[FairfieldLife] FYI - Dzogchen Direct Instructions
October 23-25 New York City Younge Khachab Rinpoche Returns to New York City October 23rd through the 25th Friday 4-6pm 15 minutes Private Interviews with Rinpoche Friday October 23rd : 6-8pm Buddhism Beyond the Basics: Free public talk -open to all Explore Buddhism philosophy and meditation methods with a true Tibetan Buddhist yogi. This brief talk gives new students a chance to understand how and why Tibetan Buddhism is compared to the highest levels of “mind-science” , the yogic techniques that bring bliss and awareness and how one enters and completes the path. Followed by group meal at local restaurant and chance to visit Rinpoche. Looking for volunteers to host and establish a growing sangha group in NYC RSL is a reg. non profit with centers and practice groups world-wide. Saturday October 24th 10-12/2-6pm Ceaseless Awareness of the Vast Expanse : open to all Rinpoche will teach the Trekchod and Togyal method of Dzogchen according to his own treasure revelations and experience. This is a day to develop true understanding and recognition of one’s primordial pure basis under the step by step personal instruction by a gifted meditation master. Sunday October 25th 10-12/2-6pm Inner Dorje Drollo Practice and Instruction on the Copper-Tube Treasure: Restricted Intensive practice session and deeper instruction on the Younge Dorje Drollo: The Inner Practice of the Copper-Tube Treasure utilizes the tantric meditation of Drollo-Seng-Dongma YabYum with the Dzogchen view of Kadag or Primordial Purity. Rinpoche will also clarify the Tsa-Lung (Wind-Channel Practice) with his own accomplished techniques. Open to those with Younge Dorje Drollo Empowerment or by permission. Verbal Transmission will be given in the first session. Personal Interviews will be available each evening. Contact unagin...@yahoo.com to arrange. Discounts available for Sponsors/Work-study: Please see website for details: Pre-registration must apply!!! Contact westmassachuse...@rimeshedrubling.org for arrangements Or www.rimeshedrubling.org Pre-Registration ONLY: Sessions on Saturday and Sunday are $25 or full day for $40/ AT THE DOOR $50 per session/$75 a day Friday Night is free Location: Kundrolling 151 West 30th St Suite 403 (4th Floor) Between 6th and 7th Street NYC, NY For more information: i...@rimeshedrubling.org www.rimeshedrubling.org
[FairfieldLife] Reality of the world
Isha Upanishad: brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva na parahah brahma satyam - brahman is true jagan mithya - the world is fiction jivo brahmaiva - jiva is brahman indeed na parahah - not other That which is real always *is* - it never comes into being and it never ceases to be. Anything which comes into being or depends upon something (contingency) is temporary and not ultimate. In all forms of Shaivism the universe is dependent upon Shiva. The totality (all universes) and all jiva-s exist as forms projected by Shiva. Shakti (power not energy) is Shiva as such - his power-as-such. She is He. He/She is expressed as iccha (volition), jnana (gnosis), kriya (activity). This universe is relatively real but not ultimately real. It is as real as Shiva chooses (iccha-shakti). He creates and eliminates the universe(s) and all knowers and actors (pashu-s) by his will as a form of his dance. The transcendent is Param: the other, the beyond, the ultimate. To transcend is taraati: cross over, go beyond, go across, to overcome. The transcendent is taranam. Transcendental meditation is Taraatita dhyanam.
[FairfieldLife] Sri Aurobindo went into CC after 3 days of practice
Aurobindo had no sat-guru. He did have a Vaishnava yogi as a upa-guru who gave him a most important technique. I paraphrase from memory from his Letters on Yoga. *This will be easy for you since you are a poet and are used to watching thoughts form out of stillness. Sit and watch these thoughts but this time recognize that they are not you nor are they part of you. See them as happenings that are outside of you. Then reject them as something other than what you are. Throw them out when they come to intrude on your awareness. Then leave them outside, having nothing to do with you whatsoever. *I did as he said and in three days was free. I was enveloped in complete silence that expanded to encompass everything. >From that day on I was drowned in that silence. All mental and physical activity occurred outside of this vast stillness on the boundary of this world. Awakened to the Divine Mission The famous Alipore Bomb Case was the turning point in Sri Aurobindo’s life. For a year Aurobindo was an undertrial prisoner in solitary confinement in the Alipore Central Jail. It was in a dingy cell of the Alipore Jail that he dreamt the dream of his future life, the divine mission ordained for him by God. Aurobindo bore the rigours of the imprisonment, the bad food, the inadequate clothes, the lack of light and free air, the strain of boredom and the creeping solitariness of the gloomy cell. He utilized this period of incarceration for an intense study and practice of the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. Chittaranjan Das defended Sri Aurobindo, who was acquitted after a memorable trial. His Practice of Yoga Sri Aurobindo began his Yoga in 1904. He had no helper or Guru in Yoga till he met Lele, a Maharashtrian Yogi in Baroda; and that was only for a short time. Meditating only for three days with Lele, Aurobindo followed the Yogi’s instructions for silencing the mind and freeing it from the constant pressure of thought. Sri Aurobindo himself once wrote in a letter about his practice of Yoga: "I began my Yoga in 1904 without a Guru. In 1908 I received important help from a Mahratti Yogi and discovered the foundations of my Sadhana". He started Yoga by himself, getting the rule from a friend, a disciple of Brahmananda of Ganga Mutt. It was confined at first to assiduous practice of Pranayama, for six or more hours a day. Aurobindo practised and meditated on the teachings of the Gita and the Upanishads.
[FairfieldLife] Hanussen
There is biography about him, written in German, by an English scholar. There is also information about him in the diary of Joseph Goebbels and in "To The Bitter End" by Hans Gisevius. He is also a rather dark figure in Mel Gordon's autobiography of the stage magician Herr Steinschneider, aka Hanussen. Lots of speculation about him because of his insider status and why he became a plotter in the assassination attempt.
[FairfieldLife] Mahaparinirvana
Billy - I agree with Vaj. Give it up. Even more scary, consider this. If Vaj and I agree on something like this then you should be afraid ... very afraid. It means that universal apocatastasis is almost here and your ass is soon to become a burnt offering to the gods. However, while you are awaiting such oblivion peruse this: http://www.answers.com/topic/nirvana#cite_ref-30
[FairfieldLife] Vajra-duta Natha-duta Yama-duta: many heads, numerous titles, abundant eminence
Vaj: And Bill thanks for trying to elevate me to guru, but you have no clue what my credentials and authorizations are, because I've never discussed them with. So stop spreading lies about what you think my credentials and authorizations might be. Well gosh Vaj. You mean you're not a nath-guru? But that can't be true 'cuz your disciple Kaladevi told me she received teachings and initiation from you and that you were a real nath-acharya. I think you're just too modest. You really don't want to present yourself that way because you would be embarrassed by all the accolades. However, it is nice to know how tight you are with the Shankaracharyas. One of the maths is in trouble now with the Indian government. I’m sure you must be helping them out. Did the US government allow the Indian constabulary to depose you in the murder case against Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati and his junior partner? Since you are so close to the "Shanks" that would make sense. That would also explain why you attacked that poor naive pandit here on FFL. Can't have too many pandits on the same forum can we? Especially if there might be some South Indian religious politics intertwined. You are a pandit aren't you? Why else would those mighty gentlemen whom you call your "Shanks" consort with you? Let's see ... since you have an american body that must mean they recognize that you are actually a maha-tantrika reborn here to lead us dumb westerners from darkness to light. Yeah, that's it ... tamaso ma jyotir gamaya, etc. Well that make sense. According to your disciple Kaladevi, we are just too ignorant to know how eminent you are on the high altars of the Natha-duta lineage. Oh, by the way, so sorry for your Tigers. Those theravada soldiers in Sri Lanka didn't seem to project the level of compassion you've so often discussed and embraced here on FFL. They just killed those Tamil Tigers without even reading them the Satipatthana Sutta first. Must have been jungle karma from old leftover tantrika mantras ... courtesy of that multi-headed rakshasa Ravana - enemy of Lord Ram. Since you also have mutiple heads, I'm wondering if maybe that's your secret too. Let's see - as a pandit that would make you a Brahma-Rakshasa. Now that I think about it ... gosh ... I better be more careful. Oops ... gulp gulp, sweat sweat. So sorry Lord Nath. Thank you, thank you, for not obliterating me with your maha-astra mantras and once and for all doing away with me ... just because you could. Of course, I know that's not your only reason, since doing that might scare away your admirers here FFL. Gosh that too just shows your keen wisdom.
[FairfieldLife] More Palast des Okkulten
Emptybill: So the Palast des Okkulten is in your back bedroom? Robert: Hey Billy, What the heck is a Palast des Okkulten? I have no idea what kind of person you think I am... We have never met, as far as I can remember... I had a horrible death last time around, so I had to heal up a lot. Emptybill: Although you call yourself babaji you don't stage yourself like a 20th Century Magician. (snip) Robert: Hey Billy, Last time I looked, it is the 21st. Century... Did you miss the last 100 years, Mr. Empty? or what? R.g. Hey Robert, Just a little elbow to the ribs that’s all … not meaning to offend as Tripura Kirk would say. I have no idea of "what kind of person" you are nor have we met in this life that I know. Perhaps the last, for what it's worth. You mentioned Hanussen so I followed by asking some questions that you still haven’t answered. Here are some more: On what basis do you make this connection? How do you know? Here … I’ll help by providing possible answers: You saw a Triumph des Willens and felt sympathy.You heard Mack the Knife and then had a dream.You went to a psychic who said - “you were a stage clairvoyant”. You did a past life regression without any knowledge about who, what, when but you keep yelling in the mirror “I see a great fire!” You remember driving a Bugatti.You want to go Boar hunting without knowing why. However you do know you were not Krishna's friend Arjuna during the Kurukshetra war.
[FairfieldLife] Palast des Okkulten (was Marshy: All Hat, No cattle)
Herr Babaji said: Last time around, I think I chose the name: Hanussen. Look it up! "I think" is a weak way to propose that something is actual. What could be your basis other than sheer wishfulness? Although you call yourself babaji you don't stage yourself like a 20th Century Magician. So the Palast des Okkulten is in your back bedroom?
[FairfieldLife] Goodbuddy Vajraduta
Vaj says- Interesting in that Mahesh's obsession with the southmay have had to do with him acting out his own unresolvedfear of death. For the yogin it is the south of the body--the anus and the legs-- that one wants to remain closed, and the aperture of brahman, the north, open. Externals matter little unless you're sellingreal estate like the Marshy.. We should all now be pleased that Vaj has finally come around to a more balanced view. He is now either channeling Maharishi or talking to him secretly in the mirror. Maybe that is what his crying monologues really reflect – he hears Roy Orbison singing “Skrying Over You” every time he thinks of Marshy (one of his first loves). As adeptus annihil he sure does k-no-w a lot.. However, I’mbeginning to realize just how beneficial this Marshy channeling is for him.He is no longer worried about anal fistula breaches to his south entrance like he was a few years ago.Now if the Ganas would just abandon the upa-chakras in his legs he might seem almost normal. Maybe we should all do some Ganapati mantra for our good buddy Vajraduta – it would be a miraculous restoration.
[FairfieldLife] Direction of the head
To face East is to face the solar dawn and hence the source of light. The same for sleeping with the head pointing East. The South is the direction of Yama, the deva of death. This is why in India the corpse is turned with the head pointing toward the South - it is a signal for the Yamadutas, the servants of Yama, to come take the jiva-soul to Yama and not allow it to wander lost and alone in the antarbhava, the interspace between the worlds. All of this is part of the mythogeography defining the South entrance as a direction of loss and is another reason it is sometimes sealed off from common use.
[FairfieldLife] Vipassana Retreats
This looks and sounds like the 10-day vipassana sourse of Goenka. It demonstrates a typical style designed for retreats in Indo-China (ie: for semi-tropical weather). Thus the evening meal is absent in this schedule. However it is more necessary for cold climates. That it is forbidden here shows the same old rigid pattern of practice and understanding - something which stands in for a "received" tradition of practice. The same holds for "noble" silence. Silent vipassana retreats are famous for "silent glance" romances during the formal 10 days of practice. Two of my friends taught TM in SE Asia. In conversation with Western vipassana teachers, who also taught in SE Asia, my friends discovered that both meditation traditions encountered the same over-riding problem: difficulty in training new practitioners NOT to concentrate or strain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Kaladevi's maya
Normal 0 Sorry to break it too you Nab but Kaladevi is an impersonation of that old cross-dressing Vaj. "They" are the self-same. Gives a new meaning to the Sanskrit word advaita (not-two-ness) doesnt it? When Vaj gets short on posts he brings her out of the closet, inflates her, cleans the jism off of her and parades around in the FFL livingroom as "her dark-radiance, Kunti-nath - Kaladevi". Wish there was something more exotic but this is how self-initiated gurus get their start.
[FairfieldLife] Kaladevi's claims
So kaladevi, dear. You portray yourself as knowing something. However, we have never talked, either in this forum or another. If you think you know so much about me then please present the message number or date/time of our conversation - anything where you can claim that you know me or anything about me. Please be specific - none of Vaj's bullshit. Perhaps you can enlighten me about myself - dear. The message number please! I think this is the same Bill who claims to be an Orthodox Greek monk (I guess he must have been defrocked?), a TM teacher who still practices TM, a student of Younge Khachab Rinpoche ( http://www.rimeshed rubling.dreamhos ters.com/ site/ ) but seems to dabble in a number of lamas who happen upon the center in Kansas City. IOW it sounds like Bill doesn't know what his lineage is. He's what we'd call a dabbler. I think this is the same guy who also claimed to be a disciple of Hitler in a previous life. One things for certain, he really should repeat the ngondro (if he has ever performed it at all). Based on his roughshod presentation here I would seriously doubt he's Dzogchen material.
[FairfieldLife] For Barry, the French and compassion's claimants.
Normal 0 Normal 0 Barry: The French were the second nation on the planet to have to live with and deal with terrorism. (The first was Britain, inter- estingly enough. The modern definition of terrorism was invented in the press to describe the actions of the Jewish groups in Palestine who were planting bombs to drive the English out and have it become Israel.) But "next in line" was France, having to deal with terrorist wars in their colonies of Morocco and Algeria and Vietnam. Emptybill: The French have a huge Army that is now a professional one like in the US. In some ways we are fortunate that they provide a second anchor for Western civilization - along with the nuclear arms to back it up. However, who could believe they might ever use them? After their flight from the Germans in '39-40 they dived into post-empire irrelevance. Their defeat in Vietnam merely proved that they were weak post-Colonials. That is not the same as the American anti-communist fight in Vietnam nor the same as our rather unnecessary war in Iraq. We should have left that puffed up little dictator in place to oppose the Persian - this has now become obvious. As far as your statement about terrorism, I advance a different claim - Colonial Americans were the first terrorists of the modern age and the Brits were our chosen targets. I say this not just to restate history but as a physical being born in a specific family lineage. The fact is that I come from a long line of independence seekers - from dream-seekers straight off of the original mayflower to Virginians fighting against the British redcoats. To this day, my kinfolk still believe that the only thing standing between us and the bayonets of the ruling government is a loaded firearm. Such a view puts "terrorism" in a different light. Just in case your are wondering, I am quite aware that the French were our backers in the revolutionary war. We owed them a debt from the revolution which we finally repaid - from the Marne River in 1918 to the beaches of Normandy in 1943. However we need to redefine most of this history as the mere "past" since all those former Frenchmen from that time are gone. They vanished from Europe because they lost faith in the old values during the slaughter of the trenches. They are here and them is us. They/We have taken rebirth upon the North American continent and in Australia. Think this is absurd? Mere bullshit or opinion? Then you obviously must think your own intellect is equal to assay "reality-as-such"? Find it comforting having such a lofty view to assert that everything is merely a matter of opinion? I say fuck such arrogantly endemic doubt parading as certainty. I know the Frogs went to North America and Australia because god told me so. She also told me that the devil has always loved Her more than you do. She pointed out that this is why she rewards him every day with supreme recognition and why you get only shit. Such is life. Live with it. Thus it is so. (Doesn't that sound o'-so-Buddhist?) By the way, no wonder you have nothing to claim other than your own opinion. You were probably that poor SOB that Plato referred to when he said that opinion (doxa) was the lowest form of knowledge - one bordering on mere superstition. Wouldn't you like to stop hanging on to your old sanskaras from that 340 B.C. lifetime? Emptybill said: > Yeah, why don't we become more like the French? We could stick our asses up into the wind and shout "Please come here and fuck me!!!" All the nations would praise us and we would finally be liked by the rest of the world. Barry: Uh, billy jim...I cannot help but wonder where this came from. Can you provide a cite of the Buddhist sutra on compassion you base it on? :-) I do Tantric sadhanas and Dzogchen Trekcho along with TM-Sahaj. Even the Medicine Buddha Sadhanas that I do are Tantric. Mahayana Sutras are for the pious. Do I sound pious? Barry, if you are actually such a high-flying Buddhist then why don't you stand up like a real universal-vehicle practitioner that is if you really give a shit about someone else with all your weeping compassion? What your posts seem to demonstrate is that you dearly believe in yourself. Which Sutra, Tantra or Upadesh do you use as a support for that display? None. You doubt everything but you don't doubt yourself. What chutzpah. And by the way, don't give me some Tantric bullshit like Vaj. If the Yidam-Devas really cared about us, they would sweep us up and throw us into the next lifetime with terrifying abandon - one where we could no longer hide like rats here in the outhouse of samsara.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
I always knew we would eventually get something worthwhile from Vaj. So now she can be revealed: The Vajra Yoni Sutras. Vaj discovered her in a cave (guha) back East. She called herself AdhiStrih nee Kunti. No wonder he rants like a man who makes it all up. This whole universe is made up. From golden embryo to solos nocturnus it is just a dream.
[FairfieldLife] The Vedic Gods as Figures of Biology
This sounds like the photocopy of a book I saw at Fiuggi Fonte, Italy in late April of 1972 during the so-called '2000' course. MMY had the SIMS dogs set up an SCI administration office in one of the hotels along with a few books - a sort of starter library. Somehow I got word of this text showing correspondences between Vedic Devas and human anatomy/physiology. I went to that office and they actually let me read the text, although they wouldn't let me photocopy it or take it out of the office. They did let me take notes and if I remember correctly those are probably in a footnote on my course notes from one of MMY's lectures at that time. How weird. The bardo of this life is stranger than a David Lynch film. om hrih strih vikrtaanana hum phat.
[FairfieldLife] Re: sahasraara maatrika
Normal 0 Card According to Sanjukta Gupta (translator), "Lakshmi Tantra - A Panchratra Text", the sanskrit *ara means either a wheel-spoke or a radius. Thus the rays of the sun are also sometimes call *ara. You might consider buying the Lakshmi Tantra since it is worth some study the sahasra-ara mantras are contained in it. Here are some itsy-bitsy pointers from this large text: om sahasraara hu.m pha.t is the six syllable sudarshana mantra of Vishnu-Narayana. sahasraara iim is the sudarshana bijamantra om sa.m ha.m sraa.m ra.m huu.m pha.t is the samj~na mantra hrii.m (taaraa) and shrii.m (anutaaraa) pacify sudarshana and must always follow and concluded any iterations, either verbal, mental or contemplative. This last point is considered essential for maintaining mind-prana sanity when doing any serious sadhana of sudarshana mantra. If you remember that sudarshana-chakra was a gift from Rudra-Shiva to Vishnu-Narayana of his own final universal end-it-all incandescence then you will be careful. It is considered potent mantra - not for sand-box play. Better to just be a curiously amused dilettante rather than commit self-induced mantracide i.e. jivaatma-maarana. Posted by: "cardemaister" no_re...@yahoogroups.com cardemaister Wed May 13, 2009 1:41 am(PDT) I used to think "saharara" is some kind of derivative from 'sahasra', which means 'thousand'. Only recently realized it's a compound word, and the accurate spelling is actually 'sahasraara' , which is sandhi for 'sahasra' + 'ara': ara m. spoke of a wheel. So, 'sahasraara' seems to be a bahuvriihi-compound , perhaps meaning something like 'thousand-spoked' (wheel).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Now it can be told - the secret story behind Rishi, Devata, Chhandas, Swara
Normal 0 Everyone wake up! Vaj is about to reveal what that devil Maharishi concealed from us. (All so he could bilk us of our hard earned cash.) At last, Vaj the Valiant will give us this secret knowledge (guhya-vidya) and will do so utterly for free, free, free swaha. What a yogi. What a saint. What a common man for the rest of us. Ok, Vaj. Now do it! Re: Mantra and Devata-One and the same. Posted by: "Vaj" vajradh...@earthlink.net vajradhatu108 Tue May 12, 2009 5:07 pm (PDT) Really I hope you realize that this is a moot point. The last thing on earth Mahesh would want would be for the world to correctly understand what rishi, devata, chhandhas, svara, etc. (the necessary aspects of any mantra) really meant. Why? Devata is the specific force of deity. MMY's whole facade is built around it NOT being religious, but "science", Maharishi Vedic "Science". IOW, his exposition, for a correct understanding of mantra, is best avoided.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Drinking and Cigars: a recognized religious rite and requirement
Here Here - There There - Hare Hare Even Bhaktivedanta used snuff. It was an Indian gentleman's indulgence. Let us enjoy fine Dominicans, like Romeo Y Julieta. Let us enjoy fine British Empire indulgences, like kick in the door and shoot 'em all - Black and Tan. Let us enjoy fine Americans, like Woodford Reserve. Let us enjoy - all you puritanical prudes!
[FairfieldLife] Questions unanswered by Vaj
Normal 0 Vaj: One of the fastest ways, if not the fastest way to generate nondual samadhi is to learn the practice of nondual compassion meditation. It actually generates the same neurological signatures as advanced Patanjali meditators in samadhi. Too imprecise. Give us something substantive to consider. What do you mean by non-dual samadhi. Whose non-dual samadhi? Gaudapada in the Mandukya Karikas? Shankara in his Bhagavad Gita commentary? Abhinavagupta? Radharani in Goloka Vrindavana? Or is this more Buddhist superimposition? What is non-dual compassion? How can compassion be non-dual since it involves an other? In Buddhism the Brahma-Vihara meditations are not considered adequate to generate liberation either in Theravada or Mahayana but they can generate a full dhyana-samapatti. Is this what you mean or are you discussing something else. If so what is it? Who are these advanced Patanjali meditators in samadhi? Where and when were their neurological signatures studied? What studies of non-dual meditators demonstrate significant parallels with Patanjali meditators. What studies are you talking about? Where can we find these studies? What should anyone believe that neurological brainwave activity is a definitive indicator of anything spiritual such as higher states of consciousness? This sounds like TM speak.This is a question that has never been answered by anyone, most especially by neurologists. It all appears to be sets of inferences linked to a-prior assumptions. This is especially true of the TMO. Why parrot it if you distain it?
[FairfieldLife] The Gita mesage: kill 'em all - let god sort 'em out.
Normal 0 What a nice fricative-guttural, finished off with the prime utterance. This must be part of the newly discovered american veda. Yep, it's a real sound of wonder - "FuckAh!" It make you want to become a cantor in the american vedic church doesn't it? In that old epic, Krishna and Arjuna were kshatriya. What a shame. Poor Arjuna and Krishna were just slaves to the gunas weren't they? They couldn't stop killing. Rajas uber alles. Even worse! Arjuna unknowingly contested with Shiva (who took up the form of a hunter in the forest) in shooting at a wild boar. Poor Shiva Sharva, the Archer who killed a boar. He must not have heard of PETA yet. He must have been a slave of the gunas too. Poor Rama, he put Dharma before love of Sita. If he had been a Vaishya instead of a Raja he could have bought off the washerman who slandered his wife. But he couldn't even kill his slanderous subject. He must have been weak. But what else could you expect from a Raja constrained by satyam, ritam, brihat? Dharma - it's just so inconvenient. And that old filthy intellect emotions oozing whore. Everyone look out! What a heartless objective hammer to pound down the relativities and then throw towards us! I had to duck. But at last, finally, it can now be told! The edgerunner was alone in the forest of uncertainty with his little tag-along whore. Then whooaa! She turns out to be Durga herself, in tutelage to the edgerunner a rishi level intellect free of influence from emotion or obscuration. How else to explain how a human being could even notice the possibility of objectivity seeing they can never go beyond human subjectivity? But wait! I just got it! Sorry Im so stupid that it took me this long. Its Deus ex Machina. Only here the Deus is edgerunner himself. Gosh, oh gee. What is the sound of one hand striking the forehead?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Questions about empathy for Judy (Re: Warning!)
Normal 0 Too imprecise. Give us something substantive to consider. What do you mean by non-dual samadhi. Whose non-dual samadhi? Gaudapada in the Mandukya Karikas? Shankara in his Bhagavad Gita commentary? Abhinavagupta? Longchenpa? AbnAl-Arabi? St. Symeon the New Theologian, St. Gregory Palamas? Radharani in Goloka Vrindavana? What is non-dual compassion? How can compassion be non-dual since it involves an other? In Buddhism the Brahma-Vihara meditations are not considered adequate to generate liberation either in Theravada or Mahayana but they can generate a full dhyana-samapatti. Is this what you mean or are you discussing something else. If so what is it? Who are these advanced Patanjali meditators? Where and when were their neurological signatures studied? What studies of non-dual meditators demonstrate significant parallels with Patanjali meditators. What studies are you talking about? Where can we find these studies? Why should anyone believe that neurological brainwave activity is a definitive indicator of anything spiritual? This sounds like TM speak. This is a question that has never been answered by anyone, most especially by neurologists. It all appears to be sets of inferences linked to a-prior assumptions. This is especially true of the TMO. Why parrot it if you hate it? Vaj: One of the fastest ways, if not the fastest way to generate nondual samadhi is to learn the practice of nondual compassion meditation. It actually generates the same neurological signatures as advanced Patanjali meditators in samadhi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gayatri, Buddhist mantra, HHDL on enlightenment
>Posted by: "Kirk" kirk_bernha...@cox.net >tripura_kirk >Sun Mar 15, >2009 8:24 am(PDT) >Sounds kinda bookish. Who >wrote all that? Who else? Moi. Sound too pedantic? Then you should consider reading HHDL instead of worshiping him from afar. He is a Gelugpa scholar. His scholastic books are full of pedantic reasoning. I gave a very short positional description of one significant conclusion he repeats many times in his books. Go look up "non-affirming negative" on google or wiki. But understand that this is exactly how the Gelugpa and HHDL see it. Go read "The Gelug/Kagya Tradition of Mahamudra". You will see one of the cental criticisms of the HHDL/Gelugpa presented to you in black and white - that they replace direct insight with conceptual abstraction. Read it and weep. On the other hand, the Lama I work with, Younge Khachab Rimpoche, insists that HHDL is also yogi and not just a scholar. I have asked him this at least three times. He should know since he is a Geshe Rabjam trained at Ganden Monastery (the Dalai Lama's own) and is a Rime scholar-yogin himself. Although trained as a Geshe, he is a Kagyu Khenpo Dzogchen yogi scholar. That means I have it on good authority who is the real thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth eclipses the sun
Yes I wrote it but I was occluded. I admit it. High sounding talk like that may seem pedantic but I figure meditating stoners will flip back and forth with it in a bardo of felt meaning. Who needs the immediacy of transcendence when you can have felt meaning? Reminds me of a sutra I heard somewhere - Experience is not always what it seems, Even skimmed milk parades as ghee.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the devious
Normal 0 Here are some thoughts for your consideration about using the term "yogi": Definitions of these kinds of terms depend on the context in which such a term is used. Wiki definitions are often useful for a quick introduction to a topic. However they are sometimes inaccurate when taken as authoritative. We use the term yogi here in the West in a rather casual way. We use it to identify someone who engages in some kind of serious practice of yoga, whether that practice is Hindu or Buddhist. In the past the situation was different particularly in India. Yogi was a term only used for someone who was enlightened whether that meant yoked to Bhagavan or united in Brahman. It was not a term used for a practitioner of yoga. The term used for a serious practitioner (sadhaka) of yoga was tapasin a term meaning someone who practiced tapasya (either particular kinds of austerities or practiced yoga in an austere, rigorous manner). Perhaps this way of using the term is less prevelant in contemporary times since Indian culture has become influenced by Western ideas. Tibetans are less formal about these designations. They use the term yogi to differentiate a serious practitioner from a mere scholar. However they more generally use the term Ngakpa (a Mantrin or mantrika) - meaning a practitioner of mantras. However this does not mean that someone only practices mantra and nothing else. Rather it means someone whose whole life is devoted to yoga practice. This Tibetan definition may sound similar to our own but is much more challenging way of practicing than most of us are willing to do. The foundational practices (so called preliminaries) for taking up Tantric discipline begins with sets of 100,000 repetitions for each of four or five separate types of practice - prostrations being only one type. When we consider that full prostrations on the floor (danda pranams) are the norm then for we begin to see it all in a different way. And that is just to get started. Posted by: "BillyG." wg...@yahoo.com wgm4u Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:57 am (PST) Even I am a Yogi, only because I meditate. It's really a generic term and he certainly NEVER said he was a Guru or a Sat-Guru, he's offering *Yoga-lite for modernity*, the only Yoga modernity is capable of getting any benefit from, at its present state of evolution. I think in the context you're speaking you mean a *realized* Yogi, or Jivan Mukti, yes? From Wiki: A yogi (Sanskrit, feminine root: yogini) is a term for a male practitioner of various forms of spiritual practice. In contemporary English yogin is an alternative rendering for the word yogi. In Hinduism it refers to an adherent of Yoga. The word is also often used in the Buddhist context to describe Buddhist monks or a householders devoted to meditation. Chatral Rinpoche for example is a famous wandering yogi from Tibet
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Randy or Kirk
Kirk, you need to check out your keyboard. You keep typing in navanath when you are obviously trying to hit naganath. The fact is that Vaj denied being a Gaudiya Vaishnava but not being a naga. It was very revealing. But then he has no sense of humor. In this way Vaj reminds me of Baptist Jimmy Carter. Back in the late '70, we realized "how could we ever have trusted a president who wasn't a two fisted drinker". Vaj proves himself similar. I try and throw the guy an absurb but tasty vignette - just to give him a way to creatively play off his negative depictions here and prove that he is not the viciously doctinare man he appears to be. What does he do? Returns to his naga-kaya in the next few posts. What greater display of ego absorbtion is needed? Vaj throws doubt on everything else but believes firmly in himself. That is why he was unable to get it. Judy certainly got it and she doesn't even like Vaj. If we accord ourselves in this way then we have no basis to complain when the Yidam throws us across multiple lifetimes in utter distain. Navanath my ass. You appear to have become intoxicated with the bitches running the cosmos. However, the fact is that you don't seem to admitt they aren't running it for you. The shaktis are not concerned with you. Your assumptions about them are sentimental delusions. You are a yoni not a yogi. Don't like how I'm addressing you? Unlike you and Vaj, I'm not talking figuratively. I work in a hospital, bub. Every day I watch the shaktis perform their dance. Most are wrapped up in ordinary consciousness - they just help people in distress and remain within that domain. Even then they give 100's of times more genuine human help to real people then either of us with our big-ass bodhisattva vows. Only that is not all. Some of them are nuns. Dressed like the rest of us they are utterly invisible - that is until you interact with them. Try as I might I have never been able to shake even one of them. And I should know how since I spent three years in a Russian Orthodox Monastery. What I found were women so unshakeable, yet still awake and open, that I couldn't fool them or get a grip long enough to shake their bodhi tree. These are real flesh and blood shaktis with shtiti prajna. They possess shocking sensitivity without even a trace of sentimentality. These are the kinds of shakits you lustfully talk about (shri yantra and all) but the reality is that they just jack off petty sadhakas to keep them absorbed and asleep in the dream. Like the Valkyies however, they don't accept the aparads of the transgressors - they just cut their arotas and send them into the beyond as offering for the universal agni-hotra. Samaya Jah Jah Jah --Vaj a Vaishnava? That's a new one. Just so you all know, so as to refute, since he must have some position, you should all accept him as a Natha of the original Navanath tradition. As such I was friends with a friend of his guru in a past life that I remember all too well. Navanaths are Hindu - sometimes Buddhist or bordering both and believe in no supreme lord or personality beyond that of the founding fishy one of Navanaths and sometimes Guru Datta or Bhaskaraya. Vaj may refute me if he likes. If I am mistaken then I stand to be corrected. Some Nathas dislike Buddhism and extremely dislike the Nyingma tradition. They mistakenly think that Dzogpachenpos are trying to dissolve the essential drops and tigles when this is simply not the case. Some Naths may exist in any other dimension of tradition or not, as it's all a matter of will to them - Take your Jah Jah Jah and add a 93
[FairfieldLife] Re:BSG
I've mainlined it since it started. Love the questions it raises and refuses to answer in a doctrinare fashion. This is scifi at its best - glorifying ultimate questions in a high manner - torture, jihad, revelation, genocide, species annihilation, human nature as such. The list goes on and it would all be television bull except for the witnessing non-position it takes. I've heard various claims about the final story but none seem accurate yet. I just wanna watch and be amazed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Website Gita
This commentary on BG Chapters 8 and 9 definitely has the feel of MMY's earlier manner of thought and delivery.
[FairfieldLife] Re:Q: viraama-pratyaya?
Normal 0 Feuerstein in The Yoga-Sutra of Patanjali, Sutra I.18: The compound viraama-pratyaya means: viraama = ceasing or stopping (from vi + |ram to stop) pratyaya = an idea or notion (presented forth to consciousness) abhyaasa = practice puurva = former sa.mskaara = latent seed-impression, subliminal-activator, s`e.sa = remainder, residuum anya = other Thus Patanjali, after discussing samadhi with prajna (samadhi with an object of cognition), describes the method of entering seedless samadhi (samadhi without any object of cognition): Trevor Leggett: The other (samadhi) follows on practice of the idea of stopping and consists of samskaras alone. Feuerstein: the other (type of samadhi) has a residuum of subliminal-activators; (it follows) the former (cognitive-samadhi) upon the practice of the presented-idea of cessation. Thus a completed translation: Samadhi without an object of cognition follows upon practicing the idea of stopping and consists of only a residue of latent impressions. Vyasa: When all the activities of individual consciousness (chitta-vritti) have stopped* and only latent-impressions remain, then in that state of resting-consciousness, samadhi is no longer filled with cognitions (a-sam-prajna-ta). The means to that state is the highest non-attraction (vairagya)**. No meditation can be a means to it, so the meditation is made upon the idea of stopping and ceasing (virama), which is the absence of anything. A seedless samadhi-without-cognitions is devoid of any object. Thus the mind, since it practices this samadhi-without-support, leads to a state wherein the mind itself appears non-existent. This is samadhi-without-a-seed and is trans-cognitive. Shankara: Patanjalis words - follows upon practicing the idea of stopping show the relation to the discipline of practice (upaya) but consists of only a residue of latent impressions explains its nature (svabhava). Stopping (virama) means ceasing. The compound idea-of-stopping (virama-pratyaya) means: stopping and the idea of it; the form of this idea is simply stopping, so it is called the idea of stopping. It still has the form of an idea at the time it begins ceasing from everything, as while it is still coming to a stop and before it has finally ceased to be an idea at all. It is thus like a flaming fire that is little by little going down as its fuel is used up but which is still truly a flame until it finally extinguishes, leaving only ashes. Shankara, quoting Vyasas text the mind, since it practices this samadhi-without-support, leads to a state wherein the mind itself appears non-existent, then remarks, which must have been preceded by this practice. Thus also quoting Patanjali, and consists of only a residue of latent impressions, with the stopping of all ideas, what remains is only the latent impressions (sanskaras) of them. The meaning is that when the mind has withdrawn from ideas of objects, there remain sanskaras alone. Vyasas The means to that state is the highest non-attraction (viraga/vairagya) shows that the highest degree of non-attraction is the means to this samadhi. Card: Im sure you may see the relevance of this sutra to both our meditation and sanyama practice. Practice of the idea of stopping and ceasing (not the words but the idea) performed during sanyama leads, through sheer non-attraction/non-excitation, to seedless samadhi - no sutra. This seedless, nirbija-samadhi described by this sutra (I.18) furthermore points to the fading out of both objective and subjective references into a samadhi of latent impressions only thus no mantra either. Since vairagya as not just a condition of non-excitation but also one of non-attraction, it means not favoring (iccha) the sutra/mantra (the ishta in ishta-devata) while one is established in an awareness that remains awake to the activities in consciousness. It means remaining at rest (nirodha or arrestment of activities) in awareness just as it is until it is overcome by sanskaras and no longer maintains itself as various thoughts arise and then seize attention. Not sure if this is relative to anything? Then just give it a try. Over time youll see its value as a certified Patanjali sanyama-sutra. And by the way, this is one of those subtle nuances in meditation instruction between SSRS and the later-day teachers of MMYs meditation technique. It is also highlights one of the complaints brought up by a number of former teachers of MMY between his finalized method (from the early 70s) and the method of instruction now given by contemporary teachers of the TMO. Anyway, please feel free to review and critique as you see fit. I will be working 12 hour shifts the next four days and so will probably not be able to continue a discussion on this topic. Maybe I can reply on Tuesd
[FairfieldLife] Re: A reply to Vaj about Mantras, Religion, etc.
Normal 0 Re: [FairfieldLife] Mantras, Religion, etc Hi Billy Jim: On Jan 26, 2009, at 6:05 PM, billy jim wrote: Their fundamental claim is that a mantra is the name of a Hindu god. Vaj wrote: You might want to reread those "claims". These aren't "names" per se, but seed-forms of nicknames of Goddesses or Gods. Code-words, if you will. Hi Vaj. Why gee, Vaj, you must have thought my post was talking about you. However, I have not reviewed your vast variety of claims here on FFL. Some of the people making these more basic claim about mantras write here, while others make their claims on different forums. Sorry to say, but whether you might agree or disagree with those peoples claims was not really significant to me when I composed my original post. I was addressing a set of common claims we all have heard over the years, many of them sounded out here on FFL. Vaj: To use a previous example, "Shri" is not the name of Laxmi, Shri is a nickname or epithet of Laxmi. This is a crucial distinction. Gosh gee, Vaj. You have become so creative that you are now making your own definitions. I dont have your flair for it so I just stick with scholars of Indian yoga, religion and mythology. According to them, Shri and Lakshmi were separate values that did not become properly defined as goddesses until the period of the Brahmanas. The famous Shri Suktam is actually a khila, or appendage hymn, added to the Rig Veda but is not placed with any of the original riks. Shri and Lakshmi appear in the Yajur Veda and later they coalesce into a single deity. As epitaphs, the words shri and lakshmi do appear in the Rig Veda but not as goddesses. These terms were used as adjectives of splendor and opulence, along with the word shiva, meaning auspicious, which also appears in Yajur Veda as the now famous namah shivaya. So in comment upon your claim, the only distinction that is crucial is that these terms were originally used to describe various forms of glory. They were later mythologized into goddesses, where they received these attributions as proper names, which then were descriptively united as a single goddess. And yes Vaj, I realize that you know there never were gods or goddesses in India, only devas. This is a well known journey from Vedic Brahmism to Purana-Agama Hindu temple worship. BillyJim: The claim is that a mantra, by definition, encapsulates a method for worshiping a Hindu god but that this fact is withheld from practitioners. Vaj: No! It does not withhold any sort of method at all. It only withholds a meaning. Sorry again Vaj, but I really must confess that I did not have you in mind. Christians and Post-Christians, who consider method and meaning to be the same for their argument, constructed this particular claim. Since mantras are considered god-names for them, worship of a false god is ingredient in using mantras, whether a meaning is imparted or not, whether a mantra is understood or not. This was why I used the word encapsulate. So sorry again, Vaj. Perhaps I should consult you first before posting here. That way you could better guarantee my posts would strictly follow your own prescient ideas about correct interpretation. Even better, maybe you can construct for me an outline I can follow to get it just right. What a relief you could give to me Vaj. I would no longer need to think for myself nor would I need to contemplate anything. I could then call myself Nirvikalpa Bill instead of just plain old Empty Bill. BillyJim: Within the domain of this argument, these claimants will often quote some text from a Hindu Tantra. These are passages usually assigning a particular deity to a particular mantra and sometimes even assigning a set of deities to each of the Sanskrit letters composing the written forms of the mantric sound. This textual assignment is sometimes done haphazardly and occasionally is done in the Vedic format of rishi-deva-chhanda. Vaj: Again, wrong. They are done in the TANTRIC format. This is only related to the Vedic sense in that the prior tantric forms, at a certain point in history, reached a certain symbiosis with the invading Vedic ideals. Gee gosh, Vaj. When a poster puts up quotes from a Tantra and then makes claims about the mantras in TM having the same meaning, I guess I need to send them to you on FFL. You could then say something like: Vaj: But the fact is, the tantric forms of mantra-shastra existed BEFORE the Vedic adaptations, not vice versa as you attempt. This would include the broader tantric interpretation of rishi-devata-chhandas-svara-prayoga, etc. etc. Gosh again, Vaj. What if these people need to see some history of the Veda literature and then compare it to Tantra, Shaiva Agama and Pancha
[FairfieldLife] Mantras, Religion and finally a statement from an liberated tapasin
Normal 0 Recently I have read here on FFL an argument professed by some former TMers who stopped practicing because they claimed they were deceived about the "meaning" of mantras. Their fundamental claim is that a mantra is the name of a Hindu god. The claim is that a mantra, by definition, encapsulates a method for worshiping a Hindu god but that this fact is withheld from practitioners. Within the domain of this argument, these claimants will often quote some text from a Hindu Tantra. These are passages usually assigning a particular deity to a particular mantra and sometimes even assigning a set of deities to each of the Sanskrit letters composing the written forms of the mantric sound. This textual assignment is sometimes done haphazardly and occasionally is done in the Vedic format of rishi-deva-chhanda. Along with the quoted Tantric text is sometimes a statement by MMY, declaring that a mantra is a "sound whose effect is known". This argument quotes the TMO claim that a mantra is used in TM for the beneficial effects it produces in causing the spontaneous refinement of perception. This explanation is then paraded as an example of shameful exploitation of Western ignorance of the "Hindu" foundation of TM and of any other Indian meditation that does not confess itself as a form of "Hindu devotionalism". This devotionalist criticism is further paraded by pointing to various Indian swamis and cross-eyed yogis who make these same claims and arguments themselves. Some considerations about these claims: SBS taught in India. MMY began teaching in India before coming to the West. They both taught within the context of the Indian Hindu cultural model. Although they taught in India, where there are many Muslims, they did not present their teaching within a Muslim cultural model. Although Buddhism is from India and many Indian consider Buddha one of their own, neither SBS nor MMY taught within a Buddhist cultural model. Rather, they taught within the cultural context of their listeners. After coming to the West, MMY continued speaking and teaching within a similar Indian cultural model - for a while. It was the teaching model established by Vivekananda and Paramahansa Yogananda partly religious, partly philosophical and partly yogic. However the cultural context of this form of teachings was the 19th and 20th century paradigm of Western Modernity. When MMY realized the limitations brought by this model and of religious language here in the West he took a left turn. That divergence left some of his teachers behind - Charlie Lutts being an example. This is one reason that pointing to early religious language by MMY or SBS is an inaccurate over-simplification. As far as the it is all a deceit claimants, the two groups that are the most antagonist and strident are the materialists and the religionists. Materialists claim mantras are the mumbo formulas of hindoo gods and that the concept of gods/god is a false idea propounded by power brokers to enslave the masses. This is a truncated Marxist view popular among the half-educated among us. Contrary to this, the religionists claim that mantras are secret demonic traps devised to enslave us to hindoo devils. This is the view of true believing adherents of the Abrahamic religions Jews, Christians and Muslims. This is not a fundamentalist diatribe from TV evangelicals. This was the original view of Christians from the second century C.E. forward and was used as incinerating ideological propellant for killing polytheists after Constantines ascent to Roman power. What is obvious is that both groups are unable to rationally consider the facts because they are ideologues entrenched in a priori conclusions. One example of this is a clear demarcation about the difference between yoga and religion. Materialists dismiss such an idea because yoga historically emerged within in a Hindu cultural context. Semitic monotheists condemn this idea for the same reason. If we consider the role of yoga, it is apparent that most meditating Westerners are functionally ignorant about the nature, range, depth and complexity of yoga lineages - whether Vedic, Hindu, Buddhist or Jain. Most of them do not know the difference between Vedic, Puranic and Tantric lineages of practice. They also do not understand how these three streams developed and then intertwined into Hindu temple rites. They don't know vidhi from vedi.* Even more surprising, most swamis and imported "yogis" are not Pandits, Indologists, or Sanskritists. Very few are formally educated in the yoga traditions of the Indian subcontinent. Most are only trained in asana, pranayam and japa. A little bhakti here, a few upanishad citations there and "om tat sat" - Im a guru. Faced with this, most of us Westerners who meditate are at a disadvantage when presented with claims that we are not educated to conceptualize w
[FairfieldLife] Re: Independent TM Teachers?
Vaj - >Tat Whale Baba and his successor both insist they be done in >Sanskrit. They also insist the entire set be performed each day, and >the requisite other techniques the sutras require (which are oral or >upadesha instructions on inner yoga). Tat Wala Baba's status as a yogin and guru allowed him to insist on anything he pleased. Everything a traditional guru says about sadhana is upadesha. Everything Tat Wala said during his one-hour daily darshan was upadesha. I never heard his teachings so I don't know if the definitional split between inner yoga and outer yoga was a category he used. The facts remain the same. The crux of a sutra is its meaning because the sutra is an idea. It is that idea which is entertained in awareness through the mode of a briefly focused attention. It is entertained through recollection or smriti. Thus mindfulness is summarily present. Maharishi described meditative attention as "active but undirected", meaning alert but resting. Returning to the mantra occurs when recollection occurs. Thus mindfulness is also summarily present. Whether the idea-sutra is entertained in Sanskrit or natural, conventional language does not change these facts. In fact the idea-sutra is used MMY's sanyama technique in a manner that makes it also a mode of contemplation (bhavana). It does not function merely as a meditation "object". As far as Tat Wala preferring Sanskrit, Sanskrit chanting of the sutras of Patanjali is itself a type of yoga. This is what Vyas Houston was able to transmit to Westerners even from the beginning of his introductory courses in spoken Sanskrit. Chanting the Yoga Sutras is itself a direct path and most Indologists cannot do this - yet even a beginner in his intro course engages in this process. I hope that Tat Wala's method helps people learn the sutras in Sanskrit. However doing so cannot make sanyama any better because the sutras are specifically used as ideas rather than sounds as such. I just wish that more TM teachers and meditators would dig deeper and realize that there is much more in the soup than the broth. No one explained that the sanyama technique includes a contemplative value (bhavana). No one explained that the holding-flowing-uniting of sanyama and the inherently contemplative bhavana were actually values of Dhi, the original form of rishi-drishta/rishi-shrauta. Maharishi didn't want to encourage discrimination in meditation, so he didn't say much to ordinary meditators, whether citizen-siddhas or governors. However, there are now Westerns that have mastered the Visuddhimagga Jhanas which means there are people willing to do the practice seriously over a long period of time. Whether any Westerners have become adept enough in tsa-lung and tummo to master the generation and completion stages of Naropa's sadhanas is unknown. For them to be able to sucessfully train other Westerners to a level of mastery is even less certain. In fact it is improbable at this point. What is certain is that more is possible for TM/Sidhi practitioners. However, in my opinion this won't develop through any form of tutelage by the TMO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Independent TM Teachers?
" - or that the siddhi program doesn't use Sanskrit?" I'm wondering where people got the idea that the various sutras should be used only in a Sanskrit form? Although trained as a TM teacher, I took my sutra training at a citizen siddha course. After receiving a couple of the sutras, a few of the participants went spinning off on an arc. Some of them were outraged that they had spent $3000 to hear English words that they could have gotten from a book or maybe a friend. I told them that I agreed about the cost (which should have been one-tenth the charge) but that after studying the Yoga Sutras for many years it made perfect sense to me that they would not be practiced in Sanskrit. The focus of the sutras was their meaning - a meaning which was by definition independent of their articulated sound value in any language. The TMO could have prevented this reaction by discussing the sanyama practice as a advance development through using "meaning" as a more subtle value than the beginning practice of "sound without meaning" and "learning to focus a deeper form of attention" rather than "only favoring the mantra". However, Maharishi was always wary that people would exchange-out the innocence of the practice for an ineffectual discrimination.
[FairfieldLife] Re: abandoning thought
Back in the mid-80's Korean Zen master Seung Sahn Nim, while guiding a retreat, was asked whether Master Hsuan Hua was a Zen Master. Seung Sahn Nim described him as a Tripitaka master. He considered him important for his role in inspiring young Americans to take up Dharma practice in a manner similar to the serious practitioners in China, ie: three steps, one bow - dedicating the results to all beings equally without remainder. Reading his talks inspired me at the time, eventually to join a small monastery. Later I met Anagarika Munindra, who was a master of Vipassana and had specialized in mastering the Jhanas (Dhyana-samapati), particularly the Metta Jhana (Brahma-viharas). When he walked into a house the walls glowed and waves of bliss-energy permeated the people present. This kind of experience ended up being my gauge, since it is impossible to verify someone's station of awareness - inference is an undependably ally. I have found some Neo-vedantin writings to be valuable. However, many of them seem to stop going deeper after experiencing a few special cognitions of their own "ground-nature". The primal dzogchen instructions of Garab Dorje discuss how our attention needs to be focused after such "congnitions" so that the originary and experiential radiances united in continous clear light awareness.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Interpretation of the Rig Veda
I was not present. My description came from that same friend who was present at Tahoe for some of those recording. We had a discussion at the time about where Maharishi could have obtained his meditation bija-mantras. My friend and I knew something about mantra sourcing since we were both students of a remarkable European Buddhologist at collegetown. However, we only had Arthur Avaon and some other works on Tantric mantra. Thus we really couldn't determine more at the time. As far as other individuals are concerned, according to my friend, there was a Mr. Barrel Wight present in L.A. in that era. He looked sort of scarry yet didn't seem to be speaking much at the time. My friend assumed he was engaging in the practice of silence but maybe he was just a stoner. I did know someone who liked to shoot smack and then do tm on the down. If I remember correctly that person did have a special mantra - hum hum hu mm mm uh uh. However, I don't believe his name was Barrel Wight, so it's all a dream to me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY's Interpretation of the Rig Veda
Vaj ... "My take on his whole "Rig Ved" spiel was it was what he purloined from the father-son Vedic chanting duo he used to hang with" That was Mahapandit Brahmarshi Devaratji and his son. He was the pandit with the fan that had various devabijakshara on the fan folds. During the Tahoe Rig recordings (in-between recitations) someone asked him about the symbols on the fan. He verbally repeated them for the audience ... and many of them were the bijas used for the tm practice. As a point of fact, Brahmarshi agreed with MMY about the foundational importance of the the first word, first line and the first hymn. However, this was before Maharishi presented in detail his sprout-seed-leaf-branch-tree analogy. Those recordings were our first chance as westerners to steal the Veda by copying Brahmarshi's recording and practicing the chhandas by directly hearing them from this remarkable mahapandit. Since non twice-born and Mlechhas like me were killed in the old days just for hearing the Veda, I guess we blew our chances in those few months. On a humorous note: a friend of mine tried to play a recording from it at my home in collegetown but the tape tangled and self-destructed during the attempt. He was sure this incident proved we were being punished by "natural law". My feeling was different because I was less superstitious. Later I realized with some certainty that we simply screwed up by using old equipment. And as far as punishing laws of nature ... ppffuu. Manu smanu. Dharmaphalas? ... ppffuuhhh. Ekajati no longer cuts the arortas of transgressors. Even more to the point - considering 6 million jews in the Shoah and 10-20 million christians in Stalin's democide we can only conclude that dead daimons can't kick ass. What's left? Just those little devabijaksharas on Brahmarshi't fan folds. As they say here in mudville ... them is the real it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: SaaMkhya-suutras: any takers?
Card sez:
So, the first words seem to claim that 'prakriti is saamyaavasthaa
of sattva, rajas and tamas'. Now we have to find out, what the heck
that word means. (It seems to consist of 'saamya' and 'avasthaa').
"sAmyAvasthA f. a state of equipoise (of the 3 constituent
ingredients of Prakr2iti ; see %{guNa}) Sarvad. Sa1m2khyak.: RTL.32".
Of course, we can also put 'prakriti' as a complement(? ):
The equipoise of sattva, rajas and tamas is [called] prakriti.
The Kramadipika:
THE AVYAKTA
He then continues: 1. "Here then the Avyakta, neuter (the undeveloped), is
explained. As in the world various objects such as water-jars, cloth, vases,
beds, &c., are manifest, not so is the Avyakta manifest. It is not apprehended
by the senses, such as the ear, etc. And why? Because it has neither beginning,
middle nor end, nor has it any parts. It is inaudible, intangible, invisible,
indestructible, eternal, without savour and odour. The learned declare it to be
without beginning and middle, to be beyond what is great, unchanging,
pre-eminent. And again, this Avyakta is subtle, without attributes, without
beginning or end, producing (Prasuta), but alone of all the eight Prakritis
unproduced (Aprasuta), without parts, one only, but common to all. "
THREE GUNAS
Whenever this triad is perceived in the world it is clear that agency belongs
to the Gunas, and it follows that Purusha is not the agent.
Deceived by passion and darkness, and taking a wrong view of these Gunas
which belong to Prakriti, not to himself, a fool imagines that he himself is
the agent, though in reality he is unable by himself to bend even a straw. Nay,
he becomes an agent, as it were, foolish and intoxicated by vain imagination
and saying, "All this was made by me and belongs to me."
-
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the pleasure of exercising power
Angela, your view sounds rather familiar. Where did I hear this? Wait a minute here it is. Its an statement on the instrumentality of power from a friend of one of your mentors. Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. Herman Goering, 1945 (interview while in detention at Nuremberg) Hmmm. Juicy. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Cardmaister: about the essays
Card, At the moment I have about 20 more essays from major scholars. Most are around 10-12 pages long and I have 4-5 that deal with topics in the Yogasutras. Other topics include: the ontology of bhakti (Madhusudana Saraswati), theories of karma, causality in different traditions, tension between vyutthana and nirodha in the YS and various other questions. These essays are in .pdf format as was Rukmani's essay on Dharmamegha. I'll look closer this evening and see if I can resend her essay in .pdf format. You will need to send me your email address since few people here on FFL would be interested in this material. If you are interested you can email me at emptybillATyahoo.com. Perhaps I can send a list of titles. emptybill __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Thought Crime Bill, Nazi Germany and the New Age
2007 America is not the Weimar Republic. There will be no enabling law unless we have a WMD go off in a major city. If that happens we might actually need martial law. Also all these assertions about your privileged status as a witness to history sound rather fantastic. I dont deny that you could have been in that specific post-war confluence of time (more so if you were a rebounder from the Reich) only that it all sounds like stories you heard from people you met along the way. I had a teacher in high school who was a member of the SS at a very high level. Waffen-SS or Allgemeine-SS? You may not know his unit but what was his rank, what were his duties? What is very high was he a Gruppenfurher or Obergruppenfurher? My mother was in the resistance movement against Hitler during the Nazi era, Which resistance, there were several? What years 1938, 1944? Generalizing stories dont go far - they just appear as speculation posing for truth. Coming from a self-professed redpill-er such as yourself, it seems more like sellective belief and selective doubt. Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If the thought crime bill gets passed into law by the Senate, then, I suspect that this is the last step needed before the concentration camps open their doors. Bush does not really need another 9/11 to declare martial law because posse comitatus, the law that keeps him from declaring martial law for no reason, was struck down as of the first of this month. Of course I hope there is a miracle that will prevent all this, but I have seen this coming all my adult life, and even earlier. It's true I was only five years old when the war was over, but when you hang out on battle fields at that age with body parts flying around your ears, bombs exploding all around you, airplanes crashing into buildings, it tends to be more memorable than ordinary life which most five year olds don't remember. Or, maybe, I just have an unusually good memory. I remember making a conscious decision to learn language (descend into language is how I thought of it) before I was out of diapers. I had a teacher in high school who was a member of the SS at a very high level. My mother was in the resistance movement against Hitler during the Nazi era, and, irony of ironies, she was a secret agent for the Americans immediately after the war. Her main job was to kidnap Nazi scientists from behind the Iron Curtain and get them into the American sector so they could be shipped to America rather than stand trial for war crimes. She was also a sometime interpreter at the Nuremberg war crimes trials. I was a conscious meditating human being, while, all around me, Germany woke up from the trance that the Nazi era had been. I have also done years of solid research on the Nazi-U.S. connection, and in addition to the research there have many interviews with ex Nazis, with survivors of concentration camps, with unrepentant post war Nazis, and with members of the underground resistance against Nazis. One thing I have learned by becoming an expert in several different fields, is that the only people who respect expertise are those who have also gained it in some field, especially in America. The New Age--Nazi Germany connection is something you ignore at your own peril---and that is the last thing I shall say about it. a Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dont be sure. Jane Harman, a Democratic member of the House from California, has just gotten together with fellow members to pass HR 1955 RFS. Just four days ago, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 sailed off to the Senate. Harman had fourteen co-sponsors, ten Democrats and four Republicans. Harmans bill has been called, quite properly, a thought crime bill. http://www.truthnews.us/?p=519 This country apparently isn't teaming enough with terrorists for our government's taste so they are redefining "terrorist" to include all of us. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] The Flaming Edge
Edg needs a serious alternative ... like Lithium. Maybe someone here can convince him (offline) to get a referral to a real professional. Marek Reavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Edg, after reading your posts of hate, venom and insult just today, it strikes me that you would be more likely to volunteer to man the future gas chambers (only for the "pedophile, the dog-fight promoters, the murderer, etc.", i.e. "only those who really deserve it") than anyone else here. Your hate-filled point of view and your willingness to project it on anyone who doesn't tow the line of righteousness you've drawn is scary, repugnant and wholly in line with the hate-filled propaganda put out by any of the current crop of demogogues, dictators or their stooges. I'm truly sorry that you have so much pain in your life but your out of control expression of it on FFL is way out of line. Marek Recent Activity 5 New Members 1 New Photos Visit Your Group New business? Get new customers. List your web site in Yahoo! Search. Endurance Zone on Yahoo! Groups Communities about higher endurance. Green Y! Groups Environment Groups Find them here connect with others. . __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] A parampara reply about Prabhupada's quote: On Genitals and Heavenly Nectar
Thinking about the original Prabhupada quote, I didn't feel qualified to answer the post. So I talked with AlankarDas, a friend of mine who was among the first disciples of Prabhupad. Originally a student of Swami Satchitananda, he met Prabhupada when Prabhupad began teaching in New York City and then stayed with him until his death. Later AlankarDas spent fifteen years in India and was among a just a handfull of Westerners trained to be the first Western pujari-s. In 1993 he installed a traditional carved Shivalingam for me in a full Maha-rudra-abhishekam. Done in the Panchratra style, it was a inundation of our local physical space with a dazzling confluence of devas. Thats when I first realized that God (Gott) is only a mythopoeic figure and that it is the devas in Brahman who are the actual reality we seek to comprehend. I asked Alankar Das if he would comment on the Prabhupada quote given in this thread ... Alankar: My question regarding this quote from Prabhupada is ... what is the question? It seems to be fully explained in the purport. It is said that the highest pleasure in the conditioned world is sex. The problem is that it lasts for only a moment and is gone. Thus suffering occurs. Prabhupada once said that the whole universe is moving based on the sex desire. This is an explanation of that statement ... Sex is originating with the original person (Adi-purusha or Purushottama), then the Caturvuyha (four primal expansions of Vishnu), then the Rudra expansion from the Anantashesha and then the Prajapatis, expanding outward. However, this particular expression of sex that we experience is a product of the Mahamaya (shakti of Durga) not the Yogamaya (shakti of Vishnu), the internal potency which is only visible and active for the realized soul. This is a complete paradigm shift where one is fully situated in their Satchitananda-Vigraha or eternal identity and body, apart from the physical temporary body. The physical body can still function but the knower is not limited by the urges of the body and experiences transcendent sensual life. We get pale glimpses of this through the grace of the Guru and the spiritual practices. Important to mention that the Guru is essential because the Guru is descended from the Anantashesha directly and thus qualified to introduce the now conditioned entity (us) to the Yogamaya potency. Then the conditioned state gradually (generally) dissolves and after leaving the body the Guru personally introduces the realized soul directly to Radha-Krishna. By this time the reality of the nature of sex is clear. - Alankar Das John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Billy and all, My comments are shown below: > > > > Here is what Prabhupada commented on one of the slokas in the Srimad > > Bhagavatam, Canto 2, Chapter 10: > > > > "The heavenly pleasure for the conditioned soul is sexual pleasure, > >and > > this pleasure is tasted by the genitals. > > > What he is saying IMO is; for those souls that are 'conditioned', that > is their happiness is based on 'conditions' in the material world > (object oriented), their highest pleasure is derived thru the genitals. > By TM standards and a few orthodox religions, this assertion may be true. But there are others who do not believe that they are conditioned. Thus, they are subjected to the three gunas, the sufferings of the world. But it is likely they don't know that or won't accept it. At worst, they would blame everyone else for their sufferings. > > The woman is the object of > > sexual pleasure, and both the sense perception of sexual pleasure >and > > the woman are controlled by the Prajapati, who is under the control >of > > the Lord's genitals. > > The parjapati is the deity that presides over procreation. > Prajapatis are also considered to be the executives of cosmic order. > > > > The impersonalist must know from this verse that > > the Lord is not impersonal, for He has His genitals, on which all >the > > pleasurable objects of sex depend. > > Not sure what he means here other than the Lord is all of creation > including the genitals of all humans..?? Prabhupad use to say that > "everything belongs to God" and the criterion of success is if it > pleases God. IMO, he is criticizing those philosophers who teach notions of the Supreme Being in terms of intellectual sophistication and arguments, as in Plato's ideas of Being. Prabhupada is saying the Supreme Being has body parts that are "similar" to human beings. This line of argument is not so different from the Judeo-Christian religion tradition. > > >No one would have taken the trouble > > to maintain children if there were no taste of heavenly nectar by > >means > > of sexual intercourse" > > > Under the direction of the prajapati humans are enticed (thru sexual > pleasure) to have sex for the procreation of children. This genera
Re: [FairfieldLife] Shearer's translation?
Alistair Shearer's version: I.18 After the repeated experience of the settling and ceasing of mental activity comes another samadhi. In this only the latent impressions of past experience remain. cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Anyone's got Alistair Shearer's translation of YS? I'd like to see his translation of I 18. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Jews Turning Against Israel's Right Wing Zionist Policy
Who cares? Let them all eat yellow cake. Better yet, while dining in the valley of megiddo. "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jewish Glasnost Update: Zionist Panic! Tony Karon Rootless Cosmopolitan, October 23, 2007 http://tonykaron.com/2007/10/23/jewish-glasnost-update-zionist-panic/ Is Israel's top liberal daily a fifth column? Apropos my earlier piece arguing that the ferocious backlash by the Zionist right against Jewish critics of Israel also targeting as 'anti-semitic' those like Archbishop Desmond Tutu who seek to judge Israel by universal moral standards is a sign of panic over losing their claim to a monopoly on representing Jews, evidence is growing that they are increasingly aware of their own predicament. One reader ... pointed out this glum editorial by arch-Zionist and neocon Daniel Pipes, warning that even if it overcomes all the mortal threats that neocons like to see all around Israel, that won't help it cope with what he calls Israel's ultimate challenge "a Jewish population increasingly disenchanted with, even embarrassed by, the country's founding ideology, Zionism, the Jewish national movement." (Actually, Daniel, I'd call it the Jewish nationalist movement, but let's not quibble here.) It's worth quoting at length from Pipes' piece: "Worse for Israel, Jewish nationalism has lost the near-automatic support it once had among secular Jews, many of whom find this nineteenth-century ideology out of date. Some accept arguments that a Jewish state represents racism or ethnic supremacism, others find universalist and multi-cultural alternatives compelling. Consider some signs of the changes underway: # Young Israelis are avoiding the military in record numbers, with 26 percent of enlistment-age Jewish males and 43 percent of females not drafted in 2006. An alarmed Israel Defense Forces has requested legislation to deny state-provided benefits to Jewish Israelis who do not serve. # Israel's Attorney General Menachem Mazuz has up-ended the work of the Jewish National Fund, one of the pioneer Zionist institutions (founded in 1901) by determining that its role of acquiring land specifically for Jews cannot continue in the future with state assistance. # Prominent Israeli historians focus on showing how Israel was conceived in sin and has been a force for evil. Israel's ministry of education has approved school books for third-grade Arab students that present the creation of Israel in 1948 as a 'catastrophe' (Arabic: nakba). # Avraham Burg, scion of a leading Zionist household and himself a prominent Labor Party figure, has published a book comparing Israel with 1930s Germany. # A 2004 poll found only 17 percent of American Jews call themselves 'Zionist.' Noting that these trends simply put young Israelis and American Jews in line with international trends, the only consolation he offers is that things will hopefully get better for the Zionists a quarter century from now. Add to this the observations of Phil Weiss, whose blog is must-read for those seeking a smart and sober chronicling of the battle of ideas in today's America, much of it focused on Jewish identity politics (although far from exclusively so). When he heard that the rightwing Zionist media watchdog organization CAMERA was organizing a summit on "Jewish Defamers of Israel," he did what any good journalist should: He paid his $40 and attended the event. And what he found was a bunch of alte kakkers (he didn't call them that, of course, simply noted that the average age appeared to be over 60) kvetching in communion with stalwarts of the Zionist right. He writes: The CAMERA people are losing and they know it. Near the end Cynthia Ozick was asked how we should go about delegitimizing the delegitimizers of the Jewish state and she sighed and said, "It's hopeless." Alvin Rosenfeld, the author of the disgraceful report on Jewish anti-Semitism put out by the American Jewish Committee, was mildly more optimistic. He said exactly what I say: "We are in a furious intellectual struggle. There is a war of ideas going on it won't end quickly . It is steady work." And it is "serious and worrisome" inasmuch as these ideas may now "enter the mainstream." Amen. The reason It's hopeless for the other side is that there was, in the basement of the synagogue, little to zero acknowledgement of the three great realities that are feeding Jewish post-Zionism. 1. the end of anti-Semitism. My old friend and I talked about a Jewish Daily News columnist who refused to hire Jews. That was 50 years ago. The injury is fresh. As the memories of anti-Semitism are for my parents. And they are virtually meaningless to young Americans. A panelist very briefly acknowledged this at the end, saying that Jews are so comfortable in America, how do we stir them? 2. the Israeli occupation of Arab lands and Israel's brutal treatment of Palestinians were at no time acknowledged, but endlessly rationalized. The separate roadwa
[FairfieldLife] Re: In TM, Samadhi requires long periods of silent meditation.
In YS 1. 17 the vitarka, vichara, ananda, asmita levels of samaadhi are simply descriptive references. (vitarkavicaaraanandaasmitaanugamaat saMprajñaataH) However, YS 1.18 actually give the technique to use in samyama for entering asamprajnata. (viraama-pratyayaabhyaasapuurvaH saMskaarasheso 'nyaH) " The other (samaadhi) has a residuum of sanskara-s; it follows upon practice (abhyaasa) of the idea (pratyaya) of stopping (viraama)." This practice works just like any othe sutra ... i.e. entertaining the idea of "stopping" everything or total "stopping" - which is entertained softly and delicately in the quietest range of awareness. I assume you guys have tried it previously. I realize that some tmsp people avoid doing it because it isn't juicy. Others don't do it because it goes into total quietude without bliss waves and leaves a big time gap of noetic emptiness (present with an almost indescibible form of awareness.) Without any experience to reference it can be disconcerting. However, if you have never tried it then consider that after doing it for a little while you will tend toward experiencing the stopping of all experiential activity - along with its concomitant conscious reflectivity. According to Patanjali only a residuum or remainder (shesa) of sanskara-s subsists in this meditative samaadhi. Please disregard the thought that this is the same as laya-samaadhi - dissolution of awareness in unconsciousness. cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I remember in Mallorca MMY had us take 3 days of silence with limited > food intake, we'd stay in our rooms for 3 days rounding. And then in > the Fuiggi Fonte Theatre he said: "You could meditate a million years > and not reach CC unless you come to these courses", well that ended > any speculation about reaching it in 5 to 8 years. > > So,you know this idea that TM'ers are reaching Samadhi in their > regular meditations 2X20 is just theory pertaining to the bubble > diagram, 'some day' you will actually transcend relativity and that > experience will be so profound it will change your life forever. This > idea that I transcended and forgot the experience is not Samadhi, > Samadhi is something you'll NEVER forget! Aren't there several stages of samaadhi? __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: About the story "The attentions of monks".
Yep, it is a nice story and your telling is much richer than most I have heard. I certainly agree with you about its value for every/any one since we all tend to carry rules-based social conduct as an interpretive register. And I would agree that such a social syndrome leads us to perpetuate robotistic dreaming as a form of illucid waking ... perhaps the binary twin of lucid dreaming. My only point was that monastic stories are a bit different in flavor. I was given one in the monastery and it has stuck across the years. However I don't have the time right now to pass it on but maybe later it could be done. Actually it never occurred to me to tell such a story here on FFL. So I'm thinking about it. A few here might enjoy it. Thanks for the reply. emptyhillbillyjim Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Billy, Woo, nice dense writing. Good on ya. But, though I wrote it up as a romantic fable of sorts, don't you think that this story has something very important for all spiritual adherants to "eventually get?" It is one thing for the "universe" to suddenly make the monk robot sweep the woman up in his (the universe's) arms -- against all proprieties of the culture -- and by doing so create a paradox worthy of any Zen one-hand-clappingness, and quite another for a mind to then obsessively re-run in one's imagination (not really memory cuz it's all nowness donchaknow) this paradox using a moralistic dogmatism to justify what is actually an abuse of one's nervous system that will slow one's evolution. The one monk broke local mores but fulfilled a larger purpose, the other monk, not seeing that as God's freedom to create without any absolute restraints in the relative (can't corner God with his own laws,) CHOSE to not transcend but instead fixated on and perseverated an egoic POV -- thus hardwiring an identification that will eventually have to be withdrawn. Arjuna was told to "cheat" the "polite rules of war" and kill his evil twin brother, Karna, by attacking him when his head was turned. Krishna didn't care about dharma-one when it came to eradicating all the Kshatriaic race, and told Arjuna -- if you don't throw this broken wagon wheel, I'll be so pissed, I'll break my vow of "not fighting" and I'll kill that bastard. Inside one's head are two voices, and this tale is about one's freedom to chose which to tune into. Seems to me to be pretty deep as concepts go, and the contemplation of this can lead to your "absorption into a station of being." Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is a nice story but it is not a monastic story. > > I'm thinking it first appeared in the '65-68's and was recounted by Paul Reps. However, I may be overshadowed by brain fuzz on the orginal dates. > > In any case this is a story about two monks - which is not the same as a monastic story. Monastic stories are not designed to engage the mind. This is one way you can tell which stories are created by and/or transmitted by monastics. Monastic stories are not sentimental in any way but strike directly at the heart (nous/intellectus). They are not descriptively rich but rather sparse although they can also be funny. The narrative point of monastic stories tends to reverberate for years in a pracitioner's psyche because the story presents a discernment about the relationship between contemplation and action. It is therefore not reducible to a state of noetic recognition but can only be resolved by absorption into a station of being, ie. knowing by being. > > > > > Marek Reavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Edg, a very nice retelling a great parable. I'd be interested to read other re-writes you > might do. > > Marek > > ** > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Many versions this story has been posted around the Web, and I've > > liked them so much that I put this tale into my own words. > > > > I post this as an effort to show that I have dealt with the nuances of > > drooling, and that "writing off Edg's morality as simple projection > > and sublimination" may not be the only way to sum up my stance on the > > morals involving relationships. After this story, I'll post another > > one with a correlative theme, and then we'll see if I have in any way > > tempered the perception that I'm a sublimnationist without clarity. > > > > Edg > > > > TWO MONKS > > > > An ancient story. Two student monks were walking in a town, ages ago, > > far away. They were both handsome young men, but they were serious > > about
[FairfieldLife] Re: About the story "The attentions of monks".
This is a nice story but it is not a monastic story. I'm thinking it first appeared in the '65-68's and was recounted by Paul Reps. However, I may be overshadowed by brain fuzz on the orginal dates. In any case this is a story about two monks - which is not the same as a monastic story. Monastic stories are not designed to engage the mind. This is one way you can tell which stories are created by and/or transmitted by monastics. Monastic stories are not sentimental in any way but strike directly at the heart (nous/intellectus). They are not descriptively rich but rather sparse although they can also be funny. The narrative point of monastic stories tends to reverberate for years in a pracitioner's psyche because the story presents a discernment about the relationship between contemplation and action. It is therefore not reducible to a state of noetic recognition but can only be resolved by absorption into a station of being, ie. knowing by being. Marek Reavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Edg, a very nice retelling a great parable. I'd be interested to read other re-writes you might do. Marek ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Many versions this story has been posted around the Web, and I've > liked them so much that I put this tale into my own words. > > I post this as an effort to show that I have dealt with the nuances of > drooling, and that "writing off Edg's morality as simple projection > and sublimination" may not be the only way to sum up my stance on the > morals involving relationships. After this story, I'll post another > one with a correlative theme, and then we'll see if I have in any way > tempered the perception that I'm a sublimnationist without clarity. > > Edg > > TWO MONKS > > An ancient story. Two student monks were walking in a town, ages ago, > far away. They were both handsome young men, but they were serious > about becoming absolutely aware of their inner spirits. The monastery > in which they lived and took instruction had very strict rules of > behavior for its students. > > A hot rain had been falling all morning, but at last the sun had come > out, and everything was glistening with a coating of pure water. The > marketplace was filled with noise and bustle, and the streets were > very muddy. Only under the woven thatched awnings of the storefronts > of the streets were there any dry paths. > > They came upon a lovely lady attired in expensive clothing, holding a > delicate hand painted parasol. Everything about this woman was > refined and spoke of wealth and knowledge of the world and its many ways. > > It was obvious to the monks that she was trying to cross the road > without getting her clothes dirty, but it was impossible. She stood > there in a perfect moment as the sun echoed in thousands of small > puddles from foot and hoof prints. Suddenly, the taller of the monks > swept the woman and her beauty up in his arms and carried her safely > across the road. > > Afterwards, they went back to their monastery rooms to meditate before > the evening's rituals. As they sat down together, the shorter monk > finally spoke his mind, saying, "I cannot understand your actions! We > are monks! We do not go near females -- especially beautiful women > who are experienced with the ways of the life that we have put behind > us. That was dangerous. Why did you do that?" > > The taller monk settled into his meditative pose, and just before he > closed his eyes, he looked at his friend, and said, "I left the girl > there on the side of the street. Are you still carrying her?" > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hmmm... dharma-megha?
According to Georg Feuerstein the sole source for this term is Buddhist sutra
and shastra. There are no other instances of "dharma-megha" being used in the
darshanas, epics or yogic literature prior to Patanjali's usage. I did look at
Shankara's vivarana and will check out Vijnanabhikshu's commentary. Sorry but I
don't have time to type it all. Maybe I can summarize. We'll see.
cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| prakRSTamashuklakRSNaM dharmaM parama-
> puruSaarthasaadhakaM mehati siñcatiiti dharmameghaH |
Let's suppose for the time being that 'dharmameghaH'
actually is the subject of that sentence. Then
the core of it could be for instance 'dharmameghaH...
mehati (does mih):
mih, mehati 1 ({-te}), pp. {mIDha3} (q.v.) make water; wet,
sprinkle.
(and) siñcati (does sic [pron - sich]):
sic, siJcati, -te , pp. {sikta3} 1 pour out, sprinkle, scatter (also
[[-,]] semen); pour in or upon (loc.), besprinkle with (instr.);
cast (molten metal), form into (2 acc.).
Whoa... the meaning 'form into' seems to take two accusatives.
Thus it would fit very well into that sentence, because there
actually seems to be two accusatives ('dharmam' with its modifiers
and 'saadhakam' with its...). That was a *huge* relief. I was
almost desperate because e.g. with the meaning 'sprinkle' that
sentence didn't seem to make much sence, especially there apparently
being another verb with almost the same meaning. :D
If 'form into' is the meaning Bhoja has had in mind, the last
words 'siñcatiiti [siñcati + iti] dharmameghaH' could be rather
freely translated to 'thus (iti) "is formed" (siñcati) the cloud
(meghaH) of virtue (dharma)' [around the saadhaka fellow??].
-
Don't let your dream ride pass you by.Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Kundalini Through The Chakras
Sorry, also, but I don't understand what you are looking for here. You asked for "classic descriptions" as well as personal experiences. These classical descriptions are found in the yoga and tantric texts of early and medieval Hinduism and Buddhism. Your reply seems unusual. Are you actually asking something that is a real question to you or are you wanting to make a statement about how things are? Perhaps you are looking for descriptions that accord with your own ideas as evidenced in your reply. Sorry, but I don't think I can help much. However, Vaj also shares this background, so perhaps you can query him. "Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It?" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Regardless of what one "believes", Bill, the kundalini precedes, in the continuity of the cosmos, such prejudices. Symptoms of it passing through the chakras has to do with nonprejudicial experiences. So, I don't understand the question, sorry. Of all that anyone leading or teaching has to convey, the most valuable thing to cultivate and convey to others is a moral conscience. Only such persons deserve to lead others, in any capacity. Anything less is a menace to society. I want every person to be complete in themselves. Your himsa has no place in my mission. On 9/29/07, emptybill <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Functionalist Buddhist Tantra or Structuralist Hindu Tantra? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Mystical Sadhu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does anyone have descriptions of experiences, perceptions resulting from > raising the kundalini through the various chakras? > > "Classic" descriptions as well as personal experiences. > > Thank you, > > Satya > > When Shakyamuni Buddha was at Mount Grdhrakuta, he held up a flower to his > listeners. Everyone was silent. Only Mahakashyapa broke into a broad smile. > The Buddha said, "I have the True Dharma Eye, the Marvelous Mind of Nirvana, > the True Form of the Formless, and the Subtle Dharma Gate, independent of > words and transmitted beyond doctrine. This I have entrusted to Mahakashyapa." - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Shri Adi Shankara raises and answers Questions
What Sanskrit text or texts of Adi Shankara were these quotes culled from when composing this list? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . Shri Adi Shankara Raises and Answers Some Important Questions __ What is the best thing a spiritual aspirant can do? Carry out his guru's instructions. What must be avoided? Deeds which lead us into greater ignorance of the truth. Who is a guru? He who has found the truth of Brahman and is always concerned for the welfare of his disciples. What is the first and most important duty for a man of right understanding? To cut through (transcend) the bonds of worldly desire. How can one be liberated? By attaining the knowledge of Brahman. Who, in this world, can be called pure? He whose mind is pure. Who can be called wise? He who can discriminate between the real and the unreal. What poisons the spiritual aspirant? Neglect of his guru's teachings. For one who has achieved human birth, what is the most desirable objective? To realize that which is his ultimate good and to be constantly engaged in doing good to others. What deludes a man like an intoxicating drink? Attachment to the objects of the senses. What are thieves? The objects which steal our hearts away from the truth. What causes the bondage of worldly desire? Thirst to enjoy these objects. What is the obstacle to spiritual growth? Laziness. What is the best weapon with which to subdue others? Sound reasoning. Wherein lies strength? In patience. Where is poison? Within the wicked. What is fearlessness? Dispassion. What is most to be feared? To become possessed by your own wealth. What is most rarely found among mankind? Love for the Lord. What are the evils most difficult to rid one's self of? Jealousy and envy. Who is dear to the Lord? He who is fearless and takes away fear from others. How does one attain liberation? By practicing spiritual disciplines. Who is most lovable? The knower of Brahman. How does one develop the power of discrimination? Through service to an elder. Who are elders? Those who have realized the ultimate truth. Who is truly wealthy? He who worships the Lord with devotion. Who profits from his life? The humble man. Who is a loser? He who is proud. What is the most difficult task for a man? To keep his mind under constant control. Who protects an aspirant? His guru. Who is the teacher of this world? The Lord. How does one attain wisdom? By the grace of the Lord. How is one liberated? Through devotion to the Lord. Who is the Lord? He who leads us out of ignorance. What is ignorance? The obstacle to the unfoldment of the Divine which is within us. What is the ultimate Reality? Brahman. What is unreal? That which disappears when knowledge awakens. How long has ignorance existed? From a time without beginning. What is unavoidable? The death of the body. Whom should we worship? An incarnation of God. What is liberation? The destruction of our ignorance. Who is not to be trusted? He who lies habitually. What is the strength of a holy man? His trust in God. Who is a holy man? He who is forever blissful. Who is free from sin? He who chants the name of the Lord. What is the source of all the scriptures? The sacred syllable OM. What carries us across the ocean of worldliness? The lotus feet of the Lord - they carry us like a great ship. Who is bound? He who is attached to worldliness. Who is free? He who is dispassionate. How is heaven attained? The attainment of heaven is freedom from cravings. What destroys craving? Realization of one' s true self. What is the gate to hell? Lust. Who lives in happiness? He who has attained samadhi. Who is awake? He who discriminates between right and wrong. Who are our enemies? Our sense organs, when they are uncontrolled. Who are our friends? Our sense organs, when they are controlled. Who is poor? He who is greedy. Who totally blind? He who is lustful. Who has overcome the world? He who has conquered his own mind. What are the duties of a spiritual aspirant? To keep company with the holy, to renounce all thoughts of "me" and "mine", to devote himself to God. Whose birth is blessed? His who does not have to be reborn. Who is immortal? He who does not have to pass through another death. When is one established in the ideal of renunciation? When one knows that Atman and Brahman are one. What is right action? Action which pleases the Lord. In this world, what is the greatest terror? The fear of death. Who is the greatest hero? He who is not terror-stricken by the arrows which shoot from the eyes of a beautiful girl. Who is poor? He who is not contented. What is meanness? To beg from someone who has less than you. Whom should we honor? Him who does not beg from anyone. Who, in this world, is truly alive? He whose character is free from blemish. Who is awake? He who practices discrimination. Who is asleep? He who lives in
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Challenge -- say something true
Thanks for the input. authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, I like it because it reinforces the recognition > that these Sanskrit words (read Arabic for "Houri") are > provisional terms, not necessarily fit yet to be > reified into English. > > I understand how you, as an editor, might find this mode of > presentation to be contra-instinctual for a trained English > reader. However, rather than just dismissing it, tell me why > you might find it confusing or irritating. Well, actually, I did. I said I didn't think it was called for, i.e., there was no good reason *for* doing it in an informal forum like this, where whether these terms are fit yet to be reified into English isn't at issue, and it made the text more difficult to read. As an editor, I think anything about the technical details of a piece of writing that causes the reader to go "Huh?" even for a split second inhibits communication of the *content* of the writing; it disturbs the flow and distracts the reader's attention. No biggie, and I really wasn't objecting to your use of the hyphens so much as I was curious to know why you were using them. - Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Challenge -- say something true
Hmm. the "r" at the end must be for rishi. What else could explain such insights? I have to admit I'm hoping life in deva-land beats moping around feeling bad for humans. Angels ... mere sexless, boring slaves of yhvh - who needs them? The Houri-s sound so much better. qntmpkt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --Maybe you were a "Conqueror Worm", a genuine evolutionary hero. But see, amid the mimic rout A crawling shape intrude! A blood-red thing that writhes from out The scenic solitude! It writhes!it writhes!with mortal pangs The mimes become its food, And seraphs sob at vermin fangs In human gore imbued. Outout are the lightsout all! And, over each quivering form, The curtain, a funeral pall, Comes down with the rush of a storm, While the angels, all pallid and wan, Uprising, unveiling, affirm That the play is the tragedy, "Man," And its hero the Conqueror Worm. r - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm not sure that I should reply to you. You must be a devil since Sin is the better part of your name - and don't tell me its Sine. I think it's a sign. > > As far as Vaj is concerned, I wouldn't want to speak for him since he is the author of his own arguments. I'm actually waiting for this clarification myself. > > And by the way - I take great pride in my lowly origins, even lower than the ordinary maggot you reference in your comment. As a former shit-eating larvae, I do in fact claim a super-rapid ascent through the evolutionary strata of complex organisms. I have done extensive past-life research into my odious prior incarnations and have found the startling truth. > > Starting from my introduction into the earth realm as a fecal larvae, I transformed into an extremely large and irritating fly, able to viciously bite large sweat-emitting mammals. This lead to my rather rapid demise from a vigorous fly-swat. Next incarnation - grain-devouring rodent, soon dispelled by suffocating poison, terribly painful but quickly liberating. After that I launched deeper into the mammalian realm as a boar, enabling me to recognize and somehow choose to identify as a predator rather than helpless prey. > > Next came a wonderfully deceptive incarnation as a jackal - the key incarnation that caused me to become human. As I remember it, I was tearing out the entrails of a large mammal we had felled. The animal wasn't dead yet and when it looked up in shock, horror and agony at me eating it while still alive, I looked into its eyes and saw "myself" - not literally but rather another desperately entombed intelligence, just like "myself", the jackal. This caused me to suddenly generate the genuine idea "oh, its just like me", and this in spite of the fact that the other animal looked nothing like me. > > That was it - birth of an idea unbound by particularity and able to appreciate something authentically generalized and universal. In other words, I recognized a "universal" - the defining characteristic of human nature according to Socrates of Athens. > > After this pivotal event, I took a quick series of human incarnations, lowly and serf-like at first but later more confident and assertive. From plebeian to patrician was just a couple of incarnations and then wham, I was reborn into 20th century Europe and then here into the new world. > > Now my jyotish chart shows that I'll be reborn into the deva realm after death, obviously because I still can't tell the difference between purusha and the three guna-s. However, I don't feel bad because I figure I'll see everybody else here on FFL in that land of bliss, except Vaj, since we've all been deceived by Mahesh except him. > > So aren't you really impressed at my rapid evolution? Maybe I should try and get promoted to a local, divinized logos like the Mormons claim (they say it is the next step). Maybe it would even beat twenty dark-eyed virgins. Hmm > > Emptybill's a goin' higher > > heh,heh > > > sinhlnx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Recent Activity > > 3 > New Members > > 1 > New Files > > Visit Your Group > Ads on Yahoo! > Learn more now. > Reach customers > searching for you. > > Special K Challenge > on Yahoo! Groups > Find shape-up > tips and tools. > > HDTV Support > The official Samsung > Y! Group for HDTVs > and devices. > > > > . > > Thanks, billy jim! During my first 6 weeks in the Army long ago > they used to call us "maggots". > > > > > - > Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. > - Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Challenge -- say something true
I'm not sure that I should reply to you. You must be a devil since Sin is the better part of your name - and don't tell me its Sine. I think it's a sign. As far as Vaj is concerned, I wouldn't want to speak for him since he is the author of his own arguments. I'm actually waiting for this clarification myself. And by the way - I take great pride in my lowly origins, even lower than the ordinary maggot you reference in your comment. As a former shit-eating larvae, I do in fact claim a super-rapid ascent through the evolutionary strata of complex organisms. I have done extensive past-life research into my odious prior incarnations and have found the startling truth. Starting from my introduction into the earth realm as a fecal larvae, I transformed into an extremely large and irritating fly, able to viciously bite large sweat-emitting mammals. This lead to my rather rapid demise from a vigorous fly-swat. Next incarnation - grain-devouring rodent, soon dispelled by suffocating poison, terribly painful but quickly liberating. After that I launched deeper into the mammalian realm as a boar, enabling me to recognize and somehow choose to identify as a predator rather than helpless prey. Next came a wonderfully deceptive incarnation as a jackal - the key incarnation that caused me to become human. As I remember it, I was tearing out the entrails of a large mammal we had felled. The animal wasn't dead yet and when it looked up in shock, horror and agony at me eating it while still alive, I looked into its eyes and saw "myself" - not literally but rather another desperately entombed intelligence, just like "myself", the jackal. This caused me to suddenly generate the genuine idea "oh, its just like me", and this in spite of the fact that the other animal looked nothing like me. That was it - birth of an idea unbound by particularity and able to appreciate something authentically generalized and universal. In other words, I recognized a "universal" - the defining characteristic of human nature according to Socrates of Athens. After this pivotal event, I took a quick series of human incarnations, lowly and serf-like at first but later more confident and assertive. From plebeian to patrician was just a couple of incarnations and then wham, I was reborn into 20th century Europe and then here into the new world. Now my jyotish chart shows that I'll be reborn into the deva realm after death, obviously because I still can't tell the difference between purusha and the three guna-s. However, I don't feel bad because I figure I'll see everybody else here on FFL in that land of bliss, except Vaj, since we've all been deceived by Mahesh except him. So aren't you really impressed at my rapid evolution? Maybe I should try and get promoted to a local, divinized logos like the Mormons claim (they say it is the next step). Maybe it would even beat twenty dark-eyed virgins. Hmm Emptybill's a goin' higher heh,heh sinhlnx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Recent Activity 3 New Members 1 New Files Visit Your Group Ads on Yahoo! Learn more now. Reach customers searching for you. Special K Challenge on Yahoo! Groups Find shape-up tips and tools. HDTV Support The official Samsung Y! Group for HDTVs and devices. . Thanks, billy jim! During my first 6 weeks in the Army long ago they used to call us "maggots". - Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Challenge -- say something true
OK Vaj, I'm going to enter the fray here. The way this conversation is preceding youre going to get tired soon from the suffocating squeeze of the pythoness. (I actually mean this as a complement to Judy.) Then the conversation will attenuate into a final pair of mutual - the pox on your house, dear. This is not only boring - it is unilluminating. And, being a fools fool, I only exist for the dazzling radiance that others of real worth, like you and Judy, can shine on my miserable bug-like existence. Help me out here, Vaj - illuminate me. Ive heard this argument from you before and I never could decide which sutra-s of Patanjali you are directing our attention toward - above all because Im overwhelmed by your ocean-like compassion to save us from our slavish adulation of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. (And who is this Mr. Varma who you keep talking about?) So let me try to restate your referenced argument in simplified form one that even a fecal larvae like me can understand: TM practitioners, particularly brain-washed TM teachers, falsely identify their direct, unmediated experiences of utter difference between pure-consciousness (purusha) and the intellect (buddhi-sattva) as kaivalya (aloneness of pure consciousness). However, kaivalya is described by Patanjali (Pada II.25) as the disappearance of ignorance (avidya) and the consequent ceasing of the correlation (samyoga) between the seer and the seen. The experiences of TMer are NOT kaivalya but rather are transient flashes of viveka-khyati, or the vision-of-discernment between purusha and prakriti. So, Vaj, is this an accurate description of your argument against TM claims vis-à-vis Patanjalis Yoga Sutras? If so then please help me out by pointing which of Patanjalis sutras you are referencing as positive proof that TMers misidentify the vision of discernment with the Aloneness of seeing (Kaivalya). If not, then also help me out by restating your argument so you can correct my misunderstanding. Please do so in a form that likewise tags your references to each of the relevant Sutra-s of my good friend, Maharishi Patanjali and please dont call him Mr. Naga. The shit-eating worm Emptybill whatever whatever - Don't let your dream ride pass you by.Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Fwd: Re: [FairfieldLife] Vyaasa's comment on II 30
Repost of my original email which did not appear on FFL: billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:49:17 -0700 (PDT) From: billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Vyaasa's comment on II 30 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com T.S. Rukmani's translation of Vyasa's comment on YS II.30 - brahmacaryaM guptendriyasyopasthasya samyamaaH "continence is the control of the hidden sense-organ of generation" Where she apparently takes gupta = (guha/guhya) secret or hidden indra/indriya = power/sense-power (and its physical organ) Her translation of the vivarana of Shankara on this passage of Vyasa: brahmacaryam ... samyamah, the control of the other organ of generation of purusa which is hidden, with the absence of activity of the mind, words, etc., which has the result of not observing brahmacarya. Rukmani observes: Thus brahmacarya is not just celibacy but extends to even speech and mental activity pertaining to lack of sex control. She also has the following note at the bottom of the page (note 9): * instead of 'gupendriyasyopasthasya ..." the vivaranakara has "upasthendriyasya" * Hope this helps. Quoted from Yogasutrabhasyvivarana of Shankara by T.S. Rukmani Vol. I, (Samadhipada, Sadhanapada) of a two volume set Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 2001 emptybill cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: YS II 30: ahiMsaasatyaasteyabrahmacharyaaparigrahaa yamaaH (ahimsaa-satya-asteya-brahmacarya-aparigrahaaH; yamaaH) Vyaasa's comment on brahmacarya (from a DN text): brahmacaryaM guptendiyasyopasthasya saMyamaH. (There is apparently one typo in "guptendiya". It should prolly read "guptendriya" which would be sandhi for "gupta + indriya", cf. "karmendriya" < "karma + indriya"; thus, without sandhi that would be: brahmacaryam; gupta + indriyasya + upasthasya saMyamaH). I think some of you guys have a translation of Vyaasa's commentary. I'd like to know how the above passage is translated in it. Bhojadeva's comment is much more laconic: brahmacaryam upasthasaMyamaH. - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
[FairfieldLife] Am I an "I" or a "Me"?
I'm always amazed at the things people say so unconsciously ... "The Ego" ,"The Divine". In post-20th Century spiritual language it has become common to speak this way - putting an article before the word. I believe it started with the Freudians using this type of language to fortify their claims about the persistence of trace psychological structures in common language. However, it now has become commonplace in new-age and "spiritual" talk. To overstate the obvious: "Ego" is the Latin word for "I". To place an article such as the word "the" in front of the word "ego" objectifies it and turns this common referent into an "object of observation". Who then is left to "observe" the "I" or "ego". Another "I" other than the "I" called "me"? Two "I"s then? One objective and the other subjective? Bullshit! This is all a form of speech which has become a mode for obscuring how we know objects and how we know ourselves. Object and selves? Yes, just like that, "object there, subject here". This simple phenomenological structure is the root of all philosophical inquiry and of all psychological integrity (ie. simple sanity). Sound "dualistic"? I hope so! Because only western, hypnotized, pseudo-advaitins and their Buddhist co-bullshitters could possibly believe that they are not indulging in grossly fantasized conceptuality by using this type of language. Is it final? NO. Is it necessary? YES. So what about "The Divine"? This religious-speak is an word-absurdity painted upon a demythologized Zeus-Paeter, the warmly feared "God the father". "The Divine" is a mode of speech designed to shelter us from our frightful picture of a horrible, wrathful God. However is also shelters us from having to confront the "Being" at the heart of the most powerful experiences of deity found in the western tradition - all-consuming fire, overwhelming light, extinguishing presence, drowning dissolution. "The Ego." "The Divine." The Self-Delusion. The Self-Indulgence. John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Both of you are making good points. We don't see any major difference between your ideas. I would just like to add something to the discussion about the point relating to the 'mistake of the intellect'. This mistake can be the contributing factor of those who are agnostics or atheists. I believe they have created a human set of values into which the Divine is supposed to fulfill before they will accept Its existence. However, the Divine is beyond these set of values. Hence, they fail to see the message. But I doubt if one can convince them otherwise. I believe this issue is depicted in the story of the war between the good and bad angels. Similarly, the same message is made in the vedic story of the demigods and demons battling for the pot of amrita created by their churning of the ocean of milk. In the end, one can only say, "to each his own". --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter > wrote: > > > > Bill wrote: > > The soul is a pure reflection of God called the Jivatma, when in >the > > beginning when it was tempted by Lucifer (maya/avidya) in the Garden > > of Eden (pure innocence) it was warned not to eat of the tree of > > knowledge of Good and evil or surely it would die (be subject to the > >wheel of > > samasara/reincarnat ion). Because it disobeyed and identified itself > > with material creation (i.e. the flesh) it became trapped due to > > attachment, the product of this identification is the 'ego' or the > > pseudo-soul. > > > > Bronte writes: > > I would say the creation went awry NOT when the soul identified > >with material creation (which it was supposed to do) but when it > >forgot that it was the Infinite. We can involve ourselves in matter > >all we like as long as we maintain our cosmic connection. > > Same difference really, I've heard it called the 'mistake of the > intellect'. It 'forgot' it was the infinite *because* it identified > with something 'other' than the infinite/Self, hence the 'fall of man'. > > > Enlightenment means remembering that connection. But if you add to > >the meaning of enlightenment that you have to disidentify with your > >soul, you have subverted the purpose of creation. > > You don't disidentify with the soul you disidentify with avidya or the > individual illusion of identification of matter and circumstances, the > product of which is the me and I. Whenever you use the terms me and I > you draw a circle creating a boundary, that's not infinite, you are > that, *tat tvam asi* (Upanishads-That Thou Art). > > > > Because being so disidentified, you will never be a dynamic creator, > >only a passive observer. You'll "watch" your "body/mind" or "meat > >robot" rather than BE your brilliant individuality. > > Yes and NO, it is the gunas the that are the true actors in creat
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mantras, meditation and deities
Herr Leo Fischer, the Austrian Sanskritist, was one of a handful of European academics to throw aside his scholastic robes and assume the robes of a Dashanami Swami. It was rather remarkable for his day but now, unfortunately, any California Hausfrau can do the same The text you quoted below was the first serious study of mantra by an Orientalist. However, his qualifications were strictly academic - not spiritual nor a mix of both. He was, after all, the person who grandly declared Ramana Maharshi to be nothing but a "crashing bore". Agehananda put on Ochre robes because it gave him access in India to many people who wouldn't usually talk to a Westerner about tantric traditions. In this way he broke new ground. However, after all these years, his works are no longer a main resource in defining mantra, although his works are still widely cited. One thing to note is that his definition of mantra, as given below, is now just one academic opinion among others. Among those other opinions are claims that mantras can only be evaluated by their "purpose for use". Thus, even if mantra syllables have no meaning "as such", they can still be defined by how they are used in ritual speech acts or meditative practice. empty "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: bill wrote: > When someone tells us such meditation is hindu worship > then they are simply misinformed, ignorant or ideologues. > For clarity, here is a definition of mantra, according to Swami Ageananda Bharati: "A mantra is a quasi-morpheme or a series of quasi-morphemes, or a series of mixed genuine and quasi-morphemes arranged in conventional patterns, based on codified esoteric traditions, and passed on from one preceptor to one disciple in the course of a prescribed initiation ritual." According to Swami Ageananda, this definition does not include any reference to the purpose or purposes of mantra, for the statement of purpose is a material statement, which must be excluded from a definition, which is a set of formal propositions of exception less validity. If there is a single exception to a statement, then that statement forfeits its claim to being a definition. As there is a conceivable exception with regard to the purpose of mantra, purpose could not be included. Work Cited: 'The Tantric Tradition' Swami Ageananda Bharati Rider, 1965 - Don't let your dream ride pass you by.Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Bhojadeva: 2.5, Vyaasa: 22+
All the "weird" stuff is straight out of various Puranas - which means from traditionally transmitted oral histories and mythologies later written down and expanded. The Buddhist Abhidharma cosmologies of Sumeru use similar or same sourcing. The confounding part for Westerners is that the descriptions are composed of three overlaping streams: direct sensory perception (i.e. the sun seems to pass across the sky), Yogipratyaksha (yogic non-sensory perception) and geo-mythic speculation. empty cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Bhojadeva's comment on YS III 26 (Sun) has two and a half lines of devanaagarii text; Vyaasa's comment on the same suutra has 22+ lines. Seems like Bhoja doesn't believe all the "weird" stuff in Vyaasa's comment (mahaatala, rasaatala, atala, vitala, sutala, talaatala, paataala, and stuff). - Don't let your dream ride pass you by.Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
[FairfieldLife] FFL Awaken - Rick, Erwache!! this is a nightmare not a movie.
I hate it when reality mocks my prescience with such utter contempt: Rick, remember Message #148634, September 9th, 2007 - Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Furher ... "Welcome to the world of Stazi informants." "Need help to make it all work? Just go offline and turn it over to your seconds-in-command, your obergruppenfurhers ... and Edg for intuitively recognizable insults". In truth Robespierre is reborn among us ... right here on Fairfield Life. empty Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Judy, I didn't go very deeply into it, because, well, Rick would know whatever you seem to know that I don't know regarding this matter. That and the fact that I am a sinner of this very kind of sinning and to the same or worst degree. I didn't delineate my own conceptions because Rick is the one who has the power to describe what a flame is. I merely bring to his attention a posting that -- even if editorially reiterative -- "abuses the spirit of our group's intent to keep things a bit more responsible." To wit: the swear words and the ad hominem attacks cited have been "actively and mindfully edited into a 'list of past offenses' for the obvious purpose of attacking the character of another poster." We've all sinned, but for Willy to single you out -- gratuitously -- is a flame in my opinion. Others may have other issues to "see" in this scenario, but mine is the first one to pop in my mind. Come on, you folks o'light, ain't it a flame on Judy? Given that at a this time when we're trying to "begin anew" to have "community of civility" here that at the least accords each poster the dignity of having logic, truth, and kindness (sweet truth) applied to her/his presentation with the expectation that all will enjoy the benefits of these velvet constraints on our egoic artistries, why the Willytext posts? We all know, right? If you're silent, thanks for agreeing with me. If there's any aging hippies out there reading this, "Give peace a chance you hosers!" Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Edg, Willytex is quoting old posts (mostly mine) > from FFL and alt.m.t. Didn't you click on the links? > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Rick, > > > > Er, after a hundred posts from folks who seemed to agree to warn > then > > penalize someone for flaming, I would think that you'd have warned > > Willy for his previous post. Now the one below seems to go way over > > the top into very obvious flaming. > > > > Are you going to do this warn-then-ban bit? > > > > Edg > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > > wrote: > > > > > > jstein wrote: > > > > I'd ask Barry to provide examples to the contrary, > > > > but there wouldn't be any point. > > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/143310 > > > > > > No, the above is what I actually wrote, citing Wilber, > > > and showing you to be a liar. > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/143497 > > > > > > As you know, Willytex, what I was calling Barry's fantasy > > > was *not* that Lenz had levitated. Liar that you are, you > > > omitted the context to make it seem that I had. > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/140399 > > > > > > Your team of profligate liars and racketeers lost > > > in '06 and continues to lose. > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/143504 > > > > > > Horseshit. > > > > > > Classics from the alt.m.t. Groove Yard > > > http://tinyurl.com/74d95 > > > > > > From Judy Stein to Willytex: > > > > > > Liar. > > > No, liar. > > > Wrong, liar. > > > Bite me, toots. > > > Non sequitur, liar. > > > Yes, it does, liar. > > > Willytex is a liar. > > > No, she did not, liar. > > > Yeah, it's a non sequitur. > > > As usual, Willytex is the liar. > > > Outright, deliberate falsehood. > > > Bob Dole is a liar, just like you. > > > Another right-winger bent on deception. > > > You've been lying your head off for months. > > > And that's just an outright, deliberate falsehood. > > > You snipped the context to obscure that fact, liar. > > > Boy, do you need a course in the fundamentals of logic. > > > > > > > His "opinion" about the general usage here of the > > > > term "liar" is also incorrect, in my observation. > > > > It's rare that someone is called a liar for merely > > > > expressing an opinion about someone else. If it > > > > does happen, it's likely to be because the person > > > > using the term knows that the person expressing > > > > the "opinion" has evidence that clearly documents > > > > the inaccuracy of that "opinion." > > > > > > - Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
[FairfieldLife] Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Furher
Rick, clarify this for members: Define "gratuitous profanity" and also help me understand "non-gratuitous profanity". I want to be able to use non-gratuitous profanity (if I deem it important) without you censoring me or initiating an administrative reprisal. What comprises a "sexist slur" since we must assume that you have intentionally demarcated it from the more usual "profanity" to be able to monitor it. What about racist slurs? Is trailer-trash permitted but white, trailer-trash forbidden? Is the visually, literal euphemism "f*ckhead"(which you have used in your email about the new guidelines) an example of an allowed or disallowed term? So Don't want to explicitly answer these questions? Then you choose to deliberately obscure the horizon between permitted and forbidden speech. This can only mean that you intend to exercise your edicts based upon personal likes and dislikes whether about ideas or persons. Don't like being forced to monitor member's posts for content, style and intent? Welcome to the world of Stazi informants. You are now the oberstfurher. And please dont give me that Im light with my trigger finger. Youve already proved that you are easily manipulated by the pathetic sentimentality of Bronte and the machinations of New Morning. So find the thought of monitoring it all rather taxing? Need help to make it all work? Just go offline and turn it over to your seconds-in-command, your obergruppenfurhers - New Morning for obvious outrages, Bronte Baxter for emotionally insensitive offences and Edg for intuitively recognizable insults. Oh, and by the way - just so I don t leave anyone with any ambiguity, which is what I believe will soon happen regularly: 1. I believe that you, Rick Archer, have made an extremely foolish decision to jeopardize the independent speech of FFL members. 2. I believe that Bronte Baxter is too sentimental and cowardly to fight for her own points-of-view and has cut a deal (consciously or unconsciously) with you to create a special FFL privileged status for herself. Such a status would allow her to speak without incurring the confrontation that the rest of us might reasonably incur as a result of firmly stating our point of view. Based upon the gender-driven definitions of Brontes recent emails, and New Mornings insistence that you are not doing your job, which you have explicitly sympathized with, you are subjecting the rest of us to the secret domination motives of these two members. I have noticed that Peter is already afraid to use language stronger than I agree or I disagree when replying to Bronte. 3. For years Judy Stein has rationally slugged it out with anyone who wants to take her on and has endured being called slut and cunt. You, Rick Archer, have never intervened, and for you to do so now, generally and without cause, renders Judys forbearance worthless and the duplicity in Baxter and New Morns domination strategy especially egregious and destructive. 4. I believe that New Morning has conspired to excise the free speech of FFL members. I believe this renders her actions nothing less than traitorous to the spirit of FFL. I consider her efforts not only fundamentally dishonest but a blatant attempt to destroy the free-speech integrity of this forum. For you, Rick Archer, to frame these domination attempts as just an exercise is like the Maoist officer declaring the Tiananmen Square massacre as just the end of a democratic experiment. - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
[FairfieldLife] VOTE to change the rules and VOTE to ban two posters (was Re: Civil Speech and Behavior)
Proposal to FFL members Rather than endlessly discuss what we all know to be all to true, lets vote to make a deliberate and permanent change in the mode of discussion here on FFL. What I am proposing below is not an attempt at humor but is dead serious: I am proposing to ban two members from the forum for 30 days. To recall Brontes message: Bronte: And who wants that damage to their tender feeling level, when they're already working through enough shit from their confusing years in the movement? Certainly most women don't want to do that. We value the intelligence and sensitivity of our feelings, and don't choose to participate in forums where they are dealt with violently. To let ourselves turn into despairing, hating monsters on account of our abused past is a mistake. It hurts us personally, and our get-even attitude gets taken out on our undeserving fellow victims. I don't think personal attacks ever should be permitted in a forum that courts independent thought, vulnerability of expression and sincere sharing of experiences -- the sort of things that would help all of us heal the years we spent as victims. I do think we should be permitted to use swear words -- why the hell not, after all that we've been through? But even then, it's smart to self-monitor and keep it fairly decent. A post that's 90 percent full of barf and dogshit is going to turn off sensitive readers, certainly women like me, who would otherwise participate in FFL Sometimes policemen are needed in this world, as a necessary evil. If people can't self-regulate in a moment of rage, a rule-enforcing moderator provides a safety valve to stop a damaging post from going through. If it saves the feeling level of the group, and helps promote a higher level of discussion, isn't it worth the small pinch of rule-enforcement? I don't think Rick should have to read and "judge on" every post. He has no time for that. Vaj: As long as there are trolls--and many of the so-called trolls here are (I feel) important voices--the delicate voices will not speak. Given the moderation style here, I guess you should get used to never hearing all these wonderful people that really were the crowning beauty of the TMO. Empty Bill: After reading Bronte's victim statement, I PROPOSE to Rich Archer and all of the incestuous little group members here on FFL that we vote to elect Bronte Baxter as (êîìèññàð) commissar for all acts of speech or communication, in any form, here on FFL. Bronte should act as a moderator for assaying the feeling-level of the various posts here on FFL. This could be a special speech police patrol position helping to guarantee that no FFL member be subjected to independent speech acts which could potentially endanger their self-reference and re-victimize them. Furthermore, I propose that the following people assist Bronte Baxter as sensitivity monitors in the important role of speech commissar: Judy Stein: Since Judy is another female she can verify that delicate, female feeling-levels might be violated by allowing despairing, hate-monsters to freely post their claims here on FFL. This will spare Bronte Baxter from the burden of having to claim executive privilege in declaring which posts are improper (in either form or ideological content). As a well-known disputant in many argumentative threads, Judy has demonstrated that she appreciates reasoned argumentation. This also means that Judy is unlikely to attempt to delete a members right to post simply because they call her a moron (as happened previously on FFL). Judy is also willing to use the word fuck upon occasion, which will spare both females from accusations of prudishness. Vajranath: is a breath of fresh air from the usual corpse-stench, male-dominated, hate-speech vomit here on FFL. Vajranath brings a rare male sensitivity to female defined and emotionally based vulnerabilities of expression. He also rarely uses the word fuck in his posts, even when addressed in a confrontational way. Vaj will make a fine representative of polite, reasoned argumentation for the ignorant, raging men who are too pathetically immature to post sensitive, understanding comments here on FFL. FURTHERMORE: I PROPOSE that Dr. Peter Sutphen be banned from FFL for not less than 30 days for demonstrating (what some members of FFL consider) a flagrant misuse of his professional judgment. I PRPOSE that I, Empty Bill, also be banned from FFL for not less that 30 days for vicious and flagrant mockery of other posters and for deliberate attempts to insult the claims and propositions of fellow FFL members. THEREFORE: VOTE to install Bronte Baxter for FFL commissar, along with Judy Stein and Vajranath for sensitivity monitors. VOTE to BAN me. It is my only hope. And Bronte, please forgive me for all the
[FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Reincarnation in Judaism
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem here is that Judaism doesn't teach reincarnation.
_,_._,___
Empty Bill opines -
Here is an interesting counter-point for your consideration. His book is
especially
interesting for those who were "there and then".
Reincarnation in Judaism
By Rabbi Yonassan Gershom
While traveling on the spiritual speaking circuit, I have met many Hindus who
were surprised to learn that Jews have teachings about reincarnation. This is
because Hindus have often heard about Jews and Judaism only through Christian
missionaries, who refer to "Judeo-Christian tradition" as if it were a single
religion. Although Christianity sprang from Jewish roots (similar to the way
Buddhism came from Hinduism), Christian theologians have long ago rejected or
completely reinterpreted many Jewish teachings. For example, the well-known
saying of Jesus, "You must be born again," was probably about reincarnation,
and not necessarily a reference to changing one's religion. (Jews do not have
missionaries.)
The Hebrew word for reincarnation, gilgul, is derived from a verb which means
"turning in a circle"-just like samsara, the wheel of death and rebirth
described in Hindu scriptures. Jewish teachings about gilgul are not explained
in the Bible, but can be found in a collection of mystical writings called
kabbalah, which means, in the Hebrew language, "that which has been received."
For many centuries, kabbalah was a secret, esoteric doctrine, passed only by
word-of-mouth and initiation from teacher to disciple within Jewish circles.
Today, many of these mystical teachings have been written in books and
translated into other languages besides the original Hebrew and Aramaic, making
them more accessible to everyone.
Not all Jews believe in kabbalah, however. Like Hinduism, Judaism has
different schools of thought, which do not always agree with each other. Today
there are four main ideas about the afterlife taught among Jews: 1) genetic
survival through one's children; 2) resurrection; 3) Heaven and Hell; and 4)
reincarnation. Among the more Westernized, rationalistic sects of Jews,
reincarnation is rarely mentioned, but, on the other hand, many traditional
Orthodox Jews and all Hasidic Jews still believe in it.
Hasidic Jews are followers of the Baal Shem Tov ("the Master of the Good
Name"), an enlightened spiritual teacher who lived in Eastern Europe during the
1700s. Each Hasidic community is made up of families of Hasidim-which means
"pious ones"-who are organized around a rebbe, which is somewhat different from
a rabbi. While a rabbi is a scholar of sacred texts, similar to a pundit, a
Hasidic rebbe is more like a guru.
The leadership of a Hasidic sect is passed from father to son, because the
Hasidim believe that the soul of a previous rebbe often comes back as his own
great-grandchild, in order to continue guiding the community. If the rebbe has
no son or the son is unworthy, then a successor is chosen from another branch
of the rebbe's family line. In addition, it is believed that ordinary Jews, who
have not yet become enlightened, will continue to return many times, in order
to atone for sins in previous lives.
Kabbalah also teaches that souls will come back much sooner if their earthly
lives were cut short prematurely. Examples of this can be found in our own
century. In recent years, I have met many people who believe that they have
reincarnated from World War II. Since the publication of my book, Beyond the
Ashes: Cases of Reincarnation from the Holocaust (A.R.E. Press, 1992), I have
been receiving correspondence from people in the United States and Europe, who
have past-life memories of dying in the Nazi concentration camps. In some
cases, they were born into non-Jewish families this time around, but can
clearly remember details about Jewish life in Eastern Europe that are not
well-known to the outside world.
Jewish mysticism, like Hinduism, also teaches that some souls break the cycle
of birth and death, to become like angels in the spiritual world. Elijah the
Prophet is one of these, who, like a Jewish version of the immortal Babaji,
appears to worthy seekers and initiates them into the deeper mysteries of
kabbalah.
Rabbi Yonassan Gershom is a traveling storyteller/teacher in the tradition
of the Hasidic Jews. He is the author of two books and numerous articles
on Jewish mysticism, and teaches at the Institute for Adult Jewish Studies
in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
-
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Diagnostic Delusions
>> Curtisdeltablues said: >> Posting here is a place to unwind from professional identities > New morning said: > Yes, it must be great to get outside of that Blues/rocker superstar dross. To get rid of all > those damn long-legged blonde groupies. Empty: What could I add to that other than an old man's lament? - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
[FairfieldLife] [FairfieldLife] Re: Remote Diagnostic Demons
Yup, see below. authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Unlike you, in her reply to me, Judy merely called me a nitwit. > It was a bit unimaginative for my tastes. Nitwit means dull and > stewped but can mean silly too. However, "Nitwit" did at least > make the demons briefly laugh. I wanted to explain it all to her > but she does not have much of a sense of humor. Especially in > reference to herself. The demons prohibit me from entering > conversations with humorless people so I guess I'll just have to > wait. I'm afraid it's your demons who don't have much of a sense of humor if "nitwit" made them laugh. Unless, of course, they were laughing because they've kept you from realizing you're a nitwit and were delighted that you had no idea what a fool you were making of yourself (and not for the first time here, either). Judy, I begged the demons to let me answer and they finally relented, so here goes. The demons laughed at your use of the word "nitwit" because they knew it would hurt my feeling (I still have one remaining) and pierce to the core of my shallow being. They know I don't apply this evaluation to my own self-image of somehow being "semi-intelligent" so they found your usage to be hilarious. They are easily amused I have discovered. However, they didn't even laugh when you called me "Hypocrite!" From my understanding of their point of view, anyone who lives beneath his or her own intellectual and moral standards is a hypocrite. So unfortunatly, by this touchstone, most humans are hypocrites - of which I confess that I am first. This is not funny, it's just ordinary. Therefore no laughter. As far as your other comments, I sincerely hope I am appearing as a fool for I am indeed a fool. I have proclaimed it for quite a while. Years ago I found out just how much of a fool I was while gossiping with Death. No matter how many nuanced lies I traded with "his finalness", he was no fool. Oh, by the way, I actually appeciate your dogged, teeth snapping pursuit of Vaj's duplicities - even if you are a neo-marxist. Someone has to keep the menshevics in their place ... entombed. empty Messages in this topic (0) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 6 New Members 1 New Photos 3 New Links Visit Your Group New web site? Drive traffic now. Get your business on Yahoo! search. Yoga Resources on Yahoo! Groups Take the stress out of your life. Real Food Group Share recipes and favorite meals w/ Real Food lovers. . - Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Remote Diagnostic Delusions
"new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Gee, you sure nailed me, bill. You and Peter must be psychic to see others' inner states so clearly. Ever notice how close psychic and psychotic in spelling? Does the definition of psychotic include the syndrome of those who believe they can know via some postings, with no understanding of a person's life or context, with great accuracy assess another person's, a stranger's, inner states, motives, ego attachments, physiological responses, metal health. Or is it not psychotic, but simply silly. Silly is good too. However it's no mere psychism here, this is special. How did you KNOW! I AM a closet Maoist! And you nailed my motives in discussing this, self-aggrandizing all the way. How DID you KNOW man. This is awesome. The demons told me. You would like them. Unlike you, in her reply to me, Judy merely called me a nitwit. It was a bit unimaginative for my tastes. Nitwit means dull and stewped but can mean silly too. However, "Nitwit" did at least make the demons briefly laugh. I wanted to explain it all to her but she does not have much of a sense of humor. Especially in reference to herself. The demons prohibit me from entering conversations with humorless people so I guess I'll just have to wait. You however have some sense of absurdity developed. The demons showed me that also. You have looked into the mirror long enough to realize what is happening here. Not bad for a Maoist. Me, I'm so old that when I look into the mirror not even I can believe the lies that other guy is telling. No matter what he says, I know who the real fool is. I think this delusion, of professionally trained or not, of the manifest syndrome above, is interesting. That is why I have ventured out a few posts exploring the issue. This syndrome, it seems to me, is so germane to this list, and manifestly present in an abundance of posts. That people choose to go beyond discussing and analyzing, others' ideas, and try to then attribute motives, identify inner states, propose past childhood traumas as the cause of such ideas, is a fascination. I KNOW, its hard not to speculate on the inner motives, drives and states of mind that seem to thrive on doing such. But think: how would one actually know such is true? Or has any accuracy what so ever. There is no delusion here - demons rule. But, to get somewhat technical, your comments are simply not following the logic you stated above. If we cannot know each other's ideas, as such, then you have no access to my states of mind. You can only know my verbalizations, whether uttered or written. This is implicit in your argument above. If such is true then you are bereft of knowledge about my own states of mind. You simply do not possess certitude about whether I can or cannot know your own personal and subjective states of mind. Please understand that, in fact, I do know your inner states of mind, motives, ego attachments, physiological reponses and mental health -(geez, what a list!). The demons show me all this directly, not inferentially, which is the method most humans must use. By the way, the demons are prodding me to let you know they like your attitude. They don't mind neo-marxists, unlike conservative me, so you all should get along in a rodney king sort of way. Finally, I believe their exact message is slowly coming to me. Here is is ... "Come ... come to the dark side of the farce". empty Curtisdeltablues said: > > > Posting here is a place to unwind from professional identities with > > their serious consequences. No one is always acting in their > > professional capacity and posting on boards like this is not a way > > to receive a medical diagnosis. - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
"Heresy" means to personally choose a particular belief in opposition to some previously established orthodox belief. "Heterodoxy" is simply to choose all on one's own without regard to orthodoxy. Hsuan Hua was observing Chinese Buddhist monastic vinaya. Unless you were a monk in full possession of the pratimoksha vows neither you nor he could be in heretical antipathy to the other's practice. As far as differences and separations, you began your posted comments with Buddhist versus Hindu so you edged yourself out of discussing them in terms that were reflective of mutuality. "Tathata" is Sanskrit for "thusness. "Entity" is Latin for "ens" - a being. These are well established terms without a lot of mystery to them. "Dai" means "Great" as in the Dai of Dainichi or the "Maha" in mahayana and mahamudra. Gohonzon is an object of veneration. You apparently venerate the proclamation that the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren are the same and in the same manner that Dharma and Buddha are sometimes worshiped as the same. This means you are probably here to proselytize us at FFL for SGI. yifuxero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---You're looking at differences and separations. The Gohonzon integrates mutually agreeable M-fields and tends to demolish those getting in the way. True, Hsuan Hua didn't approve of the Gohonzon which I showed him once. Nichiren's Buddhism was heretical to him. However, his habit of eating only once per day before noon is heretical to me since I have low blood sugar and have to eat continually throughout the day. I had such pre-noon meals with him on a number of occasions. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a Japanese description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual identity between particulars in Indra's net). Recent Activity 4 New Members 1 New Photos 3 New Links Visit Your Group Search Ads Get new customers. List your web site in Yahoo! Search. Real Food Group Share recipes and favorite meals w/ Real Food lovers. Dog Fanatics on Yahoo! Groups Find people who are crazy about dogs. . - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
[FairfieldLife] Dai Gohonzon (was Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC)
Don't know much about Nichiren. Dai Gohonzon sounds like a Japanese description of Kegon's "riji-muge" (interpenetration and mutual identity between particulars in Indra's net). I presume that the "true entity" is tathata or tathata-garbha if you prefer. Buddha sees nothing but Buddha. So you do dharani-s from and to the multi-form Buddha? By the way, didn't Nichiren call Zenji-s self-power devils? Don't think Hsuan Hua would agree. Also, I doubt Nichiren would approve of Padmasambhava - particularly, Vajrakila the Yidam which he gave as a first sadhana. Why don't you collapse your multiple identities here on FFL and give up the parade. Tell us about your background is so we can't understand the context of your dialog. Also - there no such thing as "Buddhist" tathata, as you know. These are all concepts, which you also know. Why make the separation except to be polemical? empty tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---empty bill, you are a very astute observer and have keen insight!. How many? Ans: many!! - but all will be explained in due time; but for now all I can say is that it's the power of the GOHONZON which reflects many facets of the one hologram; into one living organism, with no danger of the separate parts flying off into separateness. Thus, one can reconcile the various parts without conflictyet, the whole and relationship between the parts remain Buddhist, not Hindu. There are certain advantages in Buddhism over Hinduism, but the core nature of the advantage(s) can't be addressed through the type of intellectual analysis going on in this forum. (not to put such analysis down, but it's limited, not entering into direct cognition of the Buddhist "true entity", represented by the Gohonzon). ps. The foregoing is not intended to make sense. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So how many of you inhabit you? Please explain. > > > Message #146579 August 15th, 2007 - > --- Tertonzeno wrote: > > --Thanks, I'm a Buddhist and don't accept Patanjali as an Authority. > > > Message #145659 , August 16th, 2007 > Tertonzeno wrote: > > ---Thanks, on Buddhist practice, I'll get more into this later. I > > practice TM but my Buddhist Guru is Hsuan Hua; whom I used to visit > > during the 70's: > > > Message #147828, August 30, 2007 - Tertonzeno wrote: > > ---Thanks, Lahiri Mahasay is the lineage Uncle of my Kriya yoga Guru > (initiated me into Kriya yoga in 1982 - Swami Satyeswarananda). > > d. he could perform the Kriya of out of body travel at will > (mentioned by Patanjani), involving the mudra of connecting his > tongue to his uvula. > > > - > Luggage? GPS? Comic books? > Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search. > - Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Lahiri Mahasaya on CC
So how many of you inhabit you? Please explain. Message #146579 August 15th, 2007 - --- Tertonzeno wrote: --Thanks, I'm a Buddhist and don't accept Patanjali as an Authority. Message #145659 , August 16th, 2007 Tertonzeno wrote: ---Thanks, on Buddhist practice, I'll get more into this later. I > practice TM but my Buddhist Guru is Hsuan Hua; whom I used to visit > during the 70's: Message #147828, August 30, 2007 - Tertonzeno wrote: ---Thanks, Lahiri Mahasay is the lineage Uncle of my Kriya yoga Guru (initiated me into Kriya yoga in 1982 - Swami Satyeswarananda). d. he could perform the Kriya of out of body travel at will (mentioned by Patanjani), involving the mudra of connecting his tongue to his uvula. - Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
If you'll check the source you'll see that this statement was made by suziezuzie (msilver1951) and that my contribution was to follow with an article discussing Gandhi's passifist views about the Jews. It was Martin Buber who answered Gandhi publicly. Anyone reading Gandhi's comments can see that he wouldn't have minded sending every Jew to the slaughter so he could prove that "ahimsa" was morally superior. There is so much post-WWII cultural propaganda that people don't even know that the SS wanted to send the Jews out of Europe by train to their home in Palestine. The British refused this request because they didn't want the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem to lead Palestinian Muslims in rebellion against British colonialism. It is one of the ironies of history that the SS (who took the homes and possessions of the Jews by force) wanted to return all Jews to their homeland and it was therefore British who blocked this from happening (to protect their territorial interests). To this day the British still deny this truth. (See "The Order of the Death's Head" by German historian Heinz Hohne). Gandhi's story had now become a westernized cultural hagiography. Western Buddhists (hand in hand with Satyagraha proponents) have been a large part of this effort to portray him as a "saint". For my part I take sides with the Jewish fighters in the Warsaw ghetto, who were respected even by the SS. On the other hand, if Gandhi's soul is back on Earth doing the same type of thing again then the Jihadists will slaughter him this time instead of an Indian nationalist. After all, Dar-as-salam (the realm of Islam) has no earthly boundaries. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 8/29/07 6:37:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about this? Should have? Isn't that what they did?Thus the saying *never again*. - Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. - Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: What Fairfield and Fairfield Life Could Become
To paraphrase a Japanese poet: Such piercing chill I feel My dead guru's sandal at his altar under my heel heh heh Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jim_flanegin Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 2:40 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: What Fairfield and Fairfield Life Could Become Someone oughta remind folks *who are interested* (and *only* those who are interested...) that a piercing intellect is a requirement for Enlightenment...Even Byron Katie would agree.:-) Maybe, but Trotaka didnt have one, and I once heard MMY tell Charlie Donahue that all this logic and exactness could just be a symptom of stress. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.10/977 - Release Date: 8/28/2007 4:29 PM - Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
suziezuzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about this? Empty Bill helps out boys and girls! What Did Gandhi Do? One-sided pacifist. By David Lewis Schaefer In the weeks leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom, American college campuses were plastered with posters asking What Would Gandhi Do? The implication, of course, was that the U.S. should emulate the tactics of the celebrated Hindu pacifist who successfully led the movement for Indian independence from Britain. The analogy, it should go without saying, overlooks major differences between the two cases. Whereas the 20th-century British were far too benign an imperial power to choose to slaughter peaceful resisters to their rule, theres no evidence that Saddam Hussein, already responsible for the massacre and torture of hundreds of thousands of his countrymen (to say nothing of the many more who died in his aggressive wars against Iran and Kuwait) would likewise have succumbed to friendly persuasion Jacques Chirac to the contrary notwithstanding. (Its not that we didnt try!) It is interesting, in this regard, to recall how Gandhi himself responded to the evil perpetrated by one of Saddams role models, Adolf Hitler. In November, 1938, responding to Jewish pleas that he endorse the Zionist cause so as to persuade the British government to open Palestine to immigrants fleeing Hitlers persecution, Gandhi published an open letter flatly rejecting the request. While expressing the utmost sympathy with the Jews and lamenting their age-old persecution, Gandhi explained that the cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me, since Palestine belongs to the Arabs. Instead, he urged the Jews to make that country their home where they are born. To demand just treatment in the lands of their current residence while also demanding that Palestine be made their home, he argued, smacked of hypocrisy. Gandhi even went so far as to remark that this cry for the national home affords a colorable justification for the German expulsion of the Jews. Of course, Gandhi added, the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history, and if there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. Hitlers regime was showing the world how efficiently violence can be worked when it is not hampered by any hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as humanitarianism. Nonetheless, the Hindu leader rejected that notion, since I do not believe in any war. And for Britain, France, and America to declare war on Hitlers regime would bring them no inner joy, no inner strength. Having rejected both the plea that Palestine should be offered as a place of refuge for the Jews and the idea that the Western democracies should launch a war to overthrow Hitler, Gandhi offered only one avenue for the Jews to resist their persecution while preserving their self-respect. Were he a German Jew, Gandhi pronounced, he would challenge the Germans to shoot or imprison him rather than submit to discriminating treatment. Such voluntary suffering, practiced by all the Jews of Germany, would bring them, he promised, immeasurable inner strength and joy. Indeed, if the Jewish mind could be prepared for such suffering, even a massacre of all German Jews could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy, since to the God-fearing, death has no terror. According to Gandhi, it would (for unexplained reasons) be easier for the Jews than for the Czechs (then facing German occupation) to follow his prescription. As inspiration, he offered an exact parallel in the campaign for Indian civil rights in South Africa that he had led decades earlier. Through their strength of suffering, he promised, the German Jews will score a lasting victory over the German Gentiles in the sense that they will have converted [them] to an appreciation of human dignity. And the same policy ought to be followed by Jews already in Palestine enduring Arab pogroms launched against them: if only they would discard the help of the British bayonet for their defense, and instead offer themselves [to the Arabs] to be shot or thrown into the Dead Sea without raising a little finger, the Jews would win a favorable world opinion regarding their religious aspiration. In a thoughtful personal response dated February 24, 1939, the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber who had himself emigrated to Israel from Germany a short time earlier and combined his Zionism with earnest efforts to peacefully reconcile Jewish and Arab claims in the Holy Land chided Gandhi for offer
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blue Pearl in the Guru Gita
Vaj, for you this is shameless speculation.
I don't mean to be mean but you are better at speculating when you know at
least something about the topic - rather than here where you know only what
someone wrote. There are different levels of technical complexity in Lahiri
Mahasaya's kriya-yoga, not just what you can read in Tantra magazine.
Kriya-yoga is actually a Vaishnava tantric yoga using different mahamantras of
Hari in an internal sacrifice (antaryaga). And that is just one level only.
Taoist microscopic circuit functions in adjunct nadi-s, not sushumna,
chintrini, etc. Tibetans use a microsopic type of process to prepare mediums
for shamanic pocession by dharma-protectors. For the real Kriyavani-s, much of
what they learn is oral transmission only with privacy samaya-s. You should be
able to understand and honor this.
I only know a little bit anyway but still cannot aid your speculation in this
case. Go see Swami Prajanananda and receive initiation if you want to know
enough to make one of your famous judgements ... i.e. it is just "only like
such and such" or "my Grandmother gave a more powerfull diksha in her kitchen
while making peach cobbler, quoting Issac of Nineveh and drinking Johnny Walker
Black".
Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 28, 2007, at 9:57 PM, billy jim wrote:
The Kriya-Yoga lineage of Kriya Babaji, Lahiri Mahasaya, Yukteshvar Giri
and Yogananda has fully preserved both the yogic ascent-descent process and the
direct realization process of Brahma-vidya in Shankara's lineage.
Another reason I consider it more complete and balanced.
Interesting, when they published yogandana's secret "kriyas" years ago in
Tantra Magazine, they were the same as the basic practices of Taoist Inner
Alchemy called the 'Microcosmic orbit'. And really these were intro practices
in that system.
It makes one wonder if that was all yogananda knew. If so, given the
spiritual supermarket today, it's not so impressive.
-
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blue Pearl in the Guru Gita
I remember reading the controversy between FreeJonny and MukBab back in those days. The real question between them was about the means to enlightenment and the contentions of MukBab that Shankara believed in the sushumna and the blue pearl and that this particular tantric process was the model for Shankara's Advaita. In contrast, FreeJonny claimed he became "enlightened" through the assistance of Ramana Maharshi's descriptions of returning to ultimate, unconditioned awareness in the "heart" through the "amrit-nadi". According to this model, amrit-nadi descends from the brahmarandra to the heart (secret heart-cave/hrid-guha) which is not the same as the anahat-chakra within the tantric sushumna, Freejonny therefore claimed that his final emancipatory process was not through the shaktipat he received from MukBab. And, of course, all this talk was a bit exacerbated by various groups of "disciples' on opposite sides, in the usual slavish manner. The controversy partly revolved around the differences between tantric shaktipata (the fall-of- power) along with shakti's consequent ascent and return to the over-the-head crown center. This ascending process was contrasted with Shankara's Upanishadic sushumna, with its focus on the sun-door (surya-dvara) which co-identifies the purusha in the heart (brahma-pura or city of brahman), the purusha in the right eye (krsna-tara or black-star) and the purusha in the sun (hiranyagarbha). This upanishadic process was a description of realization through direct cognition (brahma-vid) rather than one of unification. Freejonny went through a extensive public reading of Shankara's Upanishadic commentaries to convincingly demonstrate that this was the exact advaita path of Shankara rather than yogic cultivation of subtle perceptions via the sushumna and the various major chakras. Including blue bindus. Interesting how people forget this stuff because they never really understood the distinctions. The Kriya-Yoga lineage of Kriya Babaji, Lahiri Mahasaya, Yukteshvar Giri and Yogananda has fully preserved both the yogic ascent-descent process and the direct realization process of Brahma-vidya in Shankara's lineage. Another reason I consider it more complete and balanced. empty tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---You're forgetting something (based on the essential falling out between Muktananda and Adi Da). Adi Da claimed M. wasn't fully Enlightened (or E. period) since he was fixated on the Blue Pearl. M's position is that one can be Enlightened and "apparently" be engaged in something relative. M. used the Blue Pearl in his Sidhi. It gave him information on the Spiritual status of people who came before him. Thus, he was fixated on the Blue Pearl before Enlightenment, but after Enlightenment; having eradicated the last traces of dualistic identification, he continued to use the Blue Pearl for special purposes. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Fucking idiocy, no offense. There is nothing and nowhere to go and nothing > else to strive for all having existance with no fixation. Blue bindu, and > all the millions of others are the dense nature of the ground of all being > which is the source of and realization of all qualities simultaneously. One > doesn't need to travel trough bindus to already be their entire essence. > Already forever. > > > - Original Message - > From: "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 11:19 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Blue Pearl in the Guru Gita > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tertonzeno" wrote: > > > > > >> Verse 121: > >> "Shri Mahadeva said: Pinda is Kundalini Shakti. Hamsa (OSpontaneous > >> repetiton of Hamsa) is pada. Know rupa to be the bindu (blue pearl) > >> and rupatita is the pure One (beyond the three.) > > > > This seems to be a reference to the spiritual third eye or ajna chakra > > which is threefold; the first *experience* is a sphere or circle made > > of gold color within which is the blue (pearl), within this blue > > (pearl) is a five pointed white star, which upon entering one achieves > > Cosmic Consciousness or complete freedom in the eternal Silence beyond > > all relativity, Nirvikalpa Samadhi. > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Or go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > and click 'Join This Group!' > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > - Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on the Two Paths
Swami Muktananada's "blue pearl" is the title he gave to the nila-bindu (blue point-essence) experienced at the ajna-chakra. Shankara does not talk about the nila-bindu although in his Bha.Gita commentary on Bh.G. 8.10 he does discuss the Ajna-chakra prayaana-kaale: At the time of death, after first bringing the mind under control in the lotus of the heart, and then lifting up the prana through the nadi going upward - by gradually gaining control over the rudiments of nature such as earth, etc.; and after that, samyak aasveshya: having fully fixed; Praana: (life energy); madhye: between; the bhruvoh: eye-brows, without losing attention; achalena manasaa: with an unwavering mind; he, the yogin possessed of such wisdom, yuktah: imbued, united; bhaktyaa: with devotion, deep love; ca eva: as also; yoga-balena: with the strength of yoga i.e. imbued with that strength also, consisting in steadfastness of the mind arising from accumulation of impressions resulting from samadhi; upaiti: reaches; tam: that; divyam: resplendent; param: supreme; purusham: person - described as the Omniscient, the Ancient, etc. However, Shankara based his descriptions of yogic practice upon more than one source. In fact he described a path of return which co-identifies the purusha in the heart, the purusha in the right-eye and the purusha in the Sun (hiranyagarbha) as manifestation of the same purusha, the source-being who is transcendent over unmanifest maya. Muktananada's lineage was a siddha lineage, just like the lineage of Paramahansa Yogananada. Both contain practices focusing upon the nila-bindu, but, (IMO) Yogananda's is more extensive in teaching a wide range of knowledge and techniques and is also more balanced in understanding and weighing the various aspect of the yogic knowledge that can be imparted to sadhakas. (One example is the overwhelming importance he placed upon the meditator dwelling in deep, silent awareness at the end of any meditative practice). Disclaimer: Please note that I have received diksha from one of Yogananda's disciples [brother Anandamoy] and have also received diksha from Swami Prajnanananda - disciple of Swami Hariharananda, (guru-brother of Yogananada). I have not received diksha from Muktananada or Swami Chidvilasananda, his lineage heir. (You may therefore weigh my judgments as you please.) The nila-bindu is the yogic archetype for the experience of the three worlds (tri-lokya). Putting it into Buddhist term which you will understand - 1. the outer golden ring is the mano-prana mandala of kama-loka, which terminates not in the Vaishwanara palace of Indra upon Mt. Meru but in Hiranyagarbha, the golden embryo, the deity in the sun - (symbolized by the Narmadeshvar lingam prior to the bifurcation of male/female into the lingam/yoni). 2. the radiant, blue sky-like expanse (inside the golden aura) is the vijnana-mandala of rupa-arupa loka, the realm of meditative dhyana-samapatti-s. According to Shri Yukteshwar it is the karana-chitta, the casual realm of pure ideation (not mere thinking but noetic-eidetic cognition). 3. the central bindu (described as being either in the form of the Guru, the Ishta-devata (Yidam) or a five-pointed star) is the door to the divine realm (not arupa-loka but lokuttara). This descriptive model is not quite the same as the one used in the Upanishads. It is a later yogic model arising from the yogic siddha tradition. In contrast, Shankara uses the Upanishadic description of the sushumna primarily as the nadi exiting from the heart (hrid) which ascends to the center between the eye-brows (bhru-madya) and terminates at the peak (shiras) of the head. This is the method which Shankara describes in the Bhag.Gita as the Krama-mukti patha, the path of gradual realization of the conditioned Brahman. It is not the same as the Shaiva (shivite) path of kundalini-yoga nor is it the same as the Vaishnava (Vishnuite) path of return found in the Panchratra lineages of yogic meditation equally profound. This is all that I have time to do today and is probably more than you wanted to know anyway. Interesting question though. tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---How about the Blue Pearl? What does Shankara say about that? In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The problem here is in characterizing Shankara's views only in terms of his commentary on the Brahma Sutras. Recent Activity 2 New Members Visit Your Group Search Ads Get new customers. List your web site in Yahoo! Search. Official Samsung Yahoo! Group for supporting your HDTVs and devices. Featured Y! Groups and category pages. There is something for everyone. . -
[FairfieldLife] Shankara on the Two Paths
The problem here is in characterizing Shankara's views only in terms of his commentary on the Brahma Sutras. It is well established that the Brahma Sutra-s deal with bridging the variant perspectives found in the major Upanishads. Shankara's Brahama Sutra commentary is concerned with demonstrating that gnosis (jnana) or Brahma-vidya of the unconditional (nirguna) Brahman is both a direct and indirect means for vedantic realization. However, if we want to discuss Shankara then we need to take a wider perspective which is inclusive of his commentaries on the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads. Taken together, these sources deal with action (karma), meditation (upasana) and direct knowing (jnana). And by the way, Shankara's wider view is the source for Maharishi's original explanatory model of the three fields of life which preceded the formulation of the Science of Creative Intelligence. Shankara's commentary on the Bhagavad Gita is the oldest among the older commentaries still existing today. Shankara was also the first to accept the Bhagavad Gita, along with the Brahma Sutras and the Upanishads, as one of the three foundations (prashtana traya) of Vedanta. His Bhagavad Gita commentary discusses Yoga, as does the Gita itself. It has also been noted by some scholars (particularly John Arapura) that Shankara does not superimpose upon the 18 chapters of the Gita a division into three topical sections dealing with karma, bhakti and jnana, respectively. Rather he discusses the two resolute observances (nishta-s) 1. jnana-yoga for the knowers (sankhyanam) and 2. karma-yoga for the yogin-s. These "nishta-s" are found in Gita 3.3 and are often mis-translated into English as "paths". However, according to Shankara, these resolute observances (nishta-s) are not two separate paths but rather two stages on the single path to brahma-vidya. I have not found anyone here on FFL who has read Adi-Shankara's commentary on the Bhagavad Gita, even though Maharishi made a point about it in his Gita commentary. Remember Maharishi's line about Shankara teaching not just transcendental knowledge but also transcendental devotion? What about his commentaries on the principal Upanishads? If you had this teaching you would understand what it means that the purusha in the heart and the purusha in the sun are one. You would recognize that the doorway leading from the purusha in the heart to the purusha in the sun was the krsna-tara, the black-star in the right eye. You would no longer think that Shankaras teachings were just a bunch of abstractions for intellectuals who think too much. So what? Yah, so what. ivan_galeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: According to Shankara's commentary on Brahma sutras there is no mention of Yoga as such path. Shankara dropped off philosophy of Yoga system. Both paths have basis in Brahmanic rituals but the later one is characterized by transcending rituals (advaita Vedanta). In both paths Unity is possible to reach; in first after total pralaya; in second immediately. > According to Marshy, the Purusha is totally separate > from the gunas born of nature, prakriti. What is needed > is not a metaphysics, but a PRACTICE, that can be used > to isolate the Purusha from the prakriti: TM is that > effortless technique. Purusha (Atman) can be experienced as if isolated, but real nature of Purusha (Atman) is Brahman, totality. There is no isolation in Brahman state of consciousness. Yoga leads to turya and turyatit (kaivalya), Vedanta leads to Unity of Atman and Brahman. - Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Upanishads: Two Paths - Sun and Moon
The preeminent explanatory text for these ideas is "The Symbolism of the Stupa" by Adrian Snodgrass. Published in 1985 it is now selling for about US $30-35. It describes the principle ideas and symbolism of the solar path starting with the homology between the mandala of the solar year and the 10,000 bricks of the vedic agnicayana fire altar. It continues through the vedic chaitanya and the buddhist stupa, then goes through the chakra-nadi system and ends with an examination of this idea in the Diamond and Matrix-realm mandalas of the Shingon Tantric Buddhists of China and Japan. Adrian Snodgrass is an archetect and his text is filled with insightful visual illustrations of the solar path. empty "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" wrote: > > > 271:5 ... That future life is reached by two roads; p. 272 one, the > > Devapatha, leading to the world of Brahman (the conditioned), > > That would be the path of the Devas/Gods/Angels/Shining Ones or the > *dynamism* MMY talks about, conditioned..by space and time. > > > > beyond > > which there lies one other stage only, represented by knowledge of and > > identity with the unconditioned Brahman; > > The 'unconditioned' Brahman is the *Silence* part of the two fold > transcendental absolute, Cosmic Consciousness or Nirvikalpa Samadhi. > > > > > > > the other leading to the world of the fathers, and from thence, after > > the reward of good works has been consumed, back to a new round of > > mundane existence. > > That is the heaven world where one is rewarded for good karma, but not > freedom for Samsara, (the wheel of rebirth). > > > There is a third road for creatures which live and die, worms, > > insects, and creeping things, but they are of little consequence. > > > Of little consequence > > > Now it is quite clear that the knowledge which king Kitra possesses, > > and which Svetaketu does not possess, is that of the two roads after > > death, sometimes called the right and the left, or the southern and > > northern roads. These roads are fully described in the > > Khândogya-upanishad and in the Brihad-âranyaka, with certain > > variations, yet on the whole with the same purpose. > > The Northern road is the upward path of the prana leading to the 7th > chakra or spiritual illumination and freedom from rebirth. > > > The northern or left road, called also the path of the Devas, passes > > on from light and day to the bright half of the moon; > > Up the spine to the brain. > > the southern or > > right road, called also the path of the fathers, passes on from smoke > > and night to the dark half of the moon. > > Back to rebirth due to unworked out karma. > > > > Both roads therefore meet in the moon, but diverge afterwards. While > > the northern road passes by the six months when the sun moves towards > > the north, through the sun, (moon,) and the lightning to the world of > > Brahman, the southern passes by the six months when the sun moves > > towards the south, to the world of the fathers, the ether, and the > moon. > > One is temporary enlightenment (return to rebirth) and one is > permanent (no return). > > > The great difference, however, between the two roads is, that while > > those who travel on the former do not return again to a new life on > > earth, but reach in the end a true knowledge of the unconditioned > > Brahman, those who pass on to the world of the fathers and the moon > > return to earth to be born again and again. > > Until they take the Northern path > > > http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe01/sbe01239.htm > > The northern and southern paths are symbolic of the two directions of > the kundalini shakti, Northern going up towards Cosmic Consciousness > or the brain and Southern coming downwards towards the body or > reincarnation. Thanks. - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Swami G chating with ex purusha about MMY
How pitiful. How lost. This is what happens when you don't know anything but what the TMO tell you. Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Aug 18, 2007, at 5:34 PM, Ron wrote: Tomas Yes I understand that but how to do it I tried with meditation for 30 years A purusha who lived with the Big Reesh for years and doesn't know much about real deep meditation or where he is? Surprise, surprise. - Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Huen Tsiang on Uddiyana
Huen Tisang was as real/unreal as you or me. Uddiyana was as real/unreal as the USA. The muslims jihadists who murdered everyone and turned uddiyana into a wasteland were as real/unreal as the murdering jihadists today. What other real/unreal uddiyana are you referring to in your comment? If you are talking about the mythic dimension, as in Shambhala, then you need to address Vaj (Vajranath) on this forum. He claims to have a mythical, personal guru - Garab Dorje in "fact". Perhaps he can talk with Garab Dorje for you. Perhaps he'll call himself TertonDorje and initiate a series of Mind Terma-s, just for you. Worth a try. Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Neat, now what about the real Urgyen? - Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
[FairfieldLife] Grave dwelling Hsuan Hua (was Re: Mud puddle buddhism)
Korean Son master Soen Sa Nim described the venerable Hsuan Hua as a tripitaka master. I haven't tracked his teachings or activities since the late 70's but was pleased to see that his students still exist. He always seemed very pious and inspiring but I neve made the trip to meet him. To bad for me. I've heard there was some contention about his claims to be dharma heir to Chan master Hsu Yun. Since the various Chan lineages atrophied over the centuries after the Ming dynasty and the maoists eradicated the rest, I don't know how many Chinese can still claim an authentic decent. So where is he now? Not his sharira but the former grave dweller himself. At a guesthouse in sukhavati? Hosting 10,000 hua-tou's in akanishta? empty tertonzeno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ---Thanks, on Buddhist practice, I'll get more into this later. I practice TM but my Buddhist Guru is Hsuan Hua; whom I used to visit during the 70's: http://www.drba.org/dharma/hsuanhuabio.asp The fact that he's no longer physically alive doesn't diminish our relationship. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yah Billy. Lots of people like to claim they are buddhists. It's a belief thing now. It also doesn't mean much by itself. If someone claims to be a buddhist then it is fair to question exactly what they mean by that claim. Who is their teacher. What is their practice. What kind of meditation do they perform - etc. > > empty > > "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim wrote: > > > > Ever do TM or Sahaj Samadhi? Or do you make your meditations up - new > >age style. What is established authority for you? Or do you claim to > >have no authority higher than your "I"? > > > > empty > > Mud puddle Buddhism??? shame, SHAME!!...:-) > > > > > > > - > Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. > - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Yoni Puja
Don't get it. You meant oddiyoni? Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Alot of what goes on around here. - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Dalai Lama Quote
Dalai Lama states -
"The continuum of an impure substratum will later cease, not existing in
Buddhahood, whereas a pure substratum's continuum of similar type will exist
right through Buddhahood."
Would any of you actually envisage yourself speaking or writing this way?
Even in a philosophically oriented discussion? This type of Gelugpa-speak is a
mode of discourse so divorced from human experience that it has ossified into a
ideologically fixated form of thinking.
Tsongkhapa, the founder of the Dalai Lama's Gelugpa sect was quite strident
in his claim that no one can be enlightened unless they hold the position that
reality (emptiness) is a "non-affirming negation" - in other words a complete
nullity or absence. So how do we hold such a point of view? By intellectually
coming to that conclusion and then maintaining that very conclusion as an idea.
Think about that for a moment. You can't be enlightened without holding a
"thought".
For the Dalai Lama it is this thought - "Any thing that is lacks inherent
existence".
For Christians it is the thought - "Jesus is my savior".
Furthermore:
For Buddhists there is no beginning but there is an end.
For Christians there is a beginning but no end.
Amazing what antinomies our minds will construe to maintain a sense of
meaning.
kenotic bill
quantum packet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What he's saying is 180 degrees opposite to the nihilistic teachings
of Neo-Advaita.
Recent Activity
1
New Members
2
New Photos
Visit Your Group
Search Ads
Get new customers.
List your web site
in Yahoo! Search.
Yahoo! Groups HD
The official Samsung
Y! Group for HDTVs
and devices.
Yahoo! Groups
Be a Better Planet
Share with others
Help the Planet.
.
TD {font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial;font-size: 12px;
color: #33; }
-
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Missouri or Kansas?
According to Joseph Smith, the Garden of Eden's physical location was not in the Levant but in the new world - it's actual placement in the area now encompassed by Jackson County, Missouri, which is now part of metropolitan Kansas City. The City of Independence, Missouri is considered the Mormon terrestrial center and the Temple and International Headquarters of the Church of Christ is the center of that center. This Temple is a Mormon Church although it is separate from the Church of the Latter Day Saints and has mainstreamed itself somewhat in line with more standard Protestant denominations. In keeping with some other Mormon temples the Church of Christ - International HQ's is quite spectacular in idea and design. Joseph Smith, as prophet of the peoples of the New World, declared that the New Jerusalem of Zion would be founded here. He also declared that Jesus Christ would physically descend to this earth at that precise location to actualize the new millennium. For his beliefs, Joseph Smith was murdered along with his brother Hyrum at Carthage, Illinois in June, 1844. The two were attacked by an enraged mob of faithful Christians while the brothers were in jail awaiting trial on various accusations. He should have expected nothing less since Christians have always murdered those whom they oppose but cannot convert. It started with Helena, mother of the Roman emperor Constantine and has been an honored practice since then. Therefore wake up you Hindu demon worshipers! Cover yourself with the blood of Jesus before they murder you too. Because even if they don't get you while alive, in the bardo their blood drinking YHVH surely will. heh, heh Kenotic bill shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: According to the Mormons, the second coming of Jesus Christ will occur in Missouri: "Building of the New Jerusalem "Near the time of the coming of Jesus, the faithful Saints will build a righteous city, a city of God, called the New Jerusalem. Jesus Christ himself will rule there. (See 3 Nephi 21:2325.) The Lord said the city will be built in the state of Missouri in the United States (see D&C 84:34). "These are only a few of the signs that the Lord has given us. The scriptures describe many more." But the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is claiming some place in Kansas as the World Capital of Peace. Hmmm. Kansas and Missouri are right next to each other. Could it be that one of them is just off by a couple a hundred miles? __._,_ Recent Activity 1 New Members 2 New Photos Visit Your Group Moderator Central An online resource for moderators of Yahoo! Groups. Fashion Groups on Yahoo! Groups A great place to connect and share. Yoga Groups Exchange insights with members of the yoga community. . - Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Enlightenment occurs at the 6th chakra......MMY.
I've heard him discuss this two or three times, although I'm a little fuzzy about where/when. At least once was at the Montreal ashram and the others may have been at Lake Tahoe. Usually the context was someone's question about the purpose and results of practicing hollow and empty. Sorry I don't remember all the details. I went to 10-12 courses with him from 1996-2002. It is a little blurry for me now. My brain should do yoga sit-ups. empty Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes, I have been taking lessons from Turq and I do like your post and sorry I'm such an inadequate human beingI'll do more yogic sit-ups in the future. When have you heard SSRS talk about this? This is actually a great insight into many peoples' experience of the confusion and fear that arises as pure consciousness/Self shifts from a bound identification and a "self" to a unlocalized Self. It takes some time for the mind to shift in its thinking. I've heard this expressed as old mental habits that change over time. I've never heard it terms of very subtle physiology. Great food for thought. I'd love to hear SSRS's exact words...important guru speak here. --- billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With all due respect, Peter, your reply is > meaningless - simply another interjection of opinion > (doxa) without any context (or content for that > matter). Have you taken secret offline lessons from > TurkB in expressing your dis-approvals? At least > your style is more terse. > > I've heard SSRS indicate that the ajna-chakra is > the crucial point in the shift to an enlightened > state of consciousness. Full time pure consciousness > brings only confusion until a profound dissolution > of wrong identification occurs. This realization is > grounded in recognition of the baseless nature of > the empirical jiva. Such a change only finalizes > when the intellect shifts from its previous error of > misidentification through a transcendent insight > functioning within the depths of pure awareness. In > subtle neurological functioning, this shift occurs > at the ajna-chakra. This is not my opinion but only > my summary of his explanation. > > Shankara called this insight samyak-darshana. > How's that for a Sanskrit irritant? > > By the way, ditto on your lack of reasoning about > the contradiction between Krishna's "stand up and > fight" and Patanjali's "ahimsa in all conditions". > > I work seven days a week yet still can find time > to give a short explanation about my reasoning if it > warrants more than a single line reply. I think you > could do the same and bring some profit to the > discussion. To bad you don't. > > empty > > Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is absolute nonsense. With all due > respect, you > don't know what the f*ck you're talking about. ;-) > > --- "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > MMY seems to be suggesting Enlightenment occurs at > > the 6th chakra, > > enlightenment or 'Self-Realization', and Cosmic > > Consciousness > > (realization of all of the Cosmos) occurs at the > 7th > > Chakra or the > > cerebral cortex/brain. > > > > This would concur with classical Yoga > > teachings..the sixth chakra > > would be the spiritual spherical 'third eye' and > the > > center of Self > > Realization; and CC in the cerebral cortex would > be > > realization of the > > Spirit/Purusha omnipresent in and beyond creation. > > > > So far I haven't felt any ants crawling around up > > and down so I guess > > I have a ways to go! > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Or go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > and click 'Join This Group!' > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > __ > Luggage? GPS? Comic books? > Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search > http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz > > > > > > - > Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with > an Edge to see what's on, when. __ Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/ - Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Enlightenment occurs at the 6th chakra......MMY.
With all due respect, Peter, your reply is meaningless - simply another interjection of opinion (doxa) without any context (or content for that matter). Have you taken secret offline lessons from TurkB in expressing your dis-approvals? At least your style is more terse. I've heard SSRS indicate that the ajna-chakra is the crucial point in the shift to an enlightened state of consciousness. Full time pure consciousness brings only confusion until a profound dissolution of wrong identification occurs. This realization is grounded in recognition of the baseless nature of the empirical jiva. Such a change only finalizes when the intellect shifts from its previous error of misidentification through a transcendent insight functioning within the depths of pure awareness. In subtle neurological functioning, this shift occurs at the ajna-chakra. This is not my opinion but only my summary of his explanation. Shankara called this insight samyak-darshana. How's that for a Sanskrit irritant? By the way, ditto on your lack of reasoning about the contradiction between Krishna's "stand up and fight" and Patanjali's "ahimsa in all conditions". I work seven days a week yet still can find time to give a short explanation about my reasoning if it warrants more than a single line reply. I think you could do the same and bring some profit to the discussion. To bad you don't. empty Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is absolute nonsense. With all due respect, you don't know what the f*ck you're talking about. ;-) --- "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MMY seems to be suggesting Enlightenment occurs at > the 6th chakra, > enlightenment or 'Self-Realization', and Cosmic > Consciousness > (realization of all of the Cosmos) occurs at the 7th > Chakra or the > cerebral cortex/brain. > > This would concur with classical Yoga > teachings..the sixth chakra > would be the spiritual spherical 'third eye' and the > center of Self > Realization; and CC in the cerebral cortex would be > realization of the > Spirit/Purusha omnipresent in and beyond creation. > > So far I haven't felt any ants crawling around up > and down so I guess > I have a ways to go! > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!' > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __ Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz - Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Given his very different understanding, of course MMY would not have taught mastery of the yamas and niyamas as a prerequisite to samadhi, even to the most religiously devoted Hindu practitioners; it would have been counterproductive, in his view. He wasn't "snubbing" the yamas and niyamas, he was putting them in what he believed to be their proper context. Judy, You're not giving Vaj any credit here. It is just that Maharishi hadn't yet read Swami Rama's "Living with the Himalayan Masters". After all, Maharishi is a kshatriya and you know those ksatriyas can't practice ahimsa and keep their dharma too. Therefore (as Dr. Pete says) it is just a different context for each of the two opposite teachings. If Krishna says "stand up and fight!" and Yoga Sutras say "no harm to anyone, for any reason, in any situation, at any time" then what's a poor guru to do? According to Vaj, Mahesh Varma decided to make up a technique to fool people into forgeting who they were. He got them to meditate with a technique that caused their minds to go blank (laya/naypa). When they came out of that momentaryly sleep-like state and felt more rested he called it samadhi. The rest is history. What else is there to know? empty - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Is the TMO part of the Shankara tradition?
Not a single part of Swami Rama's statement is based upon Shankara's actual written works or upon his transmissions to his disciples. Scholars of Shankara would consider the claims written below to be typical hindu nonsense. empty Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Recently I was looking thru an old copy of _Living with the Himalayan Masters_ by Swami Rama. He is also from the Shankaracharya tradition. He actually outlines the full path to enlightenment in that tradition. I include it below for those interested in the big picture. -Vaj Our Tradition Shankaracharya established an ascetic order 1,200 years ago, though renunciates had already lived in an unbroken lineage from the Vedic period. He organized his orders through five main centers in the North, East, South, West, and center of India. The entire ascetic order of India traces its tradition from one of these centers. Our tradition is Bharati. Bha means "knowledge;" rati means "lover." Bharati means, "he who is the lover of knowledge." From this comes the word Bharata, the land of spiritual knowledge, one of the Sanskrit names used for India. There is one thing unique to our tradition. It links itself to an unbroken lineage of sages even beyond Shankara. Our Himalayan tradition, though a tradition of Shankara, is purely ascetic, and is practiced in the Himalayan caves rather than being related with institutions established in the plains of India. In our tradition, learning of the Upanishads is very important, along with the special advanced spiritual practices taught by the sages. The Mandukya Upanishad is accepted as one of the authoritative scriptures. The knowledge of Sri Vidya is imparted stage by stage and the advanced student is taught Prayoga Shastra. * We believe in both the Mother and the Father principles of the universe. That which is called maya or illusion, in our worship becomes the Mother and does not remain as a stumbling block or obstacle on the path of spiritual enlightenment. All of our worship is internal and we do not perform any rituals. There are three stages of initiation given according to our tradition. First, mantra, breath awareness, and meditation; second, inner worship of Sri Vidya and bindu vedhan (piercing the pearl of wisdom); third, shaktipata and leading the force of kundalini to the thousand-petaled lotus called sahasrara chakra. At this stage, we do not associate ourselves with any particular religion, caste, sex, or color. Such yogis are called masters and are allowed to impart the traditional knowledge. We strictly follow the discipline of the sages. It is not possible for me to discuss in detail the secret teachings of Prayoga Shastra for it is said, "na datavyam, na datavyam, na datavyam" -- "don't impart, don't impart, don't impart" unless someone is fully prepared and committed and has practiced self-control to a high degree. These attainments can be verified through the experiences of the sages of the past. In our path, gurudeva is not a god but a bright being who has faithfully and sincerely attained a state of enlightenment. We believe in the grace of the guru as the highest means for enlightenment, but never as the end. The purpose of the guru is to selflessly help his disciples on the way to perfection. Our tradition has the following orientation: I. One absolute without a second is our philosophy. 2. Serving humanity through selflessness is an expression of love which one should follow through mind, action, and speech. 3. The yoga system of Patanjali is a preliminary step accepted by us for the higher practices in our tradition, but philosophically we follow the Advaita system of one absolute without a second. 4. Meditation is systematized by stilling the body, having serene breath, and controlling the mind. Breath awareness, control of the autonomic nervous system, and learning to discipline primitive urges are practiced. 5. We teach the middle path to students in general, and those who are prepared for higher steps of learning have the opportunity to learn the advanced practices. This helps people in general in their daily lives to live in the world and yet remain above. Our method, for the convenience of Western students, is called Superconscious Meditation. I am only a messenger delivering the wisdom of the Himalayan sages of this tradition, and whatever spontaneously comes from the center of intuition, that I teach. I never prepare my lectures or speeches, for I was told by my master not to do so. 6. We do not believe in conversion, changing cultural habits, or introducing any God in particular. We respect all religions equally, loving all and excluding none. Neither do we oppose any temple, mosque, or church, nor do we believe in building homes for God while ignoring human beings. Our firm belief is that every human being is a living i
Re: [FairfieldLife] Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
Yep drP. Ain't it so. And MMY talked about this in the old days - late 60's and
early 70's.
It is this "different context" which is the difference between a renunciate's
life and a householder's life. It is the difference between walking away from
social responsibility to focus on individual development versus balancing those
two values in a single human life.
Patanjali's text was codified within the renunciate's tradition. Ahimsa
(non-harming), as a formal requirement, reflects this definition. This is why
the idea that householders can't get enlightened is so fixed in the hindu and
buddhist lineages. In India, if you are not a sannyasin then no one will listen
to you - except ignorant westerners and a few women. At least in the past. Now
of course you have a chance to turn the whole thing into a type of business,
based in part upon the TMO model combined with slavish forms of guru worship.
Based upon Patanjali's path, no martial artist, police officer, military
officer or sexually active man or woman will ever, nor can ever be an
enlightened person. This is also the authorized conclusion of the Theravada
Buddhists. In fact, according to them, if you return to a householder's life
after realizing the Arhat stage then this proves that you are not an Arhat. The
only exception to this for Patanjali is if Ishvara grants liberation to one of
his devotees. Ishvara does so only "because he can".
That is why mastery of the Yama and Niyama limbs are not really requirements
for mastery of the inner limbs, or sanyama, but are rather valuable adjuncts.
We have heard Vaj argue the opposite. He is quite capable of speaking for
himself so I'll leave it to him to clarify this, if he so wishes.
Now wasn't that nice of me Vaj? Barry would be proud.
empty
Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Krishna's teaching is from and within a different
context than Patanjali.
--- billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Poor Arjuna. He was a warrior and was instructed by
> Lord Krishna to follow his dharma and fight. That
> means he could not follow Patanjali's practice of
> non-harming (ahimsa) without regard to time, place
> or intent. Nor could any of the other warriors for
> that matter. Although many of them practiced intense
> yoga tapas (austerity) to obtain martial arts
> siddhis they really must have only been practicing a
> form of yoga-lite McMeditation.
>
> Don't you just feel sorry for poor Arjuna? He
> killed people in battle. He therefore wasn't
> qualified for yama-niyama nor sannyasa
> (renunciation). He was not qualified for the inner
> limbs used in sanyama - dharana, dhyana, samadhi.
> Too bad - must have had bad karma.
>
> Poor Krishna. He was a warrior and killed people
> too. He wasn't qualified to do sanyama either. To
> bad. He must have had bad karma.
>
> The unqualified teaching the unqualified. What is
> this world coming to?
>
> empty
>
>
> "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MMY took the essential teachings of the
> Sanatana Dharma of India
> (eternal Religion of the Vedas)and made them into a
> science.
>
> In order to do this he had to sever certain parts of
> Patanjali's
> teachings in order to teach it as a Science. Limbs 1
> and 2 are NOT
> being taught by the TMorg, but MMY concedes they are
> necessary in his
> BG and must be practiced simultaneously with the
> other 6. (page 363)
> Limbs 1 and 2 are *Religious* in nature!
>
> The reason he did it was to reach as many as
> possible by tailoring it
> to meet the needs (or mentality) of the day, some
> compromises were
> made, but essentially TM is yoga-lite for modernity.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network
> Research Panel today!
__
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
-
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Peter's post= what is EN.- sidhananda response
Hi Vaj. Yes Vaj. Their mythos just is expansive enough to talk extensively about channels of mind-body coordination (nadi), internal life-energy flows (prana-vayu )and point-essences (bindu). You don't believe this kind of mythos do you Vaj? Let's see - "Tsa-Lung-Tigle" - isn't that a breakfast sandwich at McD's? Didn't the Dalai Lama eat one of those on his US tour? Oh, wait a minute. That was before he became a vegetarian. Now his form of mythos is cooked with a Dzogchen Wok. empty Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 27, 2007, at 1:31 AM, Ron wrote: *It has nothing to do > with kundalini experiences. That's all in the > physiology. S Hahahahaha yes the world is all physical, what you see is what you get (wrong)kundalini is a journey through consciousnes and has nothing to do with the physical. Kundalini phenomena dissolves after enlightenment, if there are any mild shifts that take place- it is empty in nature and does not touch the pure consciousness that remains. It's amazing how pervasive the "it's in the physiology" idea is embedded in the TM mythos. - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Maharishi-What he did, and why he did it!
Poor Arjuna. He was a warrior and was instructed by Lord Krishna to follow his dharma and fight. That means he could not follow Patanjali's practice of non-harming (ahimsa) without regard to time, place or intent. Nor could any of the other warriors for that matter. Although many of them practiced intense yoga tapas (austerity) to obtain martial arts siddhis they really must have only been practicing a form of yoga-lite McMeditation. Don't you just feel sorry for poor Arjuna? He killed people in battle. He therefore wasn't qualified for yama-niyama nor sannyasa (renunciation). He was not qualified for the inner limbs used in sanyama - dharana, dhyana, samadhi. Too bad - must have had bad karma. Poor Krishna. He was a warrior and killed people too. He wasn't qualified to do sanyama either. To bad. He must have had bad karma. The unqualified teaching the unqualified. What is this world coming to? empty "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: MMY took the essential teachings of the Sanatana Dharma of India (eternal Religion of the Vedas)and made them into a science. In order to do this he had to sever certain parts of Patanjali's teachings in order to teach it as a Science. Limbs 1 and 2 are NOT being taught by the TMorg, but MMY concedes they are necessary in his BG and must be practiced simultaneously with the other 6. (page 363) Limbs 1 and 2 are *Religious* in nature! The reason he did it was to reach as many as possible by tailoring it to meet the needs (or mentality) of the day, some compromises were made, but essentially TM is yoga-lite for modernity. - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Claims to enlightenment
TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Empty, Since I've been somewhat critical of your posts in the past, I figured I should balance that with praise for this one. *Much* improved tone and intent. I also tend to agree with what you said. Gee TurqB, you're rewarding me? But you're so lavish in applying your praise and blame to everyone that I have to temper my shouts of halleluyah. That also presents me with a quandry - in this case about your likes and dislikes. In fact it reminds me of a comment Norman Mailer made in an interview. I believe he wrote in longhand and used a typest to make copy. He pointed out when he hired her that he would be forced to fire her quickly if she showed any particular emotion while bringing him his copy. He said he realized that once he started detecting her subtle valuations of his written pieces he would be finished - within a week he would be writing exclusively for her. You get my meaning? Vaj and I took part of our dialogue offline so we can discuss a couple of issues. As far as tone and intent - don't take my stuff so seriously that you need to measure my intent. You analysis can only be inferential. Understand that I enjoy the artful insult because I know the joke is on me. "Dude", I trade lies with Death every day. It is a my main source for gossip and means that when I look in the mirror not even I can can believe what that other guy's make believe is about. Sorry I can't talk more at the moment but I have to get to work. I'm a slave to many women and you know ... I just can't be late. empty hillbilly My concern is not with the actual "tests" that some traditions use to "measure" enlightenment in those that claim it, but with the willingness of the claimants to undergo such tests. Those who are will- ing to examine their subjective experiences are IMO making a statement about who they are and how they relate to other people. Those who adamantly refuse to examine their subjective experiences -- much less when they make statements about the ignorance of those requesting that they do so, or who suggest that those requesters are less evolved than they are -- are making a statement of another kind. Neither "statement" says anything definitive about the state of consciousness of the claimant. But it does tend to trigger "preference reactions" in me. I prefer not to spend a lot of time with people who can only relate to others in terms of, "This is how things are; you either accept it or you don't." IMO that's a manifestation of trying to emulate the master-disciple relationship they've seen in their teachers, *expecting* their declar- ations to be treated *as* declarations the way they've tended to treate the declarations of their teachers. And while that's one way of addressing life, and making one's Way through it, I'd kinda prefer to spend my time with others who don't run that particular act. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vaj, > > I'm wondering what criteria they used? Please see if you can find out or at least get a trackable reference. There is conflict at times among the Tibetans about the relationship between siddhis and jnana. Their term for siddhi ,"abhijna", reflects this. I'll ask YKR when he gets here tomorrow about it. He has talked a bit about the usual Tummo tests and you've seen the short version is on his website. But that is a test only of one siddhi. > > I'm thinking in terms of Kalu Rimpoche's statement about himself. Since the abhidharma texts state that at the first bhumi the bodhisattva can project multiple transformation bodies at will throughout the world, his conclusion was that he wasn't even at the first bhumi because he couldn't do that yet. This is from a monk who spent years meditating in a box. This is a sign to me of the catholic over-literalism of the Tibetans when they interpret the Sutras and Abhidharma texts. > > Thus I'm wondering if the DL's office was using the same kind of criteria with this claimant to enlightenment. > > Also, I don't know if you know YKR well enough (I saw your name on his web email list) but I can pass any type of message or greeting you want to him this weekend. And, by the way, my differences with you have to do with mmy's teaching and techniques. As far as YKR, I observe proper Sangha samaya. You can do this offline if you so prefer. He'll be at my house Friday so get me soon if you are interested. You can get me at emptybillatyahoodotcom. > > `Nough said. > > hep me jezuz > I'm just an > empty headed > hill billy > > > Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, new.morning wrot
[FairfieldLife] Claims to enlightenment (Re: Is Byron Katie's "the work" a form of moodmaking?)
Vaj, I'm wondering what criteria they used? Please see if you can find out or at least get a trackable reference. There is conflict at times among the Tibetans about the relationship between siddhis and jnana. Their term for siddhi ,abhijna, reflects this. I'll ask YKR when he gets here tomorrow about it. He has talked a bit about the usual Tummo tests and youve seen the short version is on his website. But that is a test only of one siddhi. Im thinking in terms of Kalu Rimpoches statement about himself. Since the abhidharma texts state that at the first bhumi the bodhisattva can project multiple transformation bodies at will throughout the world, his conclusion was that he wasnt even at the first bhumi because he couldnt do that yet. This is from a monk who spent years meditating in a box. This is a sign to me of the catholic over-literalism of the Tibetans when they interpret the Sutras and Abhidharma texts. Thus Im wondering if the DLs office was using the same kind of criteria with this claimant to enlightenment. Also, I dont know if you know YKR well enough (I saw your name on his web email list) but I can pass any type of message or greeting you want to him this weekend. And, by the way, my differences with you have to do with mmys teaching and techniques. As far as YKR, I observe proper Sangha samaya. You can do this offline if you so prefer. He'll be at my house Friday so get me soon if you are interested. You can get me at emptybillatyahoodotcom. Nough said. hep me jezuz Im just an empty headed hill billy Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, new.morning wrote: Can you absolutely know that it's true? I hate to bring up what seems obvious to me, but there are objective ways to test states of enlightenment which have been used successfully for thousands of years. These are simple tests. If you claim to be enlightened thru an approach that used samadhi--nitya-samadhi (permanent samadhi, CC) as MMY called it, it is easy to test. Rather recently there was a rather famous western Tibetan Buddhist who claimed a high stage of enlightenment and it was interesting the type of verification they used. The person had to be capable of performing certain siddhis at will. When he did not meet any of the criteria, HHDL's office issued a statement essentially saying this person was not who he claimed to be. - Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Is Byron Katie's "the work" a form of moodmaking?
We buddhists? What is this about?
empty
TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "matrixmonitor"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --Right, but Byron Katie is a Neo-Advaitin, and if we go too
> far into that realm, there's no karma, no people, no suffering
> (in fact, nothing!). Nope - Buddhism as a whole has more
> compassion.
While I agree wholeheartedly, I find myself more interested
in the seeming contradiction that I stumbled upon last night
in the one-liner that made Rory *lol*, but which he didn't
deal with. I've pasted in the whole exchange below, with
all of its context restored, because I'm interested in hear-
ing the fans of advaita (neo- or not) or Byron Katie explain
to me why what seems like a contradiction to me isn't one.
> > > > OK, I asked Swami G - does everyone go through the Kundalini
> > > > Journey. I asked because based on my own experience with it,
> > > > I can't imagine that it is possible without it.
> > >
> > > I think that this is the most accurate and telling
> > > statement in your post, Ron, and the one that is
> > > most relevant to Fairfield Life and the majority
> > > of posts here about spiritual "progress." It's
> > > about *personal experience*, which is valid, and
> > > about *projection of that experience onto others*,
> > > which IMO is not.
> > >
> > > On this forum we've had people say that because
> > > *they* went through a period of anger at some
> > > spiritual teacher who disappointed them, everyone
> > > who criticizes a spiritual teacher is also feeling
> > > anger.
> >
> > FWIW I still support my original premise: If we criticise another
> > (particularly if the other isn't even present, and we're
> > criticising them to a 3rd party), we generally *are* coming from
> > a place of pain (hurt/anger), whether or not we are consciously
> > aware of it at that moment. This is because we are "shoulding"
> > all over them :-) -- expecting them to be other than they are,
> > and judging them for not living up to our expectations of what
> > they "should" be or do. All of this stems from the core belief
> > and illusion that what we are criticising is outside of ourself
> > -- a position that is fraught with addictive pain. Practicing a
> > little Byron-Katiesque Inquiry will soon sober us up and show
> > us otherwise :-)
>
> Now let me get this straight. This sobering up
> and seeing things otherwise, that's something
> that we "should" be doing?
The question is, "How is doing 'the work,' Byron Katie-
style, *not* fraught with addictive pain?" It seems to
me that what Rory describes above is very much a form
of moodmaking -- starting with the assumption that one
*should* not be criticizing other aspects of ones Self
and acting accordingly, *in the pursuit of a desire*.
The desire in this case is to have no expectations of
others in terms of their behavior, and to see them as
other aspects of one's Self, if I've gotten what
Rory is saying. However, the desire to behave like that
is an expectation. One *practices* "a little Byron
Katiesque Inquiry" and intellectually convinces one's
self that it is relating to others on a non-judgmental
level. But it seems to me that the very *process* of
doing this is by definition a judgment upon one's *own*
self, a desire to *change* the way it's behaving and
"should" it into another form of behavior, an attempt
to moodmake it into acting the way that it "should."
I'm not particularly down on Byron Katie, or advaita,
or Rory...I'm just intrigued by the proponents of these
philosophies' ability to ignore what seems to me to be
a raging contradiction. If the practice they're recom-
mending to get beyond judgment requires "the work,"
isn't that *by definition* a form of judgment about
judgment?
And please, anyone who feels like answering, don't come
back with "a thorn to remove a thorn." That may work on
TMers who've been trained to salivate at the sound of
Maharishi's voice, but it ain't gonna cut the mustard
intellectually. What I'm asking is whether the Byron
Katie "thorn" is just a form of moodmaking, of training
one's self into acting a certain way ("acting" in all
senses of that word) because they've been convinced
that they "should" act that way? Sounds like classic
moodmaking to me.
How is "the work" gonna help you determine the proper
course of action when the other person you're trying
not to be judgmental about is holding a gun on you, and
acting a whole lot like a madman on crack who is more
interested in shooting you and your family just to see
how you fall than he is in your wallet?
We Buddhists might have compassion for the poor, drugged-
out guy, but we'd also do our best to kick the sucker in
the nuts and get the gun away from him. The way I'm read-
ing Rory's comments, he'd see that the guy is coming from
a place of hurt/pain, relate it to his own hurt and pain,
and say, "LOL. You're just another aspect of my Self, and
everythin
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras
That's it! Now I've got it. SBS was the head of the danda sannyasins and a practitioner of Samaya Shri Vidya. MMY, being a kshatriya, has more latitude - he can get away with practicing the Kaula Shri Vidya - those women are his little dainties. Mmmm - little dainties. Makes me feel like Homer Simpson. As far as these pundits go, I couldn't find one to discuss any intriguing points, so I tried to bait (rather than debate) one into a discussion. Found out he had little interest in it ... sniff. TurqBnimble, of course, was the emergency responder who attempted to defend him from the terrorist attack - ishvara, buddha, better, best ... woof woof arf arf is a mantra test. By the way, imo, Madhyamaka is highly overrated. The tibetans have turned it into a philosophical requirement, much like Aquinas for the Roman Catholics. Unfortunately, it can't actually be the middle of anything because it ends in negation. Shankara was quite accurate - from nothing you only get nothing. empty empty mess is the only ness "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: cardemaister wrote: > etena yogaH *pratyuktaH* (brahmasuutras, II 1.3.) :0 > This is outrageous! You're telling me that Shankara wrote a vivarana on Vyasa's commentary on Patanjali's Yoga Sutras? And that the pundits on Usenet and FFL withheld this information from me for nearly 10 years. For what purpose, I wonder? This seems tyo be a pattern with some TMer informants - withholding information. First, they wouldn't tell me the meaning of the bija mantras, then they refused to tell me where all the money was going, then they tried to hide the fact that Marshy was having relations with his female students. Now I find out that Shankara wrote about the Yoga Sutras and not a single respondent has a thing to say about it. Some pundits they turned out to be. This is the final straw with these punditsters. I can only conclude that they are devious, lying soundrels, and intellectually dishonest. They've confused Middle Way Buddhism with Adwaita Vedanta! There is no Being in God - the Transcendental Person is an illusion, Brahman is a "nothing". And the Marshy is a left-handed, tantric basket weaver. Go figure. > > Billy-Jim wrote: > > > Have you read Shankara's vivarana on Patanjali's > > > sutras dealing with Ishvara? > > > > > Bill - You are wasting your time here. From what I > > can tell, not a single informant on this forum has > > even heard of Shankara's vivarana on Patanjali's Yoga > > Sutras. Years ago on Usenet, I tried to strike up a > > dialog on this subject, to no avail. This is not > > surprising, considering that the most informed > > respondents here can't even tell the difference > > between Shankara's Vedanta and Nagarjuna's Madyamaka. > > Judy Stein and Michael Dean Goodman proved, using > > Nagarjuna's Four Negations, that Brahmna was devoid > > of Being. Can you believe that? > > > > Read more: > > > > The Vivarana sub-commentary to Vyasa-bhasya on the > > Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. > > Translated by Trevor Leggett > > Routledge & Kegan Paul 1983 - Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TurquoiseB made me see - praise Iesus.
Yep, you've hit upon something. By choice I prefer to be a two-fisted soma drinker at the banquet of the gods. However upon suitable occasions I sip earthly distillations. I'll probably still be able to enjoy something like it in hell with lucy since I can't really cover myself with the blood of Jesus (at least enough to cheat god's punishment). However I think this image may be outside of your milieu since it is from a different rasa. empty - of the mess of ness vajradhatu108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" wrote: > > > > Barry, > > > > Just to let you know, I really enjoyed reading your vignette about > > searching in the dark alleyways of your medieval town. > > No problemo. I was just trying to point out that > you were taking Vaj to task and challenging his > statements in a thread to which he had never posted. > You never seemed to notice. Probably from his Kentucky rasayana dose. - No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Distinction Between- Light of God & Lucifer's Sparkle'
bobby gee! Nice reply - your waxing today. But what's this "the Jewish version, the German version"? Don't know what that means about him - the hanging one. bobby gee: "Since we are created in the image of God, then it logically follows that we have the same creative abiltiy." empty: You have hit a gold-mine, and vajra-nut can't even claim to have illuminated your way there! Imposserbull! Yep, although it's considered by evangelical fundies to be the satanic imprimatur - imago dei is the trip line for plunging into the neoplatonic residue within xtianity. The Eastern Orthodox have wrapped it up theologically by asserting that the statement "god became man so that man could become god" means that what god is in essence, we can become by grace. It is quite juicy. However they talk about both "image and likeness". According to them, our image of god, established within us, is purely given - it is a gift. We, as contingent beings, do not have the power to alter this image. The "likeness" however is our responsibility alone and is usually covered over with trash of the "pathe" - the emotionality and darkness of narcissus. Their way out? Hit the deck with me buddy-boy and get your heart lower than your head. Bow but don't bow-wow. Use your senses to receive the richness of creation (displayed liberally in the offerings used in the Orthodox liturgy). See, hear, taste the imprints of beauty left by the most beautiful One. And, if you are fortunate, you'll meet someone who will show you how to pick up the scent, like a well-bred hound, of the pathway into the heart (nous). Once there, you'll either leave out of narcisstic boredom, or stand silent, awake and alert before the one who alone is the source of all. By the way, all Latin-based theologies (this includes all western, post-augustinian xtians from roman catholics to hyperfundies) consider this POV to be heretical - broaching the line between creator and creature. Imagine it. Transcendent intelligence and free will - everything that makes us what we are - is truncated by the evangelical fundies into the twin horns on satan's head. Imposserble. empty empty of ness is messiness. Robert Gimbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Iesus - as in Jesus and Satan, fictions created for the control of roman women and their slaves. And now look at them - hypostasized into mythic figures so realistic that even Yogananada treated them yogically. Poor Billy G. - without Yogananda what could he say about the blessed lard - and him crucified! > > empty > > emptyless is the final ness > Yeah, well then I recon that the Coliseum is a figment of your imagination, my imagination, whose story is it anyway. There's the Roman version, the Jewish version, the German version, the Baptist version, Methodist version, Orthodox version, and no version at all: the innocence of a child, a bird, an elephant...even a lion! "Lions & Tigers & Bears, oh my!!! So many versions of reality to choose from. Since we are created in the image of God, then it logically follows that we have the same creative ability. If you believe in emptiness, that you are welcome to create it. It will be empty as you wish... - Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Distinction Between- Light of God & Lucifer's Sparkle'
Iesus - as in Jesus and Satan, fictions created for the control of roman women and their slaves. And now look at them - hypostasized into mythic figures so realistic that even Yogananada treated them yogically. Poor Billy G. - without Yogananda what could he say about the blessed lard - and him crucified! empty emptyless is the final ness peterklutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jesus who? The fictional character invented by the Illuminati to mind-control the West thru their prison-religion Christian ity? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "peterklutz" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > .. the only thing you need to do is to remember who you are! > > > > > > .. to suggest a mere mortal could devise a plan to thwart the > > > will of almighty God would render God impotent which is not the > > > case. > > > > The thwarting involved is based on introducing/enhancing the sense of > > duality and element of amnesia of who you really are. > > > > The Illuminati conspiracy to keep humanity enslaved indefinitely does > > not exclusively involve incarnated entities. > > > > > Jesus said, "The Kingdom of Heaven is within", also, > "Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven and all else will be added unto you". > This jives perfectly with Maharishi's teaching... > And it is true, that there are many other entities, which are > attracted to you, when you are angry, or in a state of despair, and > other lower vibrational states... > The people who commit suicide, or blow themselves up: these are people > possessed with these lower vibrations... > The weapons industry, the obsession with death, and destruction. > The mocking of spirituality in the media. > It is more than a few people controlling everything- we are all > susceptible to the flu of fear and mind control... > This so-called Illuminati conspiracy, I believe attempts to simplify > everything into a neat black and white package, and being obsessed > with conspiracy theory's is another way to keep you distracted with > evil... > So, the best thing to do is to stay in a spiritual clean place > yourself; stay out of the muck, and mud, so to speak. > There are ways to release negative energies, from your aura... > It is all up to your intention. > "Ask, and ye shall receive" > - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
Prof Nelson and Advaita Bhakti (Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras)
New.Morn - thanks for the clarification about the different San Diego Edu's. Unfortunately I only briefly corresponded with him in email. As far as his possible association with the TMO, my scholar-friend did not say and I did not ask Dr. Nelson in my emails. I've been waiting for word that he finally published something in book form. Perhaps I should try to email him again. Since you have been to his website, you know this already, but here are a couple of references for readers of this thread who might want to look deeper: "The Ontology of Bhakti: Devotion as Paramapurusartha in Gaudiya Vaisnavism and Madhusudana Sarasvati."Journal of Indian Philosophy 32/4 (November, 2004): 345-392. "Bhakti Preempted: Madhusudana Sarasvati on Devotion for the Advaitin Renouncer." Journal of Vaisnava Studies 6 (Winter 1998): 53-74. empty Emptiness without the ness is like Loch without the ness - it's sheer Lochless Help me o' nessy! - without you it's emptyless "new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > An FYI for Trinity, (and anyone else) > > For those interested in how krishna-bhakta manifests in the consciousness of an advaita yogin, an excellent resource to read is MadhusUdana Saraswati's commentary on the Bhagavad Gita. He interweaves a word-for-word analysis of each Gita verse with many quotes and examples of text from the yogasutras, upanishads and brahmasutras. He wrote extraordinary bhakti text such as the Bhakti-Rasayana but these have not been translated yet. Dr. Lance Nelson, professor and chair of the religion department at UC-San Diego, http://www.sandiego.edu/theo/facultystaff/nelson.php Actually its University of San Diego -- a completely different university than UC San Diego. Though both have stellar reputations -- and both sit on hills perched above San Diego -- but 5-10 miles apart. Both not to be confused with SDSU -- San Diego Sate University (can you say "party"?) -- which again sits on a hill, but more inland. Fascinating that Lance is at USD. I do not know of him -- but lived in SD for many years. Funny how such great resources are within walking (aka bicycling) distance -- without even knowing it. Does have any past TMO connection? http://www.sandiego.edu/theo/facultystaff/nelson.php told me in an email that he is planning to publish some of this material in a book but I haven't seen anything yet. > > The best translation is: "Madhusudana Sarasvati Bhagavad-Gita: with the annotation Gudhartha-Dipika" Translated by Swami Gambhirananda 1038 page quality hardback for $19.95 (a steal) published by Advaita Ashrama This book is available at: "Vedanta Press and Catalog" www.vedanta.com > > > t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim wrote: > > > > I read your link. I agree with you entirely. > > The link in the link is worth reading. So, as an information to Judy, > the following might be instructive: > > 'As an aside, these authors are quite aware that their method is very > close to the madhyamaka approach, but they categorically assert > brahman as the only absolute, and still find fault with nAgArjuna for > not asserting the existence of one absolute.' > > http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/creation.html > > There was recently a thread in the Yahoo group Advaitin, regarding the > difference between the three major Vedanta philosophies: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/messages/36214?threaded=1&m=e&var=1&tidx=1 > > It led me to the following overview: > http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/74.html > > The thread also mentions 'Madhusudana Saraswati' > who was an Advaitin, but also a great Bhakta. We recently had here > with Ron and Swami_G the discussion about Non Brahmins non being > admitted to the Dandi Swami orders. Well, that Non-Brahmins had access > to the 7 other orders finally, was due to the activity of Madhusudana > Sarsawati, who was also a great scholar, and this was also the birth > of the Naga Babas, the warrior sadhus. It was he who brought the issue > that many Sadhus where the victim of islamic faqirs to Akbar, who > suggested that Non-Brahmins should be admitted who could fight and > carry weapons. As a concession to the orthodox it was determined, that > three orders should be excluded from this innovation, among them the > Saraswati order. Madhusudana persuaded the Sadhu congregations to > follow Akhbars advice. > There was also an argument with Ron that Shivananda, > being a Saraswati, also initiated Non-Brahmins. I now have read that > this tradition has loosened in the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Sat Guru's growing on trees- defining the word Maharishi
Ronnytanmay You are such a diligent worker for gspot. You must love this slave-uh you perform for her - trawling the forums for potential disciples. However this is just not working very well here on FFL. You don't seem to be getting the necessary bites to pay for the ideative disdain your guruess receives. If I may recommend - why don't you consult with the statuesque Vajra-naught, an illumnated masonite. He has defended swami uttama before from the sneers of puny minds like mine (help me jesus - there's nothing to make me what i am). Surely he can recommend more successful ways to troll your bait in the streams of consciouness here. empty emptyless is nessy's mess Ron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Poster Billy: Sat Gurus don't grow on trees, in this day and age you'd think so! MMY has never claimed to be a Sat Guru, his honesty is refreshing. Yet, he still offers an effective technique for Self Realization, although, at some point a Sat guru may step in and help a *sincere* devotee out, not till then. One must have very good karma to get the personal attention of a Sat Guru.there may not even be any on the planet as we speak, at least not in the west!! Tanmay: For me a some point, there is going to be a leap of faith, probably for most. So here is what I have to go on regarding my own Guru because after that, then what does my Guru have to say... The line with my own Guru is Her SatGuru Rajiv is still in the body, still a SatGuru but not very available to most, and was appointed by PapaJi. Some of my Guru's disciples visited Rajiv under my Guru's instructions. PapaJi was apointed by Ramana Maharishi. Under Papaji were also GangaJi and others. Also, my Guru was tested with machines. At will and while conscious, only delta waves were seen. This is something seen in deep sleep, acording to my Guru ( I think I have this right). The one conducting the study did not know how to respond. Because of my own progress, the above is enough for me. On this basis, my leap of faith is accepting my Guru as Sat Guru for me, and it is a westerner living in the usa. One side thing- why would this be limited to Indians? God's design? I am not buying into that. Sat Guru's can be in any country, of any background. Based on what you have seen, unless this One is known, then there is going to have to be a leap of faith- do you see it that there may not be any Sat Guru's on the planet? OK I am going with what I said- then the next point about it is what my Guru has to say about unfolding enlightenment through your Guru- that they can take you only to where they are. Furthermore, I have seen a lot say I am not a Guru but this is a curious thing, as even if they say this, there are many that still consider them their Guru. Mother Meera say's she is not a Guru. From reading her books, she is saying she is an Avatar and was aware of her birth. I buy into that one. She said her role is more general. I have seen some clearly play the part of Guru, and at the same time putting Guru's down and saying you dont need a Guru. One of these is Christine Breese from metaphysics University- on youtube. My Guru's comments to this is if this is so, then Christine should come on with one line- You are there, and that is the end. Instead , she has many videos, acting in the capacity of a Guru while saying you dont need one.= which is it? Didn't Maharishi define what that means? Rishi see's, Maharishi- shows others how to see. I don't remember where that definition came from. Also, it appears Maharishi never procalaimed this name, people starting calling him this. I think the word Maharishi would be defined as Sat Guru - Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras
Trinity, If you pay in rupees it may be even more of a steal. You then might have to join Pope Benedict's "True Church" when you get back so you can be properly confessed. ;-) Enjoy your trip and watch out for the nagas. empty (without the ness) t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > An FYI for Trinity, (and anyone else) > > The best translation is: "Madhusudana Sarasvati Bhagavad-Gita: >with the annotation Gudhartha-Dipika" Translated by Swami >Gambhirananda 1038 page quality hardback for $19.95 (a steal) >published by Advaita Ashrama This book is available at: "Vedanta >Press and Catalog" www.vedanta.com Thanks a lot. I'll be soon in India, and can get it may be from there, e.g. Ramakrishna Math in Madras, a very nice place. - Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
[FairfieldLife] MadhusUdhana Saraswati (was Re: Shankara on Yoga Sutras)
For those interested - An excellent resourse to read is MadhusuUdana Saraswati's commentary on the Bhagavad Gita. He interweaves a word-for-word analysis of each Gita verse with many quotes and examples of text from the yogasutras, upanishads and brahmasutras. The best translation is: "Madhusudana Sarasvati Bhagavad-Gita: with the annotation Gudhartha-Dipika" Translated by Swami Gambhirananda 1038 page quality hardback for $19.95 published by Advaita Ashrama This book is available at: Vedanta Press and Catalog www.vedanta.com t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I read your link. I agree with you entirely. The link in the link is worth reading. So, as an information to Judy, the following might be instructive: 'As an aside, these authors are quite aware that their method is very close to the madhyamaka approach, but they categorically assert brahman as the only absolute, and still find fault with nAgArjuna for not asserting the existence of one absolute.' http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/creation.html There was recently a thread in the Yahoo group Advaitin, regarding the difference between the three major Vedanta philosophies: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/messages/36214?threaded=1&m=e&var=1&tidx=1 It led me to the following overview: http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/74.html The thread also mentions 'Madhusudana Saraswati' who was an Advaitin, but also a great Bhakta. We recently had here with Ron and Swami_G the discussion about Non Brahmins non being admitted to the Dandi Swami orders. Well, that Non-Brahmins had access to the 7 other orders finally, was due to the activity of Madhusudana Sarsawati, who was also a great scholar, and this was also the birth of the Naga Babas, the warrior sadhus. It was he who brought the issue that many Sadhus where the victim of islamic faqirs to Akbar, who suggested that Non-Brahmins should be admitted who could fight and carry weapons. As a concession to the orthodox it was determined, that three orders should be excluded from this innovation, among them the Saraswati order. Madhusudana persuaded the Sadhu congregations to follow Akhbars advice. There was also an argument with Ron that Shivananda, being a Saraswati, also initiated Non-Brahmins. I now have read that this tradition has loosened in the south, so, yes Saraswatis in the south can be Non Brahmins, but they can definitely not be Dandi Swamis. Regarding bhakti, Madhusudana Saraswati says : "Duality is Bondage before MOKSHA, and after Realization it is wisdom ! The imaginary duality of BHAKTI is sweeter than even Non- duality!" This may be especially interesting to Vaj who believes that MMY invented Bhagavati Chetana. Nothing could be further from truth! - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. - Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
