 It is my joy to invite
 everyone to come in the light of the knowledge and
 experience that
 the Science of Creative Intelligence provides and enjoy
 participating
 in this global awakening to herald the Age of
 Enlightenment.
 
 
 
 -Maharishi
 
 
 
 12 January
 1975
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Happy Happy 12 January

[dhamiltony2k5]

Right from the beginning of his movement, Maharishi predicted that even a small 
number of the world's population practicing his Transcendental Meditation 
technique could neutralize the stress being built up in the world 
consciousness, thus averting conflicts and wars.  
 

 In 1974 these predictions were validated by scientific studies showing that in 
cities where one percent of the population learned the transcendental 
Meditation technique there was a sudden decrease in crime rates.
 

 By 1974 more than one million people throughout the world had learned the 
practice of Transcendental Meditation and were experiencing higher states of 
consciousness. With this, world consciousness was already becoming increasingly 
purified. Furthermore, people everywhere were experiencing the practical 
benefits of the development of higher states of consciousness in all aspects of 
their daily life, including greater happiness, peace, and harmony. A growing 
body of scientific research was validating the beneficial effects this practice 
had on all levels of mind, body, and behavior of the individual.
 

 It was at this time that research scientists discovered that in cities where 
one percent of the population was practicing Transcendental Meditation, the 
cities' crime rates decreased. As more and more cities rose to one percent of 
the population practicing Transcendental Meditation, scientific research found 
that not only did crime decrease, but accidents, sickness, and other negative 
trends also decreased, and positivity increased. Research scientists named this 
phenomenon the Maharishi Effect in honor of Maharishi.
 

 
 With this formula, Maharishi realized that it was now easily practical to 
produce positive trends in all cities throughout the world. With this 
inspiration, Maharishi envisioned a new age dawning for mankind. On 12 January 
1975, he inaugurated the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment proclaiming, “Through 
the window of science I see the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment.”
 

 This is the time of the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment. I am only giving 
expression to the phenomenon that is taking place.
 
 
 
 One percent of the people in any country can herald the dawn of a new age for 
the whole nation by devoting only fifteen minutes of their time twice a day.
 

 It is in the hands of a few individuals in every country today to change the 
direction of time and guide the destiny of their nation for all harmony, 
happiness, and progress.
 
 It is my joy to invite everyone to come in the light of the knowledge and 
experience that the Science of Creative Intelligence provides and enjoy 
participating in this global awakening to herald the Age of Enlightenment.
 
 
 -Maharishi
 
 
 12 January 1975

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

I do believe I said "Christianity," not "Catholicism," Share. I'm astonished 
you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if 
we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem 
us and make us acceptable in God's sight.
 

 I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, 
a reminder that this is what Christianity says.
 

 The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, 
BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had 
been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important 
enough for a pope to be concerned about.
 

 << Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people 
are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt 
that Jesus taught it. 

 
I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on 
Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope 
made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).
 

 << Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between 
guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling 
that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.
 

 And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.
 

 My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."
 
 Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary 
psychology and I agree with your last sentence.
 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an 
arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary 
says shame is:
 

 "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"

 

 I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.
 

 << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
 
   Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.

 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

“In simple terms, the average founder of a new religion, especially one that 
shows some success during the first generation, is obviously an important 
factor in the growth and development of his/her movement. The movement is 
initially an extension of the founder's ideas, dreams, and emotional makeup. 
The leader may be valued as a teacher and/or venerated as a cosmic being, or 
even divine entity. However, once the founder articulates the group's teachings 
and practices, they exist independently of him/her and can and do develop a 
life of their own. Once the follower experiences the truth of the religion, 
that experience also exists independently. Once a single spokesperson for the 
founder arises, the possibility of transmitting the truth of the religion 
independently of the founder has been posited. If a leader has developed a 
religious vision with the depth to gain a significant following during his/her 
lifetime, it will be a religion in which the role of the individual who created 
the religion, however important, will be but one element, not the overwhelming 
reality.”
 

 
 "Just as the confirmation of a prophecy rarely alters the direction of a 
group(10), so the death of the founder rarely proves fatal or leads to drastic 
alteration with the groups' life. But what does happen when the founder dies? 
Generally the same thing that happens in other types of organizations, that is, 
very simply, power passes to new leadership with more or less smoothness 
depending upon the extent and thoroughness of the preparation that has been 
made ahead of time."
 
 Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions
 J. Gordon Melton
 When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements
 By Timothy Miller 
260 pages
 

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

.turquoiseb wrote:
 

 .Buck wrote:

 

 

 >

 > Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for different folks. 

 > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of 
 > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? 

As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a 
few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," 
even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to 
do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I 
wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind 
of fun I felt like hanging around. 

 > Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his 
 > teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward 
 > with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not 
 > planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in 
 > some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? 
 > Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some 
 > of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. 

All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and 
thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. 

He left *NO* successors. He left *NO* successor organization, except a 
foundation to distribute the wealth he had accumulated to further the study of 
what he called "American Buddhism." They have -- to their credit -- spread this 
money around to a number of well-meaning and in many cases well-acting 
organizations to help do just that. 

There are a few people who have "set up shop" as spiritual teacher furthering 
his tradition. I know them all, and recommend none of them. I went out of my 
way to not 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[jr_esq]

Judy,
 

 You've got a point there.  She didn't lie like Bill Clinton.  But Catholics 
have a thing called a "sin of omission".  The nun may not be able to hold up 
against that test.  If any reporter is willing to dig it up, there's probably a 
more tangled story underneath this report.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[jr_esq]

Barry,
 

 I'd prefer to talk about the nun.  But it's your option to talk about anybody 
else that may suit your purpose.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[jr_esq]

Share,
 

 There's more to this story that's left unsaid, IMO.  She could be protecting 
the identity of the father, whomever it may be.  Also, it would be difficult 
for her to stay in the convent and care for the baby herself.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are 
defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt 
that Jesus taught it. 

I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on 
Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope 
made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry!





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).



<< Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt 
which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that 
one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.

And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.

My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."


Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology 
and I agree with your last sentence.




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an arbitrary 
distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame 
is:

"a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"


I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.



<< emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
>
  
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.


And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 01/14/2014

[Bhairitu]

Yes from an ayurvedic standpoint.  One of the last questions I asked my 
late tantra guru was about why would Shiva mantras be pacifying  for 
kapha?  But he didn't know ayurveda and if he did would have probably 
been able to sidestep his heart problem.


On 01/18/2014 11:28 AM, Share Long wrote:
noozguru, you have said a few times that TM mantras are good for pitta 
types. Maybe not so good for kapha or vata...




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 11:19 AM, Bhairitu 
 wrote:
I'm sure he did many times.  TM doesn't work for everybody.  He was 
into enough other things to try anyway.


On 01/18/2014 09:03 AM, Share Long wrote:

noozguru, did your friend ever consider having his TM checked?!



On Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:33 AM, Bhairitu 
  wrote:
Not only that the people having these experiences are probably 
wondering why others aren't.  I have a friend who has been doing TM 
for years but claims to have only transcended twice.  Huh?


On 01/15/2014 04:08 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
*From:*FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 
[mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of 
*jr_...@yahoo.com 

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:50 PM
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 

*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on 
Buddha at the Gas Pump - 01/14/2014

Bhairitu,
IMO, these experiences of "celestial beings" may be due to 
hynogogia, a state of consciousness in between sleep and waking.  It 
would appear that meditation, for some people, may enhance or extend 
hynogogia into the waking state.  Thus, they appear to see or 
hallucinate visions in conjunction with ordinary activities during 
the day.
The folks I referred to in the interview see them all the time, very 
clearly, in the waking state. Although since they’re in an 
enlightened state, or whatever you’d like to call it, it’s not 
really the waking state. It’s what Maharishi predicted in his 
7-states model: refined, “celestial” perception. Subtle or 
“celestial” beings are all around us, or in a parallel dimension. 
Most people just can’t see them because their perception is not 
sufficiently refined.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: "The Bridge" SE on Hulu

[Bhairitu]

Unlike Turq, I found both the SE and US versions compelling.  I think 
they had Kruger dial back a little on the "Aspergers"  syndrome a bit 
because with all the problem we've been having with "bully" cops in the 
US the idea that a police force would allow anyone with Aspergers on the 
force is a bit of a stretch.  And sometimes I think that people don't 
have a "disease" just more detachment than others do.  I have certainly 
developed a bit of detachment over the years from doing sadhana.


There were some season one episodes of the SE version on YouTube but 
they were of poor quality.  It's also interesting to watch this version 
knowing what the real reason is behind the bridge murder and what clues 
are given early on.


"Justify" is popular because Leonard wrote about how dumb many criminals 
are.  A friend who was a police detective was full of these kind of 
tales.  Regular TV series can often make a villain look like a genius as 
well as a poor shot. :-D



On 01/18/2014 09:37 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote:


Like all the B-films the Turq recommends The Bridge is boring. The 
director has a seemingly neverending fascination for syndrome's like 
Asberger and creates a character (Saga Norlen) that glues people to 
the TV giving them their own "square-eyed-syndrome" eagerly awaiting 
what next crazy thing Saga will utter. Add to that a completely 
non-believable story and all you are left with a big yawn.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is 
arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. 
You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one 
shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no 
more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, 
that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't 
need redemption).
 

 << Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between 
guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling 
that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.
 

 And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.
 

 My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."
 
 Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary 
psychology and I agree with your last sentence.
 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an 
arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary 
says shame is:
 

 "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"

 

 I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.
 

 << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
 
   Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.

 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[authfriend]

http://www.discoveryfitandhealth.com/tv-shows/i-didnt-know-i-was-pregnant 
http://www.discoveryfitandhealth.com/tv-shows/i-didnt-know-i-was-pregnant

 

 Happens more often than you'd think. As long as she doesn't deny having had 
sex, there's no reason to disbelieve her.
 

 << She said that she didn't know she was pregnant.  Does anyone believe her? 

 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html
 >>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Classic Rock Movies

[Richard Williams]

High Fidelity

[image: Inline image 2]

Official Movie Trailer
http://youtu.be/q8DIm_47xPU

Beta Band single scene
http://youtu.be/ppJAkN4m9bY

Rock Snobs
http://youtu.be/QOwjVVSNOtY

Jack Black - Let's Get It On
http://youtu.be/1V_-iZYIofU

The perfect sales clerk scene
http://youtu.be/-ECyX8A3iP0

Empire magazine readers voted High Fidelity the 446th greatest film in
their "500 Greatest Movies of All Time" poll.

[image: Inline image 1]

"High Fidelity is a 2000 American comedy-drama film directed by Stephen
Frears and starring John Cusack and Danish actress Iben Hjejle. The film is
based on the 1995 British novel of the same name by Nick Hornby, with the
setting moved from London to Chicago and the name of the lead character
changed."

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Fidelity


On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Richard Williams wrote:

> Streets of Fire - A Rock & Roll Fable
>
> [image: Inline image 2]
>
> Nowhere Fast 1984 - Video
> http://youtu.be/251zlGliwOQ
>
> Movie Trailer:
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088194/
>
> Starring: Michael Oare, Diane Lane, Williamd Dafoe, Amy Madigan, Rick
> Moranis, Deborah Van Valkenburgh, Elizabeth Daily
> Director: Walter Hill
> Music: Ry Cooder, The Sorels
> Music producer: Jimmy Iovine
>
> Universal Pictures DVD:
>
> [image: Inline image 3]
>
> 1949 Mercury convertible:
>
> [image: Inline image 4]
>
> "The car that Cody drives in the movie is a 1951 Mercury that was chopped,
> channeled, nosed, and decked. In addition, 12 1950 and 1951 model
> Studebakers were used as police cars.[2] More than 50 motorcycles and their
> drivers were featured as the Bombers and were chosen from 200 members of
> real L.A.-based clubs like The Crusaders and The Heathens.
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> Jimmy Iovine produced five of the songs for the film and the soundtrack
> album.For Ellen Aim's singing voice, he combined the voices of Laurie
> Sargent and Holly Sherwood, billing them as "Fire Incorporated." The
> Attackers were the real-life (Face to Face) bandmates of Sargent, who
> provided the lead vocals on Ellen Aim's songs "Never Be You" and "Sorcerer"
> and supporting vocals on "Tonight Is What It Means to Be Young." The
> version of "Sorcerer," written and composed by Stevie Nicks, that was
> featured on the actual soundtrack album was performed by Marilyn Martin."
>
> Read more:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streets_of_Fire
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt 
which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that 
one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. 





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.

And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.

My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."


Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology 
and I agree with your last sentence.




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an arbitrary 
distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame 
is:

"a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"


I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.



<< emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
>
  
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.


And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[authfriend]

 Will Barry ever get over feeling threatened by Robin?
 

 BTW, the nun is not reported to have said she never had sex. And it's not that 
uncommon for a woman not to know she's pregnant until she goes into labor. So 
as far as we know, she didn't tell any lies.
 > She said that she didn't know she was pregnant. Does anyone believe her? 
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html
>  
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html
>   

 There have certainly been more outrageous lies that people believed. Like 
anyone believing that Robin Carlsen was ever enlightened. Or even sane. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Religion that doesn't take itself deadly seriously

[Jason]

It's a paradox. Capitalism drives innovation and works well
for the economic system.

But, the same capitalism also has a destructive effect on
the Political system and a destructive effect on the
Cultural system.

One of the major challenges for any modern civilisation is
to insulate and protect the 'political system' and the
'cultural system' from the deleterious effects of capitalism
and crass commercialism, while ensuring that the economic
system functions in capitalism.


---   wrote:
>
> Yep, out of balance fucking and gone fucking too far
Over-Secularization; Heck, we're talking bad upbringing that allows for
all this destructive spirituality of ill-disciplined over-sexualization.
What are parents thinking when they let their offspring dress like they
do? A lot of children will spend the rest of their adult lives in
recovery straightening out their subtle-energy bodies for all the
spiritual negligence of their parents and the predatory nature of modern
societal spirituality over the modern family unit. Such materialism in
exploitation on such early ages is completely appalling and demoralizing
spirituality.   Firstly, in public policy we certainly need a lot more
meditation everywhere to bring better coherence to everyone everywhere.
Git thee to a group meditation near you and nurture spiritual Nature for
a change. Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité, long live the French
and their high-mindedness in looking after the welfare of their children
if the parents of these exploited children will not do it.  Spiritually
criminal parents subjecting their children to the exploitation of
adolescent beauty-pageant-ing should certainly have their children taken
away from them and have them be sent directly to the care of
consciousness-based schools in the hopes of reforming any moral damage
from such adolescent pageantry forced upon these children.  We all
should have a large public interest in protecting the welfare of
children this way,
>
>  -Buck
>
>
>  jedi_spock wrote:
>
>
>  deification of women by asymmetric
> dress-codes, or putting them on a pedestal, inversely
> stereotypes them and puts severe limitations on them. It's
> almost a form of reverse slavery.
>
> In other words, hyper-sexualisation of women is as bad as
> de-sexualisaton of women.  Western society is as imbalanced
> as eastern societies.
>
>
>
> 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424462/France-bans-girls-beauty\
-contests-bid-stop-hyper-sexualisation-children.html
  >
>
> http://www.thehindu.com/features/magazine/sexualisation-of-t
he-western-woman/article4414595.ece
  >
>
>
>
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
>
>  >  > >
> > > > --- s3raphita wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The line "I am a great believer in the uni-sex dress-code" was
> > > > > copied over (by Yahoo not me!) from a post by Jason. I don't
> > > > > advocate any dress
> > > > > codes. Jason can defend that view if he wishes.
> > > >
> > > --- "TurquoiseB" turquoiseb@ wrote:
>  > > >
>  > > > Just in case you were wondering, I understood that, and so my
rap this
> > > > morning was a reply to Jason as much as it was Buck, who tried
to
> > > > springboard off of it with more of his "gotta keep the sinners
in line
> > > > any way we can" horseshit.
> > > >
> > > > I don't advocate any kind of dress code, but *especially* one
that
> > > > tries to make women or men look sexless. I, for one, would love
to
> > > > hear Jason defend that idea, and doubt that he could.
> > > >
> > > > I extended my rap to cover the uniforms worn by various
religious
> > > > groups and cults. Historically, such "uniforms" (special dress
for priests,
> > > > monks, or nuns, or even "recommended dress" for lay people) are
about
> > > > mind control more than anything else. The priesthood always
needed
> > > > something to *make themselves seem better or "more special," and
> > > > wearing
> > > > certain robes that no one else was able to wear was one way to
achieve
> > > > that, and thus achieve the control they wanted to maintain over
their
> > > > "flocks." Note that in most cults or religious orders, the
> > > > robes/costumes worn by "lower class monks" are usually different
and
> > > > less ornate and "special" than those worn by people higher up in
the
> > > > hierarchy. (Think the ludicrous costumes worn by TMO "Rajas")
This is
> > > > also about control.
> > > >
> > > > Making the monks and nuns wear costumes, period, is also an
aspect of
> > > > control freakdom, because the higher-ups want to remind them at
all
> > > > times tha

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense 
that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something 
wrong with what you did.
 

 And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If 
there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the 
first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat 
yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean 
you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever.
 

 My last sentence is what I mean--and what  most people (including the 
dictionary) mean--by "shame."
 
 Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary 
psychology and I agree with your last sentence.
 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an 
arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary 
says shame is:
 

 "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"

 

 I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.
 

 << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
 
   Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.

 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 01/14/2014

[Share Long]

noozguru, you have said a few times that TM mantras are good for pitta types. 
Maybe not so good for kapha or vata...





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 11:19 AM, Bhairitu  wrote:
 
  
I'm sure he did many times.  TM doesn't work for everybody.  He was into enough 
other things to try anyway.

On 01/18/2014 09:03 AM, Share Long wrote:

  
>noozguru, did your friend ever consider having his TM checked?!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:33 AM, Bhairitu  
>wrote:
> 
>  
>Not only that the people having these experiences are probably wondering why 
>others aren't.  I have a friend who has been doing TM for years but claims to 
>have only transcended twice.  Huh?
>
>On 01/15/2014 04:08 PM, Rick Archer
  wrote:
>
>  
>> 
>>From:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
>>Behalf Of jr_...@yahoo.com
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:50 PM
>>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on Buddha at the 
>>Gas Pump - 01/14/2014
>> 
>>  
>>Bhairitu,
>> 
>>IMO, these experiences of "celestial beings" may be due to hynogogia, a state 
>>of consciousness in between sleep and waking.  It would appear that 
>>meditation, for some people, may enhance or extend hynogogia into the waking 
>>state.  Thus, they appear to see or hallucinate visions in conjunction with 
>>ordinary activities during the day.
>>The folks I referred to in the interview see them all the time, very clearly, 
>>in the waking state. Although since they’re in an enlightened state, or 
>>whatever you’d like to call it, it’s not really the waking state. It’s what 
>>Maharishi predicted in his 7-states model: refined, “celestial” perception. 
>>Subtle or “celestial” beings are all around us, or in a parallel dimension. 
>>Most people just can’t see them because their perception is not sufficiently 
>>refined.
>
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[Share Long]

John, I think anything is possible even though some things are definitely more 
probable! Maybe she lead a very sheltered life and entered the convent at a 
very young age. I'm just sayin...anything is possible in this funny old world!





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:19 PM, "jr_...@yahoo.com"  
wrote:
 
  
She said that she didn't know she was pregnant.  Does anyone believe her?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> She said that she didn't know she was pregnant.  Does anyone believe
her?
>
> 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-fran\
cis_n_4619218.html


There have certainly been more outrageous lies that people believed.
Like anyone believing that Robin Carlsen was ever enlightened. Or even
sane.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

Say, emptybill, did you ever think about the possibility of actually answering 
a question rather than delivering yourself of faux koans? Because your 
persistent nonanswers leave one with the sense that you don't have any answers, 
you're just spouting off at random with no concern for making sense.
 

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

 Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.
 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology 
and I agree with your last sentence.




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an arbitrary 
distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame 
is:

"a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"


I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.



<< emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
 
  
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.


And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 

[FairfieldLife] Nun Gives Birth to Baby

[jr_esq]

She said that she didn't know she was pregnant.  Does anyone believe her? 
 

 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/17/nun-gives-birth-baby-italy-francis_n_4619218.html

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

That's your personal definition of "shame," Share. You're making an arbitrary 
distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame 
is:
 

 "a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or 
impropriety"

 

 I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something 
wrong, there's something wrong with you.
 

 << emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to 
make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something 
fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. 
>>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:
 
   Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.

 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] RE: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

Just as the confirmation of a prophecy rarely alters the direction of a 
group(10), so the death of the founder rarely proves fatal or leads to drastic 
alteration with the groups' life. But what does happen when the founder dies? 
Generally the same thing that happens in other types of organizations, that is, 
very simply, power passes to new leadership with more or less smoothness 
depending upon the extent and thoroughness of the preparation that has been 
made ahead of time.
 
 Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions
 J. Gordon Melton
 When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements
 By Timothy Miller 
260 pages
 

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

.turquoiseb wrote:
 

 .Buck wrote:

 

 

 >

 > Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for different folks. 

 > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of 
 > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? 

As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a 
few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," 
even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to 
do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I 
wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind 
of fun I felt like hanging around. 

 > Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his 
 > teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward 
 > with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not 
 > planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in 
 > some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? 
 > Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some 
 > of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. 

All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and 
thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. 

He left *NO* successors. He left *NO* successor organization, except a 
foundation to distribute the wealth he had accumulated to further the study of 
what he called "American Buddhism." They have -- to their credit -- spread this 
money around to a number of well-meaning and in many cases well-acting 
organizations to help do just that. 

There are a few people who have "set up shop" as spiritual teacher furthering 
his tradition. I know them all, and recommend none of them. I went out of my 
way to not be placed into the position of "speaking for Rama," and I personally 
think his "tradition" would be better served if more had done so. 

Some -- who IMO had become dependent on always having a guru or teacher 
available to "lead" them -- felt his absence strongly, and flocked to other 
teachers. Not surprisingly, some flocked to people I considered charlatans, 
because IMO *their* charlatan energy was similar to Rama's (Sathya Sai Baba and 
Adi Da, for example). Some were IMO wiser, and went for more traditional 
Tibetan teachers who I occasionally met and respected, just never felt any 
"pull" to study with. Me, I just went my own Way. 
 
In other words, it probably went similarly to what happened after MMY kicked 
the bucket, except that he didn't kick the bucket out from underneath himself. 
:-) 

It's always *amazing* to me to see how many of the ones who tried to continue 
on "teaching in Rama's name" don't even *mention* his suicide on their 
websites, or if they do, use the hideous euphemism "his Mahasamadhi." 

Give me a fuckin' break. Guy croaked himself. 

I'm *sure* he felt he ha

[FairfieldLife] RE: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

Introduction: When Prophets Die: The Succession Crisis in New Religions
 J. Gordon Melton
 When Prophets Die: The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements
 By Timothy Miller 
260 pages
 

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

.turquoiseb wrote:
 

 .Buck wrote:

 

 

 >

 > Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for different folks. 

 > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of 
 > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? 

As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a 
few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," 
even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to 
do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I 
wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind 
of fun I felt like hanging around. 

 > Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his 
 > teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward 
 > with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not 
 > planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in 
 > some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? 
 > Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some 
 > of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. 

All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and 
thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. 

He left *NO* successors. He left *NO* successor organization, except a 
foundation to distribute the wealth he had accumulated to further the study of 
what he called "American Buddhism." They have -- to their credit -- spread this 
money around to a number of well-meaning and in many cases well-acting 
organizations to help do just that. 

There are a few people who have "set up shop" as spiritual teacher furthering 
his tradition. I know them all, and recommend none of them. I went out of my 
way to not be placed into the position of "speaking for Rama," and I personally 
think his "tradition" would be better served if more had done so. 

Some -- who IMO had become dependent on always having a guru or teacher 
available to "lead" them -- felt his absence strongly, and flocked to other 
teachers. Not surprisingly, some flocked to people I considered charlatans, 
because IMO *their* charlatan energy was similar to Rama's (Sathya Sai Baba and 
Adi Da, for example). Some were IMO wiser, and went for more traditional 
Tibetan teachers who I occasionally met and respected, just never felt any 
"pull" to study with. Me, I just went my own Way. 
 
In other words, it probably went similarly to what happened after MMY kicked 
the bucket, except that he didn't kick the bucket out from underneath himself. 
:-) 

It's always *amazing* to me to see how many of the ones who tried to continue 
on "teaching in Rama's name" don't even *mention* his suicide on their 
websites, or if they do, use the hideous euphemism "his Mahasamadhi." 

Give me a fuckin' break. Guy croaked himself. 

I'm *sure* he felt he had reasons for doing so. Anyone with as established a 
history of NPD as Rama had could have easily come up with such reasons. But 
still, he had a choice, and in my opinion he made a bad one, heavily influenced 
by a drug called Valium that he foolishly tried to "kick" his dependence on 
"cold turkey," even though it says right on the label never to do this, 
*because of the risk of suicide*. 

At this point, I really am not the person you should ask as to whether there is 
much of 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make 
amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally 
wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong.





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, "emptyb...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.


And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning.
You should've gotten it.
 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.

[FairfieldLife] Classic Rock Movies

[Richard Williams]

Streets of Fire - A Rock & Roll Fable

[image: Inline image 2]

Nowhere Fast 1984 - Video
http://youtu.be/251zlGliwOQ

Movie Trailer:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088194/

Starring: Michael Oare, Diane Lane, Williamd Dafoe, Amy Madigan, Rick
Moranis, Deborah Van Valkenburgh, Elizabeth Daily
Director: Walter Hill
Music: Ry Cooder, The Sorels
Music producer: Jimmy Iovine

Universal Pictures DVD:

[image: Inline image 3]

1949 Mercury convertible:

[image: Inline image 4]

"The car that Cody drives in the movie is a 1951 Mercury that was chopped,
channeled, nosed, and decked. In addition, 12 1950 and 1951 model
Studebakers were used as police cars.[2] More than 50 motorcycles and their
drivers were featured as the Bombers and were chosen from 200 members of
real L.A.-based clubs like The Crusaders and The Heathens.

[image: Inline image 1]

Jimmy Iovine produced five of the songs for the film and the soundtrack
album.For Ellen Aim's singing voice, he combined the voices of Laurie
Sargent and Holly Sherwood, billing them as "Fire Incorporated." The
Attackers were the real-life (Face to Face) bandmates of Sargent, who
provided the lead vocals on Ellen Aim's songs "Never Be You" and "Sorcerer"
and supporting vocals on "Tonight Is What It Means to Be Young." The
version of "Sorcerer," written and composed by Stevie Nicks, that was
featured on the actual soundtrack album was performed by Marilyn Martin."

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streets_of_Fire

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

Right. So my "mistake" in being contemptuous of the idea that one should never 
feel shame for one's mistakes is what, exactly?
 

 Obviously one shouldn't be wallowing in shame after having been absolved, but 
if one isn't feeling any shame to start with, why would one seek absolution?
 

 
 This is the essence of confession (a renewal of baptism). It was originally a 
practice that started with ordinary people seeking out desert monastics who 
spent their live in askesis. Only later was it usurped by priests whose actual 
job was just the rite of absolution. 
 

 
 The belief of the Greek Church is naturally also that of the Russian in this 
regard. Russian Orthodox theologians all hold that the Church possesses the 
power to forgive sins, where there is true repentance and sincere confession. 
The form in use at present is as follows: 

 

 "My child, N. N., may our Lord and God Christ Jesus by the mercy of His love 
absolve thee from thy sins; and I, His unworthy priest, in virtue of the 
authority committed to me, absolve thee and declare thee absolved of thy sins 
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen."

[FairfieldLife] RE: Happy Happy 12 January

[dhamiltony2k5]

In 1974 these predictions were validated by scientific studies showing that in 
cities where one percent of the population learned the transcendental 
Meditation technique there was a sudden decrease in crime rates.
 

 By 1974 more than one million people throughout the world had learned the 
practice of Transcendental Meditation and were experiencing higher states of 
consciousness. With this, world consciousness was already becoming increasingly 
purified. Furthermore, people everywhere were experiencing the practical 
benefits of the development of higher states of consciousness in all aspects of 
their daily life, including greater happiness, peace, and harmony. A growing 
body of scientific research was validating the beneficial effects this practice 
had on all levels of mind, body, and behavior of the individual.
 

 It was at this time that research scientists discovered that in cities where 
one percent of the population was practicing Transcendental Meditation, the 
cities' crime rates decreased. As more and more cities rose to one percent of 
the population practicing Transcendental Meditation, scientific research found 
that not only did crime decrease, but accidents, sickness, and other negative 
trends also decreased, and positivity increased. Research scientists named this 
phenomenon the Maharishi Effect in honor of Maharishi.
 

 
 With this formula, Maharishi realized that it was now easily practical to 
produce positive trends in all cities throughout the world. With this 
inspiration, Maharishi envisioned a new age dawning for mankind. On 12 January 
1975, he inaugurated the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment proclaiming, “Through 
the window of science I see the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment.”
 

 This is the time of the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment. I am only giving 
expression to the phenomenon that is taking place.
 
 
 
 One percent of the people in any country can herald the dawn of a new age for 
the whole nation by devoting only fifteen minutes of their time twice a day.
 

 It is in the hands of a few individuals in every country today to change the 
direction of time and guide the destiny of their nation for all harmony, 
happiness, and progress.
 
 It is my joy to invite everyone to come in the light of the knowledge and 
experience that the Science of Creative Intelligence provides and enjoy 
participating in this global awakening to herald the Age of Enlightenment.
 
 
 -Maharishi
 
 
 12 January 1975

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

This is the essence of confession (a renewal of baptism). It was originally a 
practice that started with ordinary people seeking out desert monastics who 
spent their live in askesis. Only later was it usurped by priests whose actual 
job was just the rite of absolution. 
 

 
 The belief of the Greek Church is naturally also that of the Russian in this 
regard. Russian Orthodox theologians all hold that the Church possesses the 
power to forgive sins, where there is true repentance and sincere confession. 
The form in use at present is as follows: 

 

 "My child, N. N., may our Lord and God Christ Jesus by the mercy of His love 
absolve thee from thy sins; and I, His unworthy priest, in virtue of the 
authority committed to me, absolve thee and declare thee absolved of thy sins 
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen."

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[doctordumbass]

Works for me.
 

 

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

 Muktananda said Maharishi wasn't a personal Guru because he was taking care of 
(being the Guru of) the whole world.

[FairfieldLife] The Postcharismatic Fate of New Religious Movements.

[dhamiltony2k5]

 
 Turq, thanks for this thoughtful reply. I appreciate your frank insight. The 
experience reads like a condensed textbook example as to where new 
religion/spiritual groups can go (in life-cycle succession).   -Buck in the 
Dome 

 About
 [ Zen Master Rama was Frederick P. Lenz, ]
 http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html http://www.skepdic.com/rama.html
 

 

turquoiseb wrote:
 

 Buck wrote:
 >
> Turq, 
> 
> How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself 
> in? 

 I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, 
primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared 
my doubts about the whole thing, the "Don't you dare say anything negative 
about a previous spiritual teacher" or "Don't say anything bad about somebody 
who is...uh...dead" thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line 
parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same 
way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives 
around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that "set them free," and 
enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material 
or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset 
into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. 

In other words, different strokes for different folks. 

 > Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of 
 > organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? 

 As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a 
few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are "Rama's tradition," 
even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to 
do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I 
wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind 
of fun I felt like hanging around. 

 > Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his 
 > teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward 
 > with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not 
 > planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in 
 > some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? 
 > Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some 
 > of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. 

 All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and 
thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. 

He left *NO* successors. He left *NO* successor organization, except a 
foundation to distribute the wealth he had accumulated to further the study of 
what he called "American Buddhism." They have -- to their credit -- spread this 
money around to a number of well-meaning and in many cases well-acting 
organizations to help do just that. 

There are a few people who have "set up shop" as spiritual teacher furthering 
his tradition. I know them all, and recommend none of them. I went out of my 
way to not be placed into the position of "speaking for Rama," and I personally 
think his "tradition" would be better served if more had done so. 

Some -- who IMO had become dependent on always having a guru or teacher 
available to "lead" them -- felt his absence strongly, and flocked to other 
teachers. Not surprisingly, some flocked to people I considered charlatans, 
because IMO *their* charlatan energy was similar to Rama's (Sathya Sai Baba and 
Adi Da, for example). Some were IMO wiser, and went for more traditional 
Tibetan teachers who I occasionally met and respected, just never felt any 
"pull" to study with. Me, I just went my own Way. 
 
In other words, it probably went similarly to what happened after MMY kicked 
the bucket, except that he didn't kick the bucket out from underneath himself. 
:-) 

It's always *amazing* to me to see how many of the ones who tried to continue 
on "teaching in Rama's name" don't even *mention* his suicide on their 
websites, or if they do, use the hideous euphemism "his Mahasamadhi." 

Give me a fuckin' break. Guy croaked himself. 

I'm *sure* he felt he had reasons for doing so. Anyone with as established a 
history of NPD as Rama had could have easily come up with such reasons. But 
still, he had a choice, and in my opinion he made a bad one, heavily influenced 
by a drug called Valium that he foolishly tried to "kick" his dependence on 
"cold turkey," even though it says right on the label never to do this, 
*because of the risk of suicide*. 

At this point, I really am not the person you should ask as to whether there is 
much of a lingering "tradition" in his name. I'm sure there is, but I'm SO not 
part of it. Even if I wanted to be, I doubt I'd be allowed to be, because Road 
Trip Mind was not exactly what those who run such

[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> MMY was not a personal guru and said so many times. How could he, with
so many followers? At my TTC in Fiuggi, there were over 2,000 teachers.
Just getting the mantras of initiation took about 1-1/2 hours of waiting
to go through the whole process.
>
>  A personal guru (like Shri Yukteshwar) gives strict guideline to help
form the personality of a student. Self-evaluation is part of that
practice.
>
>  What MMY gave was simple - practice your own culture's ethics and
teach TM. He only gave a general outline about yama-niyama once (at
Humbolt TTC). He may have taught more elsewhere but he was moving the TM
Movement and that was his focus.
>
>  Robin probably didn't get anything more than anyone else.

Maharishi wouldn't have been *able* to give any advice to anyone having
actual experiences of higher states of consciousness, never having
experienced them himself. He did the same thing with everyone who ever
claimed such experiences -- blow them off with a hearty "Something good
is happening" and go back to selling beginner meditation to people who
thought it was advanced.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

"The first way of repentance is condemnation of sins. 'You must declare your 
own sins first that you may be justified.' Wherefore also the prophet said 'I 
said, I will speak out, my transgression to the Lord, and You remitted the 
iniquity of my heart.' Condemn yourself therefore for your own sins. This is 
enough for the Master by way of self-defense. For he who condemns his sins, is 
slower to fall into them again. Awake your conscience, that inward accuser, in 
order that you may have no accuser at the judgment seat of the Lord."--St. John 
Chrysostom
 
 << And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

 I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible. >>

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

So many World Teachers ... SBS, MMY and Robin.

How many world teachers does it take to liberate everyone?
None.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[nablusoss1008]

Muktananda said Maharishi wasn't a personal Guru because he was taking care of 
(being the Guru of) the whole world.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

How many followers did Maharishi have who had an experience similar to Robin's 
of popping into what seemed to be Unity Consciousness without any warning in 
the space of a minute or two?
 

 It's one thing not to give personal attention to thousands of grunts slogging 
along with their sadhana. It's quite another not to give personal attention to 
the person out of all those grunts who suddenly appeared to have achieved the 
very pinnacle of what the grunts were working toward.
 
 MMY was not a personal guru and said so many times. How could he, with so many 
followers? At my TTC in Fiuggi, there were over 2,000 teachers. Just getting 
the mantras of initiation took about 1-1/2 hours of waiting to go through the 
whole process. 

 

 A personal guru (like Shri Yukteshwar) gives strict guideline to help form the 
personality of a student. Self-evaluation is part of that practice. 

 

 What MMY gave was simple - practice your own culture's ethics and teach TM. He 
only gave a general outline about yama-niyama once (at Humbolt TTC). He may 
have taught more elsewhere but he was moving the TM Movement and that was his 
focus. 
 

 Robin probably didn't get anything more than anyone else. 




 

 

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

 If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the 
disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary?
 

 FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after 
he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin 
didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if 
Maharishi had offered it.
 

 Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would 
have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted 
to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin 
once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even 
told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing 
trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing.
 

 I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what 
ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach.
 

 << emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for 
a teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin? >>
 

 This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana 
(practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and 
“gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations 
necessary for real sadhana. 
 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 




 

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 

 I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.

[FairfieldLife] RE: "The Bridge" SE on Hulu

[nablusoss1008]

Like all the B-films the Turq recommends The Bridge is boring. The director has 
a seemingly neverending fascination for syndrome's like Asberger and creates a 
character (Saga Norlen) that glues people to the TV giving them their own 
"square-eyed-syndrome" eagerly awaiting what next crazy thing Saga will utter. 
Add to that a completely non-believable story and all you are left with a big 
yawn.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Great Country Classics

[Richard Williams]

Waylon Jennings

[image: Inline image 2]

Live in Austin, Texas - April 1, 1989 - Austin City Limits
http://youtu.be/nZvqQMeOEd8

Luckenbach, Texas (Back to the Basics of Love) Live
http://youtu.be/3dXR5Dk8YNw

[image: Inline image 1]

We went to this place - Luckenbach, Texas, USA

Good Hearted Woman
http://youtu.be/NvlE14cM-zk

Mammas Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Cowboys
http://youtu.be/rhRqDvP-mwM

"Waylon Jennings was born in Littlefield, Texas, the seat of Lamb County.
He released critically acclaimed albums Lonesome, On'ry and Mean and Honky
Tonk Heroes, followed by hit albums Dreaming My Dreams and Are You Ready
for the Country.

In 1976 he released the album Wanted! The Outlaws with Willie Nelson,
Tompall Glaser, and Jessi Colter, the first platinum country music album.
The success of the album was followed by Ol' Waylon, and the hit song
“Luckenbach, Texas (Back to the Basics of Love)."

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waylon_Jennings


On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 8:05 PM,  wrote:

>
>
> That I like. And kudos to the composer. But the Patsy Cline version is
> one of my favourite songs.
>
>
> Talking country: here in the UK and Ireland Jim Reeves was mega-huge.
> Probably a bigger star than in the States. I especially liked the "dub"
> song Distant Drums.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AqESKOaeGk
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

MMY was not a personal guru and said so many times. How could he, with so many 
followers? At my TTC in Fiuggi, there were over 2,000 teachers. Just getting 
the mantras of initiation took about 1-1/2 hours of waiting to go through the 
whole process. 

 

 A personal guru (like Shri Yukteshwar) gives strict guideline to help form the 
personality of a student. Self-evaluation is part of that practice. 

 

 What MMY gave was simple - practice your own culture's ethics and teach TM. He 
only gave a general outline about yama-niyama once (at Humbolt TTC). He may 
have taught more elsewhere but he was moving the TM Movement and that was his 
focus. 
 

 Robin probably didn't get anything more than anyone else. 




 

 

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

 If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the 
disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary?
 

 FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after 
he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin 
didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if 
Maharishi had offered it.
 

 Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would 
have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted 
to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin 
once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even 
told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing 
trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing.
 

 I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what 
ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach.
 

 << emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for 
a teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin? >>
 

 This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana 
(practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and 
“gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations 
necessary for real sadhana. 
 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 




 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

I knew Barry wouldn't be able to resist the opportunity to demonize Robin and 
me after I commented on Michael's post. I also knew he'd fuck it up badly, 
which is precisely what he's done. He thinks he can divine what I'm "trying to 
say" without having read what I actually said (or what Robin actually said, for 
that matter). One more time: Robin took all the blame for his behavior (and I'm 
certainly in no position to disagree). Unlike Barry, Robin believes in being 
accountable for one's actions.
 
 > if you don't understand how people make excuses for then own behavior then 
 > you need more life experience - do you think just because someone says 
 > something, they are being truthful, including with themselves?

 I think Judy's trying to say that if a delusional person firmly *believes* 
that they are being made to do something by forces outside their control, 
they're blameless. She and Robin both probably believe that the real culprit in 
the "Son Of Sam" murders was the demon who talked to David Berkowitz through 
his neighbor's dog.  :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

Maybe your experience isn't the be-all and end-all for everybody, Share, not to 
mention that you haven't had the sort of sudden profoundly transformative 
experience Robin had. In any case, Robin got all kinds of positive feedback; 
nobody questioned his enlightenment. "Life" didn't make it obvious, or even 
evident, that self-evaluation was needed until years down the line when his 
group fell apart--and once that happened, he embarked on 25 years of 
self-evaluation and self-reform.
 

 Also, I can't imagine a teacher not at least offering guidance to a disciple 
whose experience of himself and of the world has been so utterly and 
unexpectedly changed without any preparation, even if the disciple doesn't ask 
for it.

 

 FWIW, Robin has never blamed Maharishi for what happened to him. That was my 
suggestion, not his. Robin has never blamed anyone but himself.
 

 And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's 
mistakes contemptible.
 
 << Judy, I don't think self evaluation is something that a disciple needs to 
demand. In my experience, life makes it obvious when self evaluation is needed! 
On second thought, I think empty meant that if the guru emphasizes experience, 
meaning spiritual experience, then the disciple will go with that, perhaps 
ignoring the feedback he or she is getting from life, from all the other 
experiences he or she is having, assuming that one is have more than just 
spiritual experiences since one is still in a body!

It could be that Maharishi realized that, as you say above, Robin thought he 
didn't need guidance and thus Maharishi didn't offer it. 

Many people, myself included, have gone outside of the TMO to get what we need 
in terms of healing and continuing human development. As I've said before, that 
I've been able to do this proves to me that the TMO is not a cult.

IMO it's good if people simply learn from their mistakes without the need to 
blame and or feel ashamed of their mistakes. >>
 

 
 
 On Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:48 AM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:
 
   If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can 
the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary?
 

 FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after 
he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin 
didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if 
Maharishi had offered it.
 

 Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would 
have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted 
to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin 
once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even 
told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing 
trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing.
 

 I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what 
ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach.
 

 << emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for 
a teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin? >>
 

 This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana 
(practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and 
“gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations 
necessary for real sadhana. 
 
 

 




 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

[FairfieldLife] The Himalayan Times: 'Transcendental meditation for internal peace'

[nablusoss1008]

http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=%27Transcendental+meditation+for+internal+peace%27&NewsID=402806
 
http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=%27Transcendental+meditation+for+internal+peace%27&NewsID=402806

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 01/14/2014

[Bhairitu]

I'm sure he did many times.  TM doesn't work for everybody.  He was into 
enough other things to try anyway.


On 01/18/2014 09:03 AM, Share Long wrote:

noozguru, did your friend ever consider having his TM checked?!



On Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:33 AM, Bhairitu 
 wrote:
Not only that the people having these experiences are probably 
wondering why others aren't.  I have a friend who has been doing TM 
for years but claims to have only transcended twice.  Huh?


On 01/15/2014 04:08 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
*From:*FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 
[mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of 
*jr_...@yahoo.com 

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:50 PM
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 

*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on 
Buddha at the Gas Pump - 01/14/2014

Bhairitu,
IMO, these experiences of "celestial beings" may be due to hynogogia, 
a state of consciousness in between sleep and waking.  It would 
appear that meditation, for some people, may enhance or extend 
hynogogia into the waking state.  Thus, they appear to see or 
hallucinate visions in conjunction with ordinary activities during 
the day.
The folks I referred to in the interview see them all the time, very 
clearly, in the waking state. Although since they’re in an 
enlightened state, or whatever you’d like to call it, it’s not really 
the waking state. It’s what Maharishi predicted in his 7-states 
model: refined, “celestial” perception. Subtle or “celestial” beings 
are all around us, or in a parallel dimension. Most people just can’t 
see them because their perception is not sufficiently refined.

[FairfieldLife] "The Bridge" SE on Hulu

[Bhairitu]

You've read Turq rant and rave about it, now season one of the original 
Swedish/Danish version of "The Bridge" is available on Hulu.  This is 
the series that the FX series is based on.
http://www.hulu.com/the-bridge-se

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

LSD still comes in tabs? 
 

 How would you know that?
 Perhaps you read about it on MSLSD.
 

 (disclaimer for the NSA snoops: I don't know nothin' bout nothin')

 

 

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump - 01/14/2014

[Share Long]

noozguru, did your friend ever consider having his TM checked?!





On Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:33 AM, Bhairitu  wrote:
 
  
Not only that the people having these experiences are probably wondering why 
others aren't.  I have a friend who has been doing TM for years but claims to 
have only transcended twice.  Huh?

On 01/15/2014 04:08 PM, Rick Archer wrote:

  
> 
>From:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
>Behalf Of jr_...@yahoo.com
>Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:50 PM
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John Hagelin: New Interview on Buddha at the 
>Gas Pump - 01/14/2014
> 
>  
>Bhairitu,
> 
>IMO, these experiences of "celestial beings" may be due to hynogogia, a state 
>of consciousness in between sleep and waking.  It would appear that 
>meditation, for some people, may enhance or extend hynogogia into the waking 
>state.  Thus, they appear to see or hallucinate visions in conjunction with 
>ordinary activities during the day.
>The folks I referred to in the interview see them all the time, very clearly, 
>in the waking state. Although since they’re in an enlightened state, or 
>whatever you’d like to call it, it’s not really the waking state. It’s what 
>Maharishi predicted in his 7-states model: refined, “celestial” perception. 
>Subtle or “celestial” beings are all around us, or in a parallel dimension. 
>Most people just can’t see them because their perception is not sufficiently 
>refined.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Religion that doesn't take itself deadly seriously

[dhamiltony2k5]

Yep, out of balance fucking and gone fucking too far Over-Secularization; Heck, 
we're talking bad upbringing that allows for all this destructive spirituality 
of ill-disciplined over-sexualization. What are parents thinking when they let 
their offspring dress like they do? A lot of children will spend the rest of 
their adult lives in recovery straightening out their subtle-energy bodies for 
all the spiritual negligence of their parents and the predatory nature of 
modern societal spirituality over the modern family unit. Such materialism in 
exploitation on such early ages is completely appalling and demoralizing 
spirituality.   Firstly, in public policy we certainly need a lot more 
meditation everywhere to bring better coherence to everyone everywhere. Git 
thee to a group meditation near you and nurture spiritual Nature for a change. 
Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité, long live the French and their high-mindedness in 
looking after the welfare of their children if the parents of these exploited 
children will not do it.  Spiritually criminal parents subjecting their 
children to the exploitation of adolescent beauty-pageant-ing should certainly 
have their children taken away from them and have them be sent directly to the 
care of consciousness-based schools in the hopes of reforming any moral damage 
from such adolescent pageantry forced upon these children.  We all should have 
a large public interest in protecting the welfare of children this way,
 
 -Buck 
 

 jedi_spock wrote:

 

 deification of women by asymmetric 
dress-codes, or putting them on a pedestal, inversely 
stereotypes them and puts severe limitations on them. It's 
almost a form of reverse slavery.

In other words, hyper-sexualisation of women is as bad as 
de-sexualisaton of women.  Western society is as imbalanced 
as eastern societies.



 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424462/France-bans-girls-beauty-contests-bid-stop-hyper-sexualisation-children.htmlhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424462/France-bans-
 girls-beauty-contests-bid-stop-hyper-sexualisation-children. html 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424462/France-bans-girls-beauty-contests-bid-stop-hyper-sexualisation-children.html
  

http://www.thehindu.com/features/magazine/sexualisation-of-t 
he-western-woman/article4414595.ece 
http://www.thehindu.com/features/magazine/sexualisation-of-the-western-woman/article4414595.ece
 

 

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

 
 >  > >
> > > --- s3raphita wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The line "I am a great believer in the uni-sex dress-code" was
> > > > copied over (by Yahoo not me!) from a post by Jason. I don't 
> > > > advocate any dress
> > > > codes. Jason can defend that view if he wishes.
> > >
> > --- "TurquoiseB" turquoiseb@ wrote:
 > > >
 > > > Just in case you were wondering, I understood that, and so my rap this
> > > morning was a reply to Jason as much as it was Buck, who tried to
> > > springboard off of it with more of his "gotta keep the sinners in line
> > > any way we can" horseshit.
> > >
> > > I don't advocate any kind of dress code, but *especially* one that
> > > tries to make women or men look sexless. I, for one, would love to 
> > > hear Jason defend that idea, and doubt that he could.
> > >
> > > I extended my rap to cover the uniforms worn by various religious
> > > groups and cults. Historically, such "uniforms" (special dress for 
> > > priests,
> > > monks, or nuns, or even "recommended dress" for lay people) are about
> > > mind control more than anything else. The priesthood always needed
> > > something to *make themselves seem better or "more special," and
> > > wearing
> > > certain robes that no one else was able to wear was one way to achieve
> > > that, and thus achieve the control they wanted to maintain over their
> > > "flocks." Note that in most cults or religious orders, the
> > > robes/costumes worn by "lower class monks" are usually different and
> > > less ornate and "special" than those worn by people higher up in the
> > > hierarchy. (Think the ludicrous costumes worn by TMO "Rajas") This is
> > > also about control.
> > >
> > > Making the monks and nuns wear costumes, period, is also an aspect of
> > > control freakdom, because the higher-ups want to remind them at all
> > > times that they are part of an org that is better and more powerful
> > > than they are, and to remind them of their "vows," meaning their
> > > willingness to follow rules laid on them by other people.
> > >
> > > One thing I think you'll find if you look into it is that those on
> > > this
> > > forum recommending "uniforms" for monks, nuns, and other members of
> > > religious or spiritual organizations have in most cases never been
> > > actual *members* of such organizations. In other words, they're trying
> > > to justify rules they never followed.
> > >
> > > Similarly, when people like Jason mouth off about "unisex" clothing, I
> > > think you'll find that they're always

[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson  wrote:
>
> if you don't understand how people make excuses for then own behavior
then you need more life experience - do you think just because someone
says something, they are being truthful, including with themselves?

I think Judy's trying to say that if a delusional person firmly
*believes* that they are being made to do something by forces outside
their control, they're blameless. She and Robin both probably believe
that the real culprit in the "Son Of Sam" murders was the demon who
talked to David Berkowitz through his neighbor's dog.  :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[awoelflebater]

 

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

 If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the 
disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary?
 

 FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after 
he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin 
didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if 
Maharishi had offered it.
 

 Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would 
have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted 
to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin 
once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even 
told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing 
trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing.
 

 I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what 
ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach.
 

 I would have to say that if someone is putting someone else in a position 
where they might be able to access other states of consciousness, where their 
reality, their orientation to their world and their life can be substantially 
altered by this "new" state of consciousness then this person who is, in some 
sense, engineering or facilitating this change needs to follow through and 
guide the newcomer within these altered/higher/different states. To give 
someone a tab of LSD and then leave them to their own devices is only asking 
for trouble if the 'tripper' becomes confused or freaked out or afraid. You 
wouldn't hand a kid the keys to a bulldozer or put your grandmother on an 
unbroke horse. Why would/should a spiritual teacher lead one to the precipice 
of enlightenment and simply turn away and leave? If a teacher has the 
'technology' to offer someone the means for such a drastic change their life 
then they have a responsibility to guide them within the new landscape of their 
consciousness.
 

 << emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for 
a teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin? >>
 

 This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana 
(practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and 
“gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations 
necessary for real sadhana. 
 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

Judy, I don't think self evaluation is something that a disciple needs to 
demand. In my experience, life makes it obvious when self evaluation is needed! 
On second thought, I think empty meant that if the guru emphasizes experience, 
meaning spiritual experience, then the disciple will go with that, perhaps 
ignoring the feedback he or she is getting from life, from all the other 
experiences he or she is having, assuming that one is have more than just 
spiritual experiences since one is still in a body!

It could be that Maharishi realized that, as you say above, Robin thought he 
didn't need guidance and thus Maharishi didn't offer it. 

Many people, myself included, have gone outside of the TMO to get what we need 
in terms of healing and continuing human development. As I've said before, that 
I've been able to do this proves to me that the TMO is not a cult.

IMO it's good if people simply learn from their mistakes without the need to 
blame and or feel ashamed of their mistakes.





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:48 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the 
disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary?

FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after 
he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin 
didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if 
Maharishi had offered it.

Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would 
have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted 
to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin 
once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even 
told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing 
trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing.

I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what 
ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach.



<< emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for 
a teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin? >>


This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of
sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old
theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the 
self-evaluations
necessary for real sadhana. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[authfriend]

If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the 
disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary?
 

 FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after 
he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin 
didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if 
Maharishi had offered it.
 

 Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would 
have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted 
to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin 
once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even 
told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing 
trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing.
 

 I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what 
ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach.
 

 << emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for 
a teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin? >>
 

 This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana 
(practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and 
“gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations 
necessary for real sadhana. 
 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: If You Could Travel at the Speed of Light...

[Share Long]

John, you're probably right but I'm not sure I should travel with Venus retro 
transiting my third house (-:





On Friday, January 17, 2014 11:56 AM, "jr_...@yahoo.com"  
wrote:
 
  
Share,

You should take a few weeks and take a vacation in San Diego to get away from 
the snow.  You should stay in La Jolla to bask in the sun and breathe the ocean 
air.  I used to work in a building overlooking the beach over there.  It was 
fun watching the hang-gliders pass by the office window.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Mesmerizing... As we await the final collapse of capitalism, that dreadful system

[Share Long]

Wow, Nablusoss, that statement's just radical enough to probably be true. 
However, I'll let it simmer on the back burner of my brain for a while, see 
what rises to the surface...




On Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:39 AM, nablusoss1008 
 wrote:
 
  
Everything that is good and human is related to the downfall of capitalism :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Mesmerizing... As we await the final collapse of capitalism, that dreadful system

[nablusoss1008]

Everything that is good and human is related to the downfall of capitalism :-)

[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[emptybill]

 Prof. P. Dog sez:
 

 MMY's sadhana is based on yoga practice. If it was Vedantic, MMY would have 
emphasized the Vedantic notion of maya, which is not real, yet not unreal. 

 

 Your view of Vedanta is that it is Maya-vada ... a teaching about Maya. This 
is a classical misrepresentation that began with Ramanuja and continues today. 
It infiltrated Vedanta with the works of Swami Vidyaranya, who wrote 
Panchadasi. 

 

 Its modern proponent was Vivekananda and MMY just continued that mode – 
including the division of the Bha. Gita into three topical sections, also found 
in Aurobindo. This form of interpretation is known as Yogic Advaita and is more 
about yoga and less about Vedanta. 
 

 The whole concept of “enlightenment” is Buddhist not Vedantic. Shankara’s 
Vedanta teaches the ascertainment of one’s own true nature, not 
chitta-nirvikalpa or Buddhist dhyana-samadhi. The purpose of the teaching is 
realization of moksha (freedom) - liberation from any experience, whether 
inner, outer or transcendent. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Michael Jackson]

If you mean the kind of scientific objectivity that the TMO uses, anything goes.

On Sat, 1/18/14, Richard Williams  wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
 To: "Richard J. Williams" 
 Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 2:39 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Michael
 Jackson:> I do
 think some folk have done it like maybe good old Saint
 Joseph of 
 > Cupertino and am willing to
 believe Rama may have done, as the
 Brits > say. 
 >So,if
 anyone could really demonstrate levitation, the event would
 probably be on the cover of every science magazine, on TV
 and in the news every day for years.An levitation event that
 if true, would revolutionize science and cause a Copernican
 revolution in he laws of physics and the theory of general
 relativity. But, this event seems to have been missed -
 it's not even mentioned in Mark Laxer's book about
 Rama. Go figure.
 
 > M never demonstrated cause
 he couldn't do it.>
 According to your own logic it
 could have been possible for MMY to hop, levitate float and
 fly,even if nobody saw the event. You
 realize you and Barry have just blown any semblance of
 scientific objectivity, right? Maybe it's time for you
 two to apologize for posting all those fibs making fun of
 the TMer "bun-hoppers" on the forum.
 
 
 
 
 
 On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Michael Jackson 
 wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Oh, I see that you mean. As to my own belief, I
 made no comment on the reality of Lenz's levitation
 demonstration. I have done TMSP and it certainly doesn't
 qualify as flying in any way. I do think some folk have done
 it like maybe good old Saint Joseph of Cupertino and am
 willing to believe Rama may have done, as the Brits say. M
 never demonstrated cause he couldn't do it.
 
 
 
 
 On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams 
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible
 thing.
 
  To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
  Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:05 PM
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
  
 

 
  
 
  
 
  
 

 

 
On 1/17/2014 9:46 AM, Michael Jackson wrote:
 
  
 
  > "It looks like you've changed your mind
 about
 
  the 
 
  
 
  > bun-hopping-levitation too."
 
  
 
  >
 
  
 
  > I have no idea why you would say that. 
 
  
 
   >
 
  
 
  Well, it's settled then - humans can fly and levitate;
 
  we have several 
 
  
 
  eye-witnesses on the forum who can testify to this. So, I
 
  wonder why 
 
  
 
  Barry was making fun of MMY and the bun-hopping? Go
 figure.
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 

 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Essential Jazz

[Richard Williams]

Herbie Mann

[image: Inline image 2]

Comin' Home Baby - Live at the Village Gate, 1961
http://youtu.be/jiCV4Xna684

Wailing Dervishes
http://youtu.be/M0mcII-mE4g

[image: Inline image 1]

Live at the Village Gate:

Herbie Mann - Flute
Hagood Hardy - Vibraharp
Ahmad Abdul-Malik , Ben Tucker - Bass
Rudy Collins - Drums
Ray Mantilla - Conga Drums, Percussion
Chief Bey - African Drum, Percussion

"Herbie Mann, was an American jazz flautist and important early
practitioner of world music. Mann emphasized the groove approach in his
music."

Read more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbie_Mann


On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Richard Williams wrote:

> Charles Mingus Jr.
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> Better Get Hit in Yo' Soul - Track One, from the album "Mingus Ah Um" -
> Vinyl
> http://www.youtube.com/
>
> [image: Inline image 2]
>
> Sue's Changes - Live At Montreux, 1975
> http://youtu.be/jOWNkZrkLfk
>
> "Charles Mingus Jr. was a highly influential American jazz double bassist,
> composer and bandleader. Mingus's compositions retained the hot and soulful
> feel of hard bop and drew heavily from black gospel music while sometimes
> drawing on elements of Third Stream, free jazz, and classical music. Yet
> Mingus avoided categorization, forging his own brand of music that fused
> tradition with unique and unexplored realms of jazz."
>
> Read more:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Mingus
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Richard J. Williams  > wrote:
>
>>  Good point, but I don't get into the personalities of any of these guys
>> very much. Lots of jazz players were really screwed up on drugs and some
>> had questionable ethical behavior as well. Most of the time I just listen
>> to the music and enjoy. For me, it's not about the personalities, it's all
>> about the music. Thanks for the reply.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/18/2013 9:32 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard,
>>
>>
>>  Stan Gets was a great tenor sax player.  His solos were exquisite and
>> creative.  But one of his friends called him a "nice bunch of guys",
>> apparently referring to his unpredictable personality quirks.
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[nablusoss1008]

 According to Mr. Benjamin Crème the state of evolution of Lenz at the time of 
death was 1,3. In other words far from enlightened. 
 He was at a "lower" level than John Lennon (1,6) and Frank Zappa (1,4) but 
"higher" than Marilyn Monroe (0,9) and Elvis Presley (0,8)
 

 http://www.share-berlin.info/list.htm http://www.share-berlin.info/list.htm
 

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Mesmerizing... As we await the final collapse of capitalism, that dreadful system

[Share Long]

thanks, Nablusoss, these are beautiful. However, I couldn't quite figure out 
how they are related to the collapse of capitalism.





On Saturday, January 18, 2014 9:57 AM, nablusoss1008  
wrote:
 
  



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2gAI-4SJ8w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykbZ_Sk-xfY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2_EkiWp1FM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbcKO92OGNI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw_H8n7ZQEY&list=RDMxTt0UDDBmA

[FairfieldLife] Mesmerizing... As we await the final collapse of capitalism, that dreadful system

[nablusoss1008]

 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2gAI-4SJ8w 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2gAI-4SJ8w
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykbZ_Sk-xfY 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykbZ_Sk-xfY
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2_EkiWp1FM 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2_EkiWp1FM
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbcKO92OGNI 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbcKO92OGNI
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw_H8n7ZQEY&list=RDMxTt0UDDBmA 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw_H8n7ZQEY&list=RDMxTt0UDDBmA

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.

[Share Long]

emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a 
teacher to cheat a disciple "out of the self-evaluations necessary for real 
sadhana." Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is 
what happened to Robin?





On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:58 PM, "emptyb...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Michael sez:
 
"Robin's experience was that his actions were, as
it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever
he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did,
even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do
what he was doing."
 
So bottom line I don't buy Robin's assertion that he
in essence was forced to behave in this way by these "forces." That
excuse goes back as long as we have had the idea of a Devil. 
 
Emptybill replies:
 
Robin never was interested in
a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. All of this,
in spite of the fact that Shankara’s Vedanta was the proffered basis of
Maharishi’s tradition. Such an assessment would have presented an opposite view
about this whole “enlightenment meme”. I pointed this out to Robin a number of
times but he wasn’t interested in hearing about it. Rather he just wanted to 
espouse
his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by “cosmic entities” but was now
free of them. More of the old - “I didn’t fail … I was fooled” as you also 
pointed
out. 
 
This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of
sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old
theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the 
self-evaluations
necessary for real sadhana.