Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
From: curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, It sounds like you have not transcended thoughts at all. C: And what could you possibly basing that on? Just because I have not come to the conclusions you have about the experience? Do you really think that in my 15 years of practice with 4 solid years of rounding including 8 hour a day sessions at sidhaland I might not have experienced what Maharishi was going for with his techniques? The very first stage of his magical mystery tour? J: As such, you have not experienced Being. It appears that you still have a doubt in your mind, which is a thought in itself. Or, if it isn't doubt, it's the idea of denial of experiencing Being, which is a thought in itself. C: You do know we are having this conversation outside the meditaiton itself right? It would be like me claiming that you had never transcended because you are laying this trip on me, so that is a thought and therefor you never transcended. I get it. It is disturbing for you to consider that someone might have had the predicted experiences from Maharishi's programs and conclude something different than you about what it all means. I'm staying out of this, because it's by far the lamest, dumbfuck post ever made to FFL, and lowers my already-low opinion of John and his thinking abilities. But if I were to venture a guess at the reason behind his ill-disguised hatred of atheists and need to consign them in his mind to a lower class -- one SO low they can't even transcend -- the thing that has his panties in a twist is my post the other day reminding folks that at least two of the self-avowed non-theists on this forum have had strong enlightenment experiences lasting for weeks, months, and possibly years. My guess is that's what got his panties twisted, because after all this time believing in God and all this time practicing TM, he's never had a CC experience that lasted more than a second or so, and that only in meditation, with eyes closed. In other words, my guess at what's motivating this topic is jealousy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
You're assuming that transcending means letting go of a specific kind of thought, rather than thoughts i general. Thoughts are transcended during TM not because we hold onto specific thoughts during TM, but because we have been taught that it isn't necessary to attempt to control the mind during TM practice so we stop trying to control what happens next. Given the correct circumstances, aka starting TM, the mind will automatically start to settle down. That is all transcending means. Now, it is possible that the nervous system will settle down to the point where there are abrupt and obvious changes in breathing and heart rate and alpha-1 EEG coherence which researchers believe are due to an abrupt change in activity in certain parts of the thalamus, but that has nothing to do with belief, but only with specific conditions in the thalamus triggered, at times, by TM-practice. And the thalamus doesn't think or have beliefs, according to any theory I have heard. It is an important data switching center and helps regulate states of consciousness, breathing, etc., but doesn't do much data-processing in any way that would be related to belief. Belief and not-belief are influences on TM only so much as they interfere with allowing the practice to go on its own. Far more detrimental to TM is the internet habit of seeking out the online version of the Teacher Training notes available online and mentally correlating that with what you are taught, as you are taught. This likely sets up extraneous connections in parts of the brain that wouldn't exist in people who learned TM without having first read the TT notes, and likely disrupts the activity that effortlessly thinking the mantra brings to bear in a localized way simply because there's so little prior intellectual connections established to bring more distant centers of the brain into play when meditation activity happens. Innocence of practice may well have a genuine physical significance. On the other hand, one could also argue that obsessively worrying about when one will encounter God during TM is far more detrimental to the practice of TM than not worrying about God in the first place. I would say that a non-believer, all other things being equal, is more likely to transcend than a Believer. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Lawson, What is wrong with the statement that I made? Please, explain. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I think you're in the wrong meditation discussion forum or that you need to go get checked. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Why? Because they can't let go of the idea that God doesn't exist. What do you think?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Barry, My comments are shown in red letters below: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, It sounds like you have not transcended thoughts at all. C: And what could you possibly basing that on? Just because I have not come to the conclusions you have about the experience? Do you really think that in my 15 years of practice with 4 solid years of rounding including 8 hour a day sessions at sidhaland I might not have experienced what Maharishi was going for with his techniques? The very first stage of his magical mystery tour? J: As such, you have not experienced Being. It appears that you still have a doubt in your mind, which is a thought in itself. Or, if it isn't doubt, it's the idea of denial of experiencing Being, which is a thought in itself. C: You do know we are having this conversation outside the meditaiton itself right? It would be like me claiming that you had never transcended because you are laying this trip on me, so that is a thought and therefor you never transcended. I get it. It is disturbing for you to consider that someone might have had the predicted experiences from Maharishi's programs and conclude something different than you about what it all means. I'm staying out of this, because it's by far the lamest, dumbfuck post ever made to FFL, and lowers my already-low opinion of John and his thinking abilities. JR: I'm glad you're staying out of the discussion since you consider yourself to be not an atheist, but a non-theist. This may be surprising to you. But I do understand the logic behind your thinking in this regard. But if I were to venture a guess at the reason behind his ill-disguised hatred of atheists and need to consign them in his mind to a lower class -- one SO low they can't even transcend -- the thing that has his panties in a twist is my post the other day reminding folks that at least two of the self-avowed non-theists on this forum have had strong enlightenment experiences lasting for weeks, months, and possibly years. My guess is that's what got his panties twisted, because after all this time believing in God and all this time practicing TM, he's never had a CC experience that lasted more than a second or so, and that only in meditation, with eyes closed. JR: It may be surprising to you, but I really don't read all of your posts since I already know what you're going to say which you've repeated countless of times in this forum. I'm glad that you mentioned that there are two non-theists in this forum who have had enlightenment experiences. I only know of you as one. Who is the other one? Nonetheless, if you are saying you've had enlightenment experiences, I would highly question your assertions. It's my guess that you've experienced Barry-being and not Being. Unlike you, I don't pretend to say to everyone that I've reached cosmic consciousness. And yes, I have not seen anyone levitate, unlike you of course. In other words, my guess at what's motivating this topic is jealousy. No, I'm not jealous of anyone's experiences here. I'm just pointing out the contradictory statements being mentioned by some individuals, including you, when compared to MMY's definition of transcending and Being, as shown in SBAL and his comments on the Bhagavad Gita.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
Just to follow up... From: TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com But if you were trying to say that I consider America the most creative in the arts, that is simply not true. I consider a tiny, tiny portion of American TV and movie content good enough to watch. The best and most consistently creative television in the world is being made in Denmark right now, with other parts of Scandinavia close behind. Many of the TV series you probably consider American and thus creative were pure ripoffs of Danish TV series, from The Killing to The Bridge to (soon) Mammon. There is no creativity in remaking a foreign TV series, and succeeding only in making a shittier version in English. It's amusing for me to notice -- especially after my tiny, tiny portion comment above -- that of the 105 American TV series on the following list of either canceled or renewed shows, I regularly watch only one of the canceled shows ( Crisis, and I watched it only so I could lust after Gillian Anderson :-), and only watch 5 of the renewed shows. This is amusing to me because when I was writing my original reply to Steve, I was considering invoking Sturgeon's Law to describe American television. That law, named for the scifi writer who coined it, Theodore Sturgeon, is as true today as it was when he first quipped it back in the 1950s: 90% of everything is crap. Well, it turns out that I only bother to watch about 5% of the TV shows on American broadcast channels. :-) UPDATE (May 10 at 3:30 p.m.): NBC canceled Dracula. UPDATE (May 10 at 3 p.m.): ABC renewed Last Man Standing. UPDATE (May 10 at 2:10 p.m.): CBS renewed The Mentalist for a seventh season and canceled Intelligence, Hostages, The Crazy Ones, Bad Teacher and Friends With Better Lives. CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community Crisis Growing Up Fisher Revolution The Michael J. Fox Show Sean Saves The World Welcome To The Family Ironside FOX Dads Rake Surviving Jack Enlisted Raising Hope The X Factor Almost Human ABC Suburgatory Trophy Wife Super Fun Night Lucky 7 Mind Games Mixology Once Upon A Time In Wonderland Killer Woman Betrayal The Assets Back In The Game The Neighbors CBS We Are Men The CW The Carrie Diaries Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC About A Boy The Blacklist Chicago PD Grimm Chicago Fire Hannibal Law Order: SVU Parks Recreation The Voice FOX Bob's Burgers Bones American Idol Brooklyn Nine-Nine Family Guy Glee Hell's Kitchen MasterChef Junior The Following The Mindy Project New Girl Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Nashville Scandal Castle The Bachelor Dancing With The Stars Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. The Middle Modern Family Revenge Shark Tank Once Upon A Time Resurrection Grey's Anatomy The Goldbergs America's Funniest Home Videos CBS 2 Broke Girls The Amazing Race The Big Bang Theory Blue Bloods Criminal Minds CSI 48 Hours 60 Minutes Elementary The Good Wife Hawaii Five-0 Mike Molly Undercover Boss NCIS The Millers Mom NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest Survivor Two and a Half Men The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals Reign Hart of Dixie The Vampire Diaries Supernatural
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
Interesting list. I don't have specific criteria for why I watch or don't watch shows. Some quality shows I don't bother watching, and some obvious pot-boilers, I do. The only pattern is that I tend to enjoy fantasy scifi, even badly done fantasy scifi, as long as it isn't horrible beyond belief, and even then, if I still somehow am entertained. I find anime far more fun, in general, than most non-anime, but that may be partly because I am quite faceblind, so I often get similar-looking characters confused in live-action shows, while animators make sure that the average character is easily distinguished. Here's my list of watched American hows taken from your list: CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community FOX Almost Human ABC CBS The CW Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC Grimm FOX Bones Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Castle Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. Modern Family Once Upon A Time Resurrection CBS The Big Bang Theory Elementary NCIS NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals The Vampire Diaries Supernatural ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Just to follow up... From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com But if you were trying to say that I consider America the most creative in the arts, that is simply not true. I consider a tiny, tiny portion of American TV and movie content good enough to watch. The best and most consistently creative television in the world is being made in Denmark right now, with other parts of Scandinavia close behind. Many of the TV series you probably consider American and thus creative were pure ripoffs of Danish TV series, from The Killing to The Bridge to (soon) Mammon. There is no creativity in remaking a foreign TV series, and succeeding only in making a shittier version in English. It's amusing for me to notice -- especially after my tiny, tiny portion comment above -- that of the 105 American TV series on the following list of either canceled or renewed shows, I regularly watch only one of the canceled shows ( Crisis, and I watched it only so I could lust after Gillian Anderson :-), and only watch 5 of the renewed shows. This is amusing to me because when I was writing my original reply to Steve, I was considering invoking Sturgeon's Law to describe American television. That law, named for the scifi writer who coined it, Theodore Sturgeon, is as true today as it was when he first quipped it back in the 1950s: 90% of everything is crap. Well, it turns out that I only bother to watch about 5% of the TV shows on American broadcast channels. :-) UPDATE (May 10 at 3:30 p.m.): NBC canceled Dracula. http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/dracula-canceled/ UPDATE (May 10 at 3 p.m.): ABC renewed Last Man Standing. http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/last-man-standing-renewed-for-4th-season/ UPDATE (May 10 at 2:10 p.m.): CBS renewed The Mentalist http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/mentalist-renewed-canceled/ for a seventh season and canceled Intelligence, Hostages, The Crazy Ones, Bad Teacher and Friends With Better Lives. CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community Crisis Growing Up Fisher Revolution The Michael J. Fox Show Sean Saves The World Welcome To The Family Ironside FOX Dads Rake Surviving Jack Enlisted Raising Hope The X Factor Almost Human ABC Suburgatory Trophy Wife Super Fun Night Lucky 7 Mind Games Mixology Once Upon A Time In Wonderland Killer Woman Betrayal The Assets Back In The Game The Neighbors CBS We Are Men The CW The Carrie Diaries Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC About A Boy The Blacklist Chicago PD Grimm Chicago Fire Hannibal Law Order: SVU Parks Recreation The Voice FOX Bob's Burgers Bones American Idol Brooklyn Nine-Nine Family Guy Glee Hell's Kitchen MasterChef Junior The Following The Mindy Project New Girl Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Nashville Scandal Castle The Bachelor Dancing With The Stars Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. The Middle Modern Family Revenge Shark Tank Once Upon A Time Resurrection Grey's Anatomy The Goldbergs America's Funniest Home Videos CBS 2 Broke Girls The Amazing Race The Big Bang Theory Blue Bloods Criminal Minds CSI 48 Hours 60 Minutes Elementary The Good Wife Hawaii Five-0 Mike Molly Undercover Boss NCIS The Millers Mom NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest Survivor Two and a Half Men The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals Reign Hart of Dixie The Vampire Diaries Supernatural
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
One of the things to bear in mind when regarding my American TV preferences is that the terms broadcast and cable mean nothing to me. I live in a Pirate-friendly country, and thus can watch pretty much everything the day after it was broadcast originally, whether on a normal channel like NBC or a pay channel like Showtime or HBO or even Netflix. So there are a few other series that I like that aren't on this list that come from the pay channels. There are also others I like that are from Canada, like Continuum, Orphan Black, and Lost Girl. Interesting reason for preferring anime -- I had never considered the issue of faceblindness before. That would certainly make Game Of Thrones, with its cast of possibly hundreds of recurring characters, difficult to follow. From: lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 9:46 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought Interesting list. I don't have specific criteria for why I watch or don't watch shows. Some quality shows I don't bother watching, and some obvious pot-boilers, I do. The only pattern is that I tend to enjoy fantasy scifi, even badly done fantasy scifi, as long as it isn't horrible beyond belief, and even then, if I still somehow am entertained. I find anime far more fun, in general, than most non-anime, but that may be partly because I am quite faceblind, so I often get similar-looking characters confused in live-action shows, while animators make sure that the average character is easily distinguished. Here's my list of watched American hows taken from your list: CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community FOX Almost Human ABC CBS The CW Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC Grimm FOX Bones Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Castle Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. Modern Family Once Upon A Time Resurrection CBS The Big Bang Theory Elementary NCIS NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals The Vampire Diaries Supernatural ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Just to follow up... From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com But if you were trying to say that I consider America the most creative in the arts, that is simply not true. I consider a tiny, tiny portion of American TV and movie content good enough to watch. The best and most consistently creative television in the world is being made in Denmark right now, with other parts of Scandinavia close behind. Many of the TV series you probably consider American and thus creative were pure ripoffs of Danish TV series, from The Killing to The Bridge to (soon) Mammon. There is no creativity in remaking a foreign TV series, and succeeding only in making a shittier version in English. It's amusing for me to notice -- especially after my tiny, tiny portion comment above -- that of the 105 American TV series on the following list of either canceled or renewed shows, I regularly watch only one of the canceled shows ( Crisis, and I watched it only so I could lust after Gillian Anderson :-), and only watch 5 of the renewed shows. This is amusing to me because when I was writing my original reply to Steve, I was considering invoking Sturgeon's Law to describe American television. That law, named for the scifi writer who coined it, Theodore Sturgeon, is as true today as it was when he first quipped it back in the 1950s: 90% of everything is crap. Well, it turns out that I only bother to watch about 5% of the TV shows on American broadcast channels. :-) UPDATE (May 10 at 3:30 p.m.): NBC canceled Dracula. UPDATE (May 10 at 3 p.m.): ABC renewed Last Man Standing. UPDATE (May 10 at 2:10 p.m.): CBS renewed The Mentalist for a seventh season and canceled Intelligence, Hostages, The Crazy Ones, Bad Teacher and Friends With Better Lives. CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community Crisis Growing Up Fisher Revolution The Michael J. Fox Show Sean Saves The World Welcome To The Family Ironside FOX Dads Rake Surviving Jack Enlisted Raising Hope The X Factor Almost Human ABC Suburgatory Trophy Wife Super Fun Night Lucky 7 Mind Games Mixology Once Upon A Time In Wonderland Killer Woman Betrayal The Assets Back In The Game The Neighbors CBS We Are Men The CW The Carrie Diaries Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC About A Boy The Blacklist Chicago PD Grimm Chicago Fire Hannibal Law Order: SVU Parks Recreation The Voice FOX Bob's Burgers Bones American Idol Brooklyn Nine-Nine Family Guy Glee Hell's Kitchen MasterChef Junior The Following The Mindy Project New Girl Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Nashville Scandal Castle The Bachelor Dancing With The Stars Marvel's
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
John, I will do you the courtesy of replying to your reply once, before hopefully bowing out of this nonsensical thread. In parting, I suggest that your dumbfuck theory demonstrates your near-absolute inability to divorce *your* beliefs from your paltry understanding of TM and the meditation/enlightenment process. You seem unable to conceive of Being except as synonymous with God. Millions of others -- including myself and Anartaxius (the other non-theist who has had extended enlightenment experiences) are not so limited. As Curtis pointed out so clearly, what you are talking about is one's INTERPRETATION of a subjective experience, not the experience itself. I should also point out that you seem intent to portray anyone who *doesn't* believe in a God as lesser and on some lower plane of existence. SO low, in fact, that they cannot even transcend. Have you even *noticed* that in doing so you are contradicting pretty much everything Maharishi ever said about no belief being required to either transcend (as he defined it) or become enlightened (again, as he described it). My first experiences of enlightened states were pretty much *textbook* Maharishi CC, as defined in his own books. My continuing experiences of what he called transcendence and that I more accurately call samadhi are equally textbook. But none of those experiences tempt me to project some kind of intelligent God onto those experiences to interpret them. I also point out that you have fallen into the hater trap of wanting to define any atheist who claims to have had enlightenment experiences as a liar, or as deluded. Your call, and to some extent I even understand, because all you (or anyone) are dealing with is *claims*. I consider both Jim's and Robin's claims of enlightened states as delusional and/or lying, so I guess we're in the same boat on that one. :-) Finally, if I were you I'd notice that even two of the biggest TM supporters/apologists on this forum -- Lawson and Judy -- are agin' you on this one. I thought that Lawson's recent reply was pretty good from a Maharishi perspective. Good luck holding on to your beliefs in the face of reality. As Lawson pointed out, the tighter you hold on to them, the further *you* are away from any true transcendence or enlightenment. From: jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 9:21 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend Barry, My comments are shown in red letters below: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, It sounds like you have not transcended thoughts at all. C: And what could you possibly basing that on? Just because I have not come to the conclusions you have about the experience? Do you really think that in my 15 years of practice with 4 solid years of rounding including 8 hour a day sessions at sidhaland I might not have experienced what Maharishi was going for with his techniques? The very first stage of his magical mystery tour? J: As such, you have not experienced Being. It appears that you still have a doubt in your mind, which is a thought in itself. Or, if it isn't doubt, it's the idea of denial of experiencing Being, which is a thought in itself. C: You do know we are having this conversation outside the meditaiton itself right? It would be like me claiming that you had never transcended because you are laying this trip on me, so that is a thought and therefor you never transcended. I get it. It is disturbing for you to consider that someone might have had the predicted experiences from Maharishi's programs and conclude something different than you about what it all means. I'm staying out of this, because it's by far the lamest, dumbfuck post ever made to FFL, and lowers my already-low opinion of John and his thinking abilities. JR: I'm glad you're staying out of the discussion since you consider yourself to be not an atheist, but a non-theist. This may be surprising to you. But I do understand the logic behind your thinking in this regard. But if I were to venture a guess at the reason behind his ill-disguised hatred of atheists and need to consign them in his mind to a lower class -- one SO low they can't even transcend -- the thing that has his panties in a twist is my post the other day reminding folks that at least two of the self-avowed non-theists on this forum have had strong enlightenment experiences lasting for weeks, months, and possibly years. My guess is that's what got his panties twisted, because after all this time believing in God and all this time practicing TM, he's never had a CC experience that lasted more than a second or so, and that only in meditation, with eyes
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious concepts, which tends to make practice 'to go beyond the range or limits of' current experience weighted down with a lot of additional conceptualisation and conditioning, in addition to the conceptualisation and conditioning of day to day living. That tends to double the mental load one has to discard to experience everything as being. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, If you say that you've transcended while meditating, then that means you've experienced Being. So if that is so, how can you say that there is no God, which is Being Itself? C: It is all in how you attach meaning to the experiences we have. I can do better than this. I experienced God plenty, and I still say that is not how I view these experiences now. Currently I think the state in TM is a silent aspect of our minds that has zero ontological meaning about how the universe works. It is just something our brains can do that we don't understand yet and are only confused by traditional assumptions. Different world view huh? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Why? Because they can't let go of the idea that God doesn't exist. What do you think? C: I transcend just fine in the Maharishi technique sense, no differently than when I was a believer. I don't even have to have any idea that god doesn't exist any more than that you have to hold a positive idea that the Easter Bunny doesn't exist. It is a non thought.
[FairfieldLife] Uh oh...Nabby is gonna freak right out :-)
From an interview with David Lynch: David Lynch’s Heart Opened When… The director spoke of two times when he was shaken to his core. One was when he first saw Francis Bacon’s work at the Marlborough Gallery in 1966, and the other was at LACMA a couple of decades ago. He’d gone to see sandstone sculptures from the Far East and wandered by himself into a room with a Buddha from India. He spoke of his gaze falling on the face of the Buddha and seeing a “white light that shot out and filled [him] with bliss.” Long (one hour) interview with Lynch, for those who feel they could endure that much of him: http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ Supposed highlights from the interview, distilled by someone who listened to it so we don't have to. :-) http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Uh oh...Nabby is gonna freak right out :-)
Since all the Turq have experienced of enlightenment is a couple of weeks of witnessing decades ago in Italy there is no expertise in this field coming from this him. He is like the Americans say: All hat, no cattle. This interview with DL is old news, seen it before. In stark contrast to hobby Buddhists like the Turq, DL experienced some aspects of the Buddha. The Turq and other hobbyist's just use the name to feel special. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From an interview with David Lynch: David Lynch’s Heart Opened When… The director spoke of two times when he was shaken to his core. One was when he first saw Francis Bacon’s work at the Marlborough Gallery in 1966, and the other was at LACMA a couple of decades ago. He’d gone to see sandstone sculptures from the Far East and wandered by himself into a room with a Buddha from India. He spoke of his gaze falling on the face of the Buddha and seeing a “white light that shot out and filled [him] with bliss.” Long (one hour) interview with Lynch, for those who feel they could endure that much of him: http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ Supposed highlights from the interview, distilled by someone who listened to it so we don't have to. :-) http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/ http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
The beards are a big help. Size and hair color are a good aid as well. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : One of the things to bear in mind when regarding my American TV preferences is that the terms broadcast and cable mean nothing to me. I live in a Pirate-friendly country, and thus can watch pretty much everything the day after it was broadcast originally, whether on a normal channel like NBC or a pay channel like Showtime or HBO or even Netflix. So there are a few other series that I like that aren't on this list that come from the pay channels. There are also others I like that are from Canada, like Continuum, Orphan Black, and Lost Girl. Interesting reason for preferring anime -- I had never considered the issue of faceblindness before. That would certainly make Game Of Thrones, with its cast of possibly hundreds of recurring characters, difficult to follow. From: LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 9:46 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought Interesting list. I don't have specific criteria for why I watch or don't watch shows. Some quality shows I don't bother watching, and some obvious pot-boilers, I do. The only pattern is that I tend to enjoy fantasy scifi, even badly done fantasy scifi, as long as it isn't horrible beyond belief, and even then, if I still somehow am entertained. I find anime far more fun, in general, than most non-anime, but that may be partly because I am quite faceblind, so I often get similar-looking characters confused in live-action shows, while animators make sure that the average character is easily distinguished. Here's my list of watched American hows taken from your list: CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community FOX Almost Human ABC CBS The CW Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC Grimm FOX Bones Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Castle Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. Modern Family Once Upon A Time Resurrection CBS The Big Bang Theory Elementary NCIS NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals The Vampire Diaries Supernatural ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Just to follow up... From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com But if you were trying to say that I consider America the most creative in the arts, that is simply not true. I consider a tiny, tiny portion of American TV and movie content good enough to watch. The best and most consistently creative television in the world is being made in Denmark right now, with other parts of Scandinavia close behind. Many of the TV series you probably consider American and thus creative were pure ripoffs of Danish TV series, from The Killing to The Bridge to (soon) Mammon. There is no creativity in remaking a foreign TV series, and succeeding only in making a shittier version in English. It's amusing for me to notice -- especially after my tiny, tiny portion comment above -- that of the 105 American TV series on the following list of either canceled or renewed shows, I regularly watch only one of the canceled shows ( Crisis, and I watched it only so I could lust after Gillian Anderson :-), and only watch 5 of the renewed shows. This is amusing to me because when I was writing my original reply to Steve, I was considering invoking Sturgeon's Law to describe American television. That law, named for the scifi writer who coined it, Theodore Sturgeon, is as true today as it was when he first quipped it back in the 1950s: 90% of everything is crap. Well, it turns out that I only bother to watch about 5% of the TV shows on American broadcast channels. :-) UPDATE (May 10 at 3:30 p.m.): NBC canceled Dracula. http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/dracula-canceled/ UPDATE (May 10 at 3 p.m.): ABC renewed Last Man Standing. http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/last-man-standing-renewed-for-4th-season/ UPDATE (May 10 at 2:10 p.m.): CBS renewed The Mentalist http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/mentalist-renewed-canceled/ for a seventh season and canceled Intelligence, Hostages, The Crazy Ones, Bad Teacher and Friends With Better Lives. CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community Crisis Growing Up Fisher Revolution The Michael J. Fox Show Sean Saves The World Welcome To The Family Ironside FOX Dads Rake Surviving Jack Enlisted Raising Hope The X Factor Almost Human ABC Suburgatory Trophy Wife Super Fun Night Lucky 7 Mind Games Mixology Once Upon A Time In Wonderland Killer Woman Betrayal The Assets Back In The Game The Neighbors CBS We Are Men The CW The Carrie Diaries Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
I don't think that antiests or agnostics are unable to remain atheists or agnostics once they start having God Consciousness or Unity consciousness. The fact that most of our spiritual practices are bound up with religious traditions means that you have few agnostics who are also long-term practitioners of specific practices, but I was arguing about the divinity or non-divinity of Jesus when I was in 4th grade, with my 4th grade Sunday school teacher, so I have no expectation that whatever prompted MMY to talk about devas and gods and God will convince me otherwise. Maybe attaining GC will convince me God exists, or maybe it won't. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious concepts, which tends to make practice 'to go beyond the range or limits of' current experience weighted down with a lot of additional conceptualisation and conditioning, in addition to the conceptualisation and conditioning of day to day living. That tends to double the mental load one has to discard to experience everything as being. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, If you say that you've transcended while meditating, then that means you've experienced Being. So if that is so, how can you say that there is no God, which is Being Itself? C: It is all in how you attach meaning to the experiences we have. I can do better than this. I experienced God plenty, and I still say that is not how I view these experiences now. Currently I think the state in TM is a silent aspect of our minds that has zero ontological meaning about how the universe works. It is just something our brains can do that we don't understand yet and are only confused by traditional assumptions. Different world view huh? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Why? Because they can't let go of the idea that God doesn't exist. What do you think? C: I transcend just fine in the Maharishi technique sense, no differently than when I was a
[FairfieldLife] Can non-believers in the Easter Bunny experience Easter eggs?
Given a recent thread, it occurs to me that this deeply philosophical question might be appropriate for a deeply philosophical discussion on FFL. The other thread, after all, postulated that if one was an atheist, one could not experience transcendence (the clear experience of Being, as I think that poster might define it). So I got to thinking, What if this theory were not only correct, but a kind of Law Of Nature that applied equally to other entities that people believe in, such as the Easter Bunny? Might those Laws Of Nature cause an issue for abunnyists? What would happen, I wondered, in a household in which the kids believed in the Easter Bunny, and that He was the one who magically deposited their candy eggs in mysterious places for them to find during their spiritual quest for Egglightenment, and the parents did not -- they were abunnyists. These unbeliever parents, after all, might have caught a clue as to the Easter Bunny's existence while they were hiding the eggs supposedly hidden there by the EB Himself. You can see how someone might develop heretical abunnyist thoughts in a situation like that. So it seems to me that the question in the Subject line might create kind of a koan if the theory about belief in God being necessary to experience transcendence were really true and a Law Of Nature. For the kids, finding the eggs is No Problem. Because they *believe*. So the eggs are there. But now consider the parents -- the abunnyists -- discovering that not all of the eggs they had hidden earlier had been found by the kids, and so they now have to go on their own egg hunt to find and retrieve the stragglers before they become ant magnets. Would they be able to find the Easter Bunny's eggs? Or would their lack of their belief in the Easter Bunny cloud their minds and keep them from finding them? No answers here. I'm just cafe-rapping on a blustery Sunday morning. It's just a warm-uprap, nothing serious, and should not be construed as me suggesting that belief in God is on the same level as belief in the Easter Bunny. Even though it is... :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
From: lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com The beards are a big help. Size and hair color are a good aid as well. Fascinating topic. I admit to never having heard of the concept of face blindness before seeing a movie called Faces In The Crowd. Milla Jovovich stars in a plot about a woman suffering from face blindness after an encounter with a serial killer. She saw his face in the attack, but now can't tell it from any other face. Faces in the Crowd (2011) Faces In The Crowd - Official Trailer [HD] ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : One of the things to bear in mind when regarding my American TV preferences is that the terms broadcast and cable mean nothing to me. I live in a Pirate-friendly country, and thus can watch pretty much everything the day after it was broadcast originally, whether on a normal channel like NBC or a pay channel like Showtime or HBO or even Netflix. So there are a few other series that I like that aren't on this list that come from the pay channels. There are also others I like that are from Canada, like Continuum, Orphan Black, and Lost Girl. Interesting reason for preferring anime -- I had never considered the issue of faceblindness before. That would certainly make Game Of Thrones, with its cast of possibly hundreds of recurring characters, difficult to follow. From: LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 9:46 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought Interesting list. I don't have specific criteria for why I watch or don't watch shows. Some quality shows I don't bother watching, and some obvious pot-boilers, I do. The only pattern is that I tend to enjoy fantasy scifi, even badly done fantasy scifi, as long as it isn't horrible beyond belief, and even then, if I still somehow am entertained. I find anime far more fun, in general, than most non-anime, but that may be partly because I am quite faceblind, so I often get similar-looking characters confused in live-action shows, while animators make sure that the average character is easily distinguished. Here's my list of watched American hows taken from your list: CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community FOX Almost Human ABC CBS The CW Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC Grimm FOX Bones Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Castle Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. Modern Family Once Upon A Time Resurrection CBS The Big Bang Theory Elementary NCIS NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals The Vampire Diaries Supernatural ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Just to follow up... From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com But if you were trying to say that I consider America the most creative in the arts, that is simply not true. I consider a tiny, tiny portion of American TV and movie content good enough to watch. The best and most consistently creative television in the world is being made in Denmark right now, with other parts of Scandinavia close behind. Many of the TV series you probably consider American and thus creative were pure ripoffs of Danish TV series, from The Killing to The Bridge to (soon) Mammon. There is no creativity in remaking a foreign TV series, and succeeding only in making a shittier version in English. It's amusing for me to notice -- especially after my tiny, tiny portion comment above -- that of the 105 American TV series on the following list of either canceled or renewed shows, I regularly watch only one of the canceled shows ( Crisis, and I watched it only so I could lust after Gillian Anderson :-), and only watch 5 of the renewed shows. This is amusing to me because when I was writing my original reply to Steve, I was considering invoking Sturgeon's Law to describe American television. That law, named for the scifi writer who coined it, Theodore Sturgeon, is as true today as it was when he first quipped it back in the 1950s: 90% of everything is crap. Well, it turns out that I only bother to watch about 5% of the TV shows on American broadcast channels. :-) UPDATE (May 10 at 3:30 p.m.): NBC canceled Dracula. UPDATE (May 10 at 3 p.m.): ABC renewed Last Man Standing. UPDATE (May 10 at 2:10 p.m.): CBS renewed The Mentalist for a seventh season and canceled Intelligence, Hostages, The Crazy Ones, Bad Teacher and Friends With Better Lives. CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community Crisis Growing Up Fisher Revolution The Michael J. Fox Show Sean Saves The World Welcome To The Family Ironside FOX Dads Rake Surviving Jack Enlisted Raising Hope The X Factor Almost Human ABC
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
That's where Buddhism as understood today fails utterly as their models stop with nirvana, they simply don't have any idea or experience of what develops after the initial stages of transcending. To hear them even discuss these topics here on FFL simply brings a smile to your face. And it explains why a spritual child like the Turq has the nerve to claim that a couple of weeks of witnessing decades ago was an experience of enlightenment. Hilarious really :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I don't think that antiests or agnostics are unable to remain atheists or agnostics once they start having God Consciousness or Unity consciousness. The fact that most of our spiritual practices are bound up with religious traditions means that you have few agnostics who are also long-term practitioners of specific practices, but I was arguing about the divinity or non-divinity of Jesus when I was in 4th grade, with my 4th grade Sunday school teacher, so I have no expectation that whatever prompted MMY to talk about devas and gods and God will convince me otherwise. Maybe attaining GC will convince me God exists, or maybe it won't. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious concepts, which tends to make practice 'to go beyond the range or limits of' current experience weighted down with a lot of additional conceptualisation and conditioning, in addition to the conceptualisation and conditioning of day to day living. That tends to double the mental load one has to discard to experience everything as being. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, If you say that you've transcended while meditating, then that means you've experienced Being. So if that is so, how can you say that there is no God, which is Being Itself? C: It is all in how you attach meaning to the experiences we have. I can do better than this. I experienced God plenty, and I still say that is not how I view these experiences now. Currently I think the state in TM is a silent aspect of our minds
Re: [FairfieldLife] Can non-believers in the Easter Bunny experience Easter eggs?
For those who are not parents and for whom this film may not have crossed their radar, a trailer to prove that I am far from the first person to riff on the Easter Bunny as real, and dealing with real-life problems. What if He were not only real but (like the Dalai Lama) only the latest incarnation of a dynasty of Easter Bunnies throughout the ages? And what if *you* were about to be named the Big EB, and you didn't want to do it? You'd rather play in a rock 'n roll band. That's the basic plot of a movie made by some of the creators of Despicable Me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBwWf8PTLtk From: TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 12:10 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Can non-believers in the Easter Bunny experience Easter eggs? Given a recent thread, it occurs to me that this deeply philosophical question might be appropriate for a deeply philosophical discussion on FFL. The other thread, after all, postulated that if one was an atheist, one could not experience transcendence (the clear experience of Being, as I think that poster might define it). So I got to thinking, What if this theory were not only correct, but a kind of Law Of Nature that applied equally to other entities that people believe in, such as the Easter Bunny? Might those Laws Of Nature cause an issue for abunnyists? What would happen, I wondered, in a household in which the kids believed in the Easter Bunny, and that He was the one who magically deposited their candy eggs in mysterious places for them to find during their spiritual quest for Egglightenment, and the parents did not -- they were abunnyists. These unbeliever parents, after all, might have caught a clue as to the Easter Bunny's existence while they were hiding the eggs supposedly hidden there by the EB Himself. You can see how someone might develop heretical abunnyist thoughts in a situation like that. So it seems to me that the question in the Subject line might create kind of a koan if the theory about belief in God being necessary to experience transcendence were really true and a Law Of Nature. For the kids, finding the eggs is No Problem. Because they *believe*. So the eggs are there. But now consider the parents -- the abunnyists -- discovering that not all of the eggs they had hidden earlier had been found by the kids, and so they now have to go on their own egg hunt to find and retrieve the stragglers before they become ant magnets. Would they be able to find the Easter Bunny's eggs? Or would their lack of their belief in the Easter Bunny cloud their minds and keep them from finding them? No answers here. I'm just cafe-rapping on a blustery Sunday morning. It's just a warm-up rap, nothing serious, and should not be construed as me suggesting that belief in God is on the same level as belief in the Easter Bunny. Even though it is... :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
On the other hand, was a meditation that actually worked, like TM, available for the Buddhist's many of their stale and outdated concepts would naturally fall away and a new light would dawn to millions of souls. This is what is happening in South East Asia today and it will not stop there. This could very well be one of the reasons why the Buddhists on this list show such anger towards the New Age because it exposes their lack of knowledge about higher states of consciousness and brings about transformation and change. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : That's where Buddhism as understood today fails utterly as their models stop with nirvana, they simply don't have any idea or experience of what develops after the initial stages of transcending. To hear them even discuss these topics here on FFL simply brings a smile to your face. And it explains why a spritual child like the Turq has the nerve to claim that a couple of weeks of witnessing decades ago was an experience of enlightenment. Hilarious really :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I don't think that antiests or agnostics are unable to remain atheists or agnostics once they start having God Consciousness or Unity consciousness. The fact that most of our spiritual practices are bound up with religious traditions means that you have few agnostics who are also long-term practitioners of specific practices, but I was arguing about the divinity or non-divinity of Jesus when I was in 4th grade, with my 4th grade Sunday school teacher, so I have no expectation that whatever prompted MMY to talk about devas and gods and God will convince me otherwise. Maybe attaining GC will convince me God exists, or maybe it won't. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious concepts, which tends to make practice 'to go beyond the range or limits of' current experience weighted down with a lot of additional conceptualisation and conditioning, in addition to the conceptualisation and conditioning of day to day living. That tends to double the mental load one has to discard
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Note to Rick, Conderning his interview with Sam Harris
Rick, Even so, is this going to be another Deepak Chopra interview of just another highly educated Westerner? Harris seems both atheistic and agnostic a lot of times anyway. What is his spiritual experience around this that would allow him to be on Buddha at the Gas Pump anyway? Check him out before you interview him and see if he qualifies. I feel you do a really good job of sussing it out with these people. Prepare ye anyway for the worst. Best of wishes for the guy, -Buck in the Dome punditster writes: And I get it that the other side has its judgements too. But between Sam's meditation experience and your open mind, there is a chance for a unique bridge of understanding. It's also very interesting that Harris is practicing meditation himself and has some very subtle takes on reincarnation and karma. Many of us here think there's value in the meditation techniques, but like Harris, we don't buy into all the religious aspects of a practice. That's the point also of Stephen Batchelor the author of Buddhism Without Beliefs. In his classic Buddhism Without Beliefs, Stephen Batchelor offered a profound, secular approach to the teachings of the Buddha that struck an emotional chord with Western readers. Now, with the same brilliance and boldness of thought, he paints a groundbreaking portrait of the historical Buddha—told from the author’s unique perspective as a former Buddhist monk and modern seeker. 'Confession of a Buddhist Atheist' by Stephen Batchelor Spiegel Grau (March 2, 2010 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, rick@... wrote : From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2014 9:03 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Note to Rick, Conderning his interview with Sam Harris Rick, I hope you will stay mostly with a pool of wakened people who by experience are illumined for your interviews and not just some talking heads, even if they are famous professional talking-heads. There certainly is lots of ignorance to interview out there and other sources are certainly doing that. However I do feel you have done a splendid job particularly rendering down the Neo-advaita-ians down by your way of interviewing by experience that you do. I really am appreciating the last few interviews that cap this criticism of the in-the-mind- like advaita schools of sophistry. -Buck in the Dome Generally I do, but from what I understand of Sam so far, he cuts to the heart of the issue of belief vs. verifiable experience. I feel that issue has profound implications for religion, spirituality in general, and the foundations of modern culture. So Sam would fall into the same category as Hagelin, Menas Kafatos, Elisabet Satouris, and any other intellectuals I have interviewed or will interview who may not claim spiritual awakening, but whose insights should be of interest to anyone interested in awakening, and in the underlying forces driving the current social changes. I think those are much more radical than most people realize, but it’s hard to see them close up. C: Good answer Rick. I would like to add that for me, my discovery of the perspective beyond a spiritual experience of life WAS my enlightenment. It was no less perspective enhancing than anything I experienced with Maharishi, for me it was much more so. This is why this project is so uniquely yours Rick. Very few people are able to hold their judgements at bay long enough to give other perspectives a chance. Buck's reaction is so typical of spiritually oriented people. And I get it that the other side has its judgements too. But between Sam's meditation experience and your open mind, there is a chance for a unique bridge of understanding. Buck's perspective just comes off as so provincial. Buck remember when as MIU students we believed we could understand everything through SCI, that the model included everything within it? What makes you so afraid of other POVs now? To actually draw the lines of where you stand in distinction to the perspective of a guy like Sam could make you stronger in what you know. But don't assume that he has had any less experiences or shifts of consciousness than you have. It is gunna be in how these experiences are viewed where the biggest differences are probably gunna come up.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Comments below... I should also point out that you seem intent to portray anyone who *doesn't* believe in a God as lesser and on some lower plane of existence. Sorta like you portray anyone who DOES believe in a God. snips My continuing experiences of what he called transcendence and that I more accurately call samadhi Actually Maharishi called it samadhi as well. I also point out that you have fallen into the hater trap of wanting to define any atheist who claims to have had enlightenment experiences as a liar, or as deluded. Again, sorta like you consider theists to be delusional. Finally, if I were you I'd notice that even two of the biggest TM supporters/apologists on this forum -- Lawson and Judy -- are agin' you on this one. I don't even know what he's talking about. Maybe I'd be agin him if I did, but I can't be sure. It's conceivable to me that he has some kind of point and just hasn't explained it clearly.
[FairfieldLife] Speaking of Guns
Man shoots, kills woman he mistakes for groundhog SUGAR CREEK TWP., Ohio — A 22-year-old woman is dead after a farmer mistakenly shot her thinking she was a groundhog in tall grass. Stark County Sheriff George Maier says Natasha Stover was shooting targets Monday with a BB gun when she laid down in the grass. Farmer Ralph Adams Jr., 79, thought she was a groundhog and fired a rifle about 165 feet away, hitting Stover in the head. The woman died the next day at the hospital. Maier said the shooting appears to be accidental but the case is still under investigation by the Stark County prosecutor's office. Stover's family says she loved animals and had a special gift working with them. She also had a strong faith and loved going to the library. Residents said Adams is well respected in the community.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Uh oh...Nabby is gonna freak right out :-)
Nabs is a fan of Buddha, just not of Buddhists who don't practice TM. Opsie! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From an interview with David Lynch: David Lynch’s Heart Opened When… The director spoke of two times when he was shaken to his core. One was when he first saw Francis Bacon’s work at the Marlborough Gallery in 1966, and the other was at LACMA a couple of decades ago. He’d gone to see sandstone sculptures from the Far East and wandered by himself into a room with a Buddha from India. He spoke of his gaze falling on the face of the Buddha and seeing a “white light that shot out and filled [him] with bliss.” Long (one hour) interview with Lynch, for those who feel they could endure that much of him: http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ Supposed highlights from the interview, distilled by someone who listened to it so we don't have to. :-) http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/ http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Uh oh...Nabby is gonna freak right out :-)
On 5/11/2014 7:29 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Nabs is a fan of Buddha, Which one, I wonder? just not of Buddhists who don't practice TM. Opsie! Maybe it's time to define what we mean by Buddhists and Buddha. I didn't get any helpful responses when I requested a definition of the term TM. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
It is interesting that many atheists, or non-theists, have a very clear idea of the God that they say doesn't exist. They can describe this Being, who is a complete fiction to them, better than many who actually believe in God. How funny is that? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious concepts, which tends to make practice 'to go beyond the range or limits of' current experience weighted down with a lot of additional conceptualisation and conditioning, in addition to the conceptualisation and conditioning of day to day living. That tends to double the mental load one has to discard to experience everything as being. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, If you say that you've transcended while meditating, then that means you've experienced Being. So if that is so, how can you say that there is no God, which is Being Itself? C: It is all in how you attach meaning to the experiences we have. I can do better than this. I experienced God plenty, and I still say that is not how I view these experiences now. Currently I think the state in TM is a silent aspect of our minds that has zero ontological meaning about how the universe works. It is just something our brains can do that we don't understand yet and are only confused by traditional assumptions. Different world view huh? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Why? Because they can't let go of the idea that God doesn't exist. What do you think? C: I transcend just fine in the Maharishi technique sense, no differently than when I was a believer. I don't even have to have any idea that god doesn't exist any more than that you have to hold a positive idea that the Easter Bunny doesn't exist. It is a non thought.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Speaking of Guns
On 5/11/2014 7:20 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Man shoots, kills woman he mistakes for groundhog This thread should probably have been called Hunting With People.Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Note to Rick, Conderning his interview with Sam Harris
On 5/11/2014 6:51 AM, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: What is his spiritual experience around this that would allow him to be on Buddha at the Gas Pump anyway? Buck, I think the key word here is Buddha- maybe Harris is a practicing Buddhist. Go figure. There are some who would label all Buddhists atheists, but that is not really correct. Buddhists admit that there are many entities in the universe that can't be seen by man. Millions of Buddhist worldwide consider the gods to be sacred. But, these entities are not capable of offering Buddhists the saving grace, because they are not enlightened. A Buddhist believes in enlightenment - that's why they are referred to as Buddhists- enlightenment is not dependent on deities to instill the gnostic insight. There are clear parallels between the Vajrayana and the Vedanta point of view. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, It sounds like you have not transcended thoughts at all. C: And what could you possibly basing that on? Just because I have not come to the conclusions you have about the experience? Do you really think that in my 15 years of practice with 4 solid years of rounding including 8 hour a day sessions at sidhaland I might not have experienced what Maharishi was going for with his techniques? The very first stage of his magical mystery tour? J: As such, you have not experienced Being. It appears that you still have a doubt in your mind, which is a thought in itself. Or, if it isn't doubt, it's the idea of denial of experiencing Being, which is a thought in itself. C: You do know we are having this conversation outside the meditaiton itself right? It would be like me claiming that you had never transcended because you are laying this trip on me, so that is a thought and therefor you never transcended. I get it. It is disturbing for you to consider that someone might have had the predicted experiences from Maharishi's programs and conclude something different than you about what it all means. I'm staying out of this, because it's by far the lamest, dumbfuck post ever made to FFL, and lowers my already-low opinion of John and his thinking abilities. Writing a post full of contempt and pretty much simplifying the whole thing into berating John for writing the lamest, dumbfuck post ever made..., of him being jealous jealous and hateful is hardly staying out of this. But if I were to venture a guess at the reason behind his ill-disguised hatred of atheists and need to consign them in his mind to a lower class -- one SO low they can't even transcend -- the thing that has his panties in a twist is my post the other day reminding folks that at least two of the self-avowed non-theists on this forum have had strong enlightenment experiences lasting for weeks, months, and possibly years. My guess is that's what got his panties twisted, because after all this time believing in God and all this time practicing TM, he's never had a CC experience that lasted more than a second or so, and that only in meditation, with eyes closed. In other words, my guess at what's motivating this topic is jealousy. Writing a post full of contempt and pretty much simplifying the whole thing into berating John for writing the lamest, dumbfuck post ever made..., and accusing him of being jealous as well hateful is hardly staying out of it you dumbfuck Bawee. You're always the guy breaking things down in to their simplest perceived essence: If I, Bawee, don't agree with you then you aren't fit to live. Sorta like the dumb cunts too stupid to live idea. Remember that? And it's always a competition with you - who has had strong enlightenment experiences lasting for weeks, month, and possibly years. Yea, and big deal, so what? They certainly mean less than nothing to me and, if you're bluster and blow were to be believed, mean nothing to you. Oh, except if you're the guy who claims he had them walking through the streets of Amsterdam crossing dimensional reality after reality with some tourist from the Rama days all the while attempting to keep the wooden clogs firmly on his big feet. Sorry, I guess I'm just jealous, forgive me.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Can non-believers in the Easter Bunny experience Easter eggs?
On 5/11/2014 5:51 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I am far from the first person to riff on the Easter Bunny as real, The Easter Bunny is an ancient symbol for /fertility/ and it is real - almost everyone on the planet /feels to desire to procreat//e/, at one time or another. The rabbit was used as a symbol of fertility long before it was adopted by the Christian Europeans - probably as early as the building of the first pyramid in Egypt. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Just to follow up... As fascinating as it is to view a list of American channels and the TV shows they air, not to mention how riveted I am to read about the ones that you watch or don't watch I would have to list this post as just another way of you to show the world what a cool and individualistic dude you are. I'm in awe... From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com But if you were trying to say that I consider America the most creative in the arts, that is simply not true. I consider a tiny, tiny portion of American TV and movie content good enough to watch. The best and most consistently creative television in the world is being made in Denmark right now, with other parts of Scandinavia close behind. Many of the TV series you probably consider American and thus creative were pure ripoffs of Danish TV series, from The Killing to The Bridge to (soon) Mammon. There is no creativity in remaking a foreign TV series, and succeeding only in making a shittier version in English. It's amusing for me to notice -- especially after my tiny, tiny portion comment above -- that of the 105 American TV series on the following list of either canceled or renewed shows, I regularly watch only one of the canceled shows ( Crisis, and I watched it only so I could lust after Gillian Anderson :-), and only watch 5 of the renewed shows. This is amusing to me because when I was writing my original reply to Steve, I was considering invoking Sturgeon's Law to describe American television. That law, named for the scifi writer who coined it, Theodore Sturgeon, is as true today as it was when he first quipped it back in the 1950s: 90% of everything is crap. Well, it turns out that I only bother to watch about 5% of the TV shows on American broadcast channels. :-) UPDATE (May 10 at 3:30 p.m.): NBC canceled Dracula. http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/dracula-canceled/ UPDATE (May 10 at 3 p.m.): ABC renewed Last Man Standing. http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/last-man-standing-renewed-for-4th-season/ UPDATE (May 10 at 2:10 p.m.): CBS renewed The Mentalist http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/10/mentalist-renewed-canceled/ for a seventh season and canceled Intelligence, Hostages, The Crazy Ones, Bad Teacher and Friends With Better Lives. CANCELED SHOWS NBC Believe Community Crisis Growing Up Fisher Revolution The Michael J. Fox Show Sean Saves The World Welcome To The Family Ironside FOX Dads Rake Surviving Jack Enlisted Raising Hope The X Factor Almost Human ABC Suburgatory Trophy Wife Super Fun Night Lucky 7 Mind Games Mixology Once Upon A Time In Wonderland Killer Woman Betrayal The Assets Back In The Game The Neighbors CBS We Are Men The CW The Carrie Diaries Star-Crossed The Tomorrow People RENEWED SHOWS NBC About A Boy The Blacklist Chicago PD Grimm Chicago Fire Hannibal Law Order: SVU Parks Recreation The Voice FOX Bob's Burgers Bones American Idol Brooklyn Nine-Nine Family Guy Glee Hell's Kitchen MasterChef Junior The Following The Mindy Project New Girl Sleepy Hollow The Simpsons ABC Nashville Scandal Castle The Bachelor Dancing With The Stars Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. The Middle Modern Family Revenge Shark Tank Once Upon A Time Resurrection Grey's Anatomy The Goldbergs America's Funniest Home Videos CBS 2 Broke Girls The Amazing Race The Big Bang Theory Blue Bloods Criminal Minds CSI 48 Hours 60 Minutes Elementary The Good Wife Hawaii Five-0 Mike Molly Undercover Boss NCIS The Millers Mom NCIS: Los Angeles Person of Interest Survivor Two and a Half Men The CW The 100 Arrow Beauty and the Beast The Originals Reign Hart of Dixie The Vampire Diaries Supernatural
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
On 5/11/2014 5:27 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote: That's where Buddhism as understood today fails utterly as their models stop with nirvana, they simply don't have any idea or experience of what develops after the initial stages of transcending. To hear them even discuss these topics here on FFL simply brings a smile to your face. And it explains why a spritual child like the Turq has the nerve to claim that a couple of weeks of witnessing decades ago was an experience of enlightenment. Hilarious really :-) Buddhists believe in Buddhas - that's what a Buddha is, a being that the /woke up/, /awakened/. This condition is called enlightened, samadhi, or realization with the aid of /yoga/, or introspective enstasis. Something that is included in most definitions of the word /spiritual/ is the/*sense of the sacred*/ - are there any iconoclasts here that have a feeling about anything being sacred? In Vedanta and Vajrayana, the sacred is/*gnosis*/, the knowing that /consciousness is the means of obtaining the knowledge/. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I don't think that antiests or agnostics are unable to remain atheists or agnostics once they start having God Consciousness or Unity consciousness. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Speaking of Guns
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Man shoots, kills woman he mistakes for groundhog SUGAR CREEK TWP., Ohio — A 22-year-old woman is dead after a farmer mistakenly shot her thinking she was a groundhog in tall grass. Stark County Sheriff George Maier says Natasha Stover was shooting targets Monday with a BB gun when she laid down in the grass. Farmer Ralph Adams Jr., 79, thought she was a groundhog and fired a rifle about 165 feet away, hitting Stover in the head. The woman died the next day at the hospital. Maier said the shooting appears to be accidental but the case is still under investigation by the Stark County prosecutor's office. Stover's family says she loved animals and had a special gift working with them. She also had a strong faith and loved going to the library. Residents said Adams is well respected in the community. Ah, you just brought up another reason to throw all guns into one big incinerator - think of all the animals who would be spared a bullet just because they exist. Why anyone would feel compelled to kill a groundhog because it was, well, a groundhog is beyond me. Maybe the guy will think twice before he shoots randomly at some movement in the tall grass. I guess dumb, intolerant people and guns go together a lot of the time.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Can non-believers in the Easter Bunny experience Easter eggs?
On 5/11/2014 5:10 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: He was the one who magically deposited their candy eggs in mysterious places for them to find during their spiritual quest for Egglightenment The egg is a very ancient /symbol for fertility/ - it has been used in sacred iconography since at least the building ot the first pyramid in Egypt. The egg is sacred and mysterious because of its shape and how it is produced. Almost everyone knows about the eggs and fertility - it's discussed by most anthropologists as an artifact from the neolithic age. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Speaking of Guns
On 5/11/2014 8:45 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I guess dumb, intolerant people and guns go together a lot of the time. It's probably illegal for dumb people to posses firearms. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Speaking of Guns
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 5/11/2014 8:45 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: I guess dumb, intolerant people and guns go together a lot of the time. It's probably illegal for dumb people to posses firearms. Go figure. Actually, it appears to be a requirement; the dumber you are the bigger the gun they issue you. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Can non-believers in the Easter Bunny experience Easter eggs?
To your last question, they developed Alzheimer's and are unable to remember what an Easter egg is, much less how it got there. In my case, I commit Bunnycide but I'm shielded from the total effects of the karma because I used a Harris hawk to make the kill. The hawk makes the kill which I'm just a witness to. The hawk eats the bunny, I get the eggs! On Sunday, May 11, 2014 6:47 AM, 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/11/2014 5:10 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: He was the one who magically deposited their candy eggs in mysterious places for them to find during their spiritual quest for Egglightenment The egg is a very ancient symbol for fertility - it has been used in sacred iconography since at least the building ot the first pyramid in Egypt. The egg is sacred and mysterious because of its shape and how it is produced. Almost everyone knows about the eggs and fertility - it's discussed by most anthropologists as an artifact from the neolithic age. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Speaking of Guns
Well, the poor old man was an *organic* farmer and due to lack of fertilizer couldn't spare any of his crop to wild animals. I'm sure he was shooting with *love* in his heart. On Sunday, May 11, 2014 6:45 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Man shoots, kills woman he mistakes for groundhog SUGAR CREEK TWP., Ohio — A 22-year-old woman is dead after a farmer mistakenly shot her thinking she was a groundhog in tall grass. Stark County Sheriff George Maier says Natasha Stover was shooting targets Monday with a BB gun when she laid down in the grass. Farmer Ralph Adams Jr., 79, thought she was a groundhog and fired a rifle about 165 feet away, hitting Stover in the head. The woman died the next day at the hospital. Maier said the shooting appears to be accidental but the case is still under investigation by the Stark County prosecutor's office. Stover's family says she loved animals and had a special gift working with them. She also had a strong faith and loved going to the library. Residents said Adams is well respected in the community. Ah, you just brought up another reason to throw all guns into one big incinerator - think of all the animals who would be spared a bullet just because they exist. Why anyone would feel compelled to kill a groundhog because it was, well, a groundhog is beyond me. Maybe the guy will think twice before he shoots randomly at some movement in the tall grass. I guess dumb, intolerant people and guns go together a lot of the time.
[FairfieldLife] Chico's Best place to pray
I was looking in the local paper, and came across the 'Best of Chico' list, for 2013. There are all kinds of categories, for food, services, and fun. One of the categories is, Best place to pray. These lists usually have three results, and the second and third were, predictably, churches. However, the first choice for Chicoans, as their *best place to pray*, was Bidwell Park, the city park and nature reserve, of 2,500 acres. Interesting choice, since this isn't all hippies here. The town actually went for Romney in 2012, by about a 1/2 percent. I go to the park nearly every day, and everybody, from old farmers, to yuppies, shows up there. I don't do a lot of praying there, but it is beautiful and wild and about 5 minutes away. PS Everyone talks about how hot this town can get - it is supposed to be in the mid to high 90's this week, so I will see - shouldn't be too bad, as it is dry here. I recall Tempe, Arizona, in the wintertime - it was 115, with AC cooling the house down to 85, and car door handles blisteringly hot - *that* I can't do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Uh oh...Nabby is gonna freak right out :-)
That's right, in the same way I am a fan of both the historical Master Jesus and the Master of Masters The Christ/Maitreya, but not of Christians nor their silly and empty churches. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Nabs is a fan of Buddha, just not of Buddhists who don't practice TM. Opsie! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From an interview with David Lynch: David Lynch’s Heart Opened When… The director spoke of two times when he was shaken to his core. One was when he first saw Francis Bacon’s work at the Marlborough Gallery in 1966, and the other was at LACMA a couple of decades ago. He’d gone to see sandstone sculptures from the Far East and wandered by himself into a room with a Buddha from India. He spoke of his gaze falling on the face of the Buddha and seeing a “white light that shot out and filled [him] with bliss.” Long (one hour) interview with Lynch, for those who feel they could endure that much of him: http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ http://www.salon.com/2014/05/09/the_brilliant_twisted_mind_behind_twin_peaks_david_lynch_reveals_where_his_ideas_originate/ Supposed highlights from the interview, distilled by someone who listened to it so we don't have to. :-) http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/ http://www.bkmag.com/2014/04/30/david-lynch-loves-kanye-west-and-other-things-i-learned-at-bam-last-night/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Nope. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you (Luke 12:31). Matthew has Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness... (6:33). Again, Nabby, Jesus was talking to the Pharisees, who he thought were spiritually corrupt and incapable of entering the Kingdom of God. Within only works if you wrench the verse out of context. His whole point was that he, Jesus, represented the Kingdom of God, and the Pharisees were so spiritually blind they couldn't recognize him as such even though he was in the midst of or among them, right in front of their very eyes, talking to them. If you want to make a threat to the Church case, fine, but you can't legitimately use that verse to do it. Maharishi meant well, but he was no Bible scholar, and he goofed badly on that one. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
But believe it or not, there is an Atheism for Dummies book. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Okay, how bout, Atheists Can't Transcend. How Being Bounced Me Right Out of The Transcendent. One Man's Personal Journey (okay, okay, I know it's got some problems technically with transcending partially, but it's a start) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
It does have some problems, but it cuts to the heart of the matter. To believe the statement in the Subject line, you'd have to be able to believe that Being is so petty that it would bar admittance to those who didn't believe in it. From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2014 5:23 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend Okay, how bout, Atheists Can't Transcend. How Being Bounced Me Right Out of The Transcendent. One Man's Personal Journey (okay, okay, I know it's got some problems technically with transcending partially, but it's a start) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Happy to hear that you were present and knew exactly what Jesus was talking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Nope. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you (Luke 12:31). Matthew has Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness... (6:33). Again, Nabby, Jesus was talking to the Pharisees, who he thought were spiritually corrupt and incapable of entering the Kingdom of God. Within only works if you wrench the verse out of context. His whole point was that he, Jesus, represented the Kingdom of God, and the Pharisees were so spiritually blind they couldn't recognize him as such even though he was in the midst of or among them, right in front of their very eyes, talking to them. If you want to make a threat to the Church case, fine, but you can't legitimately use that verse to do it. Maharishi meant well, but he was no Bible scholar, and he goofed badly on that one. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Changing Times and the Emergence of the new
It is for us to throw off the shackles of the past and together create a new and glorious civilization, allowing people everywhere to live happy and dignified lives, a simpler life” as Maitreya puts it, “where no man lacks, where no two days are alike, where the Joy of Brotherhood manifests through all men. - Changing Times and the Emergence of the new http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/37635-hope-and-wonder.html
[FairfieldLife] London, home of the super rich
The survey of Britain's super-rich compiled for the Sunday Times newspaper is likely to prompt debate in a country where many still struggle financially and where food banks are a fact of life, despite economic growth recently returning to levels not seen since the 2008 financial crash. http://news.yahoo.com/london-tops-super-rich-city-list-survey-shows-225059524.html Billionairism is a mental disorder. Open up the old mental hospitals and gather up the money hoarders for treatment. Charge them 100 million dollars a day. That'll cure them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
I've seen research on ch'an meditators that suggests that, at least for that group, ch'an meditation had some of the same effects as TM. John Hagelin, in a recent lecture he gave in Tucson, mentioned that a researcher on Zen was proudly touting the impressive (John's word) coherent alpha EEG trace of a 26 year Zen meditator. John went on to point out that it was a 26 meditator and showed similar traces from 1 year TMers, but hey, it's something. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : On the other hand, was a meditation that actually worked, like TM, available for the Buddhist's many of their stale and outdated concepts would naturally fall away and a new light would dawn to millions of souls. This is what is happening in South East Asia today and it will not stop there. This could very well be one of the reasons why the Buddhists on this list show such anger towards the New Age because it exposes their lack of knowledge about higher states of consciousness and brings about transformation and change. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : That's where Buddhism as understood today fails utterly as their models stop with nirvana, they simply don't have any idea or experience of what develops after the initial stages of transcending. To hear them even discuss these topics here on FFL simply brings a smile to your face. And it explains why a spritual child like the Turq has the nerve to claim that a couple of weeks of witnessing decades ago was an experience of enlightenment. Hilarious really :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I don't think that antiests or agnostics are unable to remain atheists or agnostics once they start having God Consciousness or Unity consciousness. The fact that most of our spiritual practices are bound up with religious traditions means that you have few agnostics who are also long-term practitioners of specific practices, but I was arguing about the divinity or non-divinity of Jesus when I was in 4th grade, with my 4th grade Sunday school teacher, so I have no expectation that whatever prompted MMY to talk about devas and gods and God will convince me otherwise. Maybe attaining GC will convince me God exists, or maybe it won't. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
More esoteric/gnostic early Christian writings such as the Gospel of Thomas are far more clear in their mystical phrasing concerning the Kingdom of Heaven, though, of course, they aren't considered canon by any modern form of Christianity. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
26 years of struggling to achieve what a TM meditator gets in 1 year, quite an impressive achievement :-) No wonder why Buddhists everywhere now start to embrace real meditation. Wesak will prepare them further for the future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLuDcFOA8O0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLuDcFOA8O0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I've seen research on ch'an meditators that suggests that, at least for that group, ch'an meditation had some of the same effects as TM. John Hagelin, in a recent lecture he gave in Tucson, mentioned that a researcher on Zen was proudly touting the impressive (John's word) coherent alpha EEG trace of a 26 year Zen meditator. John went on to point out that it was a 26 meditator and showed similar traces from 1 year TMers, but hey, it's something. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : On the other hand, was a meditation that actually worked, like TM, available for the Buddhist's many of their stale and outdated concepts would naturally fall away and a new light would dawn to millions of souls. This is what is happening in South East Asia today and it will not stop there. This could very well be one of the reasons why the Buddhists on this list show such anger towards the New Age because it exposes their lack of knowledge about higher states of consciousness and brings about transformation and change. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : That's where Buddhism as understood today fails utterly as their models stop with nirvana, they simply don't have any idea or experience of what develops after the initial stages of transcending. To hear them even discuss these topics here on FFL simply brings a smile to your face. And it explains why a spritual child like the Turq has the nerve to claim that a couple of weeks of witnessing decades ago was an experience of enlightenment. Hilarious really :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I don't think that antiests or agnostics are unable to remain atheists or agnostics once they start having God Consciousness or Unity consciousness. The fact that most of our spiritual practices are bound up with religious traditions means that you have few agnostics who are also long-term practitioners of specific practices, but I was arguing about the divinity or non-divinity of Jesus when I was in 4th grade, with my 4th grade Sunday school teacher, so I have no expectation that whatever prompted MMY to talk about devas and gods and God will convince me otherwise. Maybe attaining GC will convince me God exists, or maybe it won't. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Agreed, the ability to transcend has nothing whatsoever to do with ones beliefs in the waking state but on the mechanical abilities of the nervous-system. But if you are doing TM correctly it is doubtful one can remain an atheist forever. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Funny, I never really associated transcending with religious concepts or with God. I just transcended to a quieter area of my mind. My religious beliefs always remained separate. Sometimes, when meditating, I had what felt like restful alertness, which then translated into what I felt was a better degree of activity. In one instance I noticed a constant of silence when I shifted from sleeping to waking up. Nor am I aware of traditional religions talking much about transcending. But I like much of what else you say here. I mean a lot of it is the 'ol, ultimately, there's nowhere to go, sort of thing. But if you're not there, you really can't relate to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Sure. And for all we know, similar sayings of Jesus to those in the Gospel of Thomas may have been redacted from the canonical Gospels. But in this case, he had a very specific point to make to the Pharisees about his identity and their inability to see him for who he was. He wasn't saying Look within, he was saying You're missing what's right in front of your nose. Most likely a very different context from what he said in the Gospel of Thomas. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : More esoteric/gnostic early Christian writings such as the Gospel of Thomas are far more clear in their mystical phrasing concerning the Kingdom of Heaven, though, of course, they aren't considered canon by any modern form of Christianity. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Electro People
Charge up your brain with a little electricity. Maybe you'll even transcend. Inside the Strange New World of DIY Brain Stimulation http://www.wired.com/2014/05/diy-brain-stimulation/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Speaking of Guns
On 5/11/2014 8:45 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Why anyone would feel compelled to kill a groundhog because it was, well, a groundhog is beyond me. Screw those prairie dogs! Groundhogs, like prairie dogs, are pests - rodents. So, I wonder how many groundhogs are killed by motor vehicles, predators or medical research every year? Farmers don't like them because they can pose a serious threat to agricultural and residential development by damaging farm machinery and even undermining building foundations. How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? A woodchuck would chuck all the wood he could if a woodchuck could chuck wood! Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
On 5/11/2014 10:49 AM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife] wrote: One of the things to bear in mind when regarding my American TV preferences is that the terms broadcast and cable mean nothing to me. Don't tell us you even steal your neighbors wireless access point! Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
On 5/11/2014 10:39 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: To believe the statement in the Subject line, you'd have to be able to believe that Being is so petty that it would bar admittance to those who didn't believe in it. The word Being implies /a being of some kind/, or at least a /beingness as in Vajrayana or Vedanta//./ Otherwise, you have /no being//or nothing/; therefore you wouldn't exist as a self-conscious person, a /being/. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
On 5/11/2014 10:39 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: It does have some problems, but it cuts to the heart of the matter. Energy is the heart of the matter. Energy works according to /causation/ - that being so, there must be a /cause for everything/ - you can't get something out of nothing. Without positing a /first cause/, you get an endless debate into absurdity. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Note to Rick, Conderning his interview with Sam Harris
Rick, invite Sam Harris to come to Fairfield to join us in our home of all Knowledge for the Batgap interview. That could be good for stirring the deeper discussion of his spiritual experience and figure out if his is an abiding one. -Buck What is his spiritual experience around this that would allow him to be on Buddha at the Gas Pump anyway? punditster writes: Buck, I think the key word here is Buddha- maybe Harris is a practicing Buddhist. Go figure. There are some who would label all Buddhists atheists, but that is not really correct. Buddhists admit that there are many entities in the universe that can't be seen by man. Millions of Buddhist worldwide consider the gods to be sacred. But, these entities are not capable of offering Buddhists the saving grace, because they are not enlightened. A Buddhist believes in enlightenment - that's why they are referred to as Buddhists- enlightenment is not dependent on deities to instill the gnostic insight. There are clear parallels between the Vajrayana and the Vedanta point of view. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com Buck, I think the key word here is Buddha- maybe Harris is a practicing Buddhist. Go figure. There are some who would label all Buddhists atheists, but that is not really correct. Buddhists admit that there are many entities in the universe that can't be seen by man. Millions of Buddhist worldwide consider the gods to be sacred. But, these entities are not capable of offering Buddhists the saving grace, because they are not enlightened. A Buddhist believes in enlightenment - that's why they are referred to as Buddhists- enlightenment is not dependent on deities to instill the gnostic insight. There are clear parallels between the Vajrayana and the Vedanta point of view. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Note to Rick, Conderning his interview with Sam Harris
Rick as you are proly experiencing in these interviews, becoming a guru in culture can be different than abiding in spiritual experience. In a range and distribution of spiritual folks some can become 'gurus' by virtue of just scholarship alone without even much abiding experience. Others by virtue of ability to teach and talk spiritual technique, or others with having an abiding spiritual transformational effect for others by spiritual field affect. Sat- gurus it would seems would be good at combinations of all three: 1)scholarly, 2)knowledgable and good with techniques, and 3) with field effect of spiritual healing and help in Being. It would be nice to learn where Sam Harris in experience is in effect with this scale as he is becoming a famous talking head in culture. Some people evidently can become cultural gurus just by virtue of their intellectual understandings even without experience. Rick, invite Sam Harris to come to Fairfield to join us in our home of all Knowledge for the Batgap interview. That could be good for stirring the deeper discussion of his spiritual experience and figure out if his is an abiding one. -Buck What is his spiritual experience around this that would allow him to be on Buddha at the Gas Pump anyway? punditster writes: Buck, I think the key word here is Buddha- maybe Harris is a practicing Buddhist. Go figure. There are some who would label all Buddhists atheists, but that is not really correct. Buddhists admit that there are many entities in the universe that can't be seen by man. Millions of Buddhist worldwide consider the gods to be sacred. But, these entities are not capable of offering Buddhists the saving grace, because they are not enlightened. A Buddhist believes in enlightenment - that's why they are referred to as Buddhists- enlightenment is not dependent on deities to instill the gnostic insight. There are clear parallels between the Vajrayana and the Vedanta point of view. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com Buck, I think the key word here is Buddha- maybe Harris is a practicing Buddhist. Go figure. There are some who would label all Buddhists atheists, but that is not really correct. Buddhists admit that there are many entities in the universe that can't be seen by man. Millions of Buddhist worldwide consider the gods to be sacred. But, these entities are not capable of offering Buddhists the saving grace, because they are not enlightened. A Buddhist believes in enlightenment - that's why they are referred to as Buddhists- enlightenment is not dependent on deities to instill the gnostic insight. There are clear parallels between the Vajrayana and the Vedanta point of view. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It turns out that America is more insane than I thought
On 05/11/2014 10:22 AM, 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: On 5/11/2014 10:49 AM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife] wrote: One of the things to bear in mind when regarding my American TV preferences is that the terms broadcast and cable mean nothing to me. Don't tell us you even steal your neighbors wireless access point! Go figure. No, but I think my neighbors may be stealing mine. :-D
[FairfieldLife] More Yahoo Boohoo
Anyone notice that the post count now lists more than just the username? And at least on email I'm also seeing the poster's email address in the From on Thunderbird. This has not always been the case and it was noted on another forum that this began at the end of the week.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Chan and Zen are not the same - as Willy should know but does not. Chan is Chinese, Zen is Japanese and they each reflect the assumptions of their own cultures. However, Chan is not only Chinese but is the distillation of millennia of syntheses with other Buddhist traditions. Zen, on the other hand, is distinctly Japanese in presentation, although here in the West it has taken grafts from American practitioners. The comment discusses “Chan” but doesn’t distinguish the Chan practice of “Mo-Chao contemplation” from Japanese zazen meditation (whether Soto or Rinzai). Therefore, it is hard to know which meditative lineage of actual practice such a comment references. And yes, it does matter. I've seen research on ch'an meditators that suggests that, at least for that group, ch'an meditation had some of the same effects as TM. John Hagelin, in a recent lecture he gave in Tucson, mentioned that a researcher on Zen was proudly touting the impressive (John's word) coherent alpha EEG trace of a 26 year Zen meditator. John went on to point out that it was a 26 meditator and showed similar traces from 1 year TMers, but hey, it's something.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
If you go for this, it's pretty important, that the cover art for the book, contains, at a minimum, a shining sun, blue sky, and a multi-ethnic group of people, some in native garb, mostly smiling a bit too much, with a few, 'deep in thought'. Splash quotes on the cover, by Ram Dass, and Deepak, or, even, Barbra Streisand, would be helpful, too. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Okay, how bout, Atheists Can't Transcend. How Being Bounced Me Right Out of The Transcendent. One Man's Personal Journey (okay, okay, I know it's got some problems technically with transcending partially, but it's a start) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
dhyan buddhism entered CHina and became Ch'an Buddhism. Ch'an Buddhism entered Japan and became Zen Buddhism. The drift in pronunciation mirrors the drift in practices, or so I have read. That each picked up cultural baggage during the migration isn't the point. and as I said: I've seen research on ch'an meditators that suggests that, at least for that group, ch'an meditation had some of the same effects as TM. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : Chan and Zen are not the same - as Willy should know but does not. Chan is Chinese, Zen is Japanese and they each reflect the assumptions of their own cultures. However, Chan is not only Chinese but is the distillation of millennia of syntheses with other Buddhist traditions. Zen, on the other hand, is distinctly Japanese in presentation, although here in the West it has taken grafts from American practitioners. The comment discusses “Chan” but doesn’t distinguish the Chan practice of “Mo-Chao contemplation” from Japanese zazen meditation (whether Soto or Rinzai). Therefore, it is hard to know which meditative lineage of actual practice such a comment references. And yes, it does matter. I've seen research on ch'an meditators that suggests that, at least for that group, ch'an meditation had some of the same effects as TM. John Hagelin, in a recent lecture he gave in Tucson, mentioned that a researcher on Zen was proudly touting the impressive (John's word) coherent alpha EEG trace of a 26 year Zen meditator. John went on to point out that it was a 26 meditator and showed similar traces from 1 year TMers, but hey, it's something.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
The so called parallel between the results of practice means little because it lacks specifics. That is the usual TMO mode of generalization, based as it is upon proselytizing, but in this forum we are not the usual wide-eyed suchophants. We would think that you could do better but as a proselyte - maybe not.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : If you go for this, it's pretty important, that the cover art for the book, contains, at a minimum, a shining sun, blue sky, and a multi-ethnic group of people, some in native garb, mostly smiling a bit too much, with a few, 'deep in thought'. Splash quotes on the cover, by Ram Dass, and Deepak, or, even, Barbra Streisand, would be helpful, too. Don't forget Shirley MacLaine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Okay, how bout, Atheists Can't Transcend. How Being Bounced Me Right Out of The Transcendent. One Man's Personal Journey (okay, okay, I know it's got some problems technically with transcending partially, but it's a start) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
but...but...she's so forgettable...I'll consider Jane Fonda?? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : If you go for this, it's pretty important, that the cover art for the book, contains, at a minimum, a shining sun, blue sky, and a multi-ethnic group of people, some in native garb, mostly smiling a bit too much, with a few, 'deep in thought'. Splash quotes on the cover, by Ram Dass, and Deepak, or, even, Barbra Streisand, would be helpful, too. Don't forget Shirley MacLaine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Okay, how bout, Atheists Can't Transcend. How Being Bounced Me Right Out of The Transcendent. One Man's Personal Journey (okay, okay, I know it's got some problems technically with transcending partially, but it's a start) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Mon 12-May-14 00:15:03 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 05/10/14 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 05/17/14 00:00:00 158 messages as of (UTC) 05/11/14 23:42:32 18 'Richard J. Williams' punditster 16 authfriend 13 fleetwood_macncheese 13 curtisdeltablues 12 steve.sundur 12 nablusoss1008 11 TurquoiseBee turquoiseb 10 jr_esq 9 LEnglish5 7 dhamiltony2k5 7 awoelflebater 7 Bhairitu noozguru 6 Pundit Sir punditster 5 punditster 4 cardemaister 2 emptybill 2 Mike Dixon mdixon.6569 1 anartaxius 1 Share Long sharelong60 1 Michael Jackson mjackson74 1 'Rick Archer' rick Posters: 21 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: More Yahoo Boohoo
http://yahoogroups.tumblr.com/post/85163779041/dmarc-related-changes-in-yahoo-groups http://yahoogroups.tumblr.com/post/85163779041/dmarc-related-changes-in-yahoo-groups ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote : Anyone notice that the post count now lists more than just the username? And at least on email I'm also seeing the poster's email address in the From on Thunderbird. This has not always been the case and it was noted on another forum that this began at the end of the week.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
How 'bout, Betty White? Everybody loves Betty White...and I wouldn't be surprised, if, over her long acting career, she didn't plug at least a couple of Kraft products - perhaps mini-marshmallows, and A1 Steak Sauce... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : but...but...she's so forgettable...I'll consider Jane Fonda?? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : If you go for this, it's pretty important, that the cover art for the book, contains, at a minimum, a shining sun, blue sky, and a multi-ethnic group of people, some in native garb, mostly smiling a bit too much, with a few, 'deep in thought'. Splash quotes on the cover, by Ram Dass, and Deepak, or, even, Barbra Streisand, would be helpful, too. Don't forget Shirley MacLaine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Okay, how bout, Atheists Can't Transcend. How Being Bounced Me Right Out of The Transcendent. One Man's Personal Journey (okay, okay, I know it's got some problems technically with transcending partially, but it's a start) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I think it could be a great title for a book, Atheists Can't Transcend Come to think of it, I don't think I've seen a book in the series along the lines of Transcending for Dummies ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Isn't it in Lukas somewhere it says Seek yea first the kingdom of heaven within.. ? Among turned up in newer translations probably because the within was confusing since they have no idea what that is supposed to be. Also, someone who sought within would be a threat to the Church knowing he would not find a way to it in their teachings. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : P.S.: The complete sentence is, The Kingdom of God is within/among/in the midst of you--you meaning the Pharisees. You can't leave off the you without seriously misrepresenting what Jesus was saying. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Actually, there's major scholarly disagreement with the translation within. Jesus was directly addressing the Pharisees, after all, not making a general statement; and he'd made it crystal clear that he thought they were corrupt inside and out. Just contextually, it's extremely unlikely he was saying the Kingdom of God was within the Pharisees. Most translations other than the KJV have among or in the midst of or similar, referring to the Pharisees' inability to recognize Jesus as the representative of God's Kingdom. Organized religions don't talk much about transcending simply because they lack the methods to achieve it. The Kingdom of God is within must the most revolutionary concept in Christianity yet is rarely or even never discussed out of fear the Church would loose it's grip on the people.
[FairfieldLife] Maharishi: Mother's Love
It's natural for the child to love his mother and for the mother to love her child. And it's so innocent and natural that the love is there for life. A child's love for mother is born out of the necessity for life, and this necessity for life from the side of the child enriches the field of life of the mother. It's so natural. Nature has created that relationship that even though for her life the mother is not dependent on the child, because the child for his life is dependent on the mother, the mother's heart is so formulated that it naturally adds joy to the mother. The child's necessity for life creates in him dependent love for the mother, and in response to this dependent love the mother finds life in her own heart. For life she loves the child, for her own life, even though the love of the child is born of the physical necessity for the mother. This physical necessity is not on the part of the mother. Mother's life doesn't depend on the love of the child, but because the child's life depends on the mother, Nature has so formulated a mother's heart that the mother's heart will not be enriched and the joy of life of the mother will be missing if she doesn't love the child. So from both sides, ultimately, the need for love is natural. This is that natural relationship -- one loves the other. ~Maharishi~ ~Rishikesh, India -- 1969~ Happy Mother's Day! Jai Guru Dev
[FairfieldLife] Watch out for the N-Word
There's been an amusing controversy here in the UK over the past days when a BBC DJ on his regular show playing vintage 78s treated his listeners to a 1932 British hit THE SUN HAS GOT HIS HAT ON. The hapless DJ didn't realize that the lyrics included the N-word - used in all innocence back in thirties Britain - and was forced to resign from his job which he'd held for decades. Funny thing is the song has to be one of the most joyful, life-affirming songs you've ever heard. I'd like to bet if you were to ask a Jamaican if they were offended they'd just laugh and say No Man! and enjoy the piece. The offending line is: He's been tanning n*s out in Timbuktu Now he's coming back to do the same to you Take a listen and see if you don't come away smiling. What's odd is that the BBC plays lots of rap and suchlike where the offending word occurs regularly but no-one seems to mind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDIpkz6DOi8amp;list=FLJad8vN225Nr5hDIzlEOYMA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDIpkz6DOi8amp;list=FLJad8vN225Nr5hDIzlEOYMA .
[FairfieldLife] Re: Watch out for the N-Word
1932 was a good year for memorable 78s. Henry Hall released his version of TEDDY BEARS' PICNIC. This children's favourite is a forgettable, bland song in all other versions but Hall's take has to be one of the creepiest and downright sinister records ever. It was the all-time favourite record of author J G Ballard whose output included titles Crash; High Rise; and Concrete Island. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZANKFxrcKUamp;index=2amp;list=FLJad8vN225Nr5hDIzlEOYMA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZANKFxrcKUamp;index=2amp;list=FLJad8vN225Nr5hDIzlEOYMA
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
Xeno, My comments are in red letters below: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a special term used in the TM practice and should be understood as such, according to MMY's ideas in SBAL and his comments to the Bhagavad Gita. You are making your own definition which does not necessarily agree with the TM practice. Specifically, MMY states that all of life is based in Being which can be accessed by transcending thoughts. He also states in his comments to the Gita that there is a difference between the individual self and the universal Self. IMO, if the meditator does not transcend his own self, then he cannot have access to the universal Self. IOW, the atheist cannot totally access the universal Self, since he is not able to relinquish or transcend his own individual self. He may be able to experience some bliss out of the experience and could agree with the TM parameters. But it is inherently limited and cannot have the full impact of the universal Self. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious concepts, which tends to make practice 'to go beyond the range or limits of' current experience weighted down with a lot of additional conceptualisation and conditioning, in addition to the conceptualisation and conditioning of day to day living. That tends to double the mental load one has to discard to experience everything as being. Again, you are redefining the process of transcending which is not the same as defined by MMY. With the TM practice, a mantra is used to transcend thoughts in order to calm the mind and naturally reach the Unified Field or the Self. Personally, I would not use the term garbage removal to describe the process. IMO, the TM practice could be used outside of the spiritual context, as you imply above. It can provide the bliss that is advertized by the TMO. But the full benefits of the practice cannot be gained when the individual self is not transcended to merge with the universal Self. I believe MMY assumes that this will happen automatically and varies in time among its practitioners. In short, the atheists have one last hurdle to make which is to transcend their individual self in order to gain the full support of the cosmic Self. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Curtis, If you say that you've transcended while meditating, then that means you've experienced Being. So if that is so, how can you say that there is no God, which is Being Itself? C: It is all in how you attach meaning to the experiences we have. I can do better than this. I experienced God plenty, and I still say that is not how I view these experiences now. Currently I think the state in TM is a silent aspect of our minds that has zero ontological meaning about how the universe works. It is just something our brains can do that we don't understand yet and are only confused by traditional assumptions. Different world view huh? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Why? Because they can't let go of the idea that God doesn't exist. What do you think? C: I transcend just fine in the Maharishi technique sense, no differently than when I was a believer. I don't even have to have any idea that god doesn't exist any more than that you have to hold a positive idea that the Easter Bunny
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
I assume that response was to me? I dont' know enough about the presentation John was referring to. He just said 26-year zen practitioner and of course, this reference to a zen practitioner was presented at a conference that ended a couple of weeks ago, so I don't know any more details. As far as the Ch'an paper goes, this paper http://ftp.cs.kun.nl/CompMath.Found/Meditation_V01.pdf http://ftp.cs.kun.nl/CompMath.Found/Meditation_V01.pdf Shows that people who practice VIpassana or Ch'an Mo'chao show a Type B microstate preponderance, while I am expecting that TMers to show a Type C microstate preponderance outside of TM and a Type D microstate (or some more global activation state beyond it) during TM practice. On the other hand, THIS paper DOES report Type C microstates showing up more in Zen practitioners: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?tp=arnumber=5212377url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5212377 http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?tp=arnumber=5212377url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5212377 Until we can do head-to-head studies, it will be hard to make direct comparisons, of course. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : The so called parallel between the results of practice means little because it lacks specifics. That is the usual TMO mode of generalization, based as it is upon proselytizing, but in this forum we are not the usual wide-eyed suchophants. We would think that you could do better but as a proselyte - maybe not.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheists Can't Transcend
This is Maharishi's response to criticisms of his call for scientific research on TM. I found it in an old Creative Intelligence Journal, and have no reason to doubt it's veracity, though I can't give you a timeframe for when he said it: Every experience has its level of physiology, and so unbounded awareness has its own level of physiology which can be measured. Every aspect of life is integrated and connected with every other phase. When we talk of scientific measurements, it does not take away from the spiritual experience. We are not responsible for those times when spiritual experience was thought of as metaphysical. Everything is physical. Consciousness is the product of the functioning of the brain. Talking of scientific measurements is no damage to that wholeness of life which is present everywhere and which begins to be lived when the physiology is taking on a particular form. This is our understanding about spirituality: it is not on the level of faith --it is on the level of blood and bone and flesh and activity. It is measurable. From the above perspective, possibly the only one that atheists and agnostics might find worth paying attention to, TM creates a physiological situation where they perceive the world in a certain way, which Maharishi asserts is how the world really is. Some atheists and agnostics might hear about such a perspective and deem it interesting-sounding enough to want to practice TM, just so they can see the world that way. Some might hear about such a perspective and deem it something to be avoided so they don't do TM. Some might hear about such a perspective and either believe it doesn't exist or don't care, but deem TM worth doing for its health benefits and practice it only for that purpose. If they then find themselves in a condition where teh above perspective seems real, they can evaluate it intellectually however they like. There may be other reactions to the presentation about the above perspective that atheists and agnostics might have as well. In no case do I expect atheists and agnostics to automatically start believing that that perspective (perception of wholeness of life) gained via TM to be the real perspective. Likewise, any perception of God and deities would be interpreted through the intellectual filters that already exist in said atheists and agnostics. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jr_esq@... wrote : Xeno, My comments are in red letters below: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : If everything is being, 'transcending' is then just a myth, a story. The question here is, under what circumstances is the concept of transcending useful? All of us who learned TM obviously must have encountered the term. All the word means is 'to go beyond the range or limits of', and if everything, every aspect of experience is really being, then it cannot apply. It is a term useful for the spiritually stunted because it implies there is something more that can be mined from their experience than they currently recognise. Basically the term defines what is not experienced as transcending, but that does not mean that is what is actually happening when a person meditates is he or she is transcending to being. The whole thing is there all the time, like the ocean around a fish, just unnoticed. Transcending is a special term used in the TM practice and should be understood as such, according to MMY's ideas in SBAL and his comments to the Bhagavad Gita. You are making your own definition which does not necessarily agree with the TM practice. Specifically, MMY states that all of life is based in Being which can be accessed by transcending thoughts. He also states in his comments to the Gita that there is a difference between the individual self and the universal Self. IMO, if the meditator does not transcend his own self, then he cannot have access to the universal Self. IOW, the atheist cannot totally access the universal Self, since he is not able to relinquish or transcend his own individual self. He may be able to experience some bliss out of the experience and could agree with the TM parameters. But it is inherently limited and cannot have the full impact of the universal Self. Transcending is a magicians' trick, the mind takes the sense of it, unaware it is being misdirected, while what is actually happening is a process of garbage removal, deconditioning of the mind, which when complete enough reveals that there never was any transcending in the first place. There does not need to be a concept like god for this to happen. It is not even necessary to have the concept of transcending either, but sometimes it is useful as a tool, when people feel they are less than everything and separate from the world. The idea of transcending in spirituality is usually heavily tainted with traditional religious
