[FairfieldLife] Re: My response to David Orme-Johnson.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > Well, not everyone accepts the "universal being" schtick that is basically a > Hindu > interpretation of the TC state. As I have pointed out before, a strong atheist > might well attain "God Consciousness" or "Unity Consciousness' ala MMY's > definitions and still remain a strong atheist. > > > Just because YOU can't conceive of that happening doesn't mean its impossible, > or even unlikely. If these states really ARE natural states of consciousness, > then the number of interpretations of the states will be unlimited. > > > L Lawson, your point of view is interesting. But why do you believe that these states may really be natural states of consciousness? Do you believe that TM can be taught without the puja? What is the purpose of the puja? God consciousness by MMY: "In Maharishi's (1972) description of higher states of consciousness, the sixth state of consciousness, God consciousness, is defined by the unbounded, self-referral awareness of cosmic consciousness coexisting with the development of refined sensory perception during the three relative states of waking, dreaming, and sleeping. Perception and feeling reach their most sublime level, the finer and more glorious levels of creation are appreciated, and every impulse of thought and action is enriching to life (pp. 23-6?23-7). The sixth state is referred to as God consciousness, because the individual is capable of perceiving and appreciating the full range and mechanics of creation and experiences waves of love and devotion for the creation and its creator. Thus, in this state one not only experiences inner peace, but profoundly loving and peaceful relationships are cultivated with all others." http://www.mum.edu/m_effect/alexander/index.html How would an atheist interpret the part about experiencing love and devotion for the creator? I note the phrase "profoundly loving and peaceful relationships are cultivated with all others." Do you believe that MMY was in this state? How do you reconcile it with his behavior which often showed impatience with others. You could also read this description as rather ordinary. I appreciate creation, and I have felt waves of love and devotion for creation. I think many have. Though it is a rare person who has profoundly loving and peaceful relationships cultivated with ALL others. I slack off there. I'm not touching unity consciousness yet.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My response to David Orme-Johnson.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > "Repent," for example, is the term used in English > translations of the Gospels for the Greek word > "metanoia." But going back to the Greek, it turns > out that "metanoia" can also be understood to mean > "transcend" (beyond-mind). > > So John the Baptist may have been crying in the > wilderness, "Transcend! For the kingdom of heaven > is at hand." > > Jesus is recorded as having said, in the Sermon > on the Mount, "Be perfect, as your Father in > heaven is perfect." We think of this as an > impossible demand. Jesus must have meant that we > should *strive* to be perfect, knowing that we > could never achieve perfection. > > But again, the Greek word translated "perfect" can > also mean "whole," "complete." > > In the Bhagavad-Gita, Krishna tells Arjuna, "Be > without the three gunas, freed from duality, ever > firm in purity, independent of possessions, > possessed of the Self" (MMY's translation). > > MMY has interpreted "Be without the three gunas" > to mean, "Transcend!" > > Could that also be the meaning of "Be complete, as > your Father in heaven is complete"? Freed from > duality, possessed of the Self? Was Jesus telling > us to transcend? > My understanding is that metanoia meant change your mind or your outlook. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metanoia Which is somewhat similar to transcend if used in the sense of surpassing, leaving behind, or rising above. And of course intent of the biblical speakers was not for people to sit and meditate. It was more like change your outlook with a snap of your fingers.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Visions during TM-sessions: blue sun?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: > > > During the first years of my "doing" TM I often "saw" a > "blue sun" somewhat like this: > > http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/166805main_image_feature_736_ys_full.jpg > > As I recall it, the color was more even, and the "sun" had > small flames on the edge. I also seem to recall it was > very slowly "approaching" me and the disappering to start > the same all over again. > > Can't recall when I stopped "seeing" it. If it occasionally > appears nowadaze, it's rather "ragged"... > A number of physiological possibilities as well. As one example random activity in the visual cortex in the brain sometimes is interpreted as a pattern. Similarly, neuron activity in the retina can create lights (rub you eyes, you li see lights). Many people have this experience, whether meditating or just closing their eyes before they sleep.
[FairfieldLife] Re: "Bat-Shit Insane" -- A Generalized Rant About Language
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote:
>
> > > > Increasingly rabies is transmitted by bats and most
> > > > people who get rabies in the US got it from a bat bite
> > > > that most didn't even notice.
> > >
> > > Right. It's a really terrible problem in the U.S.
> > > From 1980 to 2000, there were *31 human cases* of
> > > rabies, more than 1.5 per year. Of those, 22 were
> > > caused by bats.
> >
> > OK, it looks like there is a need for a serious response.
> > Between 20,000 and 40,000 people a year in the US get the
> > rabies vaccination course of treatment, most due to bat
> > contact.
>
> And therefore don't get rabies, right?
>
> > Fortunately, deaths by rabies remain low. I did not
> > say that there was a "terrible problem" so the
> > sarcastic touch isn't necessary.
>
> Most of 20,000 to 40,000 cases of postexposure
> treatment sounds like a pretty nasty problem to me.
> The point is, of course, that cases in which
> exposure goes unnoticed and the person develops
> rabies from a bat are very rare in this country.
>
> > I also do not advocate a hysterical approach to the issue.
> > However, the problem is that if you get rabies you are
> > almost certain to die if you don't get treated promptly.
> > Just be aware of the possibility of a bat bit or scratch
> > that you might not know about if you were sleeping in a
> >room with a bat and you cannot capture the bat for testing.
> >
> > > If we lose both bees *and* bats, we'll be in a
> > > pretty pickle.
> >
> > Bats and bees are absolutely important to the ecosystem.
> > Nevertheless you rarely know which bats carry rabies,
> > hence the CDC message.
>
> And a fine message it is. We don't want even one person
> per year to die from an untreated case of rabies from a
> bat.
>
> But my point was, and remains, that we need to learn to
> love bats and do what we can to protect them. In this
> instance, for a change, Vaj proves an excellent example.
>
If your point is what you say it is (we need bats) there would be no need for
the sarcasm directed to me ("Right. It's really a terrible problem. . .") and
to Vaj ("for a change. . ."). Your point gets lost when it is coated with
poison. You get more bees with honey.
And my point was to provide some rabies treatment information after you noted
so few people die of rabies.
[FairfieldLife] Re: "Bat-Shit Insane" -- A Generalized Rant About Language
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 2:52 PM, ruthsimplicity > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > I am not so fond of bats. > > > > Bats are a big tourist thing where I live. Mexican bats and birds > come here for the Winter. There are some places where millions of > birds have collected in a block square area. The bats collect under > the Ann Richards, formerly South Congress Bridge, and then take off in > a big twilight spectacle. Perhaps one wouldn't associate it with > this region, but we have loads of caves and cliffs in the area so lots > of cave exploring, getting stuck and lost in caves and lots of rock > face climbing and repelling. > Years ago I went on some kind of bat hike in Texas where you see the bats all fly out of a cave at sunset. Gave me the willies! But we all have things that creep us out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: "Bat-Shit Insane" -- A Generalized Rant About Language
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > Thank you for your cooperation. Comparing insane > > > people to bats is really unfair to bats. > > > > Increasingly rabies is transmitted by bats and most > > people who get rabies in the US got it from a bat bite > > that most didn't even notice. > > Right. It's a really terrible problem in the U.S. > From 1980 to 2000, there were *31 human cases* of > rabies, more than 1.5 per year. Of those, 22 were > caused by bats. > OK, it looks like there is a need for a serious response. Between 20,000 and 40,000 people a year in the US get the rabies vaccination course of treatment, most due to bat contact. Fortunately, deaths by rabies remain low. I did not say that there was a "terrible problem" so the sarcastic touch isn't necessary. I also do not advocate a hysterical approach to the issue. However, the problem is that if you get rabies you are almost certain to die if you don't get treated promptly. Just be aware of the possibility of a bat bit or scratch that you might not know about if you were sleeping in a room with a bat and you cannot capture the bat for testing. . > > If we lose both bees *and* bats, we'll be in a > pretty pickle. Bats and bees are absolutely important to the ecosystem. Nevertheless you rarely know which bats carry rabies, hence the CDC message. > End of public service announcement.
[FairfieldLife] Re: "Bat-Shit Insane" -- A Generalized Rant About Language
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > I withdraw my previous rant. Oh, and I didn't mention the shit problem, where the bat guano can hold the spores of histoplasma capsulatum and give you a potentially life threatenting lung disease, histoplasmosis. Another reason to stay away from batty areas!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Christian Science Monitor: The Coming Evangelical Collapse
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mainstream20016" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > This is IMO a thoughtful article by a thoughtful > > person, but one who has completely missed the > > real reason why evangelical Christianity is dying. > > > > It's in the name. They're evangelical. They feel > > the need to *evangelize*, to "bring people to the > > faith." Remember the "Jesus Freak" years? I have many recollections of students at my university constantly asking if you were saved. Blech. Save me from the savers. Or saviors. For the most part those of us that were not saved were pretty polite about dismissing the attempts. My hunch is that people are not so polite anymore. I think calling the demise of the evangelical in 10 years is optimistic. Especially if our economy stays in the toilet.
[FairfieldLife] Re: "Bat-Shit Insane" -- A Generalized Rant About Language
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > Thank you for your cooperation. Comparing insane > people to bats is really unfair to bats. > Increasingly rabies is transmitted by bats and most people who get rabies in the US got it from a bat bite that most didn't even notice. If you wake up and there is a bat flitting around your room you should get treated asap. The CDC recommends treatment even if you can't spot any indication of a bite. I am not so fond of bats.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM Needs Your Help
Mind Reading, a Poem Ruth is afraid how insecure she'd much rather makes her feel better her own sour and significantly ignorant view She's just the kind of person :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM Needs Your Help
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > It's like the self-pity version of junk food. > The more they read, the more they want to read, > because it makes them feel so persecuted, and > thus so important. > > It's like the cultist's version of Descartes: > "I am persecuted, therefore I am." > Who knows anyone's motivation. I just know that I have seen plenty of nastiness directed at him over the web in the months I have been out there poking around on TM but he has not been nasty back. I also note the absence of factual arguments, instead it is all ad hominem.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM Needs Your Help
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" wrote: > >> -- > Keith DeBoer > 719-439-9128 Mobile and Voice Mail > 641-469-6028 Office (no voice mail) > Who is this guy? I really tire of the demonizing and belittling of Knapp.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Beyond Stem Cells: Obama Overturns Bush War On Science
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" wrote: > > > > "Promoting science isn't just about providing resources, it is also about > protecting free and open inquiry," Obama said. "It is about letting > scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or > coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient > especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data > is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make > scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology." > > He said his memorandum is meant to restore "scientific integrity to > government decision-making." He called it the beginning of a process of > ensuring his administration bases its decision on sound science; appoints > scientific advisers based on their credentials, not their politics; and is > honest about the science behind its decisions. Science really suffered under Bush, including medical research. One argument I get when I work on promoting a national health care solution is that the US will no longer be the lead in new health discoveries if we go to a national system. But the two are unrelated. Many other countries, from France to Russia, are pushing hard with research. Our government substantially reduced funding of university research scientists, forcing them to take money from special interests like drug companies. Another economic stimulus: finance independent research.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" wrote: > > Would ya'll be willing to grant Kirk a one-time pardon for overposting, > rather than our having to boot him for a week? He's been going through some > tough stuff and could probably use our continued camaraderie and feedback. > He was aware of the posting limit but accidentally went over. Most certainly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Zoloft
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan wrote: > > You may wish to explore Wellbutrin or its cheaper generic Bupropion. It helps > maintain required levels of three neurotransmitters dopamine and > norepinephrine as well as, though less so, of seretonin. Doesn't have the > sexual side effects of SSRIs. Depends on what is NTs are low in your system. > > Regarding doctors, in clinics and HMOs, they are very busy and may not be > able to evaluate you individually much. I suggest that you do your own > homework, deeply, and see what effects seem to target your issues. Go to > doctors and ask them, with long list of questions on the features of each > drug, and specific to your issues. If in your research you find one or two > drugs that stand out, politely, but be very firm, to ask the doctor for what > you feel is the right direction. Try one for 1-2 months, ask for another if > its not working out. > > Be careful with SSRIs. For many, they significantly affect the ability to > stand up and to make it home. You and your wife may not be pleased. Good post. Yes, Wellbutrin can be worth looking at. And yes, SSRIs can have sexual side effects and weight gain for some. You also have to be weaned off of SSRIs. This is why he needs to talk to a doctor about the options and doing your homework ahead of time is helpful. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: THE NEWBIE QUESTION LIST
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > If you're new here, tell us about yourself, and then post this with a > new title that includes your name: THE NEWBIE QUESTION LIST: name here> Not new, but the thread is interesting so I will respond. > > 1. In which religion were you raised? Lackadaisical christian. > > 2. In which other religious movements have you been a true believer? > List them in chronological order. None, including the one in which I was raised. > > 3. Do you believe in reincarnation? No. > > 4. Do you believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, God Who is running the > universe down to the least aspect? No. > > 5. How do you define soul? Maybe it is your identity, that sense of self. Maybe it is more. > > 6. How do you define enlightenment? Maybe it is figuring it all out. Maybe it is making peace with the fact that you can't figure it all out. > > 7. Nature or nurture? Both. > > 8. List the gurus in who's physical presence you've been. Dali Lama > > 9. What country do you live in now? USA > > 10. How many children have you parented? One > > 11. How many times married? Three > > 12. Years spent in the TMO? None, on the sidelines off and on over the years > > 13. Years spent living in Fairfield, Iowa? None > > 14. Vegetarian? What rules? Eggs, fish, dairy, chicken allowed as > exceptions? Eat meat as if it were a garnish. Try to eat fresh, local and not processed to minimize the poisons I ingest. > > 15. Do you watch entertainment that portrays raw and graphic violence? Yes. Kill Bill is my favorite. > > 16. Can drugs be spiritually useful to the ordinary person on the > street such that regular use could be supported? Spiritually useful? Maybe hallucinogenics in certain rare circumstances. > > 17. In which places of the world have you lived a year or more? USA > > 18. On a 1 - 10 scale, rate how much of your spiritual journey you've > accomplished so far. 10 would be "all the way." 5 > > 19. How much time do you spend per day in formal spiritual practices > that are not common-everyday human activities? I try to take stock everyday. How I do it and the amount of time varies. > > 20. List the recreational activities, hobbies, passions that get more > than 10 hours per week of your time. Running. Grandchildren. Governmental policy . > > 21. What do you expect to get out of posting here at FairfieldLife? I got what I came for: seeing where TM and the TMO was at and where I was at with TM. I keep coming back because of the varied ways people think and express themselves here is interesting. I leave every once in a while when I get disgusted with myself. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Coming to Fairfield, seek to learn.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > I've recently come to the thought that I want to come study at MUM and > an the process of researching the Fairfield area, luckily came to this > thriving chat list. > > It would seem that many, if not most, of the people on this list are > in Fairfield now. This got me to wondering, if you might know of and > would share some online resources for the town which might include > calendars, classifieds, pictures, etc? > > I am curious to learn more about the place before actually being there > physically. Things like rent prices are also something I'd like to > learn more about. > > I thank you in advance for considering this request. > > Cheers, > Mike > Fairfield is a lovely little town. There are several people here who live in Fairfield, most no longer associated with the TM movement. I know several people who live in Fairfield who are part of the movement. Their living circumstances vary. There is a shortage of rental housing. You can rent a room with a shared bath through MUM inexpensively. You can rent a trailer at Utopia Park for somewhere around $450-$500. The trailers are not in the best shape and are fairly popular so you might not get one. The town has a shortage of apartments. Rooms are sometimes rented to meditators and sometimes for surprisingly large amounts of money given what you get. Houses can sometimes be rented for a fairly reasonable price and can be purchased fairly cheaply (depending on you POV and your expectations). Why do you want to go to MUM? As a school it is poorly rated. What do you want to learn?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Zoloft
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69" wrote: > > http://www.tibetanherbs.com/happinesssupport.html > -very good,safe and vegetarian formulas > > also you can use Blissful Joy from MAPI 2x2 if you are depressed, and the > aroma too is good if you can afford as well > Kirk has spent too much money on the TMO. Blissful Joy is going to be counter productive.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Zoloft
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:43 PM, off_world_beings > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" wrote: > >> > >> Anyone here take it - know how it works with meditation. Is it good? Worth > >> pursuing if one is actually sort of depressed? Supposedly at least 40% of > >> New Orleaneans have PTSD. Many others just naturally depressed, myself due > >> to crappy job market. Life prospects. Sidha midlife crisis includes > >> feeling > >> stupid for sitting dreaming of hovering for countless hours and feeling > >> bitter at such a failure. (That was a joke Haha) You know I used to hate > >> my > >> employers. > > Your best bet would be to see a psychopharmacologist, a psychiatrist > who specializes in the prescribing of psychotropic drugs. There are > so many psychotropic drugs on the market, each with its own treatment > and side effect profile that you would want to have something > prescribed by someone who's got years of experience in watching the > results of these drugs dozens of times a day. That's not something > your normal GP or even psychiatrist would get in their day to day > practice. How to find a psychopharacologist? Call up psychiatrists > and ask them if they are a psychopharmacologist. Even a > psychopharmacologist would be trying a variety of different drugs on > you until reaching a favorable result versus side effect solution. > > If you go to see such a specialist, you might mention the latest > results on propanadol, a high blood pressure drug which works by > blocking certain nerve transmissions. In low doses it's proven to be > very powerful in dealing with PTSD. The VA, which despite all the > negative press, has the best outcomes per dollar spent, is starting to > give the drug to most of its PTSD patients. > > Now there are people on this list who are going try to talk you into > the Scientologist cure of St. Johns Wort and magnesium. These people > are evil and their words are direct from the devil. > Sounds more like he was saying that he is depressed, rather than anxious or suffering from PTSD. Beta blockers reduce the startle response so the theory is that the association between the memory of a bad experience and your physical response to the memory can be broken. So, may be good for PTSD. Beta-blockers like Propanadol have been around quite a while to deal with anxiety and panic, but now SSRIs are more often used. Kirk, SSRIs like Paxil and Zoloft can be very effective in helping with depression. They do take a while to work and some people might feel nauseated the first few days. Either way, talk to your doctor. Shaddai, nice offer to pay for treatment. Drugs are best used in conjunction with cognitive therapy to get out of unproductive thought patterns. Shaddai, I also agree with you on the VA. It has come to be a model for patient care and followup.
[FairfieldLife] Re: vedic democracy - a contradiction?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: > > On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:50 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > Well, I don't want to make my BD pubic > > Freudian slip, Ruth? Considering some of the posts > lately, it makes a lot of sense. > > Sal > God, I make that typo all the time! Where is my secretary?
[FairfieldLife] Re: vedic democracy - a contradiction?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hope. Change. Believe. Sacrifice. Coming Together." wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:51 PM, ruthsimplicity > wrote: > > > > > Now does anyone here really believe that Jyotish can tell you what > > your place is in the world? From just knowing your birth time? Stand > > up and be counted. > > > > Yes. I do. My Jyotish chart pretty much describes the careers I've > chosen and the fact that money, love and status come easily to me. > > Proof that jyotish works. That isn't proof in a scientific sense.
[FairfieldLife] Re: vedic democracy - a contradiction?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Feb 27, 2009, at 5:51 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > You can make a case for anything. The question is whether it makes > > sense. I seriously doubt that the vedas and democracy are compatible. > >Let's not go backwards. I do not understand the romantic notion > > some people seem to have regarding the vedas and vedic times. > > Especially women. > > > > Now does anyone here really believe that Jyotish can tell you what > > your place is in the world? From just knowing your birth time? Stand > > up and be counted. > > > Send me you date of birth, place and time and I'll calculate your > caste. Then see what you think. If you post it to the list, others > could share as well, I'm sure. > Well, I don't want to make my BD pubic in case friends are lurking here. I trust you, I'll send it to you but please don't post it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: vedic democracy - a contradiction?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" wrote: > > One aspect of MMY's teachings that seems hopelessly "unenlightened" > to me was his take on democracy, which he saw as socially devisive > and irresponsible. For instance he talked disparangely about the > Labour Party in the UK, believing that mere "labourers", totally > uneducated, were running the country. > > Yet some of his key political ideas seem oddly "democratic", eg: > > (1) Government = reflection of collective consciousness of the people > (2) Ideal Society = self-governing individuals, attuned to Natural Law > > I saw a video today where MMY again attacked democracy and praised > the Vedic division of society into four groups on the basis of birth - > albeit in terms of Jyotish rather than socio-economic class. The > whole thing just grates with me - also the gender divisions > increasingly apparent in the Movement. > > Just wondering what FFL participants make of all this (sorry if it's > been discussed before..)! Is it possible to argue the case for a > VEDIC Democracy? > You can make a case for anything. The question is whether it makes sense. I seriously doubt that the vedas and democracy are compatible. Let's not go backwards. I do not understand the romantic notion some people seem to have regarding the vedas and vedic times. Especially women. Now does anyone here really believe that Jyotish can tell you what your place is in the world? From just knowing your birth time? Stand up and be counted.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Earth eclipses the sun
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > I'm not up on optics, but I believe that if the Moon covers the Sun > from an earthly POV, then the Earth MUST cover the Sun from a lunar > POV. So you can't have one, but must have two equal POVs, so then > that would mean it's not a suspicious coincidence. Not sure though. > Anyone? > > The Moon is moving about an inch per year away from us, so over time, > it's getting smaller and that means that someday it will be but a dot > crossing the Sun's disk instead of covering it completely. > > To me, it's not so much a red flag that God is afoot with tricks, but > that our having the Moon that is so close and so big compared to it's > parent planet was very rare and very lucky. It helped life form in > many ways. > > Edg > Yes, it is all about alignment of the earth, moon and sun and where you are on the earth, or on the moon for that matter. Simple explanation here: http://star-www.st-and.ac.uk/~awc/eclipse.html I had vague notions of being an astronaut when I was young. Along with a million other kids. Loved astronomy. Sometimes I can weird myself out by thinking: How did all this come together so perfectly that now I am sitting in a condo on Mustang Island enjoying the internet? Then again, I can think of all the things that didn't come out so perfectly. But the fact that nature appears to operate within a set of rules is intensely fascinating and mysterious.
[FairfieldLife] Re: URL for the IA Dome Numbers Please
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hope. Change. Believe. Sacrifice. Coming Together." wrote: > > Could someone please repost the URL for the Dome numbers? > http://invincibleamerica.org/tallies.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's rather cryptic answer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > PLUS probably another dozen things that I am unaware of. > In other words, it's still a mystery... > Something of a mystery, but there are many factors you can often point to that can work together to create the buzz. You mentioned some possibilities and certainly your own experiences and character bring a lot to the mix. And being young makes you especially vulnerable. It is like when I met my first husband. It was a case of love at first sight. I was very drawn to him and the feeling was mutual. Why? Hormones. Right place at the right time. Looks that fit our expectations of what we wanted in a mate. Ability to have the kind of intense conversation appropriate when you are 20 and in college. Anyway we got married and it didn't last long. I think that was the only time that I was absolutely smitten with with someone's charismatic energy. I have never been smitten with charismatic energy of a teacher. Maybe having the experience of intense love when young and having it go away made me look at charisma, whether sexual or otherwise, with a more jaded eye. And it made me realize my own impulsive nature.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's rather cryptic answer
I tend to think charisma and shakti are as much in the observer and what the observer is looking for as in the person who apparently is projecting the "force." Some people were extremely taken with MMY and his shakti. Others were not. I was always rather put off by his giggling, it sounded like a diversion to me. Why wasn't I vulnerable? I was interested in enlightenment. I was interested in the new research on mediation. But I didn't click with him and so I did not have and force of his personality to reinforce the message. In fact, it was counter-reinforcing. Some people do seem to be naturally charismatic but not everyone is vulnerable to the charisma. Quite a long time ago I met Bill Clinton. He is naturally charismatic as well. His eyes twinkle, he looks at you in the eye, he speaks a message that you may be receptive to, he projects self confidence with empathy. But is he charismatic to conservative republicans? Not hardly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's rather cryptic answer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > IIRC, MMY's take was slightly different: you do the best you can in the most > ethical/moral way, and if someone suffers for your actions in a way that you > can't have possibly predicted, then its their karma working itself out and you're not to > blame. But that doesn't apply in the case of the Nazis and the Holocaust. > > L > Much better way to look at reincarnation. Personally, I do not find reincarnation theory compelling and it is subject to all sorts of abuses to control people or rationalize. Much like I do not find the concept of heaven and hell very compelling and also subject to abuse to control people or to rationalize.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Several Maharishi Graduates Busted For Growing Pot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > the > > > Six figures ain't rich by today's standardsunless you mean SEVEN > figures and he's worth millions. Just about anyone on the east or > west coasts has a house worth $500,000, so a million "goes fast." > > Edg > My usual sloppy off the cuff typing. Yes, I meant seven figures as more than a million. But not multimillions.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Several Maharishi Graduates Busted For Growing Pot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: the > > Anyone here think they could live in FF for even a year and be a rich > TB? How rich? I know one person who lives in FF in a trailer in Utopia Park and has at least a six figure net worth. He keeps his mouth shut.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's rather cryptic answer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "uns_tressor" > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > When the host of a Finnish talk show asked Maharishi in 1973, > > > > what would Hitler have been like had he been meditating, > > > > Maharishi answered: > > > > > > > The story that went around was that he said: > > > "... he would have made a wonderful Centre Chairman". > > > Uns. > > > > > > > I have a feeling that Maharishi knew something about > > Hitler was a second degree Initiate. Maharishi was very well aware of > this fact, thus His conforming that Hitler could have done much good > to the world if he had not chosen to do do the opposite. > > > > Hitler's "real nature" that us "ordinary people" can't know... :0 > > > Hitler was evil. And I don't believe "nature wanted" six million jews to die. There was no assembly on the fields of dharma.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Several Maharishi Graduates Busted For Growing Pot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine > wrote: > > > > On Feb 24, 2009, at 9:42 AM, boo_lives wrote: > > > > > People I know who "see auras" all say that anti-depressants are about > > > the worst drug to take, and no-one is in jail for taking and selling > > > antidepressants, and anti-depressants are much more common among ffld > > > sidhas than pot. I won't even bother to get into alchohol and the > > > suffering that causes in society and in ffld. > > > > Well maybe your friends who "see auras" ought to > > go back to the loony bins they obviously > > escaped from, boo. Who the hell are they to > > pass judgements on medication which has helped > > millions? > > > > Sal > > > To clarify I'm not saying that anti-depressant medication can't help > some people and it's fully up to them to decide what to do. I > mentioned the aura readers just because someone else did to put down > cannabis and I wanted to say these people see lots of things and you > actually shouldn't go by that either way. > > I wanted to point out that our society is bipolar regarding drugs. > Antidepressants help some people, but also have many physical side > effects plus the well known clouding over of the personality and > emotions for many people, plus a study I saw last week saying that > certain antidepressants in fact didn't have any benefit at all, plus > the overprescription of antidepressants to children and to low > depression patients who could be treated other ways, YET despite all > this we still find a way to get antidepressants to people who need > them... but mention cannabis and immediately scenes from reefer > madness come to mind and teh possibility that some people will have > negative effects means hundreds of thousands of americans are in jail. > I'd like to see more equality in how we view pharmaceutical versus > non pharmaceutical drugs. > A better analogy is comparing mood altering drugs to marijuana. Anti-depressants don't alter the mood and are not addicting in that sense. Benzodiazepines like Xanax or Valium are psychoactive drugs that work on the central nervous system, altering mood and behavior. They are usually dispensed in small amounts and are highly addictive. They have their place but certainly should not be legal and freely available. Marijuana I have mixed feelings about. Face it, marijuana makes you stupid. Not many people can use it day in and day out and still function well. I can see some people may get some benefit from it in medical treatment, though there usually is something else available that works as well or better. But the amount of resources that go to combating this drug seems extreme. I tend to favor decriminalizing its use, but I am not happy about it. California is talking about legalizing it and taxing it. I am sure that won't go over well with the feds. And yes, I smoked a few in my day.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Where are you getting your B-12 from as a vegetarian?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings wrote: > > Where are you getting your B-12 from as a vegetarian? > > Anybody know? > > > OffWorld > Dairy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Any one know how to reacdh my lost friend Dr. Robert David
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: > > On Feb 22, 2009, at 10:56 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > >>> Investigators from the Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control > >>> Units > >>> in Ft. Lauderdale and Miami arrested Lawrence and Debbie Boudreaux, > >>> co-owners of Specialty Medical Care Centers of South Florida and an > >>> affiliated pharmacy, Ambucare Infusion, Inc. The investigators also > >>> arrested Gladys Washington, a registered nurse employed as the > >>> center's director of quality assurance, for her part in facilitating > >>> improper Medicaid billings and medication orders. Police in > >>> Fairfield, > >>> Iowa, this morning arrested Dr. Robert David, who served as one of > >>> the > >>> facility's doctors. > >> > >> This seems to be the latest thing. > >> Geez, who's gonna be next? > > Actually it took place back in 2004, but still... > > Sal I never heard of the guy but now I am intrigued with the story. Wonder what happened? >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Any one know how to reacdh my lost friend Dr. Robert David
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WLeed3@ wrote: > > > > > > He is am medical Doctor & used to for a time live in Utopia Park, & > > is a > > > Sidha. He also worked in or at an HIV clinic in Florida as I recall. > > I do not > > > believe he ever attended MIU or MUM. > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any means of contact for him email or address > > or Tel # > > > etc. > > > > > There is one Robert David licensed to practice medicine in Florida. > > He is in Miami. He got his license in 1994. I have no idea if this > > is your guy, I just looked to see if any docs by that name were > > licensed in Florida. I would have searched Iowa too, but the site > > doesn't seem to be working. You can try yourself later at > > http://medicalboard.iowa.gov/FindADoc.html > > > > > Looks like there is a Robert David practicing internal medicine in > Fairfield: > http://www.drscore.com/Iowa_/Internal_Medicine/search/Robert-David_10244600.html > And now, using Google, I find: http://tinyurl.com/42f25 I quote: "Two co-owners of a South Florida treatment center for infectious diseases, along with a physician at the center and a nurse who served as its administrator, have been arrested for their roles in a costly Medicaid fraud scheme, Attorney General Charlie Crist announced today. The scheme involved billing for prescriptions for medications that were never dispensed and the creation of false medical records to conceal the doctor's absence from patient treatment and office supervision. Investigators from the Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control Units in Ft. Lauderdale and Miami arrested Lawrence and Debbie Boudreaux, co-owners of Specialty Medical Care Centers of South Florida and an affiliated pharmacy, Ambucare Infusion, Inc. The investigators also arrested Gladys Washington, a registered nurse employed as the center's director of quality assurance, for her part in facilitating improper Medicaid billings and medication orders. Police in Fairfield, Iowa, this morning arrested Dr. Robert David, who served as one of the facility's doctors. >From 1999 to 2001, the Boudreauxes employed David as a physician at the center. According to the clinic's Medicaid billing records, David was present to administer professional treatment to HIV and Hepatitis-C patients and to oversee staff procedures. In fact, the physician was in Iowa and other locations when patients received whatever treatment was provided. David allegedly ordered a physician's assistant to initial and mark hundreds of patient records with a rubber "Robert David, MD" stamp in his absence. These records contained high-cost medication orders for injections and infusions of Neupogen and WinRho that were never administered to the clinic's patients. The pharmacy would then submit bills to Medicaid for drugs that were never actually dispensed, resulting in a total of $4.7 million in improper billings." The power of Google!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Any one know how to reacdh my lost friend Dr. Robert David
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WLeed3@ wrote: > > > > He is am medical Doctor & used to for a time live in Utopia Park, & > is a > > Sidha. He also worked in or at an HIV clinic in Florida as I recall. > I do not > > believe he ever attended MIU or MUM. > > > > Thanks in advance for any means of contact for him email or address > or Tel # > > etc. > > > There is one Robert David licensed to practice medicine in Florida. > He is in Miami. He got his license in 1994. I have no idea if this > is your guy, I just looked to see if any docs by that name were > licensed in Florida. I would have searched Iowa too, but the site > doesn't seem to be working. You can try yourself later at > http://medicalboard.iowa.gov/FindADoc.html > Looks like there is a Robert David practicing internal medicine in Fairfield: http://www.drscore.com/Iowa_/Internal_Medicine/search/Robert-David_10244600.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Any one know how to reacdh my lost friend Dr. Robert David
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wle...@... wrote: > > He is am medical Doctor & used to for a time live in Utopia Park, & is a > Sidha. He also worked in or at an HIV clinic in Florida as I recall. I do not > believe he ever attended MIU or MUM. > > Thanks in advance for any means of contact for him email or address or Tel # > etc. > There is one Robert David licensed to practice medicine in Florida. He is in Miami. He got his license in 1994. I have no idea if this is your guy, I just looked to see if any docs by that name were licensed in Florida. I would have searched Iowa too, but the site doesn't seem to be working. You can try yourself later at http://medicalboard.iowa.gov/FindADoc.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the honest and forthright
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > Someone could put together such > a book just from all the material posted on FFL. And certainly our combined > experience with him could result in such a book. > Yup! Turq could gather the materials and write it and Judy could edit it! :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Several Maharishi Graduates Busted For Growing Pot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:11 PM, bob_brigante wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Smoking pot makes ya lazy and stupid, that's why society has enacted > > laws agin it (not that this alcohol-based society has a leg up on > > stupidity). These kids threw away the opportunity to really expand > > their consciousness through TM and, proving the point about how > > stupid pot makes ya, used 100x the electricity an ordinary household > > would use just so Sheriff John would get the message. > > > > I take no joy in seeing young people choose the wrong road in life, > > but make no mistake, that's what they did, now they and their > > arrogant parents will pay the price for the wrong path. Years from > > now, if the fog clears from these kids' brains, they'll realize what > > a blessing this bust was, before their ass got shot up in some drug > > deal gone bad, which is a common occurrence in NoCal drug trafficking: > > > > http://www.chicoer.com/ci_11696206?source=most_emailed > > > > Bob > > > > I absolutely agree. The law is the law. This men knew what the law was and > what the penalties were for violating it. No court has declared the laws > these men will face unconstitutional because one interest or another caused > the laws to be enacted or because one race tends to commit crimes against > these laws or not. > > Now as far as the poor suffering parents, well these aren't kids. They are > adults. Adults who it appears had parents who didn't do a good job of > raising their kids. But there's no reason to fault them on that. Children > have their own dharma/karma and they just happen to grow up in the house of > their parents. > > Now, getting back to the Mexican food. I made the observation in my group > when I was in Phoenix that if you want real Mexican food, head for the > places with the bars on the windows. Well, wouldn't you know it, that > became the motto of our lunch group and we were never unhappy in our > choices. > > Houston? Why even both to rate Mexican restaurants? Anyplace around North > Main Street and anyplace to the east of Main Street serves good Mexican > food. Choose places with no English on the signs and where English is not > spoken inside. Definitely keep away from the chains and keep away from any > place that advertises el cheapo Mexican buffets on billboards. There's not > even real cheese served at Panchos. OTOH there are real Mexican as opposed > to Tex-Mex food served at little hole in the wall places with bars on the > windows if they serve buffet style or off a menu (assuming they have a > menu). > How about Austin? I am going to be there next week.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the honest and forthright
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > And to > hear apologists for the the caste system in the movement is a real > disgrace to the progressive values of the best thinkers of our > generation. (Oops I was one of THEM!) > > My TB friends every once in a while mention something positive about caste systems. Things like the value of reducing the stress of having to find your place in the world. Or the value of having fathers pass on knowledge to their sons. Somehow, women seem to be left out. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the honest and forthright
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Feb 19, 2009, at 6:16 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > Doesn't MMY need to be enlightened under TM theory? How else could he > > rediscover what he claimed were lost mediation techniques? > > I think it's understood by most reasonable and objective folks who've > done a little lookin', that "TM is nothing new under the sun", it's > not something he's "restored", in fact it's a ubiquitous form of basic > meditation. You could be right, I don't know enough about the history of meditation to know, but all I am saying is that isn't the TMO's claim. The claim is rediscovery, including of the meaning of the Vedas. I think that would require enlightenment under their theory. > > And > > rediscover and correct Ayurveda? Or, as the TMO says in information I > > was reading recently: for the total significance of its > > theory and practice, and organized it in the form of a complete > > science of consciousness. Maharishi's Vedic Science includes the > > restoration of the ancient Vedic system of health care, which offers a > > science and technology for unfolding perfection in life, using methods > > that are completely free from harmful side effects." > > This is particularly incorrect in regards to Ayurveda, which he > diluted, although he did help popularize it. Dr. Pete tells an > interesting story of a Vaidya or scholar that came and gave a lecture > on Ayurveda at MIU IIRC and later when the tapes were made, they > edited out so much of what the speakers lecture said that didn't jive > with official movement "think" that it no longer even resembled what > the guy was actually saying! Interesting. I don't see how MMY could have any significant background on Ayurveda. I doubt his background on the Vedas too. The claim that ""Maharishi completely restored the thousands of years-old scattered Vedic Literature . . ." is more than a bit much. > > > Vaj, I take it that you are saying that MMY is not a Yogi under the > > applicable traditions. I don't think anyone really disputes that. > > Oh my heavens Ruth, prepare to be stoned! He was a yogi who lived in > the Valley of the Saints and then came to the land of mud to bring to > TM to the world, based on a recurring thought he kept having while > trying to meditate. > > Actually one of the Shankaracharya's of Jyotir Math IIRC and a fellow > student of SBS has come out and said that MMY was not trained as a yogi. > > > One of the few things that does not bother me about MMY is the > > breaking from tradition, going from being a secretary to a teacher. > > If someone feels that they have something of value to teach, fine by > > me, even if they are not in the right caste or do not have the right > > background. However, it is of relevance in evaluating his educational > > background on topics where he professed knowledge, such as asanas or > > the siddhis or vedic science. > > And assuming titles. How do you feel when someone who's not a > physicians calls themselves a "doctor" (and infers they are a medical > doctor). An interesting point. A title like "doctor" assumes a basic education and background is required. We can legitimately dispute whether that is in fact necessary to become a spiritual teacher. I think that it is important to know of the person's background in evaluating their claims. But if you believe in enlightenment then the enlightened might have something to teach even if they do not come from the correct tradition. Yes? Now I do not personally believe that MMY was enlightened so this is only a theoretical discussion. I withhold an opinion as to whether someone who is actually enlightened could use a title like Maharishi or Yogi. My hunch is that I would think it is fine if it was bestowed by others. Thanks for the Domash quote.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the honest and forthright
>From Vaj via email, as his post apparently didn't go through: On Feb 19, 2009, at 6:16 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: >> >> >> >> The TM mythos is filled with the tacit implication or even insistence >> that MMY was fully enlightened. In fact during his death ceremonies >> they kept repeating that he wasn't just enlightened, but the most >> enlightened rishi of all yugas! >> >> > > > Doesn't MMY need to be enlightened under TM theory? How else could he > rediscover what he claimed were lost mediation techniques? I think it's understood by most reasonable and objective folks who've done a little lookin', that "TM is nothing new under the sun", it's not something he's "restored", in fact it's a ubiquitous form of basic meditation. There are still many people who will repeat, matter-a-factly, that TM is a form of "Vedic" meditation, but nothing could be farther from the truth. Movement representatives will still parrot this obviously false information. Most of them probably either aren't aware of the fact (we were always told NOT to investigate the Vedas or "Vedic texts" on our own, as it would just "confuse" us) or if they are, they're afraid to go against what the founder said or they are out-and-out TB's. > And > rediscover and correct Ayurveda? Or, as the TMO says in information I > was reading recently: "Maharishi completely restored the thousands of > years-old scattered Vedic Literature for the total significance of its > theory and practice, and organized it in the form of a complete > science of consciousness. Maharishi's Vedic Science includes the > restoration of the ancient Vedic system of health care, which offers a > science and technology for unfolding perfection in life, using methods > that are completely free from harmful side effects." This is particularly incorrect in regards to Ayurveda, which he diluted, although he did help popularize it. Dr. Pete tells an interesting story of a Vaidya or scholar that came and gave a lecture on Ayurveda at MIU IIRC and later when the tapes were made, they edited out so much of what the speakers lecture said that didn't jive with official movement "think" that it no longer even resembled what the guy was actually saying! > Vaj, I take it that you are saying that MMY is not a Yogi under the > applicable traditions. I don't think anyone really disputes that. Oh my heavens Ruth, prepare to be stoned! He was a yogi who lived in the Valley of the Saints and then came to the land of mud to bring to TM to the world, based on a recurring thought he kept having while trying to meditate. Actually one of the Shankaracharya's of Jyotir Math IIRC and a fellow student of SBS has come out and said that MMY was not trained as a yogi. > One of the few things that does not bother me about MMY is the > breaking from tradition, going from being a secretary to a teacher. > If someone feels that they have something of value to teach, fine by > me, even if they are not in the right caste or do not have the right > background. However, it is of relevance in evaluating his educational > background on topics where he professed knowledge, such as asanas or > the siddhis or vedic science. And assuming titles. How do you feel when someone who's not a physicians calls themselves a "doctor" (and infers they are a medical doctor). When it comes to mantra yoga, mantras can be authentically given by puja. But there's a bit more to mantra yoga than what we were lead to believe. > I have never been clear on how he came up with transcendental > meditation, i.e., the routine and the mantras. What did he say about it? The party line is he got them from Swami Brahmananda. The only problems with that is that Swami Brahmananda's oral teachings are in opposition to what MMY taught, although MMY does pepper his teachings with bits and pieces of authentic information and wisdom, most of which is well known by spiritual Indians. One of his most interesting faux pas is the claim that other meditation techniques have traditionally taught some form of forced concentration, meditation that involves straining. It's a red herring--of course having read or heard that, you're almost afraid to try anything else! Here's the whole spiel, which is easily refutable as hype and posturing, but it's still a pretty entertaining read: http://tinyurl.com/34bras " By the process of comparing his own direct experience of the actual goal of meditation with the common understanding then available, it became clear to Maharishi that the common idea of what meditation was supposed to be was in fact a compl
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the honest and forthright
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > The TM mythos is filled with the tacit implication or even insistence > that MMY was fully enlightened. In fact during his death ceremonies > they kept repeating that he wasn't just enlightened, but the most > enlightened rishi of all yugas! > > Doesn't MMY need to be enlightened under TM theory? How else could he rediscover what he claimed were lost mediation techniques? And rediscover and correct Ayurveda? Or, as the TMO says in information I was reading recently: "Maharishi completely restored the thousands of years-old scattered Vedic Literature for the total significance of its theory and practice, and organized it in the form of a complete science of consciousness. Maharishi's Vedic Science includes the restoration of the ancient Vedic system of health care, which offers a science and technology for unfolding perfection in life, using methods that are completely free from harmful side effects." Vaj, I take it that you are saying that MMY is not a Yogi under the applicable traditions. I don't think anyone really disputes that. One of the few things that does not bother me about MMY is the breaking from tradition, going from being a secretary to a teacher. If someone feels that they have something of value to teach, fine by me, even if they are not in the right caste or do not have the right background. However, it is of relevance in evaluating his educational background on topics where he professed knowledge, such as asanas or the siddhis or vedic science. I have never been clear on how he came up with transcendental meditation, i.e., the routine and the mantras. What did he say about it? >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the devious and dishonest
. > > But hey, I said that a very long time ago and I don't remember why > you made me say something like that ! Things change you know, and I'm > sure your friends are happy to be a friend with you ! > Why thank you Nabby!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the devious and dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > > i think Vaj was hoping that he could be our resident and pet Dalai > Lama, dispensing wisdom, and clearing the haze of ignorance from our > eyes. > I doubt it. He like others shares his point of view. You strongly disagree with it. How about mellowing out?Why not instead of using this place as a place to rant, use it as a place to make your case as to why TM is good ? My biggest complaint about this place is the mind-reading that goes on. Give a try at not making assumptions about why people post what they post and see where it leads.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the devious and dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity > > > > Because the topics here are very personal, I can understand if someone > > wants to try a new identity. Especially if they felt they were > picked> on for their beliefs and feelings. Jim believes that he is > > enlightened. He got a lot of flak for that. > > Both Jim and ED gave and give a much as they get in that regard. I > guess you have never been at the business end of both barrels. I > think if you are going to mix it up with people and be aggressive then > a level playing field is more appropriate. But I get your point too. Yes, I haven't been at the business end of both barrels from Jim or EDawn. So I am much more understanding. It is very easy to get your back up when under attack. I know from experience here and regret it. Oddly, Nabby has said the absolutely worst things to me, for example, saying that he did not understand why my TB friends would be friends with a person like me. But Nabby is so out there with his peculiar posts and apparently peculiar beliefs that it doesn't bug me, it just fascinates me. I kinda feel he is like the pet dog who was once abused, you want to rub him behind the ears and make him better, but you don't because he might bite.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the devious and dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > Most of the people who use > other screen names that I interact with here have connected with me > through email, so I know I am dealing with a real person. I > appreciate that. We are dealing with very personal topics here so for > me, anything that helps me understand who I am communicating with > helps me focus my writing. > > Whether ED is really Jim or not the poster is spending some editing > attention to make sure we know very little about them personally. A > technique that is much more effective without a long history of > interaction. > > But hey, I could be wrong, I often am! > Because the topics here are very personal, I can understand if someone wants to try a new identity. Especially if they felt they were picked on for their beliefs and feelings. Jim believes that he is enlightened. He got a lot of flak for that. Not surprisingly he was defensive. If he wanted to escape that trap one way is a new identity. I like Jim because he answered my questions, did not try to be cute or score points. In return, I tried to be respectful of him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vaj the devious and dishonest
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" wrote: > > So, it's all about Jim. > I like Jim. Enlightened Dawn, if you are Jim, I am glad you came back. I couldn't stay away either. Be cool. Keep in mind what Kirk said try not to bait or be baited. I am going to give it a shot myself. :)
[FairfieldLife] Rant for Shemp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxPcJyypUKc
[FairfieldLife] For Shemp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxPcJyypUKc&eurl=http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/ers-getting-screwed-42571.html http://tinyurl.com/bwmgn4
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Randy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" wrote: > > So, I have anger at MMY and the TMO for fucking with the minds of my > > friends. I have anger that the MMY was a guru to those close to him > > but left all the rank and file to deal with their own problems, like > > "unstressing," while asking them to give all to the movement, making > > false and exaggerated claims to string them along until they were such > > true believers that will never give it up. MMY was ultimately > > responsible for his movement. > > > > If MMY had stuck to 2 times 20 TM, I would be fine. OK, it's a > > relaxation technique. But this quest for the constitution of the > > universe or the unified field or perfect health or enlightenment, or > > the strength of an elephant has gone nowhere fast. Now the movement > > is filled with the over 50 crowd. I hope it dies out. It is sick. > > > > -Actually, I have experiences from the TM Sidhis. I also don't regret > all the money and time I spent on all that shit, to the tune of about > 135,000 dollars now and growing. It has prevented me from developing a > materialistic mentality. I have though also been extremely lucky in friends > and love. So I cannot judge, and I don't think being judgemental is the > particular answer Ruth to Maharishi and TMO and all the bogus stuff piled on > top of the 20x2 which I agree was M's real acheivement, without which, he > could not have competed with other gurus of the time, each of which has > their 'technique.' > > Some things TM are really good, like not messing with the mind, not > concentrating, etc, some things are almost therefore contraindicatory like > yajnas jyotish gems, sidhis, all of which introduce expectation into the > subtle mind. So in some ways TM all together with the whole package is very > negative, because it produces a state of constant expectation and therefore > unfulfillment. You can see this dissatisfaction in many TMer's words here. > > It was looking back on my entire development as a person that I have seen > some influence of the sidhis. Especially as regards the last five sutras, > minus flying. As for being impatient as nowblowus has said, I did the entire > TM package for close to half my life. that was good enough. Time to move on. > Actually, I feel I was smart for unboarding from the Titanic before it sank. > > I normally don't get into these pro-anti things but I hate the hoi polloi > ganging up and bullying Vaj and others, some of who have always been my > favorite writers here. You give a little boy a hint of a sidhi and watch > them gang up on others. > You may have the best attitude--don't polarize. I agree, I don't like the bullying, whether from the pro or anti crowd. I'll try to avoid it. Thanks for helping me step back a bit.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Randy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" wrote: > > Fact is, none of us experience what Maharishi priomised. Not a single > lift-off ever in TMO. I know the two sons of a TM teacher and they lost > respect for their own father for his believing, nay, not only beliving, but > perpetuating the falsehood that TM Sidhas actually float. To his own sons. > > Now that TM teacher is out of sorts with the TM Movement and in complete > denial of his former involvement, and he will not confess it to anyone > except to those of us who already knew about him. > > That's all not very good stuff to relate to. His two sons lost faith in all > things spiritual - hey, they had little faith to begin with, and the bogus > promises of sidhis have estranged many persons. > > Also, many other former TM teachers are wrought with regret now - I guess > how soon they forget the recert process, and all the rest. > > I cannot disagree with Vaj that persons got hurt by Maharishi. > > Also, I cannot deny my own experience that TM was good for me right when I > really needed it. Methinks people are sourcing Vaj as the center of problems > when if one didn't have such doubts in the first place they wouldn't even > know Vaj had said anything contrariwise to Maharishi in the first place. > > The problem therefore is you and you and you, and you, for being sensitive > for being ignorant of other teachings besides TM. Fact is, I would have > thought that any spiritual aspirants would never take any half truths for > the whole truth. But then I prise truth above all else. (Except for love and > friendship). > I started here a year or so ago, exploring how I felt about TM, my true believer friends, and what I left behind. I found myself realizing that I am actually highly annoyed with the TMO and the whole siddhis thing. I see the real harm in my TB friends, who engage in superstitious thinking about all sorts of things. For example, demanding no proof of safety or effectiveness from Maharishi Ayurveda but demanding the highest level of proof for modern medicine. I see them hopping away, never to fly, but believing that they are saving the world for $700 a month. I see them suffering chronic, even likely fatal illnesses that meditation will not cure, but they firmly believe that a cure is near. I see them spending thousands on yagyas, charts, and supplements. They do my chart and have yagyas done for me as well, much to my dismay as I hate to see the money spent. And I have to keep my mouth mostly shut or I will lose them entirely. So, I have anger at MMY and the TMO for fucking with the minds of my friends. I have anger that the MMY was a guru to those close to him but left all the rank and file to deal with their own problems, like "unstressing," while asking them to give all to the movement, making false and exaggerated claims to string them along until they were such true believers that will never give it up. MMY was ultimately responsible for his movement. If MMY had stuck to 2 times 20 TM, I would be fine. OK, it's a relaxation technique. But this quest for the constitution of the universe or the unified field or perfect health or enlightenment, or the strength of an elephant has gone nowhere fast. Now the movement is filled with the over 50 crowd. I hope it dies out. It is sick.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Randy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" wrote: > > > > > > Fact is, none of us experience what Maharishi priomised. Not a single > > > lift-off ever in TMO. > > > > Sorry mate, plenty of lift-off's. I done app 7 meters in one jump > > myself. > > > > Yours, and many many others, problem is that you lack patience and more > > importantly; seriousness. > > > > Hovering is happening, albeit in the first stages for many serious > > students of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, but not from amateurs like you. > > > > For some strange reason and good luck you bumped into a real Master. > > Since you didn't get instant gratification you moved "on". > > > > The Turq here is a good example; he "moved on" but got nowhere. Now > > he's in a limbo and spends most of his life writing 7 long posts > > against the TMO and Judy, probably the only intelligent woman he ever > > knew, every day on a forum almost noone reads and whines about his lack > > of funds because nobody gives him work. > > > > He is on a dead-end road big time, and so are you. > > > OK Judy, prove you're not a TB, or ignore the amazing lies in the above. > The last time Nabby made this claim it was for a "jump" of about 10 yards. Seven meters, ten yards, either way a long ways. I said that Nabby was either delusional (maybe a bit of group hysteria) or lying. I was criticized for using the word delusional. However, no one would come out and say out right that they believed the hop, jump or fly was anywhere close to 10 yards. So I think delusional fits. Or he lies. Who knows, I can't get in his head. But based on my knowledge of how the world works, and based on the fact that no-one has shown that Newtonian physics does not apply to the gross level of the body, I do not believe that there was a jump, hop, fly or levitation of 7 meters or 10 yards.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Breaking the back of the devil thru spiritualized Will.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan wrote: > > > > You can't count on the black swan. :) > > Actually the unexpected is the only thing we can expect with certainty. > Yeah, but the totally unexpected only shows up when totally unexpected and then it isn't what you would expect. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Breaking the back of the devil thru spiritualized Will.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan wrote: Popper was adamant about the fallacy of induction -- that we > cannot prove anything is true -- only that we can prove things to be > false. And that new theories may replace old ones because they reveal > cases where the old theory is false -- but the new theory is not yet > true -- only not yet falsified. Popper and Taleb (Black Swan author) > really open your eyes to how much uncertainty there is in the world -- > and certainly the universe. And that the much of the world is far from > Gaussian (subject to the normal distribution) -- and thus not > "predictable" with Gaussian based statistical inference (which is 99 % > of statistics and probability theory) despite what your 3rd grade > teacher said. But nevertheless, even if you can't prove "truth" you can get enough evidence to act on, even if it is only based on probability. You can't count on the black swan. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 14, 2009, at 8:06 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > > In TM research there is a prevalence of small, nearly insignificant > > > results. This is ripe for seeing a pattern when there is none. If > > > the results were dramatic, then the attention of outside researchers > > > is attracted and usually the work is either confirmed or debunked. > > > Like cold fusion. But if your blood pressure drops two points or your > > > IQ increases 2 points, even if statistically significant, it is hard > > > to get outside people very interested because it just isn't that > > > interesting. > > > > > > Well, the idea and approach of the TM org is to not mention the actual > > figures or not mention them in a way makes the obviously insignificant > > result seem small. SO instead of saying "TM reduces blood pressure > > 0.08 % from normal baseline BP in healthy individuals" they'll instead > > push something like "TM reduces blood pressure, TM decreases blood > > pressure, TM is good at reducing blood pressure", etc. and saturate > > the web and broadcast media as much as they can. In other words, > > instead of poisoning the well, they sweeten it. People like "sweet" > > news. > > > > Marketing is another issue. > > > L > Yes, but it is hard to separate the issues. We acknowledge that everyone has some bias and everyone likes to be right. This is exhibited in risks of confirmation bias and risks of using a too narrow an approach. However, the risks are not the same for everyone everywhere. A marketing blitz by your supporting organization which tends to exaggerate results reflects on you as part of the organization. Some, like Orme-Johnson and Haglin, both market and research, which makes it look like they are even more biased than most. The woman who did the ADHD pilot study has participated in marketing her study. Travis has done talks that wax eloquent about the power of TM. How often do the TMO researchers test alternative hypotheses? And isn't a particular complaint of TM research that there is evidence of expectation bias in that they view all their data as fitting their expectation that TM works? It is all part of trying to evaluate the bias risks. We do not have access to their actual procedures, to their hard data. We can't know to what extent their biases effect a particular study. But given the fact that false positives are likely prevalent in research anyway, that Orme-Johnson has said that they lean towards trying to show an effect in their research, that many of the TM researchers participate in exaggerated marketing claims,that the TMO researchers truly believe TM works, my bias concerns are greater with the TMO than with Davidson. All bias is not created equal. This is separate from my discussion of pattern recognition, but as all these things are it is related. The issue of pattern recognition is two-fold. One is positive, the ability of trained experts to spot new and interesting patterns. The other is negative, the risk of seeing a pattern when none is there.
[FairfieldLife] Fwd: Re: [Fairfield_Community_Kiosk] Ringo will appear at the concert
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > I mean, this is a 63-year-old man promoting a > concert that features an almost 67-year-old > singer and an almost 69-year-old drummer. And > the people getting all excited about it are in > the same age range. I'm going and throwing my old lady panties on stage.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 14, 2009, at 7:15 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > > >> Interesting because one of the researchers is probably the most > > >> qualified man in the world to comment on EEG, having been the section > > >> editor of the state of the art work on Human electroencephalography, > > >> esp. electroencephalography and meditation. Davidson's also the man > > >> who's systematically mapped the correlates of alpha. > > >> > > >> These guys ain't no slouchers. ;-) > > >> > > > > > > Bias in a specific field of interest is orthogonal to expertise. > > > > > > Well, not exactly, the greater the level of expertise, the more likely > > > a researcher has biases, just because. > > > > > > I don't see that. These guys who are at the forefront of their fields > > have their reputations on the line with every study they publish. It > > behooves them to uphold the highest standards of practice. > > > > So the fact that Davidson literally wrote teh book on the significance of > EEG asymmetry doesn't imply he's more likely bound to theories that > support his published work, as opposed to theories and research that > call into question his work? > > Jujst about every philsopher of science I'm familiar with from Kuhn to Lakatos > points out the exact opposite: established figures in a field tend to be > the least open-minded about theories and studies that conflict with their own > theories and findings. > > Of course, it goes both ways: TM researchers have an extreme emotional > attachment to studies that confirm MMY's theories. > > > Lawson > I understand your bias issue and I think that there are a lot of individual differences on how much a person wants to hold onto a theory. But yes, it is a problem and we all have a degree of bias. We want to be right. We get married to our ideas. However, I am not prepared to conclude that there were research results (emphasis on results) that conflicted with Davidson's theories or his results. And, Davidson does not seem to have set in stone theories on mediation, he appears to see learning about mediation as a process. I do think that there is little question that Davidson is as suited as anyone to evaluate the evidence and theories. His background is appropriately suited to look at alternative meditation theories. I certainly can understand discounting a theory if your analysis indicates that the theory is not supported by the evidence or that the evidence is so weak that it is not worth considering at this point. We all do that all the time. It is the only way to function in a complicated world. Pseudo scientific theories come up all the time. Like laying on of the hands to heal. When these theories are criticized, it is the critics who seem to get accused of bias, of having an unwillingness to expand their world view. I say the burden is on the proponent. Be interesting. Find results and people will take note. But if you treat your research like it is for sales purposes and always ignore the negative, you are going to get discounted or at least distrusted and it is your own fault.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > I read a study recently about the more expertise a person has > > in a certain area, the more likely that person will see a > > pattern in their area of expertise, to the extent of seeing > > patterns where there are none. > > "In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities. > In the expert's mind there are few." > - Shunryu Suzuki > Not really what I am thinking about. The expert sees many possibilities in the field of expertise, to the extent that they see things that don't exist. The beginner doesn't have enough of a background to see all those possibilities. For example, the psychiatrist who treats a problem with his kid like it is a mental health issue when it is just the kid being a brat.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Feb 14, 2009, at 7:15 PM, sparaig wrote: > > >> Interesting because one of the researchers is probably the most > >> qualified man in the world to comment on EEG, having been the section > >> editor of the state of the art work on Human electroencephalography, > >> esp. electroencephalography and meditation. Davidson's also the man > >> who's systematically mapped the correlates of alpha. > >> > >> These guys ain't no slouchers. ;-) > >> > > > > Bias in a specific field of interest is orthogonal to expertise. > > > > Well, not exactly, the greater the level of expertise, the more likely > > a researcher has biases, just because. > > > I don't see that. These guys who are at the forefront of their fields > have their reputations on the line with every study they publish. It > behooves them to uphold the highest standards of practice. > I read a study recently about the more expertise a person has in a certain area, the more likely that person will see a pattern in their area of expertise, to the extent of seeing patterns where there are none. (sorry, no cite, it was of all things a study of philosophy professors--I have been into pattern research lately). The false positive problem. However, this is the opposite from what Lawson describes, which I believe to be far less likely to occur, that of an expert not seeing a pattern when there is one. In TM research there is a prevalence of small, nearly insignificant results. This is ripe for seeing a pattern when there is none. If the results were dramatic, then the attention of outside researchers is attracted and usually the work is either confirmed or debunked. Like cold fusion. But if your blood pressure drops two points or your IQ increases 2 points, even if statistically significant, it is hard to get outside people very interested because it just isn't that interesting. It is hard to get people to be interested in the ME research when the TMO says violent crime goes down but not murder because murder went up for other reasons. One pattern for one type of crime. Another pattern for another type of crime. Calming plus phase transition. Scientists eyes will roll because there isn't a consistent theory--no matter what the theory is "right." It is like Haglin predicting the stock market will go up and up because of the meditators but then it goes down for the phase transition. To bring this around, Haglin was a highly trained pattern spotter in his field. The problem is that he sees patterns in everything. Yes, John Haglin, there is coincidence.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > Rather than abolish NCCAM, why not require it to have more stringent > peer review? > > L > Peer review alone is not going to cut it. Instead, far more rigorous methodologies have to be required before funding. Interestingly, Orme-Johnson on his site acknowledges that MUM researchers tend towards favoring type 2 error rather than type 1. So, there will be more false positives. I think in general we are getting way too many false positives in research and especially in research where you simply can't double blind. Plus, controlling for the placebo effect of meditation is difficult. After all, to do TM you have to go through the lectures and the puja, all done by true believers. Simply saying sit and relax for 20 minutes is not going to control for placebo. Nor is health education (which in my experience people find boring and tune out or scary and tune out). It is a tough problem to get your hands around. But I digress. I think NCCAM has to go because too much money is going to pseudo-science. After spending a billion dollars no important results have come out of NCCAM research. NCCAM has endorsed nothing as a result of the research. Too much money going to waste on stuff that simply is not scientific. For example, prayer is not scientific, it doesn't have a scientific basis on which to hang a theory. NCCAM was supposed to help sort out pseudo-science from science but instead is giving an illusion of respectability to pseudo-science. For those who are interested, Orme-Johnson says: "I would say that the faculty of Maharishi University of Management tend to be in the Type 2 camp with regard to the Transcendental Meditation program. They came to the university because of their own personal experiences that the program benefited of them, and they will tend to see it as a good thing. Therefore, in the research process, they will be reluctant to declare a finding as "negative" before they have examined it in many different ways and thought a great deal about alternative interpretations or experimental factors which may have explained the outcome. On the other hand, those who have not had the same experiences and intuition may be demand more stringent tests. Just because the researchers at Maharishi University of Management may have a Type 2 attitude does not mean that they less objective than anyone else. The research practices in place at the university listed above provide a strong set of checks and balances making sure that the research stays on track according to the highest standards of science. In the long-run, the scientific method and objectivity will win out over the inevitable diverse subjective propensities of individual researchers." I have an interesting survey study for MUM to do at very little cost. Teach 100 people to do TM in the US over the course of a year. Check back for each participant in a year, in two years and in five years to see if they are still meditating. I'll finance the research. It will be blinded with no one knowing which of all the meditators taught are part of the study. Teacher's wont even be informed of the study. Surveyors will be independent. I really would like to see them research "unstressing."
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Feb 14, 2009, at 6:00 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > No point in us arguing this. We disagree as to their conclusions. > > Apparently you can't believe that they have the background to conclude > > that the studies they excluded from their report were either not > > sufficiently rigorous or did not report anything of significant > > interest. > > > > It is, however, the TM researcher's job to specifically show what the > > theoretical framework is for their work. > > > Interesting because one of the researchers is probably the most > qualified man in the world to comment on EEG, having been the section > editor of the state of the art work on Human electroencephalography, > esp. electroencephalography and meditation. Davidson's also the man > who's systematically mapped the correlates of alpha. > > These guys ain't no slouchers. ;-) > > But I agree, it's probably not worth discussing without someone > willing to be honest and objective. Fundamentalists aren't likely to > change their beliefs, but they will do whatever they can to obfuscate > and misdirect, a form of dishonesty common in fundamentalists of many > sorts. > Yes, there is no way to even talk about it. Instead, vague accusations of not having the proper theoretical framework are made. I hope some other posters here read the article as it is worth reading. For the record, Vaj and I are not always in agreement. Vaj is a mystic and I am not. Oh well, this all makes me tired. The more I read actual TM studies the more put off I am. Here, we just talk about people who talk about the studies. Rarely do we actually talk about a particular study, which is the only thing of relevance. When I first was on this board I had not looked at TM research for years and years and was a bit interested to see how things had developed. I am starting to lose interest. I am also frustrated that so many journals publish crap. Not just TM crap, but crap in general. The signal to noise ratio is way off. Part of the problem is NCCAM. It needs to be tossed in the garbage. Instead of spending time here I should be working to abolish NCCAM. Which will be on my list of things to participate in over the next few months.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > Well, privledged email information slipping out again but its obvious from > the fact that 20 years research was ignored that they don't have a theoretical > framework to put it in, or are you seriously suggesting that every single > EEG study published by the TMO in the past 20 years can be dismissed > by citing a psychological study in 1986 and claiming there is no physiological > evidence to support the proposed theory? > > L > No point in us arguing this. We disagree as to their conclusions. Apparently you can't believe that they have the background to conclude that the studies they excluded from their report were either not sufficiently rigorous or did not report anything of significant interest. It is, however, the TM researcher's job to specifically show what the theoretical framework is for their work.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > One thing I have learned by this little exchange and others is that > > apparently it is fine with the culture here to dis someone in public > > based on a personal message. Okie dokie. > > > > > Um, feeling defensive are we? > > Defensive is not the word. It is the fact that there is not enough of a level of trust between us that I can't even ask a private question off hand without you using it as a gotcha on the public forum.Personally, I never disclose what people say to me in a pm unless they make a disclosure first. Some people here have shared private information with me, including who they are in "real life." I hope people here see now how risky that could be if you share with the wrong person.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > You asked if I was someone named Tim Guy posting > > > to Space City Skeptics, claiming that our writing > > > styles and background are similar. > > > > > > http://spacecityskeptics.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/how-to-design-a- > > positive-study- > > > meditation-for-childhood-adhd/#comment-296 > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/copqlw > > > > > > Do you really perceive my style and background as > > > the same as, or even similar to, Mr Guy's? > > > > > > Goodness. I mean, we both appear to be native > > > English speakers, but beyond that? > > > > > > Seriously. > > > > Unbelievable. Apparently she thinks this because > > Tim Guy makes a couple of the same points you have. > > Of course, there couldn't possibly be *two* people > > who have looked at the research in question and come > > to the same conclusions independently, now, could > > there? > > Thing is, Ruth claimed that our writing styles were similar. > > I guess I could write like Mr. Guy. It wouldn't be that hard. > All I would need to do is type properly. Then I would need > to write in short sentences with no commas. Or very few. > > > Actually, it's harder than it looked: I have a tendency to > think parenthetically, and trying to marshal my words in > a way that duplicates his style, really cramps mine, I found. > > > Not to mention that my arguments would have more meat to them, > seeing that I've argued with Skeptics on their home turf before, > and know the language they use. > > > > > > > An interesting feature of the discussion, BTW, is > > that while Vaj accuses Tim Guy of being > > a TMer (and therefore incapable of either honesty > > or objectivity), Vaj fails to identify himself as > > a former TMer-turned-TM-critic, leaving the highly > > misleading impression that he is simply an > > independent outside observer with no axe to grind. > > > > Well, had the subject been Buddhist meditation research, Vaj's > handle would have evoked a response. Skeptics are great > at being mono-thematic when discussing things. > > > This is particularly ironic when he makes one claim > > after another about how TM research has been > > conclusively debunked, when the *most* that can be > > said is that some of it has been called in question. > > > > Also fascinating that, as Tim Guy points out, Vaj > > confuses the hypotheses about EEG coherence with the > > ME hypothesis--and Ruth actually backs Vaj up! > > > > What leapt out at me was Ruth using silly arguments to counter > some of the same points about the Cambridge Handbook that > I've made in this forum. I may be mistaken but I don't recall her > responses being quite as simplistic and full of holes as they were > in the Skeptics forum. > > Ruth: surely you can see that TIm Guy and I are not the same person? > > > Or do you REALLY assume that anyone who disagrees with you on a > different forum, despite the different rhetorical style, must be the same > person because there can't be more than one semi-erudite pro-TM research > poster? > > > BTW, to claim that we have similar backgrounds is rather odd. I am a massive > underachiever: taught myself Calculus when I was 15 by reading a book. Surely > you had to notice that our respective perspectives concerning the Science > were at two levels of sophistication? Or, again, perhaps you simply assume that > anyone who disagrees with you must be ineddicated. > > > Sheesh. > > > L > Vaj did not confuse EEG coherence with the ME hypothesis. He spoke briefly but he isn't confused. However, the ME hypothesis is somewhat confusing and you can be fed slightly different stuff in different places. But: http://www.vedicknowledge.com/yogic_flying.html "Research has also established that the TM-Sidhi Programme cultures a profound integration of brain functioning (EEG coherence), promoting an optimal state of brain functioning that provides the basis for the unfoldment of an individual's full creative intelligence. During Yogic Flying individuals experience significant positive correlations between the abundance of alpha EEG coherence in four regions of the brain and the experience of self-referral consciousness. This coherence and integration of brain functioning is maximum at the moment the body lifts up into the air. When Yogic Flying is practised collectively, the coherence of brain functioning creates a positive and harmonious influence in the environment, reducing negative tendencies and promoting positive, harmonious trends throughout the whole society."
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > [...] > > Pardon me. You both appear to have some insider knowledge about some > > studies and both have made similar arguments. So I was curious if you > > were him. I am not a mind reader so I asked. I certainly meant no > > insult and I inquired via pm in any event. I've tired of all of the > > back and forth so I won't bother to ask you to outline what you found > > silly about my arguments. However, the one thing that bugged me about > > both you and Tim Guy was the assumption, contrary to what was said by > > the authors, that evidence in the last 20 years was ignored. They > > only reported what they found relevant but they read all the studies. > > > > And you know this because,,,? > > ALthough, I'm told the authors are aware of the studies they omitted, but they > won't discuss them because they don't have a theoretical framework to put > them in and therefore they can't be of any value. > > > Lawson > They said that they reviewed them. Who told you that they don't have the theoretical framework?
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
One thing I have learned by this little exchange and others is that apparently it is fine with the culture here to dis someone in public based on a personal message. Okie dokie.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Gwad, Ruth...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > You asked if I was someone named Tim Guy posting > > > to Space City Skeptics, claiming that our writing > > > styles and background are similar. > > > > > > http://spacecityskeptics.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/how-to-design-a- > > positive-study- > > > meditation-for-childhood-adhd/#comment-296 > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/copqlw > > > > > > Do you really perceive my style and background as > > > the same as, or even similar to, Mr Guy's? > > > > > > Goodness. I mean, we both appear to be native > > > English speakers, but beyond that? > > > > > > Seriously. > > > > Unbelievable. Apparently she thinks this because > > Tim Guy makes a couple of the same points you have. > > Of course, there couldn't possibly be *two* people > > who have looked at the research in question and come > > to the same conclusions independently, now, could > > there? > > Thing is, Ruth claimed that our writing styles were similar. > > I guess I could write like Mr. Guy. It wouldn't be that hard. > All I would need to do is type properly. Then I would need > to write in short sentences with no commas. Or very few. > > > Actually, it's harder than it looked: I have a tendency to > think parenthetically, and trying to marshal my words in > a way that duplicates his style, really cramps mine, I found. > > > Not to mention that my arguments would have more meat to them, > seeing that I've argued with Skeptics on their home turf before, > and know the language they use. > > > > > > > An interesting feature of the discussion, BTW, is > > that while Vaj accuses Tim Guy of being > > a TMer (and therefore incapable of either honesty > > or objectivity), Vaj fails to identify himself as > > a former TMer-turned-TM-critic, leaving the highly > > misleading impression that he is simply an > > independent outside observer with no axe to grind. > > > > Well, had the subject been Buddhist meditation research, Vaj's > handle would have evoked a response. Skeptics are great > at being mono-thematic when discussing things. > > > This is particularly ironic when he makes one claim > > after another about how TM research has been > > conclusively debunked, when the *most* that can be > > said is that some of it has been called in question. > > > > Also fascinating that, as Tim Guy points out, Vaj > > confuses the hypotheses about EEG coherence with the > > ME hypothesis--and Ruth actually backs Vaj up! > > > > What leapt out at me was Ruth using silly arguments to counter > some of the same points about the Cambridge Handbook that > I've made in this forum. I may be mistaken but I don't recall her > responses being quite as simplistic and full of holes as they were > in the Skeptics forum. > > Ruth: surely you can see that TIm Guy and I are not the same person? > > > Or do you REALLY assume that anyone who disagrees with you on a > different forum, despite the different rhetorical style, must be the same > person because there can't be more than one semi-erudite pro-TM research > poster? > > > BTW, to claim that we have similar backgrounds is rather odd. I am a massive > underachiever: taught myself Calculus when I was 15 by reading a book. Surely > you had to notice that our respective perspectives concerning the Science > were at two levels of sophistication? Or, again, perhaps you simply assume that > anyone who disagrees with you must be ineddicated. > > > Sheesh. > > > L > Pardon me. You both appear to have some insider knowledge about some studies and both have made similar arguments. So I was curious if you were him. I am not a mind reader so I asked. I certainly meant no insult and I inquired via pm in any event. I've tired of all of the back and forth so I won't bother to ask you to outline what you found silly about my arguments. However, the one thing that bugged me about both you and Tim Guy was the assumption, contrary to what was said by the authors, that evidence in the last 20 years was ignored. They only reported what they found relevant but they read all the studies.
[FairfieldLife] Why are you here?
Every once in a while someone questions another person's motivations for hanging out on FFL. I am curious. Why are you here? What do you get out of this place?
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" wrote: > > ---Yes, Vaj seems to be suffering from some type of mental > aberration, at least in the sense of some engrams from the > past "forcing" him into this bizarre behavior. I can see people > dissing MMY, TM, etc; a few times, but I can't fathom why one would > continue with this behavior day after day, for years. > Though I favor TM, I've long ago grown to accept the fact that > people have different preferences for various techniques, or no > technique at all. > Take the people I work with: attorneys, quite intelligent in the > brains department but not a single one of them is in the least bit > interested in nondualist Dharma. And I have no desire to tell any of > them about TM, mindfulness, etc. > Basically, I don't give a crap whether people practice TM, > mindfulness, or stand on their heads. > The fact that Vaj is so obsessive about dissing MMY and TM is indeed > a case-study in a class for abnormal psychology. Bizarre! Why are people so insistent on "diagnosing" those they tend to agree with on this forum? Mindreading is a favorite occupation. Several times I have disclosed my motivations for hanging around here. Curtis has disclosed his motivations. Beyond that, who knows why any one of us participates? If you are curious, ask.
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me jump into this attachment discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until > > > > > > > you experience pure consciousness while the mind functions. Any > > > > > > > attempt to become unattached through the mind is pure > > > > > > > mood-making/manipulation which is worthless. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know that I agree. I think that detachment can occur > > > > > > through maturity and experience, through living in accordance > > > > > > with your values. Even if this had nothing to do with pure > > > > > > consciousness, I disagree that it is irrelevant mood making or > > > > > > is worthless. It is functioning in a self actualized way, with > > > > > > empathy and at your best. This is worthwhile, whatever the label. > > > > > > > > > > I suppose an affectation of non-attachment may have some relative > > > > > value, but it reminds me of the people I saw on the Oprah message > > > > > boards, trying to imitate Eckhart Tolle being present to what is and > > > > > thinking that is what it is to be awakened. For all its relative > > > > > value, it's still not freedom. > > > > > > > > > I am not talking about an affectation. I am not talking about > > > > imitating. I am talking about who you are and who you can be. You can > > > > cultivate detachment without meditating, it has value and it is not > > > > mere moodmaking. It is you. It is about acting in accord with your > > > > values. Self actualized. Mediation not necessarily required. > > > > > > > > So, you can have empathetic detachment without an experience of pure > > > > consciousness. Peter maintains that you can't "know" attachment until > > > > you experience pure consciousness and I am saying that I don't know > > > > that I agree. I do agree that you can have what I term mystical > > > > experiences that give you an "aha" experience of what may be described > > > > as pure consciousness. However, we do not know that it is pure > > > > consciousness or any less mood making than any other state or any more > > > > worthwhile than any other state. > > > > > > > > > > People who report witnessing sleep for at least a year have a > > distinct EEG > > > pattern outside of TM: you can't tell whether they are meditating or > > not by > > > glancing at their EEG. > > > > > > Is this moodmaking? > > > > > > L > > > > > Who knows if it means anything of significance regarding > > enlightenment. I don't use the word moodmaking at all. I do know > > that there can be positive and negative states of mind. You can > > dissociate to escape your world. You can dissociate to function well > > in an emergency. Same thing but very different. You can train > > yourself to witness sleep (lucid dreaming). Does it mean anything? > > Probably not a negative, but why would it be a positive? If you had > > nightmares, lucid dreaming can get you out of that problem. But as a > > stepping stone to enlightenment? I doubt. > > > > > > Cite for study? What was the control? > > > > IBiological Psychology > Volume 61, Issue 3, November 2002, Pages 293-319 > > Patterns of EEG coherence, power, and contingent negative variation characterize the > integration of transcendental and waking states > > > Travis, F. Eyes open and TM EEG patterns after one and after eight years of TM practice. > Psychophysiology 28 (3a): S58, 1991. > > > Don't have any more info then that, sorry. > > L > Thanks!
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > IBiological Psychology > Volume 61, Issue 3, November 2002, Pages 293-319 > > Patterns of EEG coherence, power, and contingent negative variation characterize the > integration of transcendental and waking states > > > Travis, F. Eyes open and TM EEG patterns after one and after eight years of TM practice. > Psychophysiology 28 (3a): S58, 1991. > > > Don't have any more info then that, sorry. > > L > Thank you.
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2009, at 5:22 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5" > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Curtis writes in this, "I don't share his (Maharishi's) view > > > > >>> that the silence experienced in meditation is our true nature > > or our > > > > >>> real self." > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Ouch, is that right? True? > > > > >> > > > > >> Without the belief system mindset experiencing the silence of > > > > >> meditation is not obviously my "true" nature or "real self." It is > > > > >> just a state of mind I can experience. I don't know what it > > means but > > > > >> I would not on my own assume it was a part of me that survives > > death > > > > >> for example, or any of the other magical properties Maharishi > > > > >> ascribes > > > > >> to it. > > > > >> > > > > >> Do you feel that it is your true nature or real self? Why? > > > > > > > > > > If silence is more consistent than non-silence, how could you NOT > > > > > identify it > > > > > as being "more real" than non-silence? > > > > > > > > > > > > IME, meditators get addicted to "silent" states and calm, thought- > > > > free states, just makes them "flat". I suspect this is why many > > > > outsiders experience TM folks as having a flat affect. They don't > > > > integrate thought, they're too busy trying to escape it. > > > > > > > > > > Certainly mood-making would make folks "off" and no-doubt there's lots > > > of mood-making going on at MUM. On the other hand, Fred Travis has been > > > at MUM for nearly 30 years and doesn't come off that way. > > > > > > > > > L. > > > > > Maybe Fred Travis doesn't meditate too much. > > > > Maybe not. OR maybe he is just a busy researcher who meditates regularly. > > > L. > I am sure his activity helps a lot.
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Let me jump into this attachment discussion. > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until > > > > > you experience pure consciousness while the mind functions. Any > > > > > attempt to become unattached through the mind is pure > > > > > mood-making/manipulation which is worthless. > > > > > > > > I don't know that I agree. I think that detachment can occur > > > > through maturity and experience, through living in accordance > > > > with your values. Even if this had nothing to do with pure > > > > consciousness, I disagree that it is irrelevant mood making or > > > > is worthless. It is functioning in a self actualized way, with > > > > empathy and at your best. This is worthwhile, whatever the label. > > > > > > I suppose an affectation of non-attachment may have some relative > > > value, but it reminds me of the people I saw on the Oprah message > > > boards, trying to imitate Eckhart Tolle being present to what is and > > > thinking that is what it is to be awakened. For all its relative > > > value, it's still not freedom. > > > > > I am not talking about an affectation. I am not talking about > > imitating. I am talking about who you are and who you can be. You can > > cultivate detachment without meditating, it has value and it is not > > mere moodmaking. It is you. It is about acting in accord with your > > values. Self actualized. Mediation not necessarily required. > > > > So, you can have empathetic detachment without an experience of pure > > consciousness. Peter maintains that you can't "know" attachment until > > you experience pure consciousness and I am saying that I don't know > > that I agree. I do agree that you can have what I term mystical > > experiences that give you an "aha" experience of what may be described > > as pure consciousness. However, we do not know that it is pure > > consciousness or any less mood making than any other state or any more > > worthwhile than any other state. > > > > People who report witnessing sleep for at least a year have a distinct EEG > pattern outside of TM: you can't tell whether they are meditating or not by > glancing at their EEG. > > Is this moodmaking? > > L > Who knows if it means anything of significance regarding enlightenment. I don't use the word moodmaking at all. I do know that there can be positive and negative states of mind. You can dissociate to escape your world. You can dissociate to function well in an emergency. Same thing but very different. You can train yourself to witness sleep (lucid dreaming). Does it mean anything? Probably not a negative, but why would it be a positive? If you had nightmares, lucid dreaming can get you out of that problem. But as a stepping stone to enlightenment? I doubt. Cite for study? What was the control?
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2009, at 5:22 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5" > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Curtis writes in this, "I don't share his (Maharishi's) view > > >>> that the silence experienced in meditation is our true nature or our > > >>> real self." > > >>> > > >>> Ouch, is that right? True? > > >> > > >> Without the belief system mindset experiencing the silence of > > >> meditation is not obviously my "true" nature or "real self." It is > > >> just a state of mind I can experience. I don't know what it means but > > >> I would not on my own assume it was a part of me that survives death > > >> for example, or any of the other magical properties Maharishi > > >> ascribes > > >> to it. > > >> > > >> Do you feel that it is your true nature or real self? Why? > > > > > > If silence is more consistent than non-silence, how could you NOT > > > identify it > > > as being "more real" than non-silence? > > > > > > IME, meditators get addicted to "silent" states and calm, thought- > > free states, just makes them "flat". I suspect this is why many > > outsiders experience TM folks as having a flat affect. They don't > > integrate thought, they're too busy trying to escape it. > > > > Certainly mood-making would make folks "off" and no-doubt there's lots > of mood-making going on at MUM. On the other hand, Fred Travis has been > at MUM for nearly 30 years and doesn't come off that way. > > > L. > Maybe Fred Travis doesn't meditate too much.
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > > > > > Let me jump into this attachment discussion. > > > > > > I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until > > > you experience pure consciousness while the mind functions. Any > > > attempt to become unattached through the mind is pure > > > mood-making/manipulation which is worthless. > > > > I don't know that I agree. I think that detachment can occur > > through maturity and experience, through living in accordance > > with your values. Even if this had nothing to do with pure > > consciousness, I disagree that it is irrelevant mood making or > > is worthless. It is functioning in a self actualized way, with > > empathy and at your best. This is worthwhile, whatever the label. > > I suppose an affectation of non-attachment may have some relative > value, but it reminds me of the people I saw on the Oprah message > boards, trying to imitate Eckhart Tolle being present to what is and > thinking that is what it is to be awakened. For all its relative > value, it's still not freedom. > I am not talking about an affectation. I am not talking about imitating. I am talking about who you are and who you can be. You can cultivate detachment without meditating, it has value and it is not mere moodmaking. It is you. It is about acting in accord with your values. Self actualized. Mediation not necessarily required. So, you can have empathetic detachment without an experience of pure consciousness. Peter maintains that you can't "know" attachment until you experience pure consciousness and I am saying that I don't know that I agree. I do agree that you can have what I term mystical experiences that give you an "aha" experience of what may be described as pure consciousness. However, we do not know that it is pure consciousness or any less mood making than any other state or any more worthwhile than any other state.
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > Let me jump into this attachment discussion. > > I'd like to argue that you don't know what attachment is until you experience pure consciousness while the mind functions. Any attempt to become unattached through the mind is pure mood-making/manipulation which is worthless. I don't know that I agree. I think that detachment can occur through maturity and experience, through living in accordance with your values. Even if this had nothing to do with pure consciousness, I disagree that it is irrelevant mood making or is worthless. It is functioning in a self actualized way, with empathy and at your best. This is worthwhile, whatever the label.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Grist for the Rumor Mill
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal wrote: > > There's also this Indian belief that ghee one of the most valuable > things on earth. Ghee is of course good for you. Except there are > loads of ex-pat Indians from the West Indies to the US who have bad > heart problems because of the ghee. > > Now get this. We asked many times about the ghee and sugar in Amrit. > We were told that rock sugar has a special quality, making it OK for > diabetics and ghee had a different quality than butter, making it OK > for people with cholesterol/heart problems. IRRC there is now a low > sugar, low fat Amrit available, finally. > Of course, ghee is 100% saturated fat and arguably worse than butter. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8910075 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2887943 ". . .study investigated the hypothesis that ghee, a clarified butter product prized in Indian cooking, contains cholesterol oxides and could therefore be an important source of dietary exposure to cholesterol oxides and an explanation for the high atherosclerosis risk. Substantial amounts of cholesterol oxides were found in ghee (12.3% of sterols), but not in fresh butter, by thin-layer and high-performance-liquid chromatography. Dietary exposure to cholesterol oxides from ghee may offer a logical explanation for the high frequency of atherosclerotic complications in these Indian populations."
[FairfieldLife] Re: Grist for the Rumor Mill
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "pranamoocher" wrote: > > > > Could be all that "healthy vegetarian" dietary regiment these people > > have used over the last 30 years, along with tons of white sugar. > > Sooner or later, the body catches up to dietary deficiencies. > > > > My doctor told me: to avoid diabetes, stay away from white, fluffy > stuff. (e.g. white bread, cakes, white rice, etc.) Exercise. Eat a low fat diet. Eat your fruit and veggies. Whole grains are good. Fluffy stuff bad.
[FairfieldLife] What is the nature of "attachment?" (Re: All of Patanjali's 8 limbs )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > Me: > I am trying to figure out > > > why they made such a big deal out of something that > > > seems obvious to me. > > > Judy > > Maybe it's because what seems obvious to you isn't at > > all what it's about. > > OK, straighten me out on how people can be identified with the objects > of perceptions if they don't have the type of awareness provided by TM. > > > > > > Every hang out with a woman from a country who does > > > not educate women? Education makes a huge difference > > > in mental development. > > > > Sure, but lack of education doesn't equate to "severe > > mental deficiency" in the sense you were using the > > phrase. I think if you have to suggest that most people > > long ago would be considered severely mentally deficient > > today to explain the notion of identification, it's a > > sign you're on the wrong track. I think you need to bag > > that particular approach! > > Again I'm all ears for your POV on this area of why people are so > identified with the objects of perception that they need lots of TM > (decades) to become...what exactly? > > > > > From another post: > > > > > My identity is biased towards my mind and emotions. > > > My body is getting older but my mind and capacity > > > to feel is getting better. I think only very > > > superficial people identify with their bodies. > > > > Again, you're understanding it too literally, or > > too concretely. > > And again you are saying I don't get it while providing no information > on what getting it might mean. I've had the experiences lots of TM > brings and I don't see it that way now. How do you see it? > > > > > If what you experience is "my body" as opposed to > > "this body," that's identification with the body; > > doesn't mean some kind of intense focus on or > > preoccupation with the body, but simply that one's > > body is something that "belongs" to one. > > > > Interestingly, professional opera singers tend to > > refer to their voice as "the voice" rather than > > "my voice," as if it has to be regarded as > > something apart from themselves, like a musical > > instrument--but instrumentalists don't refer to > > "the trumpet" or "the violin" when they're talking > > about their own instruments. I suspect that's > > because to a singer, their voice is so *extremely* > > personal and intimate to themselves that they > > have to use that odd construction to avoid > > overly identifying with it; they must feel they > > have more control over it that way. > > > > Come to think of it, don't athletes tend to do > > this as well with reference to parts of their > > bodies that are crucial to their performance? > > "The arm is a little sore today..." > > I think the movement phrase "the body" indicates dissociation. It is > my body. The voice thing in opera you nailed down I think. It is > because they do think of it as a separate instrument. What they sing > with is not their voice that they use for speech. I haven't heard > athletes talk about their bodies that way but it wouldn't surprise me > for high level athletes since they function in a lot of pain with > their injuries and training and dissociate to survive. I felt that > way when I was in Jiu-jitsu and was always injured for practices. > > I am inviting someone to explain what this concept (identifying with > the object of perception) means to them. It may be that once you step > out of the mindset there is no bridge of understanding. I am just > playing with the idea that there might be more than: > > "If you are with us you understand, if you are not, you don't." > > > > > > My thought, based upon what Curtis has said, is that he has already cultivated enough of a sense of detachment so as to not be overly wound up with negative emotions or bad behaviors. Who needs more? I think living in accordance with your values cultivates a certain sense of detachment--you are not all wound up by living in conflict. I could not care for cancer patients without some detachment.You cultivate it by doing the best you can, in accordance with your values. It is about maturity, and often increases by simply growing older and more experienced. You cultivate it by putting troubles away in a little box to open later if you feel the need. I might shed a tear but never in the presence of a patient. So I agree some detachment is required, while maintaining empathy. If you have no empathy to start with there isn't a need to cultivate detachment. I am far less detached regarding family. I think that is fine. If my son was ill, I would not care for him as I am not detached enough. I do not want to be detached from my family and friends. I want to shed the tear when they suffer as their suffering is my suffering. As far as functioning at your highest and best level, or being "in the zone," I have a few though
[FairfieldLife] Re: How the Brain Creates God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal > > How can you forget Darwin and his day if you visit FFL? The gene pool > is so shallow here it's a wonder you don't scrape bottom. I am not regular in my visits, as I am not regular in my meditations. :) >
[FairfieldLife] Re: How the Brain Creates God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Nelson" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > Latest theory, from New Scientist: > > > > > > This is fascinating. > > > > > > Religion is an inescapable artefact of the > > > wiring in our brain, says Bloom. "All humans > > > possess the brain circuitry and that never > > > goes away." Petrovich adds that even adults > > > who describe themselves as atheists and > > > agnostics are prone to supernatural thinking. > > > Bering has seen this too. When one of his > > > students carried out interviews with > > > atheists, it became clear that they often > > > tacitly attribute purpose to significant or > > > traumatic moments in their lives, as if some > > > agency were intervening to make it happen. > > > "They don't completely exorcise the ghost of > > > god - they just muzzle it," Bering says. > > > > > > I can relate to this. I still have a magical > > > thought process that pops up sometimes about > > > events. Then I laugh at myself for my own > > > conditioning. > > > > But he's saying it's not conditioning; it's > > hard-wired. > > > Maybe we are all segments of the main program? Evolutionarily hardwired. But of course we are constantly evolving a I do think that this tendency towards believing in supernatural forces is reinforced by the fact that humans are pattern spotters, with the unfortunate side effect of seeing patterns when there are none. Also, the tendency towards justification may be a part of finding "purpose" in certain events. Don't forget Darwin Day February 12! >
[FairfieldLife] Re: TMO Finances
Hard to tell much from the 990s. I just recently looked at the David Lynch Foundation 990 for tax year 2006, the most recent. It had 2.4 million in revenues and spent about 1.3 million on programs. Not much went out in director compensation. None to Lynch.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atheism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Arhata Osho wrote: > > An atheist is more that a non believer in god. > http://www.atheists .org/Atheism/ > http://www.freedomofspeech.netfirms.com/ > That is why I said you cannot be a TMist and an atheist.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Are There Prerequisites for Advaita?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > > I've got a brother-in-law who has a heart attack, dragged half dead to > the hospital, cut open from bow to stern . . . > > and he walked out of that hospital an advaita thru and thru. He's > never heard of the concept, or come across any of its precepts. > > But he speaks of the meaninglessness of worldly pursuits, how his > daily duties only left him only with fears and anxieties - he > experienced a discontent that went right to his core. That dude has > really lightened up. > Nothing like a near miss to inspire life change. Unfortunately, after a while most forget how mortal they are and go back to being the person they were before.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Name Game (was: new books on Maharishi ???)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > And, just to end on a light note, may I express > > my appreciation for one of our new members' ID > > and screen name -- ysoy10li. > > Yes. But very soon you will suspect he is Jim. > Why certainly not. I thought Enlightened Dawn might be Sandiego. I miss him.
[FairfieldLife] Re: About Kirk
Given the way people treat each other on this forum and the fact that people distort what others say, I could not imagine using my own name here. There should be a warning on this site that people feel free to libel one another and defame their businesses. Kirk, where are you working? PM me if you don't want public. I am going to be in NOLA in April. I'll sneak in your restaurant. I am the sexy gray haired woman with rhinestones on her glasses all dressed in black. Think female Deepak Chropra.
[FairfieldLife] Re: new books on Maharishi ???
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Feb 2, 2009, at 2:13 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > Median income for physics PHD with 20+ years of experience: > > > > $125,000 > > > > ANd Hagelin isn't any old "median" physicist, despite what people here > > like to pretend. > > > He's been out of the field for how long? And with a tarnished > reputation for peddling pseudoscience? I'd be amazed if he could get > an entry level job. > I doubt any non-TMO university would hire him at this point.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Judy, MMY was a Potentate! (new books on Maharishi ???)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > When the ultra-rich buy their yachts etc., what needs are they > fulfilling? Whatever and however you describe those needs, it will be > seen that Maharishi's lifestyle fulfilled exactly those needs for his > ego. > > > Sorry, but if anyone had a private life, it was him. Did you ever try > to get to be in his physical presence? Wasn't his privacy guarded by a > corps of sycophants? Wasn't his life his to define and wasn't the > amount of "private life" he had his to increase or decrease? Do you > think that Maharishi ever complained that he wasn't seeing his family > enough, didn't get "down time" enough, etc.? The ultra rich business owners often seem to have little separation between work life and other life. It is all just life. One entrepreneur I know well has said: "Why have hobbies, why go on vacation? Work is my hobby and there is nothing to vacation from." They often don't need to work at all but do for a variety of reasons. They love what they do. Many thrive on the deal. Others thrive on the power. They believe that they can do it better than anyone else and have a hard time letting go. MMY seemed to be much the same to me as some very rich entrepreneurs I know. One person I know is well into his 80s, on the Fortune 500 list, and still works all the time. Money often is just the report card, a grade for how well you are accomplishing what you want to accomplish. Some flaunt the money more than others, but they all use it one way or another. MMY managed to buy a lot with his money, including seclusion in mighty nice surrounds.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Power Of Attraction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan wrote: > If someone can push it out -- and mesmerize us a bit, whether its our > gender of choice, teachers or politicians (actors and great > performances is another phenomenon that comes to mind -- as well as > musicians -- I mean the Beatles had some good music -- but good enough > for all that hoopla -- was there something else there?) -- is there > some antidote we can do to make us less suceptible to such > "manipulation"? You had a lot of good stuff in your post. One thing I do to help me resist manipulation is to have a personal rule that I do not make important decisions without walking away first and getting some space away from whoever is trying to sell or convince me of something. If someone is trying to get me to do something, I tell them I have this rule. It helps me stick to it. Another thing is to try to play devil's advocate with yourself. If you can clearly articulate the opposite position it will help with your critical thinking. And don't sleep with him on the first date. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: new books on Maharishi ???
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > > and we have those, like me, and i suspect the majority of those who > practice TM, who just don't know, and until something is proved one > way or another, don't care- > > unlike the Maharishi bashers who are content to climb into their > igloos of ignorance and proclaim endlessly that the Maharishi did > fuck around, and it is up to the rest of us to prove otherwise. I am a bit of a MMY basher, but the sex issue likely can't be proved one way or another. Too much time has passed. So, I don't spend time thinking about it either. Igloo of ignorance? Are you from up nort, eh?
[FairfieldLife] Re: How woman misuse the power of attraction.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." wrote: > A woman may appear more attractive sexuality because she pushes more > buttons of a sexual nature, pretty simple. The buttons she has learned > to push are designed to obtain your/and others attention for her > sometimes egotistical needs be it vanity, relationships, etc. Woman > are forced to behave this way in our primitive culture. Billy, maybe you would be happiest as a monk in seclusion. We sweat, we mate, we eat, we scratch, we poop, we laugh, we die. Enjoy it or opt out as best you can. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: new books on Maharishi ???
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > > > -that- is your standard, that something has been published in > newspapers?? unbelievable...and what about all of those health > benefits of TM that i have read published in newspapers? sorry, that > just doesn't cut it, and is a ludicrousdly low bar, my Biased > Buddhist. > I think that the point was her account was a first person account, instead of just a rumor on the internet. As to whether the account is true I have no idea.
[FairfieldLife] Re: fluoride in water
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Smith" wrote: > > Anyone have any opinions on fluoride in the drinking water, it's > benefits and health problems.Does Vedic City fluoridate it's water as > well as MUM? > My opinion is that it is fine and does much to strengthen tooth enamel and prevent cavities in the US, where dental care leaves much to be desired in many populations. We know the bad things fluoride can do because some water actually has too much fluoride in it. At a high a dose it can cause a variety of bone problems. There is no evidence that the very minimal amount of fluoride in treated drinking water is harmful. It can cause some mottling of the teeth if the dose is a bit too high, not a health but an aesthetic concern. It is one of those things like vaccines where people get all bent out of shape, distrusting government.
[FairfieldLife] Re: new books on Maharishi ???
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > My suspicion is that those who believe that Maharishi > "couldn't possibly" have fucked around believe this > because they believe he was enlightened and if the > rumor were true, that would upset their definition > of what enlightenment is. ( Which definition, it is > good to remember, came from the guy who possibly > fucked around. :-) > > The TBs don't believe the rumors because it would > be "impossible" for them to be true. Sorta along > the lines of, "If an enlightened being (and we > assume as a given that MMY was one) tells us that > he's a celibate monk, well the words of the enlight- > ened are always true (and we know this because MMY > told us so), then him fucking around is *impossible*." Or, you have those who believe that maybe he did maybe he didn't, but if he did it was in accord with Nature, Which We Cannot Understand or Comprehend Until We are Enlightened Too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: unpopular names & crime: (cause and effect?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Duveyoung wrote: > > > "spawning?" -- racist remark or insensitive gaff? > > > > Edg > > > > Frankly, I don't know which. My reaction to a 15 year old girl having a > baby which won't have a father to care for it or support it because she > feels unloved and wants for a time to have her moments of love and > respect. I don't know if it's racist or an area of crushed empathy and > concern when I look at whites around me and see the parenting classes both > parents take, the debate over having the umbilical cord frozen or not, the > frenzy to do everything right with the future child then speak with pregnant > 15 year old black girls who have no idea who they are, where they are going, > where the father is now and what they'll do with the child once they give > birth to it. And yes, I speak to such girls on a regular basis. I also > speak with their "old man" despite the endless stream of racial epithets > he's slinging at me. > > Definitely grave concern (tears are flowing down the front of my face as I > type this) that I am looking at the cycle of defeat, of a subset of society > where a fifth or more of its young adult males are convicted felons with all > the discrimination /that/ brings, of a subset of society where the values > and attitudes are almost perfect in perpetuating yet more "I told you so" > from both the whites and blacks failure. > > Definitely grave concern and a feeling of defeat that an attorney who works > for criminals should speak as a starry eyed optimist of the way the world > should be and sees my statements as racist. God damn. Why doesn't he come > join me down at the homeless shelter in his spare time and sing from The > Sound of Music to our clients there? > > Give us a couple generations before I see enough parity between the races so > I can tell whether I'm racist or not. Right now I'm just sad and angry. > And people are hurting. Many of them. Big time. > I volunteer occasionally at a shelter for runaway teens, doing med checks and the like. The shelter is located in a part of the country which is primarily white. The teens at the shelter are almost all white. They have their issues. For example, having babies when they should not, so that someone can love them. Many of the teens are quite unlikeable as they lie and steal to get along. Girls shoplift and sell sex and boys steal and sell drugs. Drugs and mental illness are a problem. I think your experience with the particular shelter may be leading you to generalize what may be due to other problems such as abuse, poor education, poor upbringing, poor health, lack of money and opportunity, etc. into a race issue.
[FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > > > Me, EnlightenDawn and Raunch sit around, smoking grasshopper weed > and engage in mental tantric practices between the domes. Oh, by the > way, many years ago I walked between the domes when everybody was > flying. Oh my God! I almost got electrocuted! The energy exchange > between the domes was mind blowing. One big yoni, one big lingam. > Stand back! > > > > Peter, I used to know a guy who said he could sense,(through his nose > physical nose or his subtle nose, I forget which) the attraction > between male and female pheromones emanating from the domes. He must > have been smokin' grasshopper weed or somethin' on a breezy day and he > got wind of it. > Or he needed to get laid real bad!
[FairfieldLife] Monkeys vs Meat (Re: Mantras, Religion and finally a statement . . .)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, I am the eternal wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 3:48 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: > > > Funny recap! I am afraid my last question might have been lost in the > > snark. I really am interested in what specific results you > > experienced from the siddhis. I have over the years heard too many > > vague statements about results without specificity. I would like > > someone to say something specific. E > > > > Intense friendliness, happiness and compassion which lasted after program. > Feeling as big and as powerful as an elephant. Reminded myself of that > experience after program and was suddenly able to turn a wrench which > wouldn't otherwise budge. Exploration of my guts and innards. Trips > through the galaxy, going to see this planet, this moon. Having no idea > what's for dinner but being able to taste, smell, see, feel and touch it. > Being blinded by blazing white light. Constantly increasing power of > intuition. > Thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Call for Lucid Dreaming stories
Here is an interesting article on lucid dreaming and the blurred lines between awake and sleep: http://www.lucidity.com/SleepAndCognition.html
[FairfieldLife] Monkeys vs Meat (Re: Mantras, Religion and finally a statement . . .)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > > > > > > I know that. I am asking what results were produced in you. > > > ok- long hops during the flying sutra-- stuff that i couldn't have > accomplished athletically, seeing inside my body-- tendons, > ligaments, muscles, blood flowing through arteries, visions, hearing > and touch of celestial beings, traveling through outer space and > between planets. that's all i recall...stuff i've lost interest in > pursuing further. > Thank you.
