[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: As I'm pretty sure both Xeno and Barry know, apostasy is not limited to defection from a religion. One can become an apostate from any previous loyalty. 'Apostasy is the formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person. One who commits apostasy is known as an apostate.' As I never was the member of any religion, I cannot ever be correctly accused of apostasy. As the TM org claims it is not a religion, so no one can ever be correctly accused for disafilliating or abandoning TM as apostasy (unless of course the TM org is lying about that claim). It's an NPD Thang, Xeno. If you've convinced yourself that the POV held by your self is true, and that any POV that contradicts it is is untrue, then you get to make up the rules. There is absolutely *no problem* with declaring someone an apostate from an organization that you declare is not a religion. :-) It's a lot like having an argument in which there is only one participant -- the person trying to start the argument -- and then declaring one's self the winner. :-) Narcissistic Personality Disorder really *does* explain almost all of the aberrant behavior we see on FFL. I would suggest that this mental disorder is the true legacy of Maharishi's teachings. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Transcendental Mediation is not a religion. - Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Doug Hamilton is an increasingly senile cultist who thinks that anyone who criticizes something he likes is a terrorist. - Sensible Americans Today, October 24 edition From: dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Barry is going to town with this smoking gun, he thinks he's found. Trying to indict the whole TMO with an extreme comment by one of its members. I predict this will be a ho hum incident for anyone excepting Barry, and likely Michael. Although Michael, has maintained a bit of lower profile lately. Yes, this must certainly be Barry's best day of the year, capping his 20 year effort to get someone to recognize a extreme view of a chat room participant. Let's give it up for Barry. (or at least a Bronx cheer) (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Transcendental Mediation is not a religion. - Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Doug Hamilton is an increasingly senile cultist who thinks that anyone who criticizes something he likes is a terrorist. - Sensible Americans Today, October 24 edition From: dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I guess the only remaining question is, if a framed copy of this blurb, (I haven't had time to look at it), will take its place next to Barry's prized ceremonial robe of the Buddhist Lama he is so fond of. Will it rank that high? (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Barry is going to town with this smoking gun, he thinks he's found. Trying to indict the whole TMO with an extreme comment by one of its members. I predict this will be a ho hum incident for anyone excepting Barry, and likely Michael. Although Michael, has maintained a bit of lower profile lately. Yes, this must certainly be Barry's best day of the year, capping his 20 year effort to get someone to recognize a extreme view of a chat room participant. Let's give it up for Barry. (or at least a Bronx cheer) (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Transcendental Mediation is not a religion. - Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Doug Hamilton is an increasingly senile cultist who thinks that anyone who criticizes something he likes is a terrorist. - Sensible Americans Today, October 24 edition From: dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
or at least occupy a prominent place in Barry's scrapbook. Likely next to an artist's rendering of the time Barry, and Zen Master Rama occupied two side by side urinals at a truck stop. Oh yea. Either before, or after that rendering, I am sure. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : I guess the only remaining question is, if a framed copy of this blurb, (I haven't had time to look at it), will take its place next to Barry's prized ceremonial robe of the Buddhist Lama he is so fond of. Will it rank that high? (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Barry is going to town with this smoking gun, he thinks he's found. Trying to indict the whole TMO with an extreme comment by one of its members. I predict this will be a ho hum incident for anyone excepting Barry, and likely Michael. Although Michael, has maintained a bit of lower profile lately. Yes, this must certainly be Barry's best day of the year, capping his 20 year effort to get someone to recognize a extreme view of a chat room participant. Let's give it up for Barry. (or at least a Bronx cheer) (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Transcendental Mediation is not a religion. - Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Doug Hamilton is an increasingly senile cultist who thinks that anyone who criticizes something he likes is a terrorist. - Sensible Americans Today, October 24 edition From: dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote : Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, M: Is this supposed to be a parody of the movement's hypocrisy by your alter ego Buck, because this is the exact opposite of what you have been doing? You have been doing more than denouncing, you have been slandering beyond all reason with odious comparisons. http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck M: It means you dropped a belief. Like everybody who grows up and changes religions for example. In modern society it should invoke a meh at best. The only reason it is an up word today is because there are still medieval morons running around enforcing a death penalty spelled out in their scriptures for this thought crime. People like you who are giving lip service to a reformed religion should be the last person to run around accusing someone of changing their mind about something and making slanderous comparisons with people who are killing other human beings for what they think. B:: An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. M: They might not be a critic at all, it just means they dropped the belief. Whey can't religious fanatics crack a book and get their words straight? B:The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner M: Slippery one Buck. Now you are redefining legitimate criticism only for people still practicing which by definition means they are not apostates. You are trying to distance yourself from the years of whining and criticism you subjected us too when you were kicked out of the dome. Your criticism was OK and his is terrorism. Nice try. B: may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. M: Which is the freak'n definition of apostasy short bus. B: That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. M: Not to you. You aren't clear about any of the definitions of words you are introducing into the discussion D:We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. M: You are making this too easy dude. Take your own preachy advice to heart, stop speaking the unsweet truth about someone you disagree with, stop making wildly inappropriate comparisons with expressing disdain for a group and people who explode bombs on babies and for your God's sake; crack a freak'n book about the terms you are using as weapons here to shoot the messenger for ideas you do not share. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: As I'm pretty sure both Xeno and Barry know, apostasy is not limited to defection from a religion. One can become an apostate from any previous loyalty. 'Apostasy is the formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person. One who commits apostasy is known as an apostate.' As I never was the member of any religion, I cannot ever be correctly accused of
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Life long atheists cannot commit apostasy for there never is, nor was, anything for them to abandon. Apostasy (/əˈpɒstəsi/; Greek: ἀποστασία (apostasia), a defection or revolt) is the formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person. One who commits apostasy (or who apostatizes) is known as an apostate. If 'spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth', what should they speak non-spiritually? Maybe they should just speak the truth instead of lying. Spiritual people divide themselves from the rest of mankind, and each other, so presumably they would speak with less rancour than the rest of us, except that is not what we observe. From: dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 11:32 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. Ditto, Spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth. Saha Nav, satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat speak the truth, speak sweetly na bruyat satyam apriyam | don't speak truth in an unloving way priyam ca nanritam bruyat don't speak untruth in a pleasant way esha dharmah sanatanah || this is the eternal law Or, TM Saha Nav: never do we speak negativity, never do we denounce anyone, http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/365694 Apostasy is just wrong thinking clearly getting over the line. Or as the Shakers would have said in their way, Out of Union with the Gospel. -Buck An apostate of course is different from someone just being a critic. The critic, who as a satisfied and regular practitioner may offer some criticism as in a state of critique. Such critique is then also quite different in grade from those others being more negative and then again from states of pernicious negativity advocacy, like those people who are both quitters and haters in method. That becomes a pretty clear sign of someone who has fallen in to TM apostasy. We should be mindful and clear about this as we filter our reading and interacting with our fellow community members here. That is justly good and sound subtle spirituality. Yes, like considering the source of posts I certainly sort my incoming mail accordingly. Om we should have, we could have better sorted the FFL membership here accordingly from way back with more aggressive moderation against the apostaic spam of outright apostasy here. Posting on FFL should be held a privilege and not just some right. Saha Nav, -Buck, a Satisfied Customer by the Practise of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation Programme Yes, that 'Disaffiliation'; Friends, for any of us we certainly know an apostate when we see one. For instance, with The Science of Creative Intelligence of which TM is the practical application. Seeing as US jurisprudence judges SCI to be a Religion it would not be a stretch to say that people who would renounce TM just by dropping or quitting the practice of said meditation and who then promote publicly against TM with an advocacy of negativity are in fact in an apostate state: apostate, as apostates in apostasy. Q.E.D., TM Apostates. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: As I'm pretty sure both Xeno and Barry know, apostasy is not limited to defection from a religion. One can become an apostate from any previous loyalty. 'Apostasy is the formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person. One who commits apostasy is known as an apostate.' As I never was the member of any religion, I cannot ever be correctly accused of apostasy. As the TM org claims it is not a religion, so no one can ever be correctly accused for disafilliating or abandoning TM as apostasy (unless of course the TM org is lying about that claim). It's an NPD Thang, Xeno. If you've convinced yourself that the POV held by your self is true, and that any POV that contradicts it is is untrue, then you get to make up the rules. There is absolutely *no problem* with declaring someone an apostate from an organization that you declare is not a religion. :-) It's a lot like having an argument in which there is only one participant -- the person trying to start the argument -- and then declaring one's self the winner. :-) Narcissistic Personality Disorder really *does* explain almost all of the aberrant behavior we see on FFL. I would suggest that this mental disorder is the true legacy of Maharishi's teachings. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
On 10/24/2014 1:37 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Life long atheists cannot commit apostasy for there never is, nor was, anything for them to abandon. /When a person professes a belief in Buddhas, karma and reincarnation, and at the same time, professes to be an atheist - they are probably experiencing cognitive dissonance./ Apostasy (/əˈpɒstəsi/; Greek: ἀποστασία (apostasia), a defection or revolt) is the formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person. One who commits apostasy (or who apostatizes) is known as an apostate. /Anyone who claims to be a Buddhist, and at the same time, professes a belief in an eternal spirit soul, is an impostor. Everyone knows that the Buddha did not teach an eternal spirit soul that survives after death to be reborn again. / If 'spiritually, people should speak the sweet truth', what should they speak non-spiritually? Maybe they should just speak the truth instead of lying. Spiritual people divide themselves from the rest of mankind, and each other, so presumably they would speak with less rancour than the rest of us, except that is not what we observe. /Non sequitur. The term spiritual has not been defined. And, it has already been established by Judy that you lied, but what lie did you post? Go figure./
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Buck wrote: Om yes, and eminent scholars. FairfieldLife and Fairfield and TM is quite topical to quite a lot of people lurking. And, who do you think reads this place? Your audience? Who do you really write for when you post? Some writers should rightfully be embarrassed. -Buck An eminent scholar is well known in his/her field of expertise, and some are well know outside of their field. By the criterion you have listed here so far, I could be an eminent scholar. So what are the field or fields of expertise of these people, and who are they, and why would they be interested in us anyway? I mean FFL is a place where level-headed people and psychos, and the intelligent impaired can meet on a level playing field.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Xeno, I think FFL is a microcosm of L. Do you think L is a level playing field? I do. On Tuesday, February 4, 2014 2:26 PM, anartax...@yahoo.com anartax...@yahoo.com wrote: Buck wrote: Om yes, and eminent scholars. FairfieldLife and Fairfield and TM is quite topical to quite a lot of people lurking. And, who do you think reads this place? Your audience? Who do you really write for when you post? Some writers should rightfully be embarrassed. -Buck An eminent scholar is well known in his/her field of expertise, and some are well know outside of their field. By the criterion you have listed here so far, I could be an eminent scholar. So what are the field or fields of expertise of these people, and who are they, and why would they be interested in us anyway? I mean FFL is a place where level-headed people and psychos, and the intelligent impaired can meet on a level playing field.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote: Buck wrote: Om yes, and eminent scholars. FairfieldLife and Fairfield and TM is quite topical to quite a lot of people lurking. And, who do you think reads this place? Your audience? Who do you really write for when you post? Some writers should rightfully be embarrassed. Yes, they should, Buck. I love this image of eminent scholars - who in their right eminence would be found hanging around here? -Buck An eminent scholar is well known in his/her field of expertise, and some are well know outside of their field. By the criterion you have listed here so far, I could be an eminent scholar. So what are the field or fields of expertise of these people, and who are they, and why would they be interested in us anyway? I mean FFL is a place where level-headed people and psychos, and the intelligent impaired can meet on a level playing field.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Well, it looks like it's settled then: MJ and the TurqoiseB were the real True Believers, whose religion was TM - - the only apostates left on the forum. It looks like nobody else on FFL ever considered TM to be their religion. You can't be apostate from something you don't believe in. Go figure. MJ: you know, I never thought about it that way before, but I guess back in the 70's and 80's, TM WAS my religion. So, it looks like it's settled then: MJ and Barry both thought of TM as their religion. They both were disappointed when they realized that it's a real stretch to make a simple relaxation technique into a religion. MJ and Barry have said that TM is a religion, so they must believe that to be true. The question is: why did it take Barry fourteen years to realize that he was making TM his religion, and it took MJ only a couple of years to figure this out? Go figure. Anything you do can be turned into a religion - L. Ron Hubbard made Diantics into a religion, based on the fact that people just feel better when they have someone to talk to. On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.comwrote: you know, I never thought about it that way before, but I guess back in the 70's and 80's, TM WAS my religion. On Sun, 1/19/14, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, January 19, 2014, 3:55 AM Share: What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! Well, it looks like it's settled then: MJ and the TurqoiseB were the real True Believers, whose religion was TM - - the only apostates left on the forum. It looks like nobody else on FFL ever considered TM to be their religion. You can't be apostate from something you don't believe in. Go figure. On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it. I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself? If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me. Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Xeno, you are probably correct that it is difficult after all this time to know what Jesus actually taught. For me he embodies agape. So any teaching that deviates much from that principle, I don't trust it as coming from him. I think early on his actual teachings got hijacked for other than spiritual purposes. I seem to have grown a cynical streak in myself! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 4:32 PM, anartax...@yahoo.com anartax...@yahoo.com wrote: There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that we are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: LSD still comes in tabs? How would you know that? Perhaps you read about it on MSLSD. (disclaimer for the NSA snoops: I don't know nothin' bout nothin') Actually, speaking not from experience but from a fascinating article I once read on the subject, LSD these days comes on tiny bits of paper, about a quarter the size of your little fingernail. And the reason why is ironic. It's to skirt Federal laws in the United States. In their crazed zeal to fight the war against drugs, the US government voted in some really, really dumb mandatory sentencing laws centering on the *quantity* of drugs found on a person. Thus if you have more than a certain amount of a banned substance, they can consider you a dealer and the mandatory sentencing laws come into effect. With LSD, one of the most potent psychotropic chemicals ever invented, of which 125 *micrograms* of pure stuff would give you a good trip, they decided to measure the dealer amount of the drug by weight. As a result, if you were caught today with *one sugar cube* of LSD from back in the 60s (essentially one dose), you would be sent to prison for a federally mandated twenty years. So the dealers just made the doses lighter. They put a tiny microdot of LSD onto a tiny piece of paper, and voila -- they can carry around literally thousands of doses in their pockets without ever going over the dealer amount of the drug that would invoke the mandatory sentencing laws. Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
you know, I never thought about it that way before, but I guess back in the 70's and 80's, TM WAS my religion. On Sun, 1/19/14, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, January 19, 2014, 3:55 AM Share: What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! Well, it looks like it's settled then: MJ and the TurqoiseB were the real True Believers, whose religion was TM - - the only apostates left on the forum. It looks like nobody else on FFL ever considered TM to be their religion. You can't be apostate from something you don't believe in. Go figure. On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it. I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself? If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me. Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, first of all, I very much enjoy this kind of discussion so thank you. Secondly, I think I still have some issues with my Catholic upbringing and that those are coming into play here. Yes, I realize the two languages are expressing the same principle. But as you must well know, language choice has such an effect on tone. And I think tone is what we register on the subconscious level. And the subconscious level is what affects us most strongly. So...while I agree that it's good to consider the literal and move beyond, I think it's also good to notice the feeling tone engendered in us by the literal. The redemptive wording for me connotes the idea that we have to be saved by something outside of ourselves while the unity wording suggests that we are already one with God but have not yet realized it. I think this is the fundamental reason why I embrace Eastern spirituality rather than western Catholicism. The former says that we are divine in our basic nature. I don't think Catholicism says that. I think the Church says that by nature, we are separate from God, where by nature is the key phrase. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 9:12 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: But you don't seem able to see that while the language is different, it's the same fundamental idea. Redemption for Christians is the Beatific Vision, being at one with God forever. We are not born in that state; we are defective in that respect. You weren't born in the state of full realization of your fundamental unity with the divine, so you are defective in that respect. Something is missing. Obviously in both cases it's a core defect--how could unity with the Divine not be the core quality of a human being? People take words much too literally instead of looking at the principles behind them. Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it. I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself? If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me. Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I would agree with this. In my own life, from childhood on, the tendency to invoke metaphysical explanations steadily declined, until now everything is immediate, direct, no need for an explanation of something out-of-sight. That is for experience. As far as the rational mind is concerned, there are things unseen, but inferred by aspects of experience. Radio waves for example. We cannot see them or feel them, but there are direct experiential reasons for supposing they are there, even though an electrical engineer and a physicist might fully understand the reason this is so. For the rest of us, that the radio, when turned on, functions, is direct evidence of that even if we cannot fully understand. But if I were to say I am getting mental messages from 'enlightened beings' in the constellation of Orion, and yet the only evidence I offer is what I say, only crazy people might believe what I say. This is the difference between shared evidence and private 'evidence'. There has to be a way to connect minds via the physical world to have evidence that involves direct experience. This is basically what divides science from religion. Science by its nature cannot endorse metaphysical explanations because there is nothing to share, to point to. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, s3raphita@... wrote: Re People take words much too literally: That's my view. I think the original founders of the world religions were talking about a change in consciousness. They had an insight (ie in - sight). The unwashed masses take the words as a description of the objective world out there. As the everyday world out there doesn't match the founders' descriptions they are then forced to imagine a supernatural world were those words would apply.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
in my experience it has basic truth in it but it is rather wordy, meaning it takes a million words to say what could be expressed in 100 words. People who latch onto it tend to be fanatic about it. The woman who channeled the material, Helen Schucman had a habit of disparaging it throughout her life - her partner in the project Bill Thetford, used the material to transform every difficult relationship in his life, except for his relationship with Schucman. So in my opinion it has value but is awfully tiresome to wade through. On Sat, 1/18/14, steve.sun...@yahoo.com steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 1:35 AM I was talking to a friend of mine the other night. In the past he has recommended some interesting reading material. He was telling me how impressed he was with The Course in Miracles. I know that material has been around for sometime. I was wondering what others might have thought of it, if they happened to take a run at it? FWIW, from what he told me, it had an interesting genesis, but other than that, again, from what he told me, it sounded like basic new age boiler plate. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote: yep, it can happen. Same with Chuck Anderson On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams punditster@... wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:13 PM On 1/17/2014 9:34 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. So, it's settled then - Amma and MMY are both hucksters that cause amazing experiences of energy in people's lives.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
emptybill: Robin never was interested in a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. That's because MMY didn't present TM in a classical assessment of enlightenment. MMY's sadhana is based on yoga practice. If it was Vedantic MMY would have emphasized the Vedantic notion of maya,which is not real, yet not unreal. Instead the TMer practice is in the context of the yogic praxis quasi-dualism. When your practice any yoga it invovles a knower and a known - it's considered to be based on a fundamental dualism. If Robin had wanted to interpret his enlightenment according to Vedantic explanations he would have done so - I haven't seen any evidence in his writing that Robin believed anything but the subject-object dualism. Vedantic realism is based on transcendental knowledge not on the maya of works or acts that can liberate. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:57 PM, emptyb...@yahoo.com wrote: *Michael sez:* *Robin's experience was that his actions were, as it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did, even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do what he was doing.* *So bottom line I don't buy Robin's assertion that he in essence was forced to behave in this way by these forces. That excuse goes back as long as we have had the idea of a Devil. * Emptybill replies: Robin never was interested in a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. All of this, in spite of the fact that Shankara’s Vedanta was the proffered basis of Maharishi’s tradition. Such an assessment would have presented an opposite view about this whole “enlightenment meme”. I pointed this out to Robin a number of times but he wasn’t interested in hearing about it. Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by “cosmic entities” but was now free of them. More of the old - “I didn’t fail … I was fooled” as you also pointed out. This is what happens when *experience* itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Michael Jackson: I do think some folk have done it like maybe good old Saint Joseph of Cupertino and am willing to believe Rama may have done, as the Brits say. So,if anyone could really demonstrate levitation, the event would probably be on the cover of every science magazine, on TV and in the news every day for years.An levitation event that if true, would revolutionize science and cause a Copernican revolution in he laws of physics and the theory of general relativity. But, this event seems to have been missed - it's not even mentioned in Mark Laxer's book about Rama. Go figure. M never demonstrated cause he couldn't do it. According to your own logic it could have been possible for MMY to hop, levitate float and fly,even if nobody saw the event. You realize you and Barry have just blown any semblance of scientific objectivity, right? Maybe it's time for you two to apologize for posting all those fibs making fun of the TMer bun-hoppers on the forum. [image: Inline image 1] On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.comwrote: Oh, I see that you mean. As to my own belief, I made no comment on the reality of Lenz's levitation demonstration. I have done TMSP and it certainly doesn't qualify as flying in any way. I do think some folk have done it like maybe good old Saint Joseph of Cupertino and am willing to believe Rama may have done, as the Brits say. M never demonstrated cause he couldn't do it. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:05 PM On 1/17/2014 9:46 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. I have no idea why you would say that. Well, it's settled then - humans can fly and levitate; we have several eye-witnesses on the forum who can testify to this. So, I wonder why Barry was making fun of MMY and the bun-hopping? Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Ann: I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell. This is a new twist - now it's Barry's fault for enabling Rama. Go figure. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:51 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: Michael wrote: I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I agree. I also have a hard time finding greater or lesser validity of any particular experience over another. An experience experienced is just that - it is reality for that experiencer. And as we all know experience is ultimately subjective and particular to each person. How to understand or interpret, let alone judge or put some value on someone else's reality/experience is, for me, an exercise in futility. I do, however, believe in personal growth and the reality of the possibility for the expansion of awareness and the development of sensibility in different human beings in different phases of their life or lives. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I also think that many people who are under the assumption that a sort of higher state of consciousness can or does exist in gurus or teachers and are therefore responsible for giving these people free licence to do as they please and to support them in this, often to the detriment of everyone involved. I have yet to see anyone free of ego and I don't think of ego as something terrible. Like many characteristics, it can become distorted, unbalanced but in and of itself ego is neither good or bad. Just as ambition or empathy or passion is not inherently, ultimately good or bad. How it manifests can make the difference between something becoming positive, negative or simply remaining benign. It's complex, of course. I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
to one side of her grabbed her arm and prevented her from plunging them into the horrified accuser's chest. After she had calmed down (and been disarmed) she vowed that she couldn't help it, that the Devil had gotten into her and made her try to stab him. Still says to this day the Devil caused her to do that. Same deal as with Robin. On Fri, 1/17/14, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 4:18 PM Really fine post, Michael, very thoughtful. Based on what I've read, I'm not sure enlightenment experiences are always a choice, at least not on a conscious level. I don't know how much you've read of what Robin posted here, but he may be a case in point. From his accounts, while he certainly wanted to become enlightened, when it happened it was completely unexpected and not at all under his control. And it lasted for more than 10 years. You write, But most of those who have 'higher states of consciousness' cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct... Robin's experience was that his actions were, as it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did, even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do what he was doing. So in his case it wasn't a matter of egoic focus in the usual sense, although that seems to have been what it looked like from the outside, especially toward the end of his cult-leader period. What's unusual about Robin is that after his group crashed and burned and he was disgraced, he realized something was very wrong with his enlightenment, and he set out to get himself back to normal consciousness. It took him 25 years of constant, grueling, agonizing effort. And he came to believe that enlightenment was a snare and a delusion, masterminded by forces inimical to the welfare of human beings. In his case, he believes, these forces took advantage of what he calls his secret infirmities, negative character traits, first to instigate his enlightenment, and then to bring him down. He never thought, and doesn't to this day, that Maharishi was a con man. He believes Maharishi was himself conned by these same forces. I'm struck by how closely your analysis tracks in many respects with Robin's. Not having known or having had any experience with Rama, I can only go by his recorded history - he certainly was known to have acted out - he apparently abused and misused his position as teacher, he was a serial womanizer, and maybe took people to the cleaners - although some seemed to feel that their money was well spent with him, regardless of his enormities. I acknowledge his shortcomings, and the fact that some like Barry had some powerful experiences with him. I am having some degree of energy experience from reading Barry's account. I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. Same with other teachers like Muktananda - they could spark energy in other people, sometimes big time Energy, but they were or are ego-centered and screwed up in a lot of ways that lead to the people around them getting screwed in different ways. Chuck Anderson who was also known as Master Teacher of the Endeavor Academy falls into that category. Bottom line for me is that all this has taught me the definition of enlightenment M gave out is flawed if not downright incorrect, and yes that includes the source material of the vedas which I feel was the pontifications of a bunch of guys roaming around in the forest who said Huh! This is my reality so I am going to tell everyone it THEIR reality too, and if they don't get on board with it, they are missing the boat. I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Ann: I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell. This is a new twist - now it's Barry's fault for enabling Rama. Go figure. Yup, just like it's my fault for enabling you by responding to your silly statement above. But thank you for the opportunity to illustrate my point. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:51 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... wrote: Michael wrote: I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I agree. I also have a hard time finding greater or lesser validity of any particular experience over another. An experience experienced is just that - it is reality for that experiencer. And as we all know experience is ultimately subjective and particular to each person. How to understand or interpret, let alone judge or put some value on someone else's reality/experience is, for me, an exercise in futility. I do, however, believe in personal growth and the reality of the possibility for the expansion of awareness and the development of sensibility in different human beings in different phases of their life or lives. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I also think that many people who are under the assumption that a sort of higher state of consciousness can or does exist in gurus or teachers and are therefore responsible for giving these people free licence to do as they please and to support them in this, often to the detriment of everyone involved. I have yet to see anyone free of ego and I don't think of ego as something terrible. Like many characteristics, it can become distorted, unbalanced but in and of itself ego is neither good or bad. Just as ambition or empathy or passion is not inherently, ultimately good or bad. How it manifests can make the difference between something becoming positive, negative or simply remaining benign. It's complex, of course. I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
* Did Rama leave a suicide note?* ** What you need to understand about Rama is that he believed in reincarnation and karma. Rama's suicide note is contained in his own writings. According to Rama, the spirit doesn't die when the body dies - your spirit goes into the Tibetan Bardo state for a few days and then your spirit is reborn in another suitable physical body. This is all explained in Rama's book, narrated by Master Fwap. So, the question is not why or how Lenz died, but where and when he will reappear. Go figure. [image: Inline image 1] Zen Master Rama From what I've read, Lentz was actually offed by paid assassins in a conspiracy that involved the Master Da. My guess is that the real reason that Barry is posting from over there in Leiden, is because he knows to much about Lenz and the secrets of levitation and floating in the air and golden auras. I'd probably be dead now too, based on what I know about about the secrets inside the golden dome. So, I'm hiding out in the Texas Hill Country until all this blows over, you know what I mean? It seems to be working pretty well because just two weeks ago I attended a satsang with Rita up in Austin and nobody even recognized me - I guess they thought I was one of the Indian ex-patriots because I was wearing a white cotton kurta shirt and had beads in both hands. Apparently, everyone posting here missed reading Surfing the Himalayas: A Spiritual Adventure by Frederick Lentz, one of the best books I've ever read about snowboarding in the Himalayas. In the words of Master Fwap, everything makes sense. Master Fwap say that there are many fake spiritual teachers and masters who have no idea of what enlightenment is and most can't even fly. They can't even levitate a pencil, much less lay claims to having endless power and influence over the universe. Snowboarding to Nirvana is the sequel to Lenz's first book, and he further explores Buddhist adventures with Master Fwap. In this book Master Fwap gives specific instructions concerning a meditation technique advocated by an Oracle. Lenz said that this book offers everything you need to attain enlightenment. According to Master Fwap: He told them that he was no longer the 'Last Incarnation of Vishnu The Cosmic Preserver,' but of Siva The Cosmic Destroyer. The first condition was that the master’s aura would turn a beautiful bright golden color when he meditated. Every living being is psychicDid you know that the vast majority of thoughts you think and emotions you feel are not even your own? Master Fwap asked with a wry smile on his face. Work cited: 'Surfing the Himalayas' Conversations and Travels with Master Fwap By Frederick Lenz St. Martin's Griffin, 1994 p. 55. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:57 PM, s3raph...@yahoo.com wrote: *Re Guy croaked himself.:* *Did Rama leave a suicide note? If not, it seems a funny way to commit suicide. Some reports claim he took 80–150 Valium. Valium comes in 2mg, 5mg and 10mg strengths. Assume (tops) he took 150 x 10mg = 1,500mg diazepam. People have taken 2,000mg of valium and had no bad effects after sleeping off the dose for 48 hours. * *Some have maintained that Rama took Phenobarbital (Abbie Hoffman's choice also) which sounds more likely if he had decided to check out - but don't US coroners run proper autopsies to determine exactly what poisons are in blood samples?* *Either way, the cause of death was drowning! Was that his intention all along? Or did he simply drown accidentally after going on a drug bender?*
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
It was pretty clearly a suicide, according to the person who was with him and attempted to join him. She survived, he didn't. : A suicide pact! Well, the fact she survived nicely makes my point that trying to overdose on Valium is a dumb idea. He owned a gun so he had a more effective means to hand.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Richard, many times turq has expressed, maybe in different words, this idea that followers actually enable leaders. At least once he has said that followers are even more responsible. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 8:45 AM, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Ann: I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell. This is a new twist - now it's Barry's fault for enabling Rama. Go figure. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:51 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: Michael wrote: I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I agree. I also have a hard time finding greater or lesser validity of any particular experience over another. An experience experienced is just that - it is reality for that experiencer. And as we all know experience is ultimately subjective and particular to each person. How to understand or interpret, let alone judge or put some value on someone else's reality/experience is, for me, an exercise in futility. I do, however, believe in personal growth and the reality of the possibility for the expansion of awareness and the development of sensibility in different human beings in different phases of their life or lives. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I also think that many people who are under the assumption that a sort of higher state of consciousness can or does exist in gurus or teachers and are therefore responsible for giving these people free licence to do as they please and to support them in this, often to the detriment of everyone involved. I have yet to see anyone free of ego and I don't think of ego as something terrible. Like many characteristics, it can become distorted, unbalanced but in and of itself ego is neither good or bad. Just as ambition or empathy or passion is not inherently, ultimately good or bad. How it manifests can make the difference between something becoming positive, negative or simply remaining benign. It's complex, of course. I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:58 PM, emptyb...@yahoo.com emptyb...@yahoo.com wrote: Michael sez: Robin's experience was that his actions were, as it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did, even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do what he was doing. So bottom line I don't buy Robin's assertion that he in essence was forced to behave in this way by these forces. That excuse goes back as long as we have had the idea of a Devil. Emptybill replies: Robin never was interested in a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. All of this, in spite of the fact that Shankara’s Vedanta was the proffered basis of Maharishi’s tradition. Such an assessment would have presented an opposite view about this whole “enlightenment meme”. I pointed this out to Robin a number of times but he wasn’t interested in hearing about it. Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by “cosmic entities” but was now free of them. More of the old - “I didn’t fail … I was fooled” as you also pointed out. This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
According to Mr. Benjamin Crème the state of evolution of Lenz at the time of death was 1,3. In other words far from enlightened. He was at a lower level than John Lennon (1,6) and Frank Zappa (1,4) but higher than Marilyn Monroe (0,9) and Elvis Presley (0,8) http://www.share-berlin.info/list.htm http://www.share-berlin.info/list.htm
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Prof. P. Dog sez: MMY's sadhana is based on yoga practice. If it was Vedantic, MMY would have emphasized the Vedantic notion of maya, which is not real, yet not unreal. Your view of Vedanta is that it is Maya-vada ... a teaching about Maya. This is a classical misrepresentation that began with Ramanuja and continues today. It infiltrated Vedanta with the works of Swami Vidyaranya, who wrote Panchadasi. Its modern proponent was Vivekananda and MMY just continued that mode – including the division of the Bha. Gita into three topical sections, also found in Aurobindo. This form of interpretation is known as Yogic Advaita and is more about yoga and less about Vedanta. The whole concept of “enlightenment” is Buddhist not Vedantic. Shankara’s Vedanta teaches the ascertainment of one’s own true nature, not chitta-nirvikalpa or Buddhist dhyana-samadhi. The purpose of the teaching is realization of moksha (freedom) - liberation from any experience, whether inner, outer or transcendent.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
If you mean the kind of scientific objectivity that the TMO uses, anything goes. On Sat, 1/18/14, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, January 18, 2014, 2:39 PM Michael Jackson: I do think some folk have done it like maybe good old Saint Joseph of Cupertino and am willing to believe Rama may have done, as the Brits say. So,if anyone could really demonstrate levitation, the event would probably be on the cover of every science magazine, on TV and in the news every day for years.An levitation event that if true, would revolutionize science and cause a Copernican revolution in he laws of physics and the theory of general relativity. But, this event seems to have been missed - it's not even mentioned in Mark Laxer's book about Rama. Go figure. M never demonstrated cause he couldn't do it. According to your own logic it could have been possible for MMY to hop, levitate float and fly,even if nobody saw the event. You realize you and Barry have just blown any semblance of scientific objectivity, right? Maybe it's time for you two to apologize for posting all those fibs making fun of the TMer bun-hoppers on the forum. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote: Oh, I see that you mean. As to my own belief, I made no comment on the reality of Lenz's levitation demonstration. I have done TMSP and it certainly doesn't qualify as flying in any way. I do think some folk have done it like maybe good old Saint Joseph of Cupertino and am willing to believe Rama may have done, as the Brits say. M never demonstrated cause he couldn't do it. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:05 PM On 1/17/2014 9:46 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. I have no idea why you would say that. Well, it's settled then - humans can fly and levitate; we have several eye-witnesses on the forum who can testify to this. So, I wonder why Barry was making fun of MMY and the bun-hopping? Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary? FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if Maharishi had offered it. Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing. I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach. emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, I don't think self evaluation is something that a disciple needs to demand. In my experience, life makes it obvious when self evaluation is needed! On second thought, I think empty meant that if the guru emphasizes experience, meaning spiritual experience, then the disciple will go with that, perhaps ignoring the feedback he or she is getting from life, from all the other experiences he or she is having, assuming that one is have more than just spiritual experiences since one is still in a body! It could be that Maharishi realized that, as you say above, Robin thought he didn't need guidance and thus Maharishi didn't offer it. Many people, myself included, have gone outside of the TMO to get what we need in terms of healing and continuing human development. As I've said before, that I've been able to do this proves to me that the TMO is not a cult. IMO it's good if people simply learn from their mistakes without the need to blame and or feel ashamed of their mistakes. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:48 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary? FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if Maharishi had offered it. Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing. I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach. emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary? FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if Maharishi had offered it. Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing. I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach. I would have to say that if someone is putting someone else in a position where they might be able to access other states of consciousness, where their reality, their orientation to their world and their life can be substantially altered by this new state of consciousness then this person who is, in some sense, engineering or facilitating this change needs to follow through and guide the newcomer within these altered/higher/different states. To give someone a tab of LSD and then leave them to their own devices is only asking for trouble if the 'tripper' becomes confused or freaked out or afraid. You wouldn't hand a kid the keys to a bulldozer or put your grandmother on an unbroke horse. Why would/should a spiritual teacher lead one to the precipice of enlightenment and simply turn away and leave? If a teacher has the 'technology' to offer someone the means for such a drastic change their life then they have a responsibility to guide them within the new landscape of their consciousness. emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: if you don't understand how people make excuses for then own behavior then you need more life experience - do you think just because someone says something, they are being truthful, including with themselves? I think Judy's trying to say that if a delusional person firmly *believes* that they are being made to do something by forces outside their control, they're blameless. She and Robin both probably believe that the real culprit in the Son Of Sam murders was the demon who talked to David Berkowitz through his neighbor's dog. :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
LSD still comes in tabs? How would you know that? Perhaps you read about it on MSLSD. (disclaimer for the NSA snoops: I don't know nothin' bout nothin')
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Maybe your experience isn't the be-all and end-all for everybody, Share, not to mention that you haven't had the sort of sudden profoundly transformative experience Robin had. In any case, Robin got all kinds of positive feedback; nobody questioned his enlightenment. Life didn't make it obvious, or even evident, that self-evaluation was needed until years down the line when his group fell apart--and once that happened, he embarked on 25 years of self-evaluation and self-reform. Also, I can't imagine a teacher not at least offering guidance to a disciple whose experience of himself and of the world has been so utterly and unexpectedly changed without any preparation, even if the disciple doesn't ask for it. FWIW, Robin has never blamed Maharishi for what happened to him. That was my suggestion, not his. Robin has never blamed anyone but himself. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. Judy, I don't think self evaluation is something that a disciple needs to demand. In my experience, life makes it obvious when self evaluation is needed! On second thought, I think empty meant that if the guru emphasizes experience, meaning spiritual experience, then the disciple will go with that, perhaps ignoring the feedback he or she is getting from life, from all the other experiences he or she is having, assuming that one is have more than just spiritual experiences since one is still in a body! It could be that Maharishi realized that, as you say above, Robin thought he didn't need guidance and thus Maharishi didn't offer it. Many people, myself included, have gone outside of the TMO to get what we need in terms of healing and continuing human development. As I've said before, that I've been able to do this proves to me that the TMO is not a cult. IMO it's good if people simply learn from their mistakes without the need to blame and or feel ashamed of their mistakes. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:48 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary? FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if Maharishi had offered it. Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing. I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach. emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I knew Barry wouldn't be able to resist the opportunity to demonize Robin and me after I commented on Michael's post. I also knew he'd fuck it up badly, which is precisely what he's done. He thinks he can divine what I'm trying to say without having read what I actually said (or what Robin actually said, for that matter). One more time: Robin took all the blame for his behavior (and I'm certainly in no position to disagree). Unlike Barry, Robin believes in being accountable for one's actions. if you don't understand how people make excuses for then own behavior then you need more life experience - do you think just because someone says something, they are being truthful, including with themselves? I think Judy's trying to say that if a delusional person firmly *believes* that they are being made to do something by forces outside their control, they're blameless. She and Robin both probably believe that the real culprit in the Son Of Sam murders was the demon who talked to David Berkowitz through his neighbor's dog. :-)
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
MMY was not a personal guru and said so many times. How could he, with so many followers? At my TTC in Fiuggi, there were over 2,000 teachers. Just getting the mantras of initiation took about 1-1/2 hours of waiting to go through the whole process. A personal guru (like Shri Yukteshwar) gives strict guideline to help form the personality of a student. Self-evaluation is part of that practice. What MMY gave was simple - practice your own culture's ethics and teach TM. He only gave a general outline about yama-niyama once (at Humbolt TTC). He may have taught more elsewhere but he was moving the TM Movement and that was his focus. Robin probably didn't get anything more than anyone else. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary? FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if Maharishi had offered it. Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing. I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach. emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
How many followers did Maharishi have who had an experience similar to Robin's of popping into what seemed to be Unity Consciousness without any warning in the space of a minute or two? It's one thing not to give personal attention to thousands of grunts slogging along with their sadhana. It's quite another not to give personal attention to the person out of all those grunts who suddenly appeared to have achieved the very pinnacle of what the grunts were working toward. MMY was not a personal guru and said so many times. How could he, with so many followers? At my TTC in Fiuggi, there were over 2,000 teachers. Just getting the mantras of initiation took about 1-1/2 hours of waiting to go through the whole process. A personal guru (like Shri Yukteshwar) gives strict guideline to help form the personality of a student. Self-evaluation is part of that practice. What MMY gave was simple - practice your own culture's ethics and teach TM. He only gave a general outline about yama-niyama once (at Humbolt TTC). He may have taught more elsewhere but he was moving the TM Movement and that was his focus. Robin probably didn't get anything more than anyone else. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: If I may comment, presumably the disciple doesn't know any better. How can the disciple demand something he or she doesn't know is necessary? FWIW, I've always thought Maharishi didn't give Robin the help he needed after he'd had this profoundly transformative experience on the mountain. Robin didn't think he needed any guidance, but he would surely have accepted it if Maharishi had offered it. Whether whatever Maharishi could have given him in the way of guidance would have made a difference, I have no idea. But it's almost as if Maharishi wanted to see what he'd do if left to his own devices. He kept close tabs on Robin once he'd gone off to teach on his own in Canada but never interfered, and even told Bevan to leave Robin alone when he came to MIU and started causing trouble, leading Robin to assume he approved of what Robin was doing. I sure could be wrong, but I'm inclined to put some of the blame for what ultimately happened to Robin on Maharishi's hands-off approach. emptybill, following up on your last sentence below, how is it possible for a teacher to cheat a disciple out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana. Surely the disciple has some say in the matter. Do you think this is what happened to Robin? This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Muktananda said Maharishi wasn't a personal Guru because he was taking care of (being the Guru of) the whole world.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
So many World Teachers ... SBS, MMY and Robin. How many world teachers does it take to liberate everyone? None.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
The first way of repentance is condemnation of sins. 'You must declare your own sins first that you may be justified.' Wherefore also the prophet said 'I said, I will speak out, my transgression to the Lord, and You remitted the iniquity of my heart.' Condemn yourself therefore for your own sins. This is enough for the Master by way of self-defense. For he who condemns his sins, is slower to fall into them again. Awake your conscience, that inward accuser, in order that you may have no accuser at the judgment seat of the Lord.--St. John Chrysostom And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: MMY was not a personal guru and said so many times. How could he, with so many followers? At my TTC in Fiuggi, there were over 2,000 teachers. Just getting the mantras of initiation took about 1-1/2 hours of waiting to go through the whole process. A personal guru (like Shri Yukteshwar) gives strict guideline to help form the personality of a student. Self-evaluation is part of that practice. What MMY gave was simple - practice your own culture's ethics and teach TM. He only gave a general outline about yama-niyama once (at Humbolt TTC). He may have taught more elsewhere but he was moving the TM Movement and that was his focus. Robin probably didn't get anything more than anyone else. Maharishi wouldn't have been *able* to give any advice to anyone having actual experiences of higher states of consciousness, never having experienced them himself. He did the same thing with everyone who ever claimed such experiences -- blow them off with a hearty Something good is happening and go back to selling beginner meditation to people who thought it was advanced.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Works for me. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: Muktananda said Maharishi wasn't a personal Guru because he was taking care of (being the Guru of) the whole world.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
This is the essence of confession (a renewal of baptism). It was originally a practice that started with ordinary people seeking out desert monastics who spent their live in askesis. Only later was it usurped by priests whose actual job was just the rite of absolution. The belief of the Greek Church is naturally also that of the Russian in this regard. Russian Orthodox theologians all hold that the Church possesses the power to forgive sins, where there is true repentance and sincere confession. The form in use at present is as follows: My child, N. N., may our Lord and God Christ Jesus by the mercy of His love absolve thee from thy sins; and I, His unworthy priest, in virtue of the authority committed to me, absolve thee and declare thee absolved of thy sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Right. So my mistake in being contemptuous of the idea that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes is what, exactly? Obviously one shouldn't be wallowing in shame after having been absolved, but if one isn't feeling any shame to start with, why would one seek absolution? This is the essence of confession (a renewal of baptism). It was originally a practice that started with ordinary people seeking out desert monastics who spent their live in askesis. Only later was it usurped by priests whose actual job was just the rite of absolution. The belief of the Greek Church is naturally also that of the Russian in this regard. Russian Orthodox theologians all hold that the Church possesses the power to forgive sins, where there is true repentance and sincere confession. The form in use at present is as follows: My child, N. N., may our Lord and God Christ Jesus by the mercy of His love absolve thee from thy sins; and I, His unworthy priest, in virtue of the authority committed to me, absolve thee and declare thee absolved of thy sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptyb...@yahoo.com emptyb...@yahoo.com wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Say, emptybill, did you ever think about the possibility of actually answering a question rather than delivering yourself of faux koans? Because your persistent nonanswers leave one with the sense that you don't have any answers, you're just spouting off at random with no concern for making sense. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
The Dancing Fool - by Kilgore Trout A flying saucer creature named Zog arrived on Earth to explain how wars could be prevented and how cancer could be cured. He brought the information from Margo, a planet where the natives conversed by means of farts and tap dancing. Zog landed at night in Connecticut. He had no sooner touched down than he saw a house on fire. He rushed into the house, farting and tap dancing, warning the people about the terrible danger they were in. The head of the house brained Zog with a golf club.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that we are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself? If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me. Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I live in the City of Unity. I did a number of residence courses at Unity Village - back in the old days. Unity Village is a fabulous facility but now there are a number of other Unity facilities - such as Unity Temple on the Plaza and Unity Church of Overland Park. Unity Temple on the Plaza is full of meditation groups and classes - Vipassana, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana, Dzogchen ... all because they have a Buddhist Center there. This also is where Khachab Rinpoche teaches Dzogchen twice a year when he comes into town.. Unity Church of Overland Park is a few blocks away from my residence. I even live next to a Unity minister. So they are pretty much everywhere. Each Unity facility has specialized in a particular part of the spiritual marketplace so their appeal has been well thought out. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote: There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that we are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: LSD still comes in tabs? How would you know that? Empty always asking the really important questions... Perhaps you read about it on MSLSD. (disclaimer for the NSA snoops: I don't know nothin' bout nothin')
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Wow, I just googled, Unity Temple on the Plaza. I want to come see this as 'field' study of communal groups. Is it a cult? There was a Unity Church here in Fairfield for a while but it seemed that it fell in to a parting of ways between spiritual meditators here and ideological stick in the mud orthodox kind of Unity people from Kansas. There is some story there. -Buck in the Dome ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: I live in the City of Unity. I did a number of residence courses at Unity Village - back in the old days. Unity Village is a fabulous facility but now there are a number of other Unity facilities - such as Unity Temple on the Plaza and Unity Church of Overland Park. Unity Temple on the Plaza is full of meditation groups and classes - Vipassana, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana, Dzogchen ... all because they have a Buddhist Center there. This also is where Khachab Rinpoche teaches Dzogchen twice a year when he comes into town.. Unity Church of Overland Park is a few blocks away from my residence. I even live next to a Unity minister. So they are pretty much everywhere. Each Unity facility has specialized in a particular part of the spiritual marketplace so their appeal has been well thought out. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote: There are a few splinter Christian churches that do not follow the idea that we are inherently sinful, but are instead, inherently good. One such church is the Unity Church of Practical Christianity. On the other hand the majority of Christian flavours do indeed seem to regard our species as base and vile in some way. Should a creator that makes such defective merchandise really be revered for attempting to patch its mistakes? It really does not make much sense. OK, y'all are bad, doomed, so I'll send my son and kill him for your benefit. After all this time it is hard to tell what Jesus actually taught; it may have had a more esoteric meaning in the beginning, but it is that more abstract way of interpretation that tends to get lost as time marches on.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Not a cult but rather a church. Most Christian don't consider it Christian because it isn't the exclusionary type with which they identity.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it. I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself? If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me. Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person rather than that they did something wrong. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:42 PM, emptybill@... emptybill@... wrote: Judy - it was a play upon and between words and meaning. You should've gotten it. And finally, I find the notion that one should never feel shame for one's mistakes contemptible. I feel shame that your mistaken notion is contemptible.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
But you don't seem able to see that while the language is different, it's the same fundamental idea. Redemption for Christians is the Beatific Vision, being at one with God forever. We are not born in that state; we are defective in that respect. You weren't born in the state of full realization of your fundamental unity with the divine, so you are defective in that respect. Something is missing. Obviously in both cases it's a core defect--how could unity with the Divine not be the core quality of a human being? People take words much too literally instead of looking at the principles behind them. Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it. I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself? If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me. Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight. I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says. The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about. Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's nothing wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. My dictionary says shame is: a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you. emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Empty, In their Unity Temple on the Plaza complex in the Kansas City area do they have open silent group transcending non-denominal meditation time, something like Quiet Time meditations? Do you need a badge to sit meditating with the group if you happen to be visiting Kansas City? I'd like to go to the Nelson art museum in KC and then have a place to go meditate. . -Buck ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: Not a cult but rather a church. Most Christian don't consider it Christian because it isn't the exclusionary type with which they identity.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Share: What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! Well, it looks like it's settled then: MJ and the TurqoiseB were the real True Believers, whose religion was TM - - the only apostates left on the forum. It looks like nobody else on FFL ever considered TM to be their religion. You can't be apostate from something you don't believe in. Go figure. On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Judy, once again I think it is a matter of language choice. I would say that I need to fully realize my fundamental unity with the divine, with all of creation. Rather than that I stand in need of redemption. For me, each of these wordings has its own flavor or tone. I prefer the former wording for various reasons. It may not be how the Church would say it. But I believe it is closer to how Jesus would express it. I recognize that all of us humans need to grow. What I reject is the idea that we are defective in our core, by our very nature. I guess that makes me apostate! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:21 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: *And I never said you should believe it. Why are you repeating yourself?* *If you don't think you stand in need of redemption, that's fine with me.* Judy, true you said Christianity but my personal experience is with Catholicism. I still think it's unhealthy to think that humans are defective by nature and I don't believe that Jesus taught that. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 3:50 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: *I do believe I said Christianity, not Catholicism, Share. I'm astonished you weren't aware that it's Christian doctrine across the board. As I said, if we weren't defective, there'd have been no need for God to send Jesus to redeem us and make us acceptable in God's sight.* *I'm not saying you or anybody else should believe this. It was just an aside, a reminder that this is what Christianity says.* *The story about the pope and the Portuguese fishing industry is apocryphal, BTW. Days of penitence, including the practice of abstaining from meat, had been established long before there was a Portuguese fishing industry important enough for a pope to be concerned about.* Judy, this is where I part company with Catholicism, the belief that people are defective at their core. I don't think this is a healthy belief and I doubt that Jesus taught it. I left the Church when they said it was no longer a mortal sin to eat meat on Friday. I realized how arbitrary their rules are. Later I heard that some Pope made that rule to help the Portuguese fishing industry! On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:51 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Did you not read what I wrote, Share? The distinction in terms of words is arbitrary. Shame isn't inherently toxic, and guilt isn't inherently healthy. You can redefine the words all you want, but all you're saying is that one shouldn't feel that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective (or at least no more so than anybody else--it's a basic doctrine of Christianity, of course, that everyone is fundamentally wrong, bad, and defective; otherwise we wouldn't need redemption). Judy, contemporary psychologists find it useful to distinguish between guilt which is healthy and shame which is toxic, where shame indicates feeling that one is fundamentally wrong, bad, defective. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:31 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: It's still an arbitrary distinction, Share. Shame need not involve the sense that there's something wrong with you rather than that there was something wrong with what you did. And anyway, the sense that there's *nothing* wrong with you is delusionary. If there were nothing wrong with you, you wouldn't have done anything wrong in the first place. It's just a faux distinction. Psychologists don't want you to beat yourself up endlessly about what you did, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel shame at all, ever. My last sentence is what I mean--and what most people (including the dictionary) mean--by shame. Judy, my distinction between shame and guilt comes from contemporary psychology and I agree with your last sentence. On Saturday, January 18, 2014 1:03 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: *That's your personal definition of shame, Share. You're making an arbitrary distinction between feeling guilt and feeling shame. **My dictionary says shame is:* *a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety* *I'd say if you are unable or refuse to feel pain about having done something wrong, there's something wrong with you.* emptybill, I think it's appropriate to feel guilt about wrong doing and to make amends. But imo shame is toxic. It says that there's something fundamentally wrong with the person
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Re People take words much too literally: That's my view. I think the original founders of the world religions were talking about a change in consciousness. They had an insight (ie in - sight). The unwashed masses take the words as a description of the objective world out there. As the everyday world out there doesn't match the founders' descriptions they are then forced to imagine a supernatural world were those words would apply.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
http://www.nelson-atkins.org/ http://www.nelson-atkins.org/ http://www.nelson-atkins.org/ http://www.unitytemple.com/healing/hmedit.asp http://www.unitytemple.com/healing/hmedit.asp http://www.martydybiczphd.com/Pages/MeditationSchedule.aspx http://www.martydybiczphd.com/Pages/MeditationSchedule.aspx
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I am still reading - its a pretty extraordinary book, to me anyway. You are quite the writer and should I ever be able to write to that level, I will be a happy man. I am still feeling energy, sometimes with a Capital E. Some I might expect such as the account of Rama allowing the golden light to glow and glow and glow in the room, the Buddha meditation in the Hawaiian restaurant..., Ah, yes...good moments, both of them. The latter story was written at the time, which possibly makes a difference. Fred Lenz was, after all, an English professor before he became a guru/cult figure, and so he highly recommended that everyone keep a Journal, and when they had extraordinary experiences, to write them down *as soon as possible* after they'd happened. His theory was -- and I fully believe it is true, based on personal experience -- that many of these experiences happen in alternate realities that you can't easily access or even remember when you're back in your normal, everyday reality. He felt -- and again I agree -- that if you have some whiz-bang experience that if you don't write it down in the first day or so after it happens, much or most of the experience will be lost to you forever. When trying to go back and recapture it, you'll end up adding too much fiction and moodmaking into the writing, because you won't be able to remember how it *felt*. You can't recapture the state of attention you were in at the time because you are no longer in it. On the other hand, his theory was that if you *do* write it down at the time, you can then go back later and polish the writing (as I did with some of the stories), but more important, the writing now serves as kind of a doorway or portal back to the state of attention you experienced while the original events were going on. He called this the second level of writing, creating a catalyst for yourself such that, when you read it again in the future, it takes you back to the mindset of the original experience and allows you to experience it again. That certainly happened for me when writing some of the stories, and still happens sometimes when I go back and read some of them. Rama's third level of writing is something I'm not sure I've ever achieved, but I still aspire to it. That's when you manage to capture enough of the energy and mindset of an extraordinary experience that *someone else* can get a hit on it, and feel a little of the original energy and wonder. I've certainly experienced that when reading some of my favorite authors. ...but some of the strongest Energy was when I read the chapter Style about how you live your life when no one else is watching (and how you decorate a house) - Maybe I am just wanting to feel a lot so I am doing so at odd moments. Whatever. A lot of these stories were written -- like my Paris cafe stories -- sitting down at a cafe in Santa Fe with essentially a blank mind and a blank canvas, and just *writing*, to see what came out. At the time of that story, I was just having SO much fun decorating my house that I guess that's what came out. :-) Anyhow I am gonna take a break for the night and see what tomorrow brings - thanks again for sharing this link - I'm getting a lot out of it. No problem, and I hope it answers some of your questions. He was definitely an odd guy, clearly the oddest I've ever met in this lifetime. Much of my experience studying with him was wonderful, and mainly because -- in contrast to the TMO where I'd spent the previous few years -- so much of it was FUN. We went to movies together; we went to Disneyland together; we went to Hawaii and Paris and Amsterdam together. We'd dress up in tuxes and evening dresses and have lavish dinners at The Pierre in NY or at Windows On The World. Nothing about the trip was reclusive or aspiring to head off someday and live in a cave. It was very much a Tantric trip -- not only about living in the world, but about living in the world *well*, and with some style. When it began to be less fun, I wound up having to make some decisions about whether to bail on it or not, and wound up bailing. Many friends stuck it out for a couple of more years, but then Rama wound up bailing on *them*, kinda leaving them floundering for some time. I consider myself fortunate that I had made my own decision to leave before then, and thus didn't have to deal with that sudden absence. Anyway, to quote the Grateful Dead, it was a long, strange trip, and even though I'm not part of it any more, I'm glad I wrote some of it down. Heck, if I hadn't, by now I'd be half convinced that I imagined it all. :-) But I didn't. On Thu, 1/16/14, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 7:47 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Rama's third level of writing is something I'm not sure I've ever achieved, but I still aspire to it. That's when you manage to capture enough of the energy and mindset of an extraordinary experience that *someone else* can get a hit on it, and feel a little of the original energy and wonder. If my experience is any indication, you have achieved that third level for sure. On Fri, 1/17/14, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 8:09 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I am still reading - its a pretty extraordinary book, to me anyway. You are quite the writer and should I ever be able to write to that level, I will be a happy man. I am still feeling energy, sometimes with a Capital E. Some I might expect such as the account of Rama allowing the golden light to glow and glow and glow in the room, the Buddha meditation in the Hawaiian restaurant..., Ah, yes...good moments, both of them. The latter story was written at the time, which possibly makes a difference. Fred Lenz was, after all, an English professor before he became a guru/cult figure, and so he highly recommended that everyone keep a Journal, and when they had extraordinary experiences, to write them down *as soon as possible* after they'd happened. His theory was -- and I fully believe it is true, based on personal experience -- that many of these experiences happen in alternate realities that you can't easily access or even remember when you're back in your normal, everyday reality. He felt -- and again I agree -- that if you have some whiz-bang experience that if you don't write it down in the first day or so after it happens, much or most of the experience will be lost to you forever. When trying to go back and recapture it, you'll end up adding too much fiction and moodmaking into the writing, because you won't be able to remember how it *felt*. You can't recapture the state of attention you were in at the time because you are no longer in it. On the other hand, his theory was that if you *do* write it down at the time, you can then go back later and polish the writing (as I did with some of the stories), but more important, the writing now serves as kind of a doorway or portal back to the state of attention you experienced while the original events were going on. He called this the second level of writing, creating a catalyst for yourself such that, when you read it again in the future, it takes you back to the mindset of the original experience and allows you to experience it again. That certainly happened for me when writing some of the stories, and still happens sometimes when I go back and read some of them. Rama's third level of writing is something I'm not sure I've ever achieved, but I still aspire to it. That's when you manage to capture enough of the energy and mindset of an extraordinary experience that *someone else* can get a hit on it, and feel a little of the original energy and wonder. I've certainly experienced that when reading some of my favorite authors. ...but some of the strongest Energy was when I read the chapter Style about how you live your life when no one else is watching (and how you decorate a house) - Maybe I am just wanting to feel a lot so I am doing so at odd moments. Whatever. A lot of these stories were written -- like my Paris cafe stories -- sitting down at a cafe in Santa Fe with essentially a blank mind and a blank canvas, and just *writing*, to see what came out. At the time of that story, I was just having SO much fun decorating my house that I guess that's what came out. :-) Anyhow I am gonna take a break for the night and see what tomorrow brings - thanks again for sharing this link - I'm getting a lot out of it. No problem, and I hope it answers some of your questions. He was definitely an odd guy, clearly the oddest I've ever met in this lifetime. Much of my experience studying with him was wonderful, and mainly because -- in contrast to the TMO where I'd spent the previous few years -- so much of it was FUN. We went to movies together; we went to Disneyland together; we went to Hawaii and Paris and Amsterdam together. We'd dress up in tuxes and evening dresses and have lavish dinners at The Pierre in NY or at Windows On The World. Nothing about the trip was reclusive or aspiring to head off someday and live in a cave. It was very much a Tantric trip -- not only about living in the world, but about living in the world *well*, and with some style. When it began to be less fun, I wound up having to make some decisions about whether to bail on it or not, and wound up bailing. Many friends stuck it out
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Well, I thought fer sure you'd say that Rama was a con man and a fake and had sexual relations with his students, like you said about MMY. Maybe you've changed your mind about that. It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. From what I've read, Rama left several million dollars, most of that given to him by his students to support his extravagant lifestyle. Barry probably gave Rama over $10,000 to be able to go see a movie with Rama. So, I wonder what that has taught Barry about giving money to people for spiritual instruction. What happened to all the money? So, how much does it cost to fly Rama over to Paris and put him up in a four-star hotel for a few days? Barry's part of the donation probably cost him close to $5,000. That's a lot of money to just spend just to be able be with your teacher at Disneyland. Go figure. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.comwrote: I changed my day so I could delve into what you had written - I have gone through a lot of it and it answers most of my questions. Mainly I wanted to know if you thought Rama was legit in the beginning and if you witnessed any of the power or sidhi demonstrations he did. Obviously yes to both. I had a hard time reading much of it because I began to feel a great deal of energy as soon as I started reading, I mean LOTS of energy. So I am taking the reading in stages. Read a little. Sweep my floors a little, clean the bathrooms, come down off the energy a little and read a little more. Two minor questions I have are: Did you know this guy? Mark Laxer Have you ever read his book Take Me for a Ride: Coming of Age in a Destructive Cult Paperback? If so is it accurate? That's all - back to the energy now and thanks for talking and thanks for writing about Rama and all the other things you wrote about. On Thu, 1/16/14, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 4:02 PM Thanks Barry - I am gonna read what you have written and if I have any questions after that, I'll send 'em. Got a busy day today, but I intend to start reading it later tonight. On Thu, 1/16/14, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 8:21 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even think about the dude any more, except when something triggers a memory, as something you said in one of your posts did yesterday. Second, I don't waste my time either condemning or defending him -- he was what he was, and I don't much care what anyone thinks about him. Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after paying thousands of dollars to supposedly learn them. Some will pile on because they don't like me, and they mistakenly believe that if they diss a former teacher I still have some positive feelings about, it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, and thus I'll react and get into one of the Robin-like confrontations with them they so hope for. That's not gonna happen, so we might as well do it here. :-) But I'll warn you ahead of time that my attention span for things Rama-related is pretty damned short these days, so if you have questions, make the first few count, because at some point I'll get tired of the whole thing and bail. :-) That said, ask anything you want, and I'll do my best to answer your questions as honestly as I wrote Road Trip Mind. That would be a good place to start if you are actually curious about the dude. I wrote it to get the Rama-monkey off my back, and it worked. I don't actually have a great deal more to say about the guy than I said in that book. http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Turq, How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself in? Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. -Buck
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Turq, How did it go in the Rama group in the longer Aftermath of Rama doing himself in? I honestly don't know, except for the few people I remained in contact with, primarily over the Internet. For some of them, even though I knew they shared my doubts about the whole thing, the Don't you dare say anything negative about a previous spiritual teacher or Don't say anything bad about somebody who is...uh...dead thang kicked in, and they just swung back into line parroting the dogma. For some it seemed to be truly devastating, in the same way that MMY's death probably was for TBs who had wrapped their whole lives around him. For others, it seemed to be an event that set them free, and enabled them to look further for their satisfactions in life, be they material or spiritual. Before he died, they were pretty much tied by the cult mindset into believing that he was the only possible source of such satisfactions. In other words, different strokes for different folks. Proly lots of immediate shock and trauma but there was existent a form of organization before he died and is there any vestige of a group afterward? As far as I can tell, being as far away from it as I am, there is. There are a few hardcore TBs who still like to pretend that they are Rama's tradition, even though he clearly didn't intend to leave one. I have never had anything to do with them, other than to attend one event they staged in Phoenix that I wrote about in the last story of Road Trip Mind. It was fun, but not the kind of fun I felt like hanging around. Before he died there were some who spoke for the group of Rama as to his teachings and and running the group. Did any of them come forward afterward with the teachings or an organization in some form? Succession was not planned for or necessarily indicated? Anybody go forward with it anyway in some form? Where did any of the key spiritual insiders tend to end up? Gravitate to be with whom? How did it transpire for the followers and some of the tru-believers in particular? I am just wondering by comparison. All good questions. I'll answer as best I can, *not* being part of it all, and thus having picked up only what I've picked up from afar, over the Net. He left *NO* successors. He left *NO* successor organization, except a foundation to distribute the wealth he had accumulated to further the study of what he called American Buddhism. They have -- to their credit -- spread this money around to a number of well-meaning and in many cases well-acting organizations to help do just that. There are a few people who have set up shop as spiritual teacher furthering his tradition. I know them all, and recommend none of them. I went out of my way to not be placed into the position of speaking for Rama, and I personally think his tradition would be better served if more had done so. Some -- who IMO had become dependent on always having a guru or teacher available to lead them -- felt his absence strongly, and flocked to other teachers. Not surprisingly, some flocked to people I considered charlatans, because IMO *their* charlatan energy was similar to Rama's (Sathya Sai Baba and Adi Da, for example). Some were IMO wiser, and went for more traditional Tibetan teachers who I occasionally met and respected, just never felt any pull to study with. Me, I just went my own Way. In other words, it probably went similarly to what happened after MMY kicked the bucket, except that he didn't kick the bucket out from underneath himself. :-) It's always *amazing* to me to see how many of the ones who tried to continue on teaching in Rama's name don't even *mention* his suicide on their websites, or if they do, use the hideous euphemism his Mahasamadhi. Give me a fuckin' break. Guy croaked himself. I'm *sure* he felt he had reasons for doing so. Anyone with as established a history of NPD as Rama had could have easily come up with such reasons. But still, he had a choice, and in my opinion he made a bad one, heavily influenced by a drug called Valium that he foolishly tried to kick his dependence on cold turkey, even though it says right on the label never to do this, *because of the risk of suicide*. At this point, I really am not the person you should ask as to whether there is much of a lingering tradition in his name. I'm sure there is, but I'm SO not part of it. Even if I wanted to be, I doubt I'd be allowed to be, because Road Trip Mind was not exactly what those who run such a tradition consider the party line. I was -- and am still -- considered somewhat of a pariah and an apostate for having written it the way that I did. Go figure. All I was trying to do was be honest.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. I have no idea why you would say that. I thought when I was doing them that the sutras were a mildly interesting practice, but not worth the time for the experiences I was having. I never one of those who thought TM and TMSP was something good to do even if you were not having pleasant experiences or at least useful experiences. levitation sutra was sometimes fun and exhilarating to practice and if I had had any sense I would have just done TM and gone straight into levitation sutra, but I was snookered into believing M was telling us the truth when he said you have to do all the OTHER sutras before you do the flying sutra. I think the amount of time is not worth the pay off (which is very little IMO) with TMSP and I have never believed group TMSP will create world peace or even lower crime rate. Ask all the people who have been raped, robbed or killed in Jefferson County there in Iowa. As to Barry's spending lots of money, if he had it and he enjoyed what he spent it on, why not? Hell, you can lay down 5K on a single yagya with the TMO with not nearly so much fun result as going to Disney. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, From what I've read, Rama left several million dollars, most of that given to him by his students to support his extravagant lifestyle. Barry probably gave Rama over $10,000 to be able to go see a movie with Rama. So, I wonder what that has taught Barry about giving money to people for spiritual instruction. What happened to all the money? So, how much does it cost to fly Rama over to Paris and put him up in a four-star hotel for a few days? Barry's part of the donation probably cost him close to $5,000. That's a lot of money to just spend just to be able be with your teacher at Disneyland. Go figure. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote: I changed my day so I could delve into what you had written - I have gone through a lot of it and it answers most of my questions. Mainly I wanted to know if you thought Rama was legit in the beginning and if you witnessed any of the power or sidhi demonstrations he did. Obviously yes to both. I had a hard time reading much of it because I began to feel a great deal of energy as soon as I started reading, I mean LOTS of energy. So I am taking the reading in stages. Read a little. Sweep my floors a little, clean the bathrooms, come down off the energy a little and read a little more. Two minor questions I have are: Did you know this guy? Mark Laxer Have you ever read his book Take Me for a Ride: Coming of Age in a Destructive Cult Paperback? If so is it accurate? That's all - back to the energy now and thanks for talking and thanks for writing about Rama and all the other things you wrote about. On Thu, 1/16/14, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 4:02 PM Thanks Barry - I am gonna read what you have written and if I have any questions after that, I'll send 'em. Got a busy day today, but I intend to start reading it later tonight. On Thu, 1/16/14, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 8:21 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: Bottom line for me is that all this has taught me the definition of enlightenment M gave out is flawed if not downright incorrect, and yes that includes the source material of the vedas which I feel was the pontifications of a bunch of guys roaming around in the forest who said Huh! This is my reality so I am going to tell everyone it THEIR reality too, and if they don't get on board with it, they are missing the boat. I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. Absofuckinglutely.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Not having known or having had any experience with Rama, I can only go by his recorded history - he certainly was known to have acted out - he apparently abused and misused his position as teacher, he was a serial womanizer, and maybe took people to the cleaners - although some seemed to feel that their money was well spent with him, regardless of his enormities. I acknowledge his shortcomings, and the fact that some like Barry had some powerful experiences with him. I am having some degree of energy experience from reading Barry's account. I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. Same with other teachers like Muktananda - they could spark energy in other people, sometimes big time Energy, but they were or are ego-centered and screwed up in a lot of ways that lead to the people around them getting screwed in different ways. Chuck Anderson who was also known as Master Teacher of the Endeavor Academy falls into that category. Bottom line for me is that all this has taught me the definition of enlightenment M gave out is flawed if not downright incorrect, and yes that includes the source material of the vedas which I feel was the pontifications of a bunch of guys roaming around in the forest who said Huh! This is my reality so I am going to tell everyone it THEIR reality too, and if they don't get on board with it, they are missing the boat. I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I acknowledge the power, the depth of silence and vibrations of the infinite that course through these people and I acknowledge the screwed up behavior. For whatever reason there was a vibration of infinite energy that Rama tapped into and was an exponent of that communicated itself to Barry and I get to feel it through Barry's writing. I am enjoying it and we'll see where it leads, if anywhere. I would kinda like to think that having such an experience was what FFL was really created for to begin with. And that is what I think of that. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 1:55 PM Well, I thought fer sure you'd say that Rama was a con man and a fake and had sexual relations with his students, like you said about MMY. Maybe you've changed your mind about that. It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. From what I've read, Rama left several million dollars, most of that given to him by his students to support his extravagant lifestyle. Barry probably gave Rama over $10,000 to be able to go see a movie with Rama. So, I wonder what that has taught Barry about giving money to people for spiritual instruction. What happened to all the money? So, how much does it cost to fly Rama over to Paris and put him up in a four-star hotel for a few days? Barry's part of the donation probably cost him close to $5,000. That's a lot of money to just spend just to be able be with your teacher at Disneyland. Go figure. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote: I changed my day so I could delve into what you had written - I have gone through a lot of it and it answers most of my questions. Mainly I wanted to know if you thought Rama was legit in the beginning and if you witnessed any of the power or sidhi demonstrations he did. Obviously yes to both. I had a hard time reading much of it because I began to feel a great deal of energy as soon as I started reading, I mean LOTS of energy. So I am taking the reading in stages. Read a little. Sweep my floors a little, clean
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
to feel it through Barry's writing. I am enjoying it and we'll see where it leads, if anywhere. I would kinda like to think that having such an experience was what FFL was really created for to begin with. And that is what I think of that. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 1:55 PM Well, I thought fer sure you'd say that Rama was a con man and a fake and had sexual relations with his students, like you said about MMY. Maybe you've changed your mind about that. It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. From what I've read, Rama left several million dollars, most of that given to him by his students to support his extravagant lifestyle. Barry probably gave Rama over $10,000 to be able to go see a movie with Rama. So, I wonder what that has taught Barry about giving money to people for spiritual instruction. What happened to all the money? So, how much does it cost to fly Rama over to Paris and put him up in a four-star hotel for a few days? Barry's part of the donation probably cost him close to $5,000. That's a lot of money to just spend just to be able be with your teacher at Disneyland. Go figure. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... mailto:mjackson74@... wrote: I changed my day so I could delve into what you had written - I have gone through a lot of it and it answers most of my questions. Mainly I wanted to know if you thought Rama was legit in the beginning and if you witnessed any of the power or sidhi demonstrations he did. Obviously yes to both. I had a hard time reading much of it because I began to feel a great deal of energy as soon as I started reading, I mean LOTS of energy. So I am taking the reading in stages. Read a little. Sweep my floors a little, clean the bathrooms, come down off the energy a little and read a little more. Two minor questions I have are: Did you know this guy? Mark Laxer Have you ever read his book Take Me for a Ride: Coming of Age in a Destructive Cult Paperback? If so is it accurate? That's all - back to the energy now and thanks for talking and thanks for writing about Rama and all the other things you wrote about. On Thu, 1/16/14, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... mailto:mjackson74@... wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 4:02 PM Thanks Barry - I am gonna read what you have written and if I have any questions after that, I'll send 'em. Got a busy day today, but I intend to start reading it later tonight. On Thu, 1/16/14, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 8:21 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even think about the dude any more, except when something triggers a memory, as something you said in one of your posts did yesterday. Second, I don't waste my time either condemning or defending him -- he was what he was, and I don't much care what anyone thinks about him. Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Michael wrote: I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I agree. I also have a hard time finding greater or lesser validity of any particular experience over another. An experience experienced is just that - it is reality for that experiencer. And as we all know experience is ultimately subjective and particular to each person. How to understand or interpret, let alone judge or put some value on someone else's reality/experience is, for me, an exercise in futility. I do, however, believe in personal growth and the reality of the possibility for the expansion of awareness and the development of sensibility in different human beings in different phases of their life or lives. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I also think that many people who are under the assumption that a sort of higher state of consciousness can or does exist in gurus or teachers and are therefore responsible for giving these people free licence to do as they please and to support them in this, often to the detriment of everyone involved. I have yet to see anyone free of ego and I don't think of ego as something terrible. Like many characteristics, it can become distorted, unbalanced but in and of itself ego is neither good or bad. Just as ambition or empathy or passion is not inherently, ultimately good or bad. How it manifests can make the difference between something becoming positive, negative or simply remaining benign. It's complex, of course. I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Michael Jackson wrote: Bottom line for me is that all this has taught me the definition of enlightenment M gave out is flawed if not downright incorrect, and yes that includes the source material of the vedas which I feel was the pontifications of a bunch of guys roaming around in the forest who said Huh! This is my reality so I am going to tell everyone it THEIR reality too, and if they don't get on board with it, they are missing the boat. Well, it's settled then - the Hindus and the Tibetans were all incorrect. MMY and the Rama guy were charlatans and frauds. But what does this tell us about their followers - the ones that enabled them, worked for them, and spread the snake-oils sales pitch for years and years? It just doesn't make any sense that you two could be that wrong for so long, and be so certain about everything now. Go figure. On 1/17/2014 9:34 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: Not having known or having had any experience with Rama, I can only go by his recorded history - he certainly was known to have acted out - he apparently abused and misused his position as teacher, he was a serial womanizer, and maybe took people to the cleaners - although some seemed to feel that their money was well spent with him, regardless of his enormities. I acknowledge his shortcomings, and the fact that some like Barry had some powerful experiences with him. I am having some degree of energy experience from reading Barry's account. I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. Same with other teachers like Muktananda - they could spark energy in other people, sometimes big time Energy, but they were or are ego-centered and screwed up in a lot of ways that lead to the people around them getting screwed in different ways. Chuck Anderson who was also known as Master Teacher of the Endeavor Academy falls into that category. Bottom line for me is that all this has taught me the definition of enlightenment M gave out is flawed if not downright incorrect, and yes that includes the source material of the vedas which I feel was the pontifications of a bunch of guys roaming around in the forest who said Huh! This is my reality so I am going to tell everyone it THEIR reality too, and if they don't get on board with it, they are missing the boat. I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I acknowledge the power, the depth of silence and vibrations of the infinite that course through these people and I acknowledge the screwed up behavior. For whatever reason there was a vibration of infinite energy that Rama tapped into and was an exponent of that communicated itself to Barry and I get to feel it through Barry's writing. I am enjoying it and we'll see where it leads, if anywhere. I would kinda like to think that having such an experience was what FFL was really created for to begin with. And that is what I think of that. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: Richard J. Williams FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 1:55 PM Well, I thought fer sure you'd say that Rama was a con man and a fake and had sexual relations with his students, like you said about MMY. Maybe you've changed your mind about that. It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. From what I've read, Rama left several million dollars, most of that given to him by his students to support his extravagant lifestyle. Barry probably gave Rama over $10,000 to be able to go see a movie with Rama. So, I wonder what that has taught Barry about giving money to people for spiritual instruction. What happened to all the money? So, how much does it cost to fly Rama over to Paris and put him up in a four-star hotel for a few days? Barry's part of the donation
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
On 1/17/2014 9:46 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. I have no idea why you would say that. Well, it's settled then - humans can fly and levitate; we have several eye-witnesses on the forum who can testify to this. So, I wonder why Barry was making fun of MMY and the bun-hopping? Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
On 1/17/2014 9:34 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. So, it's settled then - Amma and MMY are both hucksters that cause amazing experiences of energy in people's lives.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I must say I agree with everything you said. On Fri, 1/17/14, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 4:51 PM Michael wrote: I feel the Universe has nearly infinite if not infinite experiences we can all have, and the so-called higher states of awareness or enlightened perception, including all the celestial perception stuff is just another experience among a plethora of experiences. I agree. I also have a hard time finding greater or lesser validity of any particular experience over another. An experience experienced is just that - it is reality for that experiencer. And as we all know experience is ultimately subjective and particular to each person. How to understand or interpret, let alone judge or put some value on someone else's reality/experience is, for me, an exercise in futility. I do, however, believe in personal growth and the reality of the possibility for the expansion of awareness and the development of sensibility in different human beings in different phases of their life or lives. I think that if one chooses one can create an experience, a persona that is real moral, always sativcc, always unperturbed, sort of like the historical Buddha was supposed to have been. But most of those who have higher states of consciousness cycle from those kinds of experiences into egoic focus that includes often enough the idea that since everything is a play of awareness, it doesn't make a tinker's damn what they do with and to people, cuz its just all consciousness playing around. No rules, no standard of conduct, these are the ones like Muktananda, Maharishi and Rama who go off the deep end of ego and screw things up. I also think that many people who are under the assumption that a sort of higher state of consciousness can or does exist in gurus or teachers and are therefore responsible for giving these people free licence to do as they please and to support them in this, often to the detriment of everyone involved. I have yet to see anyone free of ego and I don't think of ego as something terrible. Like many characteristics, it can become distorted, unbalanced but in and of itself ego is neither good or bad. Just as ambition or empathy or passion is not inherently, ultimately good or bad. How it manifests can make the difference between something becoming positive, negative or simply remaining benign. It's complex, of course. I guess my point here is that it takes enablers to allow certain individuals to spiral out of control. When you put someone on some sort of pedestal it can really screw them up, whether they are holy men or holy women or the Justin Biebers and Miley Cyrus' of the world. Feed the ego like you would force feed a goose to fatten up the liver and sooner or later you create something that is unwell.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Oh, I see that you mean. As to my own belief, I made no comment on the reality of Lenz's levitation demonstration. I have done TMSP and it certainly doesn't qualify as flying in any way. I do think some folk have done it like maybe good old Saint Joseph of Cupertino and am willing to believe Rama may have done, as the Brits say. M never demonstrated cause he couldn't do it. On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:05 PM On 1/17/2014 9:46 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: It looks like you've changed your mind about the bun-hopping-levitation too. I have no idea why you would say that. Well, it's settled then - humans can fly and levitate; we have several eye-witnesses on the forum who can testify to this. So, I wonder why Barry was making fun of MMY and the bun-hopping? Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
yep, it can happen. Same with Chuck Anderson On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:13 PM On 1/17/2014 9:34 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. So, it's settled then - Amma and MMY are both hucksters that cause amazing experiences of energy in people's lives.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I was talking to a friend of mine the other night. In the past he has recommended some interesting reading material. He was telling me how impressed he was with The Course in Miracles. I know that material has been around for sometime. I was wondering what others might have thought of it, if they happened to take a run at it? FWIW, from what he told me, it had an interesting genesis, but other than that, again, from what he told me, it sounded like basic new age boiler plate. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote: yep, it can happen. Same with Chuck Anderson On Fri, 1/17/14, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, January 17, 2014, 6:13 PM On 1/17/2014 9:34 AM, Michael Jackson wrote: I view Amma as a huckster, but I don't deny people have pleasant and powerful experiences with her. I view M as a huckster, but the one time I saw him in person, I had what stands today as one of the most powerful, amazing experiences of energy of my life. So, it's settled then - Amma and MMY are both hucksters that cause amazing experiences of energy in people's lives.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Re Guy croaked himself.: Did Rama leave a suicide note? If not, it seems a funny way to commit suicide. Some reports claim he took 80–150 Valium. Valium comes in 2mg, 5mg and 10mg strengths. Assume (tops) he took 150 x 10mg = 1,500mg diazepam. People have taken 2,000mg of valium and had no bad effects after sleeping off the dose for 48 hours. Some have maintained that Rama took Phenobarbital (Abbie Hoffman's choice also) which sounds more likely if he had decided to check out - but don't US coroners run proper autopsies to determine exactly what poisons are in blood samples? Either way, the cause of death was drowning! Was that his intention all along? Or did he simply drown accidentally after going on a drug bender?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Michael sez: Robin's experience was that his actions were, as it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did, even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do what he was doing. So bottom line I don't buy Robin's assertion that he in essence was forced to behave in this way by these forces. That excuse goes back as long as we have had the idea of a Devil. Emptybill replies: Robin never was interested in a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. All of this, in spite of the fact that Shankara’s Vedanta was the proffered basis of Maharishi’s tradition. Such an assessment would have presented an opposite view about this whole “enlightenment meme”. I pointed this out to Robin a number of times but he wasn’t interested in hearing about it. Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by “cosmic entities” but was now free of them. More of the old - “I didn’t fail … I was fooled” as you also pointed out. This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
emptybill, this is a seriously skewed version of Robin's story. Just for one thing, you write, Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by 'cosmic entities' but was now free of them. More of the old - 'I didn’t fail … I was fooled' as you also pointed out. As Michael pointed out wrongly, and now you've pointed out wrongly. As I said--and you'll find it throughout Robin's posts--he acknowledged his failure and took responsibility for it. As far as he was concerned, the negative entities took advantage of his character flaws--what he called his secret infirmities. He was vulnerable to being fooled because he was badly screwed up, in other words. And he's been tougher on himself than anybody else has concerning his behavior back then. Robin is by far the most complicated personality I've ever encountered. It really doesn't make sense to brush him off with simplistic conclusions, nor is it fair to him. I have no idea what the real story was metaphysically speaking, but he's always been clear about how he understood it. Certainly none of us is in a position to interpret his experience. It's one thing if you disbelieve in the existence of negative entities who are capable of messing with vulnerable people. That's perfectly reasonable. What's not right is to assign motivations to the person who has had the experience of having been messed with, or to claim they're lying about their experience. Experience is experience; it may or may not conform to reality, especially whatever the hell the metaphysical reality of enlightenment is. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: Michael sez: Robin's experience was that his actions were, as it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did, even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do what he was doing. So bottom line I don't buy Robin's assertion that he in essence was forced to behave in this way by these forces. That excuse goes back as long as we have had the idea of a Devil. Emptybill replies: Robin never was interested in a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. All of this, in spite of the fact that Shankara’s Vedanta was the proffered basis of Maharishi’s tradition. Such an assessment would have presented an opposite view about this whole “enlightenment meme”. I pointed this out to Robin a number of times but he wasn’t interested in hearing about it. Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by “cosmic entities” but was now free of them. More of the old - “I didn’t fail … I was fooled” as you also pointed out. This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill, this is a seriously skewed version of Robin's story. Just for one thing, you write, Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by 'cosmic entities' but was now free of them. More of the old - 'I didn’t fail … I was fooled' as you also pointed out. As Michael pointed out wrongly, and now you've pointed out wrongly. As I said--and you'll find it throughout Robin's posts--he acknowledged his failure and took responsibility for it. As far as he was concerned, the negative entities took advantage of his character flaws--what he called his secret infirmities. He was vulnerable to being fooled because he was badly screwed up, in other words. And he's been tougher on himself than anybody else has concerning his behavior back then. Robin is by far the most complicated personality I've ever encountered. It really doesn't make sense to brush him off with simplistic conclusions, nor is it fair to him. I have no idea what the real story was metaphysically speaking, but he's always been clear about how he understood it. Certainly none of us is in a position to interpret his experience. It's one thing if you disbelieve in the existence of negative entities who are capable of messing with vulnerable people. That's perfectly reasonable. What's not right is to assign motivations to the person who has had the experience of having been messed with, or to claim they're lying about their experience. Experience is experience; it may or may not conform to reality, especially whatever the hell the metaphysical reality of enlightenment is. Here is how I see it, in a nutshell. Empty can only interpret what Robin's experience was or wasn't based on his book learning or his own interpretation of book learning and teachers who 'told him so'. Robin had an experience and he has analyzed what that actually was, based on his time within the experience and his struggles and chronology getting 'free' of it. He alone truly knows what he has discovered in his long path toward separating himself from the influence of evil entities. Robin also knows himself to the degree to which he understands he is possessed of infirmities that would have allowed him to be vulnerable to that which is viewed as enlightenment by some. Robin was a victim of outside influences but his victimization was the result of inherent weaknesses within himself. Therefore, you can accuse Robin of conscious manipulation of others or being the author of dastardly deeds to the same degree that you can accuse a one-legged man of being too clumsy to dance the tango. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: Michael sez: Robin's experience was that his actions were, as it were, dictated by cosmic forces, rather than that he could just do whatever he felt like. His experience was that he could not do other than what he did, even though at times there was some aspect of himself that didn't want to do what he was doing. So bottom line I don't buy Robin's assertion that he in essence was forced to behave in this way by these forces. That excuse goes back as long as we have had the idea of a Devil. Emptybill replies: Robin never was interested in a classical Vedantic assessment of his so-called “enlightenment”. All of this, in spite of the fact that Shankara’s Vedanta was the proffered basis of Maharishi’s tradition. Such an assessment would have presented an opposite view about this whole “enlightenment meme”. I pointed this out to Robin a number of times but he wasn’t interested in hearing about it. Rather he just wanted to espouse his chosen narrative about how he was deluded by “cosmic entities” but was now free of them. More of the old - “I didn’t fail … I was fooled” as you also pointed out. This is what happens when experience itself becomes the object of sadhana (practice) rather than conformity with Reality. It is the same old theme and “gurus” just fool people when they cheat them out of the self-evaluations necessary for real sadhana.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Ann wrote: Here is how I see it, in a nutshell. Empty can only interpret what Robin's experience was or wasn't based on his book learning or his own interpretation of book learning and teachers who 'told him so'. Robin had an experience and he has analyzed what that actually was, based on his time within the experience and his struggles and chronology getting 'free' of it. He alone truly knows what he has discovered in his long path toward separating himself from the influence of evil entities. Robin also knows himself to the degree to which he understands he is possessed of infirmities that would have allowed him to be vulnerable to that which is viewed as enlightenment by some. Robin was a victim of outside influences but his victimization was the result of inherent weaknesses within himself. Therefore, you can accuse Robin of conscious manipulation of others or being the author of dastardly deeds to the same degree that you can accuse a one-legged man of being too clumsy to dance the tango. Perfectly said, thank you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Re Guy croaked himself.: Did Rama leave a suicide note? If not, it seems a funny way to commit suicide. Some reports claim he took 80â150 Valium. Valium comes in 2mg, 5mg and 10mg strengths. Assume (tops) he took 150 x 10mg = 1,500mg diazepam. People have taken 2,000mg of valium and had no bad effects after sleeping off the dose for 48 hours. Some have maintained that Rama took Phenobarbital (Abbie Hoffman's choice also) which sounds more likely if he had decided to check out - but don't US coroners run proper autopsies to determine exactly what poisons are in blood samples? Either way, the cause of death was drowning! Was that his intention all along? Or did he simply drown accidentally after going on a drug bender? It was pretty clearly a suicide, according to the person who was with him and attempted to join him. She survived, he didn't.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even think about the dude any more, except when something triggers a memory, as something you said in one of your posts did yesterday. Second, I don't waste my time either condemning or defending him -- he was what he was, and I don't much care what anyone thinks about him. Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after paying thousands of dollars to supposedly learn them. Some will pile on because they don't like me, and they mistakenly believe that if they diss a former teacher I still have some positive feelings about, it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, and thus I'll react and get into one of the Robin-like confrontations with them they so hope for. That's not gonna happen, so we might as well do it here. :-) But I'll warn you ahead of time that my attention span for things Rama-related is pretty damned short these days, so if you have questions, make the first few count, because at some point I'll get tired of the whole thing and bail. :-) That said, ask anything you want, and I'll do my best to answer your questions as honestly as I wrote Road Trip Mind. That would be a good place to start if you are actually curious about the dude. I wrote it to get the Rama-monkey off my back, and it worked. I don't actually have a great deal more to say about the guy than I said in that book. http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
On 1/16/2014 2:21 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, So, you got your buttons pushed. Now you're throwing Rama under the bus just like you threw MMY under the bus. You spent almost half of your adult life studying with these two guys. If what you've been posting here for the past ten years is any indication, almost all your own efforts on the spiritual path were a total waste of time. I only mentioned Rama because you were making fun of MMY all the time - I actually like the Rama guy - I wish you could have turned out to think more them, but I guess you got mixed up over there in France. Go figure. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:21 AM, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? *I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even think about the dude any more, except when something triggers a memory, as something you said in one of your posts did yesterday. Second, I don't waste my time either condemning or defending him -- he was what he was, and I don't much care what anyone thinks about him. Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after paying thousands of dollars to supposedly learn them. Some will pile on because they don't like me, and they mistakenly believe that if they diss a former teacher I still have some positive feelings about, it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, and thus I'll react and get into one of the Robin-like confrontations with them they so hope for. That's not gonna happen, so we might as well do it here. :-) But I'll warn you ahead of time that my attention span for things Rama-related is pretty damned short these days, so if you have questions, make the first few count, because at some point I'll get tired of the whole thing and bail. :-)That said, ask anything you want, and I'll do my best to answer your questions as honestly as I wrote Road Trip Mind. That would be a good place to start if you are actually curious about the dude. I wrote it to get the Rama-monkey off my back, and it worked. I don't actually have a great deal more to say about the guy than I said in that book. * *http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html* http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
Thanks Barry - I am gonna read what you have written and if I have any questions after that, I'll send 'em. Got a busy day today, but I intend to start reading it later tonight. On Thu, 1/16/14, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 8:21 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even think about the dude any more, except when something triggers a memory, as something you said in one of your posts did yesterday. Second, I don't waste my time either condemning or defending him -- he was what he was, and I don't much care what anyone thinks about him. Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after paying thousands of dollars to supposedly learn them. Some will pile on because they don't like me, and they mistakenly believe that if they diss a former teacher I still have some positive feelings about, it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, and thus I'll react and get into one of the Robin-like confrontations with them they so hope for. That's not gonna happen, so we might as well do it here. :-) But I'll warn you ahead of time that my attention span for things Rama-related is pretty damned short these days, so if you have questions, make the first few count, because at some point I'll get tired of the whole thing and bail. :-) That said, ask anything you want, and I'll do my best to answer your questions as honestly as I wrote Road Trip Mind. That would be a good place to start if you are actually curious about the dude. I wrote it to get the Rama-monkey off my back, and it worked. I don't actually have a great deal more to say about the guy than I said in that book. http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
As Barry knows, by far the majority of the, er, reviling with regard to Barry's stint with Lenz has been in connection with Barry's hypocrisy in using his experience with Lenz to stalk TMers and others he doesn't like (see the example in red below, just one of many such). Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after paying thousands of dollars to supposedly learn them. Some will pile on because they don't like me, and they mistakenly believe that if they diss a former teacher I still have some positive feelings about, it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, and thus I'll react and get into one of the Robin-like confrontations with them they so hope for. Just for the record, when I comment on one of Barry's posts, it is NOT in the hope of getting into a confrontation with him. That's one of Barry's many narcissistic fantasies. I'm happy to express my opinions and let them stand as such without any reaction from him.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
-gods (think MMY) have an incredible way of *just never thinking about* anything that contradicts that dogma. They stuff any contradictions or cognitive dissonance away back in a corner of their minds -- literally out of sight, out of mind. So technically many of these people are *not* lying -- consciously -- when they say that TM is not a religion, often only a couple of hours after leaving a celebration at MUM in which they chanted and made offerings to Hindu gods. They push the dogma they've been told to repeat -- and which they desperately *need* to be true to keep up their allegiance to this org/cause they've been told is so important -- and they just hide the cognitive dissonance away in the back of their minds and never acknowledge it. I have sadly been there, done that. Both in the TMO and in the Rama trip, so I know it's not only possible, but probable for *most* of the TM Teachers repeating the TM is not a religion meme they've been taught to repeat. I myself repeated the TM is 100% life-supporting and cannot possibly have any negative characteristics even *while* assigned to the Twitching Group in Fiuggi, surrounded by dozens of people like myself experiencing non-stop jerks and spasms and symptoms that looked for all the world like a viral outbreak of Tourette's Syndrome. It took *years* -- after hearing of a number of suicides and seeing people wind up in mental hospitals after long TM courses -- before I became open enough to recognize that I'd been lying to myself, and thus to others. I *wanted* to believe the no negative side effects meme, so I managed to blot out recognition and acknowledgement of anything that suggested it wasn't true. I would suspect that many of the people still clinging to the TM is not a religion meme are doing the same thing. A few may indeed be consciously aware of the reality and be lying about it, but my bet is that many are still so stuck in the cult mindset that they feel they *have* to believe what they were told to believe, and *have* to repeat it every time the question comes up. Yes, it boggles the mind, but that is the nature of the cult mindset. People who had to learn and memorize the English translation of the TM puja and hold it lively in their minds every time they chanted the Sanskrit version of it will look you straight in the eyes and call it a non-religious, traditional ceremony. *Some* part of them knows that they're lying, but it's a part they can never admit into their conscious awareness. It's really weird, but it happens every day, in pretty much every religion, spiritual organization, and cult in the world. It even happens in business. I remember a documentary about activists who were tried in court for staging a demonstration at a General Electric plant back in (I think) the 60s. The screenplay was largely drawn from transcripts of the actual trials, and thus the under-oath testimony of workers at the plant, *dozens* of whom claimed that they didn't know what they were building in that GE plant. We just worked there, they all said, claiming that they had no idea that they were working in the largest manufacturing facility for atomic weapons in the world. Every morning they walked in through a main entrance hall in which was prominently displayed the nosecone of an Atlas missile, and yet they claimed that they didn't know what they were building megadeath every day on their assembly lines. Go figure. That's the cult mindset for you -- protect the myths, protect the memes, protect the image of the group that pays you or that you owe allegiance to, hide your own everyday lies by hiding the truth even from yourself, way down deep in parts of your mind that you never allow to surface. That's what I think is going on when any TM Teacher these days claims that the TMO is not a religious organization. They're not necessarily lying to you; they're lying to themselves. On Wed, 1/15/14, anartaxius@... anartaxius@... wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, January 15, 2014, 4:58 AM 'Apostasy is the formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person. One who commits apostasy is known as an apostate.' As I never was the member of any religion, I cannot ever be correctly accused of apostasy. As the TM org claims it is not a religion, so no one can ever be correctly accused for disafilliating or abandoning TM as apostasy (unless of course the TM org is lying about that claim).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing.
I changed my day so I could delve into what you had written - I have gone through a lot of it and it answers most of my questions. Mainly I wanted to know if you thought Rama was legit in the beginning and if you witnessed any of the power or sidhi demonstrations he did. Obviously yes to both. I had a hard time reading much of it because I began to feel a great deal of energy as soon as I started reading, I mean LOTS of energy. So I am taking the reading in stages. Read a little. Sweep my floors a little, clean the bathrooms, come down off the energy a little and read a little more. Two minor questions I have are: Did you know this guy? Mark Laxer Have you ever read his book Take Me for a Ride: Coming of Age in a Destructive Cult Paperback? If so is it accurate? That's all - back to the energy now and thanks for talking and thanks for writing about Rama and all the other things you wrote about. On Thu, 1/16/14, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 4:02 PM Thanks Barry - I am gonna read what you have written and if I have any questions after that, I'll send 'em. Got a busy day today, but I intend to start reading it later tonight. On Thu, 1/16/14, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Apostasy, is a terrible thing. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 16, 2014, 8:21 AM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: I would like to have a conversation with you about your time with Rama if you are willing. I am more than happy to do it privately if you like cause I know some on here are going to revile you no matter what you say. So can we talk? I don't mind, as long as you understand a few things at the outset. First, I rarely even think about the dude any more, except when something triggers a memory, as something you said in one of your posts did yesterday. Second, I don't waste my time either condemning or defending him -- he was what he was, and I don't much care what anyone thinks about him. Third, however, and as you say, if we do it here you can expect a lot of piling on from stalkers here. They'll do it for various reasons. Some will start piling on when they hear tales of thousands of his students witnessing siddhis they've *still* only read about, after 30 years of pursuing them and after paying thousands of dollars to supposedly learn them. Some will pile on because they don't like me, and they mistakenly believe that if they diss a former teacher I still have some positive feelings about, it'll push my hot buttons the same way me saying things about MMY pushes theirs, and thus I'll react and get into one of the Robin-like confrontations with them they so hope for. That's not gonna happen, so we might as well do it here. :-) But I'll warn you ahead of time that my attention span for things Rama-related is pretty damned short these days, so if you have questions, make the first few count, because at some point I'll get tired of the whole thing and bail. :-) That said, ask anything you want, and I'll do my best to answer your questions as honestly as I wrote Road Trip Mind. That would be a good place to start if you are actually curious about the dude. I wrote it to get the Rama-monkey off my back, and it worked. I don't actually have a great deal more to say about the guy than I said in that book. http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
