[FairfieldLife] The dark knight of the soul

[boyboy_8]

The Dark Knight of the Soul 
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/the-dark-knight-of-the-souls/372766/
 
 
 
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/the-dark-knight-of-the-souls/372766/
 
 
 The Dark Knight of the Soul 
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/the-dark-knight-of-the-souls/372766/
 For some, meditation has become more curse than cure. Willoughby Britton wants 
to know why.
 
 
 
 View on www.theatlantic.com 
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/the-dark-knight-of-the-souls/372766/
 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 
 
  
 

 I am just reading this now and I have heard her talk before.  Sounds quite 
interesting.  I will admit that I had a very negative reaction (trying) to 
watch Jim Carrey's speech to the yellow hat crowd.  I got 7 minutes into his 
talk and I started to feel sick so I shut it off.  I then spent a few days just 
being overly emotional about my past in TM and it brought up bad feelings.  It 
did not linger but my reactions caught me quite by surprise. Britton's work is 
about this experience and more.  

[FairfieldLife] My review of David Wants to Fly

[boyboy_8]

Saw it and here is what I wrote:
=

Sweet, sad and delightful documentary of discovery

Finally got to watch this documentary and I really liked it. As someone who did 
TM and the Siddhis a long time ago and knows full well some aspects of the 
inner workings of the movement I found his attention to seeking out the deeper 
layers of the story very well done. One could deflect criticism that he didn't 
cover enough or go deeply into this or that chapter but it would have detracted 
from the overall impact. There is an obviously delightful self conscious and 
youthful vigor to his journey which places his relationship with his girlfriend 
as a foil to his bumpy relationship with TM and the movement. David Lynch is 
not parodied or shown to be foolish though the opportunities were abundant to 
indulge. I believed David's honest yearning to get answers. What he didn't 
count on was that his quest would reveal the rabbit hole and boy, what a 
strange labyrinth that was.

David showed a bit of gonzo film making acumen by doing what he had to in order 
to investigate the sprawling Vedic communities both in the USA and India. He 
didn't come away as empty handed as he himself thought and the facts speak for 
themselves. Several people that he tracked down really added power to his 
story. The gentleman who was attached to MMY in the early years as a carrier of 
the holy animal skin talked openly of his painful rejection by what appears to 
be a money hungry and tempestuous, maybe heartless, guru. The single largest 
contributor to the movement, who gave upwards of 150 million (if I recall) did 
not pull any punches with how bitter his memories were, by first referring to 
Maharishi by his secular name "Mahesh". For those who understand the 
implications, to be called Mahesh is quite a slap to the head. He himself got 
fed up with giving enormous amounts of money to Maharishi only to have the guru 
admit to him in private that he had no idea if seven or eight thousand "fliers" 
living together in one spot would herald world peace; this was in direct 
contrast and opposite to everything he was saying in public. The temptation to 
call him a liar and a shyster was there but he didn't say so. We get the point. 
Finally, tracking down Shankaracharya Swaroopanand Saraswati, a devote also of 
"Guru Dev" was incredible and handled with great tenderness, respect and 
facility. The old yogi made it quite clear how he remembered Maharishi's 
standing in the pecking order around Guru Dev. What spoke strongest was his 
statement that Guru Dev's ashram had a sign up that said that donations of 
money were not allowed. The other comment was that Maharishi had no standing in 
the Swami order to be giving out mantras, let alone doing so for money.

It is quite understandable that the TM movement felt threatened by this film. 
Over time, if they follow most other large groups in the wake of the death of a 
founder, they too will probably fragment into combative and competing parties 
and over the long haul will fade away. I found the film honest, amusing, 
entertaining, insightful and dare I use the word, "enlightening". 

The truth should never be feared. Maharishi might have slept around, tossed 
egos about like he did the flowers always in his hands. He might have said one 
thing and done a completely other thing. He might not have lived according to 
moral principals that we sometimes associate with dignity and honor. On the 
other hand millions of people have been touched by some inner reality that 
(almost any) meditation technique will reveal. His teachings and overall 
outlook are hugely flawed and overly simplistic. But, that's a whole other 
story. The documentary was beautifully executed and I admire the overall 
conception. Well done.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi didn't tell us the whole picture.... etc. etc. etc. blah-di-blah

[boyboy_8]

HI Simon, 

Just a few thoughts.  In my view there is no guarentee of any 
positive result from any meditation technique, bar none.  We bring 
our entire being to the meditational table and who knows what we need 
to work on?  You might go through all kinds of changes before you see 
more back to back positive results.  You just as easily might see no 
improvements for years and years.  While you might grow impatient 
with this I think you can use your feelings to recognize motivations 
to change things in your life.  Maybe some of these changes will 
remove blocks and then the flow in meditation will get easier?  
People have such a wide assortment of experiences in meditation.   
Some just sleep and sleep and that's all they do in their meditation 
and for them at that state of their life that is just fine.  

If you feel that it is worth the long haul, then stick with your 
program and see what comes of it.  TM can be a window to evolution 
but just what sort of changes is hard to predict.  

I wish you well..

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Had enough - now will lurk

[boyboy_8]

Goodbye and all the best.

Fred

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Interpretation of text, especially so-called "sacred" text is not 
science, but art. 



The Rabbi's disagree with you.  Here is a sampling of the 13 rules:

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

It's complex but it guides all Biblical interpretations. 

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

I don't know about "enlightened" Rabbis.  I know that for me the one 
true master was Moses.  After that it becomes muddy.  There is 
a "Holy Tradition" in Judaism perhaps not unlike that of the Puja 
Holy Tradition.  It is written up in Pirkei Avot.  Here is a link 
with the words in English:

http://www.shechem.org/torah/avot.html

These men formed the main chain-link of master to disciple that went 
from Moses all the way down to the end of the Talmudic era.  That is 
a very long and largely unbroken link.  There was one time in this 
history when the nation suffered a huge disruption and this was the 
destruction of the First Temple.  At this time I believe that 
something got lost when these people were forced to go live in 
Babylonia.  This is my theory.  I believe that at some point the 
Mosaic Judaism which was more meditative and involving a more lively 
direct spiritual experience got slowly but surely replaced with a 
vivid but almost entirely intellectual process.  By the time the 
Talmudic age ended, the remnants of the Mosaic techniques were forced 
underground and basically disappeared, with only tiny fragments left 
to pass on in secret groups.  A big resurgence came with the Ari 
HaKodesh (also known as the Ari'Zal).  After him came the Chasidim 
and a re-awakening of the mystical side of our religion.  

Regards,

Fred




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Mahamuni Das" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> How do you know that there is no unbroken lineage chain in Judiasm 
or one of its later sects named Christianity?  Just because it is not 
completely public?
> 
> There certainly are traceable lineages in Jewish Mysticism that are 
on the more public side.  I believe the same would go for 
Christianity.
> 
> How do you judge "enlightenment"?  Does each disciple in the chain 
have to be "fully enlightened", in order to pass on the lineage 
Shakti?
> 
> JAI AMMA!
> 
> Surya
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

Hi there.  Comments are below.

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1. Divergent paths? Not all paths lead to the source
> of paths, the giver of paths? And there are only two
> paths?  I generalized to make a point.  The secular worlds take on
Biblical text analysis is worlds apart from Rabbinic exegisis.  I get
the impression that you've not done much reading of these here Rabbi's
I'm referring to.   A  great beginning is from a fantastic translation
of the OT into English by the late and very great Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan. 
"The Living Torah"

http://www.amazon.com/Living-Torah-Translation-introduction-bibliography\
/dp/0940118726/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203631250&sr=1-12


> 2. In what way is Frye's path "secular?" What is  "secular" about
Frye, an ordained minister? Harold > Bloom is another kettle of fish, to
be sure.

As I indicated above their approach is literary and the Rabbi's is
religious.  They are just two different and divergent approaches.
>
> 3. Rabinic commentaries lead you to an understanding  better and
faster than a mind well-trained to read the  original and translations
into several different  languages? And this is so in spite of the fact
that  these commentaries are almost "impossible to grasp?"  Isn't
"grasping" the whole point of the exercise,  since grasping is union
with the light of  understanding? And if this understanding comes, 
whether slow or instant, with difficult labor or with  easy flight, then
how was the path "secular" or in any  way inferior?

You wrote "Rabinic commentaries lead you to an understanding  better and
faster than a mind well-trained to read the  original and translations
into several different  languages?"
Think about what you just said.  Whose mind is well trained to read the
original? A Rabbi or a university professor of English? I'm not entirely
sure of your point.  These generations of Rabbi's understood the
original text and the translations into Aramaic (and way back in the
Talmudic timestranslations into Greek and Latin) a whole bunch
better than anyone living today.   Today, for us in this generation,
some of those rabbinic commentaries are very hard to grasp, especially
the more mystical ones.   Grasping is part of the exercise.  If someone
arrives at a deeper level of understanding then it matters little in
which manner your approach was.  I highlighted the different approaches
and my view that the Rabbinic/religious approach was probably closer to
the inner essence.  The Rabbi's did not have a patent on learning or
insight.  They did hold a tradition of exegisis that predates the  Greek
and Roman Empires, so they have where to stand in terms of our respect. 
Perhaps you forget how old the realms of Jewish intellectual
investigations are?  They go back to the exile in Babylonia (in terms of
the beginning of Rabbinic schools).  It is very old and very well
established.

  It is true that contemporary writers who really  understand the depth
of anagogic language are far and  few between. We do live in a
fundamentalist age.   Even so, have you read Frye's book on William
Blake?  Yes, it is wonderful and very deep.

  It is still the best guide yet produced on a writer  who is every bit
as much a prophet as any of the OT  writers.   Many academics think this
of Blake.  I do not hold that Blake was on the same level as the OT
prophets.

  But, as Blake says, "I give you the end of a  golden string--just wind
it up into a ball and it will  lead you in at heaven's gate." That it
seems to me  would be the point. The reader learns to do this with  the
words of a prophet rather than trying to grasp  something almost
impossible--another critic's way of  winding up that string.  I do not
think you quite follow what the role of a prophet or prophetess was in
the Jewish religion.  They were generally granted the grace of prophecy
for the sake of the whole nation.  Some bits and pieces of what they
gathered might have been quite mundane and pertaining to small scale
events.  The larger prophecies, the more familiar ones, were given to
help direct the nation towards repentance and correction of attitudes. 
Some prophecies were couched in totally hidden allegories and metaphors
that perhaps described events in the far off future.  The words of
Daniel and Ezekiel are very strange and describe realities that are so
sublime that they appear as if these men had taken strong drugs.

Which is more direct?   It is also true that commentary such as you
describe  can indeed be instructive. But it is my experience in 
teaching/writing/translating poetry to  students/writers/poets from
pre-school to grad school,  that children are better at understanding
metaphor  than are scholars. Take that simple poem in my last  post,
"Poem Written Dream-Side." In it, an old  wi

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

Good points.  The way I see it a person can take one of two divergent 
paths when starting to figure out what the OT is talking about.  
Either you take the secular path (we can read Frye and Harold Bloom 
for good starters) or you can plunge right into the Rabbinic 
commentaries.  These are extremely vast, deep and go way back into 
commentaries gathered up in the Talmud.  Way back.  Frankly, after 
looking at the secular writers I prefer the Rabbinic writers, even if 
they are flawed and full of their own belief systems shortcomings.  
Having said that, there are Rabbi's and there are Rabbi's.  It takes 
years to figure out who is appealing.  Believe me, most Jews never 
take a deeper interest beyond Rashi and that is just fine.  Some take 
the time to read deeper analysis and it just gets harder to 
comprehend as you go along.  The mystical interpretations are all but 
impossible to really grasp.  My choice, as I say is to work with the 
Rabbinic commentaries.  Other people just stay away from them and 
well, that's their choice.

fred


[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

I'm an English major and notwithstanding Northrop Frye's "The Great 
Code: The Bible and Literature", the OT should not, in my view, ever 
be read as literature or as a history book.  It takes not a mental 
powerhouse like Frye to see that the OT and especially the Psalms and 
even more so the works of King Solomon are full of poetic imagery. It 
is the lowest form of information, in my view. What is much more 
sublime is what the text intends us to understand.  Why read Rashi? 
He only touches on the surface, on the "p'shat" of the verse.  Why? 
because at least you know what the simple meaning of the verse is.  
You want deeper? You read the Ohr Chaim, you read the Kli Yakar and 
you get much deeper levels of meaning.  You want deeper still you 
look into the Zohar on the specific section of the Torah and try to 
get your head around what the Rabbi's are hinting at. It is almost 
impossible to really make sense of what they say because they speak 
in a language full of code words and hidden meanings that only people 
at their level could appreciate.  So, there are many levels of 
interpretation, the poetic/metaphoric is the simplest and lowest 
level, in my view.  I have to always say in my view because these are 
my understandings or failures to understand. 

Rav Nachman of Breslov, the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov, wrote much 
and sometimes gives incredibly thrilling insights into very high 
levels of insight.  

Someone was writing a bit earlier (I've lost track with so many 
postings) about the raising up of the deadand a mention was made 
of the Rambam.  Although it might be the n'th degree of "chutzpedik" 
for me to say so, I think that even the Rambam might have been in 
error here.  The truth might be that if and when a so-called Messiah 
shows up that the way he teaches Jewish law might not sound like 
anything that has been familiar to 2000 years of Rabbinic thinking. 
In my view of things (all guesses) if the M will usher in a new age, 
then he will have to help destroy all the crusty old ways of thinking 
that have accumulated over the years since prophets died out.  If, 
like MMY, he was to usher in a "spiritual regeneration" he might 
appear to be almost heretical to mainstream ultraorthodox Jews.  This 
would not surprise me at all.  What type of thinking he will 
introduce is beyond my imagination.  

I've had discussions with other orthodox J's where my position is 
that the entire section of the OT where sacrifices of animals and 
birds take place, is a misinterpretation of huge proportions.  
Somewhere along the way, don't know when, the mystery of sacrifice 
got mixed up with a literal interpretation.  In other words, instead 
of knowing what sacrifice a goat meant, people went out and 
slaughtered a goat and dashed its blood about and thought that this 
is what God wanted.  To me that part of the OT is all upside down and 
inside out.

Closing off for now: I recall years ago when MMY sent a team to 
Israel...and the way I heard the story is that MMY was told about 
what goes on during Passover and when he heard of the story of the 
blood of the paschal lamb being daubed on the door lintels he was 
supposed to have said "Oh, I didn't know that the Children of Israel 
had a technique to get to immortality?".  When I heard that told to 
me I got the shivers.

Cheers,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

I came to this group with a complex set of feelings about TMO, TM and
MMY.  I have expressed both my list of grievances and things I loved,
the things I loved list got ignored.  I do not think I'm looking at my
experience or my knowledge of the TM thing ONLY from the OT lense. 
That's not fair to me.  I use the OT as one central belief system to
issue my ONE grievance with TM which is the mantra/puja thing and I
don't think I've been cheery picking.  I believe that TM/puja/mantra
as taught to me is forbidden within my own understanding of the OT.  I
am not trying to tell anyone to climb on my bandwagon or except
anything I have to say.  It's my thing.  Everyone is free to tell me
to get lost and that they have no interest in my point of view. 
However, some people are interested in examining the grievances I
expressed because they might be common to some.  I have not got
answers really, but lots of questions.  I also have a belief that the
OT in whatever way we pick and choose the chapters and verse is in
opposition to TM.  Other than that, it's no big deal. 

In what way have I made arbitrary pronouncements?  I have quoted what
I thought and still think are relevant verses.  If you don't follow
the OT, then sure it's all pick and choose and that's fine for you.  

I do not understand the OT to be the work of men.  The OT (including
the prophets) is entirely a work of prophecy from beginning to end. 
What it all means I don't really know.  But, a congress of men getting
together and making up the Five Books of Moses, no I don't believe
that. I believe that our 5 books is the same one Moses gave.  

These so-called re-writes of the OT, can you please list some
examples?  The oldest texts found at Qumram are almost 100% the same
as the ones we have today.  So, what do you have in mind?

Old texts are interesting from a historical perspective.  I agree. 
However, the OT is not a history book nor should it be read as such. 
In my view.

You say that the old texts (presumably OT) have no relevance in todays
world?  Huh?  Where did you think that most of the ethics and moral
codes in the Western world get their groundworks from?  The Celts? 
The Druids?  The Picts?  No.  It comes from the Ten Commandments down.
 
Your idea that Biblical Israel having no human rights is quite odd to
me.  They had all kinds of rights but they also had all kinds of laws
and restrictions and appeal processes, etc.  I really don't recognize
that world you're describing at all. 

When did I ever say I had trouble with the concept of slavery?  I am
against it now and always have been.  That doesn't mean that it was
not referred to in the OT.  It means I do not understand how it came
about in that time.  I would have thought that a people who had been
redeemed from slavery would have abolished it as part of their legal
code.  They did not, I do not understand that and I leave it like
that.  I have no answer.  I am also against slavery, period.

Much is written about how we evolved as a society during and after the
European Enlightenment.  I have spent the last while reading quite a
bit about the Pocahontas/John Smith story.  Let me tell you.  The
treatment of natives in North, Central and South America has been a
holocaust from beginning to end.  The damage done to natives as far up
as the Yukon, North West Territories, having their children stolen
from them to be brought up in schools run by Priests, not allowing
them to speak their languagedon't get me started...I am disgusted
with European Enlightenment.  It might have brought us great art, it
also brought us the Nazi's, the Gulag, etc.  The Enlightenment didn't
contain the slaughter of various Christian groups against each other
for centuries...

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

An additional fwiw, from the Jewish perspective, all non-Jews, or put
another way, the sons of Noah, are required to abide by the some but
not all of the Ten Commandments.  Non-Jews are not expected to keep
the Sabbath.  But, all the laws pertaining to respect of elders,
non-killing, non-theft, etc. are expected to be lived and followed by all.

Regards,

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> 
> > When the Christian right decides that they will follow God's law
> > and stone adulterers instead of getting stoned WITH adulterers
> > (my personal preference) they can claim to use that old book as
> > a moral guide.
> 
> FWIW, Christians are not bound by Jewish Law. They
> may draw moral lessons from the Hebrew Scriptures
> but are not obligated to follow any of its
> commandments but the Big 10.


>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Chopra Letter

[boyboy_8]

Thank you for your notes.  NO, I have yet to read the other posts you
refer to. I suppose I should.  I do hope it is not a case of he said,
no he didn't, yes he did, you were not there, he lied, etc.  That
would just turn my stomach and I'd just lose interest in this
discussion very quickly.  AS I said, this Chopra letter, flaws or what
 have you, has left a pain.  You are correct though, perhaps I just
have to live with the puzzles and accept them for what they are,
rather than try to sift and winnow.  I could do that for the rest of
my life and not really know for sure.  Seeking clarity is what I
desire but there are limits to what I can know.  

All the best

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Chopra Letter

[boyboy_8]

Thank you for sharing that.  All I was saying, I think, was that I am
aware of how lost I feel (from time to time).  The Chopra letter for
some reason just knocked the wind right out of my gut.  Perhaps there
are still some ideas left in me, beliefs, that I had harbored that
need to be examined and maybe let go.  

Regards,

Fred




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> boyboy_8  wrote:
> 
> Just want to know the truth.  
> > > 
> 
> FWIW Fred, I think many of us start with this simple desire.  At at 
> some point, assuming you don't capitulate to someone else's story, we 
> realize it's not as easy a quest as we figured.  I, and many others 
> could go on and on about this.  One sort of funny example from my 
> experience.  You read accounts, seemingly credible, of people who say 
> they have accessed the akashic records.  And the accounts they come 
> back with can differ markedly from one another.  
> 
> In the final analysis, as one seeker put it, "Life is not so much a 
> mystery to be solved, as a riddle to be lived"
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Chopra Letter

[boyboy_8]

I'm sorry my words gave you those feelings.  I accept how you feel. 

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> boyboy_8  wrote:
>  
> > More and more I pray to God that I come to know what is true and what
> > is false, regardless of how I will feel about it.  Just want to know
> > the truth.  
> 
> Fred, please spare us the dramatics.  Grow up!  You're play acting a 
> jilted lover, and it is boring, I'm sorry to say.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

Life is too short to cherry pick quotes from OT?  Huh?  It depends on
what interests you have.  My central core belief system is not Gita or
Upanishads or any other Vedic/Hindu/Indian opus.  It's the OT; so, I
refer to it over and over again.

Lot did offer up his daughter, your memory is correct.  The angels
that Abraham had come visit him were now in Sodom/Gomorrah and were
outside Lot's door when a group of locals wanted to "get to know
them".  Lot was horrified (the Rabbinic commentary says that they
wanted to have their way with these strangers - sexually, if you can
believe this!) and so Lot just brings them into this house and slams
the door shut.  The locals won't go away, so Lot offers his daughter
to them if they'd just leave the strangers alone. I do not understand
a word of this part of Genesis.  So, I do not know what to say.  

It is true that the OT has many references to slavery between Hebrews.
 Why it was allowed is hotly debated.  Working out your karma?
Honestly, its a deep subject and I'm not sure this is the venue.

If the OT tells us how to live morally and we are to take it all in as
a whole, then do you accept that in the Biblical days a Hebrew might
end up as a slave to another Hebrew?  It's a tough one

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] The Chopra Letter

[boyboy_8]

I got to read it today.  I was shocked and dumbfounded.  I could not
help but feel how very sad this was for Deepak and yet how through it
all he expressed an undying love that penetrated the personal highs
and lows of his relationship with MMY.  I was astounded at how much
MMY owed his life to Deepak and yet Chopra was treated in such, well,
to my eyes, a shabby or poor way.  I never got the sense in Deepak's
words that he was not telling the 100% truth.  I refer to his denial
of ever wanting to compete with MMY, his incredulous response to those
accusations, the deep hurt this caused him.  I am flabbergasted at
this story, in some degree of awe at Chopra and even more troubled by
MMY's history.  It leaves me shaking my head, with again more
questions than answers about gurus, guru/disciple relationship, the
deification efforts of TMO leadership of MMY and much more.  Very
troubling feeling I take with me.

More and more I pray to God that I come to know what is true and what
is false, regardless of how I will feel about it.  Just want to know
the truth.  

Regards to all.

Fred

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

Not from what I've read.  From one small point of view you could use 
the word descend.  The awareness hovers over the M and then 
you "descend" into it, as if you were sort of slipping into a vehicle 
that was going to transport you.  It was a sort of metaphysical 
transport of types, I guess?  Not sure.  Not familiar with Magical 
net B practice.  

M technique took a lot of preperation and you really had to have a 
strong mind and great powers of self control.  It was also dangerous 
and you could sort of go wonkers or loose your mind, whatever that 
means.  Not for novices or the merely curious.

Fred




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Or descends. Sounds like Magical Net Buddhist practices.
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "boyboy_8" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:19 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D
> 
> 
> > Boyboy (Fred) knows of Merkabah.  The contemplative technique of 
the 
> > Merkavah was considered one of the most advanced and dangerous 
> > techniques and was eventually [almost] totally suppressed.  (Came 
about 
> > by a mystical reading of Ezekiel's prophecies). 
> > 
> > I think I once saw it in my mind.  It is used to attach one's 
awareness 
> > to as one ascends.
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk"  
wrote:
> >>
> >> boyboy know not merkabah?
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > 
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

Boyboy (Fred) knows of Merkabah.  The contemplative technique of the 
Merkavah was considered one of the most advanced and dangerous 
techniques and was eventually [almost] totally suppressed.  (Came about 
by a mystical reading of Ezekiel's prophecies). 

I think I once saw it in my mind.  It is used to attach one's awareness 
to as one ascends.

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> boyboy know not merkabah?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

It is also possible that the quote from Hebrews refers not to Mantra 
but to God's creative/destructive abilities using sounds.  For 
example, it's pretty well known in Jewish philosophical circles, that 
God creates/destroys the Universe using sounds which in turn are 
associated with individual Hebrew letters.  Hence, the deep 
mysticality hidden in the letters of the Torah, where supposedly 
there are an almost infinite number of hidden ciphers that show how 
the laws of God (or perhaps the laws of nature) work on a vibratory 
level.  It also sheds light on how master Kabbalists like Moses used 
short phrases (maybe using some of God's Holy names or whatever 
Hebrew letters) as vehicles for accomplishing miraculous events.  
Word, then might have many meanings.  God's voice is often referred 
to in the Psalms of King David.  It is anthopomorphized (spelling?) 
to mean that Gods voice booms out and literally shatters cedars and 
splits waters and well, you know.  Whether it works literally this 
way I find problematic.  It conjurs the need for God to have a voice 
that we can hear.  Not that God is limited but it stretches the point 
a bit.  

So, I am not sure I agree that "word" in this context has nothing to 
do with mantras.  The Torah does not spell out everything and it does 
frustrate everyone, the old Rabbi's no more so than us.  That's the 
price we pay for having descended in knowledge/spirituality and 
humility.  

I would not be so bold as to know for sure that Elijah and Enoch and 
a short list of others ascended to Heaven alive in their bodies.  I 
do not know how that mechanism would work.  I am not saying it is 
impossible but I am also saying I do not have knowledge on how it 
would be possible.  

You wrote: " It was not until the middle ages that religious scholars 
influenced by Plotinus began talking about a soul separate from the 
body."

Not sure.  If it is true, then the Sepher Yetzirah (associated by 
some with the Forefather Avraham) is of very ancient age.  I am not 
familiar enough with it to know if it addresses soul/body issues.  
There are other very old texts like the Bahir which might speak to 
this more directly.  (I should take some time this weekend and look 
into my copy of R. Aryeh Kaplan's magnificent book "Meditation and 
Kaballah" and see if he has something on this.  Probably does.  I 
return to this book over and over again for knowledge and 
inspiration.)

Then you wrote: "I believe the body constitutes a necessary condition 
for the existence of soul or psyche"  Probably not.  There is so 
much talk in J philosophy/mystical stuff about the instructions the 
soul gets in the after life or conversely what it gets just before it 
takes on the next incarnation.  Soul I associate with "spark" from 
Hashem and it is some essence that might not need a human body, flesh 
and blood, in order to exist.  Probably soul and psyche are not the 
same but I'm not sure.

Chanting in the observance: This, in J is now a lost art.  For 
example, all of "Tihillim", the Psalms, are written with musical 
notes, which means that when written they were to be sung/chanted.  
All of that tradition died with the destruction of the last temple.  
Alas, we have no idea what it was to be sung for, how it was to be 
intoned, etc.  The sung Torah and Prophets has a tradition and it 
goes on today.  We don't know if the tunes we sing today are the same 
as 2 or 3 thousand years ago, nor do we know how fast or slow they 
were to be intoned, etc.  I think that this knowledge is also lost.  


Then there is prayer.  The prayers we have today date to the Men of 
the Great Assembly, great Rabbi's who were the spiritual leaders 
while the J's were all over in Iraq, living in their forced new 
homes.  These men created the formality of the prayers to give to the 
simple people who had little education and who craved something to 
organize their devotions.  With the Temple in ruins and the temple 
activities gone, this made a lot of sense.  We do not know if while 
in Iraq (ok, Babylon) these prayers were given to be chanted out loud 
or to be said very quietly or whether they were to said sitting down 
or standing up.  All of those practices got made up along the many 
years and who knows how it was originally.  It's lost to us.  

There might have been (now lost) techniques that took words from 
Psalms or the Torah and were used like mantras the way we understand 
them.  I have no trouble seeing them using words as a walking 
technique and also no trouble seeing them used as a contemplative 
vehicle (by some) to achieve high levels.  Remember: several key 
prophets acheived their "nevuah" in Babylon.  They had functional and 
very effective techniques.  


"Quoting it does not make it anymore truthful or moral."
Not sure what you mean.  I usually quote from the Torah to make a 
point and whether it is the "truth" or of moral value, I leave up to 
the reader.  

Finally: I am not familiar just of

[FairfieldLife] Re: Blaine Watson: 1994

[boyboy_8]

Wow.  What a story.  I am unsure if your concluding perspective on 
Jyotish is that it's all mumbo-jumbo or it has a valid basis for 
being taken seriously?

All the best,

Fred




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In 1982 Maharishi asked us to make ourselves expert in Jyotish, 
the  
> Vedanga of astrology.  A few of us took the instruction to heart. 
For  
> me, this was the beginning of decades of complications in my  
> reputation and relationship with the administration of his 
movement.   
> It seems the administration had the instruction that no one  was 
to  
> be doing astrology, at least not us westerners and yet Maharishi 
had  
> told us to make ourselves expert in it and the only way to make 
one's  
> self expert was to do it.
> 
> In 1986 we were in Delhi for the yogi flying demonstrations there 
and  
> for weeks afterwards were meeting in Maharishi's garden in the  
> evenings with Maharishi and every other night, the Shankarachary 
who  
> had a most interesting affect on us in that the moment he started  
> speaking we would all fall asleep. Very strange.
> 
> One evening RD, from Canada, got on the mike and asked Maharishi 
what  
> the difference between free will and predestination was. Maharishi  
> said "They are the same thing."  This began an evening long  
> discussion on astrology.  At one point Maharishi asked if anyone  
> could see enlightenment in the chart.  All the friends around me  
> began to push me up to the front because that is what I had been  
> studying in recent weeks but I had nothing to offer by way of  
> explanation, only questions. I got on the mike and told Maharishi 
a  
> bunch of nonsense (a fairly typical experience for me) like you 
look  
> here and here and there and there and perhaps it's could to look 
here  
> too in the chart.  After finally running out of things to say i  
> stopped and Maharishi looked at me across the 3-4' that separated 
us  
> and said 'Perhaps more study is needed.'  This was not a surprise 
but  
> I was really hoping he would give us some clues as to what to be  
> looking for.
> 
> In 1994 we were in Holland after completing the Maharishi Jyotish  
> Teacher Training Course in Spain. Maharishi had called our course 
to  
> Vlodrop and wanted to meet with us. He kept us there for most of 
that  
> year working on various make work projects, curriculum for various  
> levels of education, a prashna course etc. Prashna is where you 
make  
> the horoscope for the moment a question is asked. Maharishi wanted 
us  
> to develop a course that could train people to answer the question  
> without a huge amount of learning time.  He was always looking for  
> the direct route to the heart of everything.
> 
> We were with him one afternoon and discussing with him a 
particular  
> prashna. He wanted to know what you would look at in the chart to 
see  
> if success could be predicted.  I, again, got on the mike and 
again  
> began to speak out a bunch of nonsense (this was a downright habit 
by  
> this time).  After some minutes of this I ran out of steam and  
> stopped. Now I had been wondering if he had remember his 
instruction  
> to me to study some more and this is what he said looking at me  
> across the room 'Seems the study has paid off.'
> 
> What we don't know to this day was whether he was being sarcastic 
or  
> not because my answer on the mike was total nonsense. He did give 
a  
> clue though as to how to answer the question of success so 
something  
> really good did come of it.
> 
> Some months later I was growing tired of being there in Vlodrop 
just  
> hanging out. The environment around Maharishi is always a little  
> intense and in many ways unnatural in that there are many people 
who  
> are very politically motivated wanting always to know who is 
seeing  
> Maharishi, and when and why and how often.  I had decided that I 
was  
> going to leave and go home and at lunch, told the people in my 
group  
> that i was planning on leaving.  Well one of them must have 
snitched  
> because later that afternoon while working on yet another project,  
> the phone rang.  Someone answered the phone, said ok, ok and then  
> hung up.  It had been Maharishi saying very simply 'No one should  
> leave. Everyone should stay.'  Busted
> 
> So ok.  I had to stay but after another month or 2 I had had 
enough.  
> This time i was smarter and didn't tell a soul. I went up to my 
room  
> when everyone was meditating, packed my bags and quietly came  
> downstairs to call a taxi from the pay phone in the hallway. As I 
was  
> on the phone, Girish Brahamchari came by looking like he was 
looking  
> for someone. He walked by the payphone once then came back and 
looked  
> inside more closely. He saw me there and motioned for me to open 
the  
> door which I did. He handed in to me a note saying Maharishi 
wanted  
> me to give this to you. The note said 'If you 

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Now that we've chewed the final heck out of my original post about what 
I did not like about the movement, I'd like to share my other (igrored) 
post.  Have a look at message 164997 and let's change the focus to the 
other side (for a little while).

regards,

Fred

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

"And now write this song for yourselves, teach it to the children of 
Israel, and place it in their mouths; in order that this song will be a 
witness for Me with the children of Israel" (Duet.31:19).

(mantra meditation - psalm)??

"11. For this commandment which I command you this day, is not 
concealed from you, nor is it far away. 12. It is not in heaven, that 
you should say, "Who will go up to heaven for us and fetch it for us, 
to tell [it] to us, so that we can fulfill it?" 13. Nor is it beyond 
the sea, that you should say, "Who will cross to the other side of the 
sea for us and fetch it for us, to tell [it] to us, so that we can 
fulfill it?" 14. Rather,[this] thing is very close to you; it is in 
your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfill it."

Source: 
Deuteronomy 29:9-30:20

Note in both cases the reference to "in your mouth", which might be a 
not so veiled reference to mantra meditation/invocation?

Regards,.

Fred




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Hebrews 4:12
> 
> 12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any 
> twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and 
> spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the 
> thoughts and intents of the heart.
>

[FairfieldLife] Whatever did become of Jerry Jarvis?

[boyboy_8]

boy, I have not thought of him in a long time. All I heard was all many 
times removed so it's probably all garbagecan someone tell me what 
happened to him?

Regards,

Fred

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bevan's call to the dome & Satyanand quote...

[boyboy_8]

I just got around to reading this.   My, my. It just made me feel 
quite sad.  I tell you the truth (heh, is this word forbidden yet at 
this group?) around the time I was reading it, on my computer I had 
playing G.F. Handel's "Israel in Egypt", the section where the massed 
chorus sings "He will reign forever and forever". I tell you, does it 
get any more spooky than this?  

Anyway, I couldn't help feel sad that Bevin and group are rapidly 
turning MMY and his legacy into a religious cult.   Next thing we'll 
be hearing that MMY says that he has it directly from (and then just 
fill in the blanks herelike Jesus, or Krishna, or Buddha, or 
Mohammed) that they (fill in the blanks) say that MMY had it right 
all along and that everyone on the earth should just do TM.  Mark my 
words, it's only days away.

I feel sad because this type of talk sounds like the Apostles (are 
supposed) to have sounded when JC rose from the dead.  The ecstatic 
pronouncements about his being accepted by the Heavenly Host, how he 
single handidly turned Kali into Sat, how he succeeded where all the 
other luminaries had utterly failed (I guess that part was implied, 
eh?) is just going to sound like total lunacy.  

Sad, I tell you.  If this type of talk from them keeps up the TMO 
will spin apart very rapidly.  Very sad.

regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Claim and belief systems

[boyboy_8]

All I can say is LOL

thanks,

Fred






--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > Good post and points.  My kids, when they were young, believed in 
all 
> > kinds of things and I was no different at that age.  When I say 
> > believe, it is what we humans do in our simple minded state.  It's 
> > not a bad or good thing in my view, just how we function.  
> > 
> > I am now reminded of a famous quote from Robert Anton Wilson who 
> > said "I do not believe in anything". I always loved that quote. 
> 
> I like another of his quotes, which is rather
> timely given recent events in the TM movement:
> 
> "A disciple is an asshole, looking for a human 
> being to attach itself to."
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Claim and belief systems

[boyboy_8]

Good post and points.  My kids, when they were young, believed in all 
kinds of things and I was no different at that age.  When I say 
believe, it is what we humans do in our simple minded state.  It's 
not a bad or good thing in my view, just how we function.  

I am now reminded of a famous quote from Robert Anton Wilson who 
said "I do not believe in anything". I always loved that quote. 

Knowledge might be timeless but as the yugas progress, it is lost and 
then found again.  I really like the way Swami Sri Yukteswar covers 
this in "The Holy Science".

BTW, in the flurry of posts, no one seems to have noticed and 
commented on my post about the short list of things I did love about 
tm/siddhis.  I'd be delighted to hear your response.

Cheers,

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Beliefs allow us to be one thing - and pretend to be another.
> 
> and the best we can hope for is to replace the fraud we believe in,
> with a better fraud - or we can drop having beliefs all together.
> 
> I remember when my kids were very small, they didn't believe in 
anything.
> 
> 
> Re the questions of 'channeling' - I know as fact there are no
> barriers (time, distance, etc) to knowledge. [Note: courtesy of
> TM-Siddhi's, specifically, the  sutra, often before I
> introduce the sutra I think now this time when barriers are 
removed, I
> will inquire about a specific someone or something , but I always
> 'forget' to inquire]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > It's worth thinking about how we go about defining what we 
believe 
> > and why we believe.  If, as the conversation is flowing lately, 
we 
> > are asked by some inside the TMO to believe that some elite 
> > individuals are still in CONSCIOUS contact with MMY, then should 
we 
> > believe this?  
> > 
> > 
> > First question: is it possible?  Maybe.  It would be called 
> > chanelling in other New Age lingo, wouldn't it?  If by death we 
> > assume the soul has exited this stage and is now on another, 
could we 
> > not set up a communication path between the two stages?  Why 
not?  
> > People who have had refined psychic experiences have seen ghosts, 
the 
> > newly dead, the old dead, etc.  People have claimed to be able 
> > to "access" the long ago dead.  This is no new story.
> > 
> > Second question: is it verifiable? Probably not in any meaningful 
> > way.   I mean, how? A machine? A voice mail machine? I mean, no, 
> > there is no reliable way to verify the claim.  The other person 
would 
> > have to have the same direct connection and they'd then be able 
to 
> > say, yes, it happened for me as well.
> > 
> > Third question: how reliable is the "contact"?  Hard to measure.  
How 
> > do we know that some other higher life form in some other realm 
is 
> > not acting as a conduit?  Use your imagination. We can't tell.
> > 
> > Fourth question: if it is not just a matter of faith on our part, 
> > then what is it?  Are we not "believing" or are we?  If people 
say 
> > that Jesus, Enoch, Malkizedek (fill in your own name here) has 
said 
> > something to someone what are we to do with this information?  
Shrug 
> > our shoulders and find a way to believe or shake our head and 
say, 
> > no, I don't believe that?
> > 
> > This is just a partial list for discussion purposes.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Fred
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bevan's call to the dome & Satyanand quote...

[boyboy_8]

I just had the image of Joaquin Phoenix sitting with the kids, all 
with tin foil hats onin the film "Signs".

Nahnoo, nahnoo, keep those nasty rakshasa's away.

fred



-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> 
> > > I think it's distinctly possible it'll stop short
> > > of that. To my knowledge, at least, MMY didn't
> > > make claims about taking direction from Guru Dev
> > > from day to day. I wouldn't be surprised if TBs
> > > start receiving "messages" from MMY in dreams and
> > > such, but I doubt they'll be encouraged by the
> > > movement suits. 
> > 
> > Movement ROBES. You're living in the past.
> 
> The Rajas and King Tony wear robes, but the suits
> (Hagelin, Bevan, et al.) wear suits, and I suspect
> they're in control now.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Bevan's call to the dome & Satyanand quote...

[boyboy_8]

First question to the other side: Is Elvis with you guys or what?  
This sighting of him at the local Arbies has just got to stop, ok?

Fred





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> >
> > On Feb 13, 2008, at 11:17 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > 
> > > It's official -- the TM movement has become
> > > Saturday Night Live. Every week Bevan (played
> > > by Chevy Chase in a fat suit) will come on and
> > > say, "And the news from Brahmaloka...Maharishi
> > > is still alive."
> > 
> > What if he took a wrong turn somehow and ended up in
> > Valhalla or the Elysian Fields instead?  Could be
> > dicey, you know how men hate to ask directions.
> 
> ROTFL!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Description of mantra?? : D

[boyboy_8]

You wrote: "> The Hebrew word usually translated "soul" is *nephesh*,
> meaning animal or living creature. As I understand it, the concept 
of an individual soul living on without the body isn't found in the 
Hebrew Scriptures."

Correct.  You'd be hard pressed to find the exact wording.  There are 
references in prayers and in the prophets.  In the prayers there are 
references for "this transmigration and that transmigration" which 
some take as a hint at re-incarnation.  I am not entirely sure what 
it means, so I'm putting it in here. In the prophetsthere is the 
story of Elisha and his master Elijah (the Prophet).  When Elijah 
told Elisha that he was to die soon, Elisha was heartbroken and 
begged a favor.  As part of what he asked for Elijah told him that if 
certain things came to be then he'd get his wish. When Elijah left, 
he supposed left ALIVE and was carried up to heaven  alive.  
Elisha's gift was to SEE him ascend to heaven with his own eyes.  
Hard to judge these stories.  There are similar Midrashim about Aaron 
at his death.  It was said that his death on top of some mountain was 
so extravagant and celestial (and witnessed consciously by Moses) 
that Moses requested the same type of death.  I have no 
idea.really, who can talk to these stories?

Then, last story...in the Book of Samuel, when the prophet Samuel has 
died and King Saul has gotten himself into a very bad situation and 
the Phillistines are massed for an imminent attack and nothing he has 
tried has been successful (including doing every spiritual technique 
he knew, including asking God to answer him through the Ummim and 
Thumim - and getting zero back), he panicked.  He broke his own Royal 
Rule, dressed himself up in commoners clothing, snuck out at night 
and went in search of a woman who was a known shaman.  She was known 
to have the ability to contact the dead.  He arrives, finally reveals 
himself, she is terrified that she will be killed by Royal law for 
helping, she is furious at him for forcing her, she finally caves in 
and does her thing.  She conjures up the recently departed soul of 
the Prophet Samuel, he arrives, he asks what's up and why is his 
sleep being distrubed.  Steps forward the cowering King Saul, 
explains his situation.  The prophet sort of sighs and says, never 
mind, tomorrow you will be with me.  That's it.  The next day King 
Saul dies (by suicide).  

Stories on the surface hint at other realities.  Maybe in the Zohar 
or some such book you'll find more direct sentences about the subject.

Regards,

Fred 


[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Claim and belief systems

[boyboy_8]

It's worth thinking about how we go about defining what we believe 
and why we believe.  If, as the conversation is flowing lately, we 
are asked by some inside the TMO to believe that some elite 
individuals are still in CONSCIOUS contact with MMY, then should we 
believe this?  


First question: is it possible?  Maybe.  It would be called 
chanelling in other New Age lingo, wouldn't it?  If by death we 
assume the soul has exited this stage and is now on another, could we 
not set up a communication path between the two stages?  Why not?  
People who have had refined psychic experiences have seen ghosts, the 
newly dead, the old dead, etc.  People have claimed to be able 
to "access" the long ago dead.  This is no new story.

Second question: is it verifiable? Probably not in any meaningful 
way.   I mean, how? A machine? A voice mail machine? I mean, no, 
there is no reliable way to verify the claim.  The other person would 
have to have the same direct connection and they'd then be able to 
say, yes, it happened for me as well.

Third question: how reliable is the "contact"?  Hard to measure.  How 
do we know that some other higher life form in some other realm is 
not acting as a conduit?  Use your imagination. We can't tell.

Fourth question: if it is not just a matter of faith on our part, 
then what is it?  Are we not "believing" or are we?  If people say 
that Jesus, Enoch, Malkizedek (fill in your own name here) has said 
something to someone what are we to do with this information?  Shrug 
our shoulders and find a way to believe or shake our head and say, 
no, I don't believe that?

This is just a partial list for discussion purposes.

Regards,

Fred

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Howdy. Yes, the Rabbi's carried the protective mentality to the n'th 
degree by creating more and more restrictions, each rationalized as a 
protector of the Torah way of life. For example, the law of Kosher 
wine does not come about in the Torah. It came about by Rabbinic 
decree.  

Not sure Adam and Eve were humans as you and I are.  Maybe but then 
again maybe they did not exist in this dimension. I also read 
somewhere that the skins that Hashem made for them was not the same 
skin you and I have.  There is a tradition about the skin that I 
think we see a hint at when we do "havdalah" and say goodbye to 
Shabbas.  We hold our "fingernails" up to the candle light and look 
at our nails.  Why? Because the nail looks a lot like the skin that 
was made for Adam and Eve.I think that is what I read

My observance these days is hard to express.  I went through a hugely 
shocking experience in the fall last year and I felt a 
distinct "fall" in my observance. I can't go into the details about 
that shock. I can say that it has taken about 6 months for me to now 
get back to doing my regular morning prayer routines.  I am not the 
same person I was before I got the shock.  The shock was information 
and that's all I will say.

Garden of Eden, oh, that's always the slippery one.  "touch" 
and "eat" are different.  Touch is external, eat is internal.  Eat 
meant to incorporate, to take into your body, to absorb, to be 
transformed.  Honestly the Zohar does a much better job of it.  All 
you have to do is try and figure out what the heck these guys are 
talking about.

The thicket of regulations probably has done more harm than good.  
That too is a big discussion.  I will say for now that the Judaism of 
today is probably no where near what Moses had in mind.  Not even 
within a country mile or kilometer.  Not even close.  I conceive of 
Moshe having taught a lifestyle of elevation of consciousness, 
leading to unimaginable high levels of enlightenment.  

We haven't even touched on what the "n'vua" or prophetic level is all 
about.

Maybe we will.

Cheers,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] A short list of things I loved about the TM/Siddhis experience

[boyboy_8]

I had read Yogananda before I was encouraged by a TM friend to try 
TM.  I was afraid but did not really know why.  Finally I screwed up 
the courage and went along to an introductory lecture.  I will leave 
off comments for now about who the lecture was done by and my 
relationship to that person.  Suffice it to say that I proceeded to 
allow myself to be encouraged and step by step I got to the day I was 
to get the TM technique.  I was led into a small room, the puja table 
was all set up, lovely scent of sandlewood in the room.  The teacher 
spoke quietly and told me to sit and watch.  Teacher did the puja and 
I felt a distinct essence of peace fill the room.  I thought it all 
charming.  I can't remember when I was asked to bow with the teacher, 
whether it was before or after I got the mantra.  Anyway, I sort of 
clumsily bowed a bit and was confused and momentarily wary.  I sat 
down and I guess it was then I was given the mantra and told to 
repeat it a few times. I did and then I was told how to use it in my 
mind.  I can't recall if I had the first meditation right then and 
there or I was led back to another room for the 1'st meditation.  In 
any case I recall that I zoomed down into a gigantic space of peace, 
quiet and calm that was instantly clear.  It felt like "home".  It 
felt wonderful.  My breathing must have become very shallow and time 
was almost entirely suspended.  My time for that first meditation was 
over before I knew it. I was asked for what my experiences were and 
was told that it was very good and that I had obviously taken very 
well to it.  Thus in 1976, September I believe, I started TM.  I 
enjoyed the meditation very much.  

I did notice as so many have as well, that you become accutely aware 
of how tired you are, how much sleep deprivation is layered into your 
cells.  I became aware of the many flavors of a meditational 
sitting.  I was taught simple asana postures and learned them easily 
and I enjoyed those.  I became aware that my knees were not meant to 
be stretched into a lotus position. I learnt to ignore that at my 
peril.  Years later after forcing my knees into position I tore 
cartilidge in my right knee and had to have an endoscopic operation.  
Never went into lotus after that.  Felt idiotic for having ignorned 
my inner voice that said not to force it.  Oh well.  You live and try 
to learn.

Years go by and eventually I came upon enough money to go for the 
Siddhis.  Took parts of it in the city and for the last set we went 
up to a lovely facility the movement had bought up in Huntsville, 
Ontario.  Well, that was a blast of a course.  I was the first one to 
lift off.  In my natural state I am quite uninhibited and so I felt 
enormously free within myself and so when the flying technique was 
tried I just felt a surge of tremendous power come from no-where and 
rush up through me.  The next thing I knew it I was bouncing like mad 
down the foam mats, with my head going up and down and me howling 
like a maniac in blissfull glee.  I made many hops until I stopped.  
The room erupted into a huge applause and I just laughed my ass off. 
After the session was over many came by where I was lying down and 
all they had to say was, "heh, how did you do that?".  I laughed 
more. I shrugged my shoulders and said I had no idea.  It just 
happened on it's own.  I also must say that the other siddhis had 
almost no discernable results for me.  I almost always could bounce 
around and did so for several years.  I loved it.  I also sensed that 
not everyone around me enjoyed being so "free" inside, feeling so 
uninhibited.  My howling and yipping and laughing and blissful 
carrying on just wore thin on some people and before you knew it some 
were swearing at me, in a joking way.  Very few flew.  Some left the 
course convinced that it was a waste of their time and money and I'm 
sure some of them never touched TM Siddhis again.  It appeared to me 
at the time that the technique shocked them on some level and they 
withdrew and reacted against the energy to "open". That is what it 
appeared to me.  

I had another memorable experience while on course.  In the middle of 
I don't now remember, not sure if it was while doing a particular 
Siddhi or just meditating before, but while in the big room, all of a 
sudden out of no-where...againa blast of a billion volts felt 
like they were buzzing in all my nerve endings throughout my body.  I 
was surprised, afraid, overcome, overwhelmed, in awe.  I could not 
feel my hands as hands anymore, they were just zillions of volts.  I 
heard a very loud buzzing sounds in my ears.  I moaned and groaned as 
it was just wayyy to much juice and I really did not know 
what the heck was going on.  It lasted for a few minutes and then 
subsided and then went away.  Say hello to Prana Fred..hello big 
energy.  Astounding experience.  Never had anything like it again.  
When smaller bursts came I knew them better and wa

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

I thought I had read that some time ago.

Thanks.


Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 12, 2008, at 3:40 PM, boyboy_8 wrote:
> 
> > Thought:
> >
> > there is an assumption within TMO and MMY's teachings that using 
his
> > specific mantra formulations is the ONLY trustworthy way of 
assuring
> > the correct transcendental pathway to enlightenment, etc.
> >
> > What happens if there are non-TM mantra-like sounds that can lead 
the
> > individual to transcend, lower heart rate, calm mind, all without 
a
> > Puja and money transaction?
> >
> > Isn't that what Benson proved, years ago?
> 
> 
> Yes and others. Benson's research has been duplicated.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Perhaps you would have had better results using his real name. 
Try "yeshua" and see what happens? 

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > "I still like my idea that "sounds whose effects
> > are known" refers to *all* the bija mantras as
> > a whole, i.e., they all have good effects, whereas
> > words like "mike" and so on would have little if
> > any effect."
> > 
> > This is the heart of this for me.  Why do we assume that
> > effortlessly meditating with different sounds has a different
> > effect at all?
> 
> I can speak only from my own experience, but shortly
> after I learned TM, I experimented using "Jesus" as
> my mantra, with disappointing results.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Thought:

there is an assumption within TMO and MMY's teachings that using his
specific mantra formulations is the ONLY trustworthy way of assuring 
the correct transcendental pathway to enlightenment, etc.

What happens if there are non-TM mantra-like sounds that can lead the 
individual to transcend, lower heart rate, calm mind, all without a 
Puja and money transaction?  

Isn't that what Benson proved, years ago?

Fred





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > > Well, sure. But lots of anecdotal accounts
> > > accumulated over time ain't always chopped
> > > liver. That's the basis of folk medicine,
> > > after all, and quite a few of its prescriptions
> > > have turned out to be effective when they were
> > > tested scientifically. And you might want to be
> > > *very* careful even testing a substance that
> > > folk medicine warns is harmful.
> > 
[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

It reveals that the Children of Israel were easily tempted to follow 
just about anything going, including all the mishigas (nonsense) of 
the Egyptian, Cananite, Phillistine religions.  They loved 'em all.  
Like a child in a candy store.  "Look but do not touch" was too weak. 
It was "Do not look, do not try, do not imitate, remove all of it 
from within your boundaries".  Very strict.

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > I too am no expert in the vagueries of mantra meanings.  The
> > point is that they are phrases...meaningless sounds whose
> > meaning is known?
> 
> (Semantically) meaningless sounds whose *effects*
> are known.
>  
> > Maybe the meaning is that they invoke an energy whose
> > association is known and is found within Indian religious
> > systems?
> 
> Or within *all* religious systems, i.e., within
> human experience.
> 
> 
> > We were told to cut down sacred trees 
> > in Palestine because of what they represented to the people who 
> > worshipped them.  The tree by itself was not a danger; it was the 
> > fact that we might find the worship of a tree of interest and
> > before you know it we're off the path.
> 
> This is revealing.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Yes, even now I still get confused between Brahma and Brahman.  Perhaps 
Brahman is closer to the J conception of God.  Maybe.  There are 
similarities.  

re: Gitaoh, I'd love to get my hands on that.pretty please?

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Some responses:
"> But that isn't the distinction, at least not the one
> we were discussing. It's between *names* of personal
> gods and *mantras* associated with personal gods."

Your comment reminds me of this: in J, sometimes we can make use of 
one of God's names as a mantra.  It is more hinted at than overtly 
stated in Kaballistic writings.  Rabbi Abulafia (I think) boldly went 
into more detail about this then others were happy to see in print.
In J, as you know, there is no distinction made between Hashem as 
personal or impersonal God. There is no small "g" god within J.  
None.  There is acknoweldgement of other practices of other groups 
who have lots of smaller "g" discussion and practices.  It was known 
and many fences were erected to block any contact with that sphere.  

"An energy within the meditator's own consciousness, one that leads 
to transcendence of all forms and boundaries."

Yes, that's true.  Consider a few things for a minute.  Many paths up 
the mountain.  One was chosen for the J's.  Specifically chosen.  
Taking other paths will take them along a way they were supposed to 
avoid.  Sounds like an implicit contradiction if the top is the 
shared objective?  Maybe.  It was God's word so I would have to take 
it up with Him. 

Consider another thing.  I have a theory.  I think that Judaism was 
taught (by Moses) as an Ascendant Technology.  TM is a transcendant 
technique. They are not the same thing.  They might both be strokes 
in the swimming pool.  One might be the breast stroke, the other a 
crawl.  They are not the same.  The ascendant path is different.  
Perhaps they both reach the same place; I really do not know.  I 
think that they achieve different things.  

"Again, though, the circuit is within one's own consciousness, not a 
circuit between one's consciousness and something external (at least
in the esoteric TM context)."

I hear your point.  I had the following scenario go through my mind.  

"Switchboard: what number would you like me to dial for you? Ok, here 
we go (dials 416-967-)
Switchboard: what numberyes sir, right away (dials main number at 
Pentagon).

Circuits might be just like that.  You plug into what you connect 
to.  For example, if you invoke the energy of a high spirit, say, an 
angel you happen to know that "name" of, might not this invocation 
get you connected to a very specific energy within the Astral Realms? 
I suppose it would.  Just like that by invoking the energy of a sound 
that has its place within H might just get a connection (within ones 
own consciousness) of an energy we are NOT supposed to dial up?


"Speak for yourself, please. (I was not required to bow down when I 
was initiated, nor was I encouraged to feel grateful to Guru Dev."

I think that your experience was not the majority.  Ask around.  If 
you didn't get the message that the Puja was a great show of 
gratitude to Guru Dev, then I can't help you on that.  

"(me) No, in his teaching there is an obfuscation of what is really
going on.
> 
> (you)  Well, you're just contradicting here. How can you
> be so sure he didn't really believe what he was
> teaching?"

I think you missed my point.  He truly believed what he taught. He 
also hid what he did not want people to take note of.  Obstruction as 
such in my view was almost akin to putting a stumbling block before 
the blind.  In the Torah this is forbidden.  A person is supposed to 
aspire to speak truthfully.  Not a personal truth, but THE truth.  I 
have come to doubt that MMY spoke THE truth and this my subjective 
idea/feeling/belief.  I think that he would have said anything at the 
outset to establish a foothold in the West, including hiding much 
that would turn people off had they access to it.  Hence no 
translation of the latter chapters of the Gita.  Hence the 
transmutation of Hindu to Vedic, which in my view was a slight of 
hands trick.  People in the West just had so little knowledge back 
then that it worked well for him.  

Referring to deities, you wrote: "What if we call them aspects 
(plural) of one's own consciousness?"

You really believe that?  Ok, no, I don't.  Which brings me to 
another big difference between J and H.  In J there is a distinct "I 
and thou" relationship. There is God almighty, the Creator of my soul 
and the entirety of creation and then there is me, just a small spark 
of light.  I and HE are not the same.  I can never be Him, nor merge 
on an equal basis with Him.  He will always be seperate from me.  In 
H there is a strong basis for the belief that enlightenment is a 
Union with the Divine where the individual takes on the status of the 
Whole at some level of Enlightenment.  You become a God person, 
someone fully realized, you can also be worhshipped if enough people 
think you've achieved that level.  Big difference.

Cheers,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

My best friend is a Wilbermaniac.  I will ask him

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Whao, you have hit a few hot buttons for me.

You wrote: "He didn't believe in cultural intermarriage, 
one should marry their own race, or they would fall from Dharma"

What?  By openly encouraging Western women to flounce around in 
Sari's was his way of supporting them staying within the boundaries 
of their dharma?  Did I miss something here?  By encouraging 
listening to Vedic music and the exclusion of Western modes this was 
his way of supporting their originating dharma?  Huh?  By spending 
decades encouraging Westerners into indulging more and more "Vedic" 
modes of lifestyles (heh, get a load at our neighbours Lingam out 
front) is a way of supporting their family Dharma?

I guess I must have been out having a beer when that truck rolled by.
Sorry, for me that is a loadMMY was not concerned if he was going 
to draw his followers into an Indian modality.  He was delighted by 
it.  As I would be if I had his objectives.  Spread Vedic this and 
that, uphold India and its values, make Indian philosopy look good, 
continue the [practically silent] work of his guru, etc.  Bringing 
world peace and individual peace was also a nice objective.  It's a 
shame that on the whole those objectives missed their mark.  

Cheers,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

I fully accept how you feel.  For me I have found my relationship to 
J goes up and down.  For me it is a lively thing where I deeply 
struggle to find my way to another level, another way to cling to 
Hashem, to grow closer but also listen to how much I dislike modern 
Rabbinic Judaism. I have much to say on that matter but will do so 
another time/day.

cheers,

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thank you fred.  Many times these discussions, especially 
> regarding "Hashem", and "Torah", just go on and on, and on, as 
> though one is thrilled to find little gem of knowledge that the 
> rabbis of old also spent countless hours in ascertaining its 
> meaning. 
> 
> Somewhere along the way, it lost its allure for me.
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I've had enough posting for today.  Time to pack it in and go 
> for a 
> > beer.  I'll be back tomorrow.
> > 
> > All the best to everyone
> > 
> > 
> > fred
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [snip]
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Dear S (Stu?), 

I have a few minutes here at work to try and respond.  You are 
correct in my view to point out that H and J (Hinduism and Judaism) 
both have a caste structure.  There is an interesting note a friend 
of mine told me (can't recall if he said it was actually an opinion 
written in the Gemorra) which stated that the main reason that the 
Talmidim of Rabbi Akiva perished was because they felt in their 
hearts to be of a higher (caste) than their brothers in the rest of 
the country.  This type of arrogance was spiritually a big no-no and 
they were summarily punished, etc.  I should really look more into 
that story one day.  

The children of Israel were more tribal than caste but the point is 
well taken.  The division within the Levites into the highest caste 
(Cohanim - Priests) and Leviim (the rest of the Levites) functioned 
very well in Israelite society until after the First Temple Period.  
In the second temple period, great corruption crept into the system 
and it was all downhill from there.

The choices you outline for Jews to take are well said but not 
entirely what I would say.  Its a bit too much 'all this or all that' 
when I think you'd agree that Judaism has so many variants and 
colorations.  The reformulation of J into a modern formula started 
the day Napoleon freed the Jews from the ghettos of Europe.  The 
Haskala sprouted, Jews shaved their beards off, doffed their head 
coverings, neglected fringes, wore the same clothes as their non-Jews 
and became "civilized" and tried to melt in.  At the same time a 
counter-reformation sprung up in Germany with Rabbi S.R. Hirsch.  
That's the way it always is in religions.  As soon as a new wave 
arrives, there is a resistance to that change.  Same thing happened 
with the schisms in Chassidism and C verus Mitnagim, etc.  Always 
fragmentation and we grow further apart as a people.  

The tunnel vision medieval approach you speak of has worked just fine 
for the Ultra's and always will.  It might not suit you or me and 
that's also fine. There are many J's in the world who have no trouble 
following each of the hundreds of commandments.  It's a lifestyle 
maybe you and me choose not to follow, but it is a valid one for 
those whose hearts are drawn to it or who are born into it. 

You write: "Fred, why are you obsessing on this short phrase from the 
OT and the remote possibility that a fantasy creature is going to 
respond to your calling its name silently?  Isn't it time to wake 
up?  Isn't waking up the goal?"

A single point clearly made makes not an obsession.  Short phrase 
from OT was succinctly written and for me is unambiguous even on 
the "p'shat", literal level.  The religion was given in all it's 
exclusivity with a purpose and as far as I can tell, no shelf life to 
that exclusivity.  I am not entirely sure what fantasy creature you 
are referring to here?  If by this you refer to a deva within the H 
system, then I could not comment on how remote the possibility is.  
The point is not the percent chances of connection.  The point is we 
are supposed to avoid looking in the first place.  When you tell a 
child not to poke its finger in the electric socket you don't do so 
by looking at the odds but by stating that it is dangerous and just 
don't do it.  You might find the danger overstated or entirely 
false.  You might be right.  I doubt that the restrictions were given 
for no good reason and for me I trust that it should be paid 
attention to.  

Kind regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Ok, I've had enough posting for today.  Time to pack it in and go for a 
beer.  I'll be back tomorrow.

All the best to everyone


fred



[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Exactly.  Many reform Jews also have no trouble eating traif, so why 
bother getting your hair-do out of sorts with a pesky mantra or two?  
I mean, let's all just get down and be happyat any cost.  Be sure 
to mail your contributions to UJA and buy at least one State of 
Israel bond.

Ok, I'm being very silly

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Feb 11, 2008, at 1:11 PM, boyboy_8 wrote:
> 
> > I cannot recommend TM to anyone in my faith as I feel that it 
would
> > be a direct contravention of the Torah. Outside of my faith I have
> > neutral feelings but I would warn them of cheaper and safer
> > alternative measures/techniques. With the recent photos of the
> > leadership now splashed all over the world, how anyone in their 
right
> > mind can take these people seriously and not see them as faux-
Hindu
> > wannabe's is beyond me. They look so silly I just laughed out 
loud.
> > I wish them well and best of luck.
> 
> 
> I friend of mine is an Orthodox Rabbi and Kabbalist. A very open- 
> minded man. But to him--and numerous others--TM does violate an  
> important mitzvah, 'take no gods before me'. And the TM mantras 
are  
> from Indian paganism.
> 
> At the same time I don't think many reformed Jews would have the 
same  
> problem. Some reform Jews consider the Kabbalah a pagan practice! 
So  
> it does depend who you ask.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Good questions.  God within the Jewish context sometimes appears very 
impersonal.  Big titles, you know.  Master of the Universe, YHVH (the 
Holy of Holy names, very mystical meaning), God in his merciful 
element, God in his strict element, etc.  God for Jews is not a 
personality; that's what you have in Pantheism and systems like 
Hinduism.  God is described to us as having no personality as a human 
would conceive.  He has no human like attributes per se.  When we 
read in Genesis that God says...let us create him in Our image, this 
refers to what we and God share: that is a big question but there it 
is.  

God does not make an appearance to our ancestors like Krishna, 
representing the Godhead.  I do not understand what or who Krishna 
was.  It is has always been an oddity to me that even though there he 
is all blue skinned, flowing effulgence, in front of hundreds of 
thousands who apparently knew who he was and still half of them say, 
go stick it in your ear oh god person, we're attacking your side. I 
could never grasp that.  I mean, if it were me, I imagine I would put 
aside my personal issues and ask God for guidance.  But, I might be 
deceiving myselfwho knows, people get caught up in the heat of 
the moment?

Within Judaism, God has no contender for the throne.  None apparent 
in the literature or revelation.  God sits alone as Creator and Ruler 
above all else.  

Perhaps being the Supreme personality of the Godhead is not the same 
thing as God Almighty within Judaism.  Really I don't know.  

I do not equate YHVH with Brahman.  Sorry if I gave you this 
impression. Brahman is but one part of a trinity story; YHVH is but 
one name or aspect of the ONE God.  No comparison exists to my 
knowledge.

I loved reading MMY's translation of the Gita.  It was the only one I 
had read and it still is.  Yes, I know why he left out the other 
chapters.having found references later on for what is in the 
those chapters. He'd have a heck of a time explaning that to 
Westerners.  

Prabupata might have dissed MMY but from I recall MMY said just about 
as many awful things about him and other Indian gurus..MMY could 
throw the dirt around like a farmer.

I respect you trying to place the issue as an either/or equation.  
Personality or no personality.  He's either this or that.  God 
Almighty within my religion has no qualities we can refer to like 
that.  He exists, in some configurations, trascendent to time, space, 
qualities, needs, etc.  


regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

I too am no expert in the vagueries of mantra meanings.  The point is 
that they are phrases...meaningless sounds whose meaning is known? 
Maybe the meaning is that they invoke an energy whose association is 
known and is found within Indian religious systems?  Meaningless 
sounds? I find that a bit of a stretch.  I am tempted to say that on 
the finest relative,,there is no such thing.  You put the 
word "Amen" in your mouth and swirl it around for a while and tell me 
what comes about in your awareness?  

A side track: in Kaballah, one of the techniques used in a meditative 
way is to take a word from the Torah, sometimes one of God's Holy 
names, and the name is repeated in a formulaic manner.  Sometimes the 
letters of the name are chopped up and repeated on their own, 
followed by the other letters.  Sometimes words and small phrases are 
lifted out and chopped up and repeated in a contemplative way.  All 
in all, it is supposed to eleveate the persons consciousness and open 
a pathway to higher revelation and if you're lucky, a closer grasp of 
God (whatever this means).  Closeness to God?  Did he go 
anywhere...this is the way it is described.  Perhaps we just clear up 
our dusty eyes and see Him a bit clearer?  Anyway, we take a word or 
phrase (sounds.whose meaning IS KNOWN) and we repeat them - 
invoking those energies.  Changes occur, the process leads to some 
changesThis is directed meditation with known essence and is 
different from the supposedly meaningless sounds of TM mantras.  
Personally I am not convinced that they are meaningless.  In what way 
should we define meaning here?  The TM mantras are MOST probably not 
unique to Indian wisdom pool.  I'd place a bet on it.  I am concerned 
that the meaning is wrapped up in a belief system that leads to an 
outcome.  Being pleasant to Saraswati might not please YHVH.we 
were told over and over again in OT that we had to leave all those 
practices we were exposed to in Egypt behind us and that we were 
forbidden to bring them along.  We were told to cut down sacred trees 
in Palestine because of what they represented to the people who 
worshipped them.  The tree by itself was not a danger; it was the 
fact that we might find the worship of a tree of interest and before 
you know it we're off the path.  

Regards,

Fred





[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Yes, I am aware of that.  Years ago when I first started my interest 
into meditation, I read "Autobiography of a Yogi" (highly 
recommended) and got hold of a big Indian Philosophy book (still have 
it).  Read "Holy Science" by Swami Yuketeswar (very highly 
recommended and was just reading some last night).  

After all these years I am still as bamboozled by what the Upanishads 
mean by those references.  It is very interesting to read about and 
as such it would shed much need insight for metrying to 
understand the hyper-complex Indian religious maze.  Indian thought 
is so elastic and accomodating that there is probably room in it to 
reflect back to me the essence of Mosiac Judaism.  Aspects of the one 
could be a way of explanation.  The stress on the One and the 
rejection of the manifestations came at the outset of Judaism. We are 
not allowed to pray to a prophet, saint, forefather/mother, angel, 
etc.  Only to God, nothing or no one else.  


Regards,

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > YHVH is but one representation of the God of Abraham, Isaac,
> > Jacob, Moses, etc.  He had several names and the this is but
> > one.  For Jews, He is THE only God.  The same for Christians
> > (with one exception) and all Muslims.  Same God.  THE God.
> > "A god" we would say is refered to in other systems, like those
> > found among natives in the Americas and throughout Hinduism.
> > There are countless gods in India.  Not the same thing as YHVH.  
> > 
> > Mainstream Judaism sees YHVH as a Unity, non-dualistic, Creator, 
> > Master of the Universe, etc.  ONE God.  To quote a passage from
> > the Torah known as the "Shema": "Hear, oh Israel. The Lord, our 
> > God, the Lord is ONE".  (Exodus 3:8).  This is the statement of 
> > Unity. 
> 
> There are innumerable such statements in the Vedic
> literature--especially in the Upanishads--referring
> to Brahman. There are lots of "gods" in Hinduism,
> but (as I said earlier) they are all simply aspects
> of the One.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

[snip]

That it might be old news is fine.  Some of this I discovered over 
the years, with very little of what I have posted being really new to 
me now.  That I found a web site that gives the quotes is just for 
discussion purposes.  The actual text of the Beacon Light is new, I 
had not gone searching for it until I happened upon it now.  I had 
heard through other sources some of these words.  

In India, the distinction between personal god and names of personal 
gods might be something worthy of discussion over a hot toddy.  
Within Judaism it is not worth discussing as it is entirely a 
forbidden endeavor.  In other words, no matter how you slice and dice 
it still smells like cheese.  These mantras we were taught in TM, 
whether the initiate has any idea of its meaning (in India/Hinduism) 
the mantra has power.  It connects the nervous system of the 
meditator to an energy.  There is simply no way from avoiding this 
reality.  If it was merely, as Benson showed, just "coca cola" and 
not some Sanskrit word, then we would not be having this discussion.  
We might be having a discussion about getting us brainwashed into 
buying Coke stock, but heh, that might not have been a bad investment 
over a 30 year period!

Whether the sounds of the mantra were pleasing to the deity is 
irrelevant.  TM would still be prohibited by Torah law whether it 
upset the deity or tickled them pink.  Verbotten either way.  What is 
at stake here is what our consciousness does with sounds, with 
thoughts, with or without intentions.  For someone in India, for 
example, fully familiar with the Indian context for a mantra, then a 
TM mantra might take on an added layer of association with a form, a 
deity, if you will, that would be entirely missing in the mind of the 
Western  meditator.  Fine.  Still, when we put our minds, our 
attention, our awareness to a place, to an energy, we set in motion a 
circuit that draws us and it closer together.  The association might 
be good in some people's eyes but it is not closely examined when you 
get initiated.  

You are not taught, never will be taught, which circuit 
you are going to plug into.  I accept that for you and many like 
youthat TM is a way to unlock your self, giving you all kinds of 
growth, etc., etc.  That has nothing to do with why it is forbidden 
to Jews within the context I have quoted.  I am happy you believe and 
experience these things.  I too had all kinds of happy experiences.  
So what?

In your next point I believe you are being disingenous and just 
repeating the same rationalization MMY would have used.  When 
speaking to fellow Hindus, it's an Indian puja, Indian deities and 
past masters invoked, all very familiar.  With Westerners, the same 
is now a pleasing sound, you don't have to worry about what they 
mean, it's all going to work out well in the end and if you'd just 
bow down just a wee bit we can finish this off, and don't you feel 
greatful to that past master who MMY just adores?  

No, that might work in the Wizard of Oz but not in the real world.  
It is smoke and mirrors and we know that.  

You say "> In other words, in his teaching there are levels of
> metaphysical abstraction that apply beyond the more
> concrete religious terminology of Hinduism."

No, in his teaching there is an obfuscation of what is really going 
on.  Had he never left India, he would have just been another Yogi 
teaching a technique.  India had Yogananda and Kria, MMY would be 
just another guy.  But, he had to totally obscure the roots of his 
techniques.  That much I will say: he was not blind.  He knew what 
he'd encounter or he sure learned quickly.  That is why those early 
Humbolt talks are so funny.  He almost has it 100% pegged down, 
Westernizedbut occassionaly he slips up and something else comes 
out.  Even earlier material is even more hilarious.  Don't get me 
wrong.  There is great good in Kria and other Indian techniques then 
and now.  But, let's not call an apple a carrot.  


Just because King Tony claimed otherwise for what the deities are 
about...does not mean I have to accept that.  As soon as we 
entertain "deities", plural, you are out of the comfort zone of the 
Torah.  It works in India, it does not work in Judaism.  It used to 
work in pre-Koran Arabic world but now does not.  

To your question about why God would allow for lower "g" gods...good 
question.  I can't speak for God but it would seem to me that the 
Creator of all would have a place for everything, including room 
enough to be deluded, room enough to burn witches, destroy foreign 
people because they are heathens, allows for the Holocaust, etc.  
Free will (oh boy, that's a big phrase) allows us nimrods to do all 
kinds of good and bad.  It's a big world and time goes on and on and 
every step of the way we re-create the world by our choices.  
Small "g" gods have their place.  Perhaps they are there to uphold 
that law of creation at that point.  They seem to 

[FairfieldLife] Re: New to the group

[boyboy_8]

Welcome.  I am new here as well.  After you have given vent/expression 
to all of your hatred/bitterness, what will be left to do?  What will 
be next for you on your spiritual path?  Be a pity if you got caught up 
in a vendetta mindset

Regards,

fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "bwaytheatrediva" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone. I'm 23 years old and I've lived in FF my whole life. I 
> have a huge amount of bitterness/hatred toward the TMO. It was shoved 
> down my throat from literally the moment I was born. MSAE was a kind 
> of hell that I wouldn't wish on anyone. A lot of the people I love 
> most are in the TMO. I always say I hate the cult, but I dearly love 
> some of the people in it. Anyway, that's my intro. I look forward to 
> talking with you.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Good point but who knows?  Whatever Abraham went through he and Isaac 
were not the same afterwards.

Regards.

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> and don't forget about Abraham, he trudged up that mountain in 
waking
> state and slid down in CC, or perhaps he went up in CC and came down
> in UC . . . 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > I salute your humor.  Very good. There is an interesting section 
in 
> > the Torah just as God tells Moses to get back to Egypt on his 
> > mission.  Moses in his extreme state of insecurity and humility, 
asks 
> > God how a simple person like him, heavy of tongue (had a speech 
> > impediment) would be believed by his people?  God then shows him 
the 
> > things to do after which they will be stirred into belief.  This 
> > whole process goes on for quite some time.  Even as late as the 
total 
> > destruction of the Egyptian army at the splitting of the waters, 
the 
> > Torah speaks of the awe and fear and belief in Moses by the 
people.  
> > Seems like he impressed more as time went by and events unfolded 
as 
> > they did.  
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung  wrote:
> > >
> > > Matrix,
> > > 
> > > I'm not so sure.  Moses had two beams of light shooting out of 
his
> > > head -- like horns -- sounds pretty enlightened to me  
> > > 
> > > Michaelangelo carved Moses with those horns.
> > > 
> > > New definitions are needed for the below:
> > > 
> > > "Me so horny" (full of the divine light of the presumptuous 
> > assumption?)
> > > 
> > > "Toot your own horn." (Miles Davis on cloud nine?)
> > > 
> > > "Little Boy Blue, come blow your horn." (Toddler Krishna ref?)
> > > 
> > > "Big Horn Sheep"  (The ones that gathered around Baby Jesus?)
> > > 
> > > Edg
> > >[snip]
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

I salute your humor.  Very good. There is an interesting section in 
the Torah just as God tells Moses to get back to Egypt on his 
mission.  Moses in his extreme state of insecurity and humility, asks 
God how a simple person like him, heavy of tongue (had a speech 
impediment) would be believed by his people?  God then shows him the 
things to do after which they will be stirred into belief.  This 
whole process goes on for quite some time.  Even as late as the total 
destruction of the Egyptian army at the splitting of the waters, the 
Torah speaks of the awe and fear and belief in Moses by the people.  
Seems like he impressed more as time went by and events unfolded as 
they did.  

Regards,

Fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Matrix,
> 
> I'm not so sure.  Moses had two beams of light shooting out of his
> head -- like horns -- sounds pretty enlightened to me  
> 
> Michaelangelo carved Moses with those horns.
> 
> New definitions are needed for the below:
> 
> "Me so horny" (full of the divine light of the presumptuous 
assumption?)
> 
> "Toot your own horn." (Miles Davis on cloud nine?)
> 
> "Little Boy Blue, come blow your horn." (Toddler Krishna ref?)
> 
> "Big Horn Sheep"  (The ones that gathered around Baby Jesus?)
> 
> Edg
>[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Nah, worse happened but I survived.  Thank God!

Regards,.

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > Started TM in 1976 (gads, was it that long ago?).  Eventually 
made my 
> > way to Siddhis.  In another post I will talk about the good 
> > experiences I had with TM/Siddhis.  I was not a teacher but was 
> > married to a Governor who was also my initiator.  
> 
> 
> That's a lawsuit right there.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

YHVH is but one representation of the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, 
Moses, etc.  He had several names and the this is but one.  For Jews, 
He is THE only God.  The same for Christians (with one exception) and 
all Muslims.  Same God.  THE God.  "A god" we would say is refered to 
in other systems, like those found among natives in the Americas and 
throughout Hinduism.  There are countless gods in India.  Not the 
same 
thing as YHVH.  

Mainstream Judaism sees YHVH as a Unity, non-dualistic, Creator, 
Master 
of the Universe, etc.  ONE God.  To quote a passage from the Torah 
known as the "Shema": "Hear, oh Israel. The Lord, our God, the Lord 
is 
ONE".  (Exodus 3:8).  This is the statement of Unity.  

My objectives?  We'll get into that later.

Regards,

fred



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "matrixmonitor" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---Of course! (re: the gods).  But are you saying that YHVH 
is "GOD" 
> and not "a god".  Clarify first whether you are a non-dualist (e.g. 
> all of Buddhism and Saivite Hinduism), or a Deistic dualist 
(orthodox 
> brands of JudaeoChristianity, Vaisnava hinduism)...then go on from 
> there. Define your objectives.  Is Enlightenment one of them?  If 
so, 
> you won't find much written about that in the Bible.
>  
> 
> 
> 
> [snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

[snip}

I just found this:

http://tmfree.blogspot.com/2007/06/maharishi-mahesh-yogis-big-lie-
part-1.html

"The mantras are either names of Vedic/Hindu deities or sounds that 
are closely associated with these deities. The evidence regarding the 
true nature of the mantras can be found in Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's 
own writings. In 1955, prior to coming to the West, three of his 
lectures were included in a book published in India called Beacon 
Light of the Himalayas. In one of these lectures he states the 
following regarding the mantras:

"…we find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind 
to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, 
table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing 
more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special 
sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations 
whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is 
the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For 
our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. 
Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us 
happier in every walk of life." 

So, we have an early quote from MMY talking about what the mantras 
are.  I rest my case.

To your other points, whether we want to say that all gods are 
manifestation of Brahman or not, within both the Jewish and Hindu 
religious systems, they have a life of their own, regardless of the 
labels we attach to them (for origin).  That the Lord in the OT 
refers to other gods is of interest and is rarely commented on.  I 
see this as an acknowledgement by Him that yes, indeed, there are 
entities that you can contact, lower "g" gods, who function at very 
subtle levels of "life" and no, I do not want you (Hebrew people) to 
contact them.  They are not for you, so stay away.  Mentally 
entertaining the energy of any other deity other than the system as 
espoused and explained by Moses was and is still forbidden.  If God 
wanted the Hebrews to just merely meditate he would have taught a 
less restrictive regime of practices.  Judaism is very highly 
restrictive because the path that was laid down for these souls was 
only for them and for no other types.  It could only be properly 
lived if lived only in that restrictive, closed way.  It is no 
coincidence that so many Jews have flocked to TM (and many other 
Eastern teachings) over the decades.  But, that is for another 
discussion. 

I do not believe we have to believe in the existence of other gods, 
pagan or however else you term them.  The God that revealed Himself 
to these people said He was exclusive and the laws, codes and 
directives were for association with only Him in the way He revealed 
Himself and to no other entity/energy/representation. These people 
were 100% surrounded by pagan relegions and were highly influenced by 
them.  They loved spirituality to a level we today do not 
appreciate.  Their guidebook was what it was: exclusive and 
prohibitive.  

Regards,

Fred

> Not to comment on the teachings of your religion,
> but the TM mantras are *not* the "names" of "pagan
> gods." They are sounds that have become associated
> with these gods (who have their own perfectly good
> names). Plus which, the gods are all said to be
> expressions of Brahman, the Ultimate One.
> 
> The Hebrew Scriptures may not be ambiguous on this
> point, but whether and how the prohibition applies
> to mentally entertaining a bija mantra may not be
> quite so clear.
> 
> Also, of course, you have to believe in the real
> existence of pagan gods in order to be concerned
> about them swaying or influencing you.
>

[FairfieldLife] A short list of my grievances with the movement

[boyboy_8]

Started TM in 1976 (gads, was it that long ago?).  Eventually made my 
way to Siddhis.  In another post I will talk about the good 
experiences I had with TM/Siddhis.  I was not a teacher but was 
married to a Governor who was also my initiator.  

When I started TM those years ago I was not overly concerned about 
the religious implications of TM and this accurately reflected my own 
disinterest in my own religion.  That was to change as I got older 
and raised a family.  For years I just accepted the standard party 
line as told by MMY which was that TM and all of its branches 
was "Vedic" and not Hindu and that it was cosmically clean and of no 
concern to any other religious group.  In time I came to question 
just what this here Vedic really meant.  As well in time I came to 
read more about the Mantras and in what context that came from.  

Years later I took a more in-depth interest in my own religion and 
began to reflect much closer on what Vedic meant.  After a while I 
realized that it was just a pale ruse to call TM stuff "Vedic" when 
in fact it was just dressed up Hindu practices, familiar to all 
Hindu's around the world.  In coming to know my own religion better I 
chanced upon a sentence in the Torah which just sealed the whole 
affair for me.  

I quote: "the name of other gods ye do not mention; 
it is not heard on thy mouth..." Source: Exodus 23:13.  I have read 
various commentaries about what this means.  While the OT is open to 
interpretation I think that the words can be taken here at face 
value.  Since these Children of Israel were spiritually open vessels 
and sensitive to all kinds of influences, the wording is not 
ambiguous.  You do NOT put the names of other (pagan) gods in your 
mouthlest they sway you, influence you.  It is surmised by some 
that these people were also taught meditational techniques by Moses, 
some standing/walking techniques, others maybe sitting/contemplative, 
prayer-like techniques.  So, back to mantras: they are the names of 
Hindu deities, end of story.  That was the end of TM for me, although 
there were other factors that were involved.  

The movements famous or perhaps infamous inability to address the 
psychological changes a person undergoes when meditating is one of 
the biggest failures.  TM has the [possible] ability to alter much 
and 
the fallback of "you're just unstressing, go and lie down and feel 
the body" is laughable and probably irresponsible.  I can see that 
some people would have been harmed by this flippant and ridiculous 
attitude while they were undergoing changes.

I will end for now on one more note.  When my "faith" in the Movement 
was undergoing the evaluation that led me to quit that path I could 
not digest the possible dissonance of seeing MMY lie to us and also 
keep the assumption that he was an enlightened man.  I had a 
simplistic idea that enlightenment could not allow a person to issue 
a lie.  I was wrong and/or he was never enlightened, or enlightenment 
really is something I do not clearly understand. In any case I could 
not hold the two ideas in my mind at the same time. Clearly he had 
hoodwinked us ignoramuses in the West by the constant "Vedic" answer 
and many of us just didn't ask enough questions or do our homework 
out of fear of confronting the hidden and having ourselves outted 
from the group.  I mean, if you want or need to belong to a group, 
you swallow and suppress anything that will be a problem.  Up to the 
point you cannot do this any more.  

For a long time I held rageful feelings towards MMY because I felt he 
had lied to me and I had been misled about many things.  I had 
listened to him discuss how easy it seemed to get to some 
enlightenment.how we only needed 6 or 7000 fliers and all would 
change for the better and a long list of constantly changing promises 
and explanations for what is going to be a better day.  All of which 
did not come about and all of which enriched the movement to 
incredible heights.  I became bitter and felt very badly about these 
feelings.  In another post I will share positive feelings/experiences 
and where I currently hold MMY in my heart.  

I cannot recommend TM to anyone in my faith as I feel that it would 
be a direct contravention of the Torah.  Outside of my faith I have 
neutral feelings but I would warn them of cheaper and safer 
alternative measures/techniques.  With the recent photos of the 
leadership now splashed all over the world, how anyone in their right 
mind can take these people seriously and not see them as faux-Hindu 
wannabe's is beyond me.  They look so silly I just laughed out loud.  
I wish them well and best of luck. 

Regards,

Fred

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[boyboy_8]

This post raises a critical point and I'm quite sure it's been hashed 
over many times before, so bear with me.  

I am reminded of something that my favourite remote viewer guy, Ingo 
Swann has said.  He lamented that of the many impressions and images 
that a viewer will see in their career the one thing they all come 
away with after the event is the sad knowledge that until the day 
they have CONFIRMATION from some source, they have ZERO way 
of "KNOWING" what exactly they "SAW".  He was clear about this.  The 
person cannot ascertain on their own whether their so 
called 'perception' was a product of their imagination, ego, mind, 
who knows what else?  A clear vision of something, in the end, means 
only something on one level to the perceiver.  What it is in the 
ultimate realms of "truth" is quite something else.  

This takes me to the other point.  Prophets in any religion will 
always say that they have received information from a higher source 
and that you had just better trust them on this.  There is, after 
all, no other way other than "FAITH" to figure out if the words of 
the prophet are true, except for one thing.  In the Old Testatment 
many prophets appear.  One of the strictest criteria for whether we 
are supposed to 'believe' them is that for at least some of their 
prophecies, some of them have to come 'true' in their lifetime.  Some 
words of some of them were for far off events, such as the words of 
Daniel and others.  In other words, if they said that the Lord had 
said such and such as a prophecy, then the test was in the results.  
That was one criteria.  

So, if someone says that they had the experience of contact with Guru 
Dev or any other entity/intelligence, be it human or non-human, by 
what measure should we apply to ascertain whether the claim has any 
value?  If we too do not have the same experience and can verify it 
on some level, then the claim is just taken at face value and you 
either believe it or not.  If someone, say, for example my remote 
viewers, say that they had "contact" with an alien being, then unless 
we can verify it, we should just take it with a grain of salt.  Maybe 
a lot of salt.  The same criteria applies to anyone who has an 
expererience that is out of the ordinary day to day.  How do we test 
the claims?  Belief systems, religious systems are almost all set up 
this way.  People line up to believe and if the right guy comes along 
with horns of light, well you know, people are impressed.  

The difference between the charlatans and the real mccoy is not 
always easy to measure.  When the prophet Elijah challenged the 
priests of Baal to a duel, he won the day because of a supernatural 
event that convinced everyone on the spot that he had God's phone 
number in his back pocket and the priests of Baal were phoney.  

I'll leave off for now.

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY as Britney?

[boyboy_8]

Good point.  At work when I read these zillion posts I don't have the 
time to really read that much.  However, my initial reaction is that 
I was turned off by so much negatavity.  Although you say that many 
posers who criticize him do not imply that they would have done 
better I disagree.  They might not consciously imply it, I would 
rather say that they leave that distinct impression with me.  The 
bitter carping I've read sounds more often than not to be childish 
rants by people who feel personally slighted by MMY.  Which brings me 
to a big point:  TM was not something that was forced on me or on any 
other person I have ever met.  That we all approached it with our own 
individual expectations, some of which were met and others that were 
not met is the way life is.  To go on and on about how evil MMY and 
his organization has done this and that, well I'm sorry.  No one 
forced me to get initiated, or spend what was then $3000 on the 
siddhis.  I did it for my own reasons and I do not regret making 
those choices.  I have many regrets about a whole bunch of other 
issues that came about over the years of my involvement.  But I do 
not feel it "right" to blame MMY.  He might very well have misled 
people.  Ok, that's fine.  History will be the judge, God Almighty 
(whatever that is) will be the judge. I do not feel that it is my 
place to tear him to pieces after his death and vilify him as so many 
here have done.  It seems to be a huge indulgent over reaction with 
the sounds of a spoiled child ranting at their psuedo-parent.  These 
are my impressions.

Those people who have spoken in more moderate tones and show a 
balanced perspective will have my respect.  Those who are just hell 
bent on making MMY sound like a criminal, madman, scheister, conman, 
you name it, are speaking with a mouth full of sour grapes.  Let them 
start a movement of spiritual regeneration and spread whatever 
message they want and not stumble.  Let them do better.  Let them 
show better.  

If we want to discuss what issues we had or have with MMY and his 
legacy, let it be done without the frothing at the mouth.  I'm all 
for venting and saying this was my experience, but I have less 
patience with those who have nothing much other than anger, 
resentment and rage to say. Or you know, maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe this 
rage has to find an outlet and we have to accomodate what it is 
trying to say.  I don't know, maybe I have to make room for those 
feelings as well

Regards,

Fred


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8  wrote:
> >
> > A newbie here, former TM'r/siddha, yada yada.
> 
> You might find more insightful responses to your posts here if you
> skip the group scolding (Which gets kinda old) and respond to 
specific
> writers.  If you stick around you might find that the posters here 
are
> also like you, as you pointed out about MMY.  Many posers who
> criticize him are not implying that they would have "done better." 
> Not everyone shared his goals or assumptions.
> 
> Don't hold back on personal stories.  I'm already caught up with the
> latest Britney details and inquiring minds want to know!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > I have just glanced through the many posts in the last few days, 
as 
> > there are just too many to read.  Few thoughts:
> > 
> >  - unexepected outpouring of rage, disgust, baseless hatred, 
> > disrespect, sarcasm.
> > 
> > - expected outpouring of grief and loss
> > 
> > - seems to me that for way too many people his passing (did 
anyone 
> > think he would live forever?) has provided a seductive outlet for 
> > externalization of beliefs, ideas, feelings, disappointments, 
etc.  
> > 
> > - way too few people see him as a person and are falling all over 
> > themselves to de-personalize him.  Pity.  He was just like you 
and me.
> > 
> > - Why do people buy the magazines and newspapers that hire 
papparatzi 
> > to hound Britney?  Same reason people can't say enough negativity 
> > about MMY.  The resounding implication is that the speaker would 
have 
> > done better in MMY's place.  Mountains of such hubris will never 
fill 
> > up the emptyness.
> > 
> > - I met him once years ago but frankly telling my stories about 
him 
> > right now just feels like a bit like trying to discuss a side bar 
> > item at the Paris 1919 Peace talks.not the right 
timemaybe 
> > another day.
> > 
> > regards,
> > 
> > Fred
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY lecture on death in CC - Humboldt

[boyboy_8]

I can recall watching that lecture as if it was yesterday.  Saw it many 
times.   Gives me the shivers now to re-read those words.

Fred


[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: An Ex-TMer Remembers the Maharishi

[boyboy_8]

Beautiful post, simply wonderful.  You have nailed so much of the TM 
experience.  

I am somehow reminded just now of some words from L Cohen's early 
poem "Butcher"

"Well, I found a silver needle, 
I put it into my arm. 
It did some good, 
did some harm. 
But the nights were cold 
and it almost kept me warm, 
how come the night is long?"

Subsitute needle for TM and you have what went through my mind. 

Regards,

Fred

[snip]

[FairfieldLife] MMY as Britney?

[boyboy_8]

A newbie here, former TM'r/siddha, yada yada.

I have just glanced through the many posts in the last few days, as 
there are just too many to read.  Few thoughts:

 - unexepected outpouring of rage, disgust, baseless hatred, 
disrespect, sarcasm.

- expected outpouring of grief and loss

- seems to me that for way too many people his passing (did anyone 
think he would live forever?) has provided a seductive outlet for 
externalization of beliefs, ideas, feelings, disappointments, etc.  

- way too few people see him as a person and are falling all over 
themselves to de-personalize him.  Pity.  He was just like you and me.

- Why do people buy the magazines and newspapers that hire papparatzi 
to hound Britney?  Same reason people can't say enough negativity 
about MMY.  The resounding implication is that the speaker would have 
done better in MMY's place.  Mountains of such hubris will never fill 
up the emptyness.

- I met him once years ago but frankly telling my stories about him 
right now just feels like a bit like trying to discuss a side bar 
item at the Paris 1919 Peace talks.not the right timemaybe 
another day.

regards,

Fred