[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- The Double-Edged Sword
TurquoiseB wrote: Since it appears that the only person on this forum who noticed the caveats that I put into my posts on the subject of guru-bhakti in big capital letters that Judy (typically) mistook for shouting, I will spell out what my insertion of the phrase ON ONE LEVEL meant... There is one big problem with this thread - Barry apparently has had no personal experience with 'Bhakti' Yoga or 'Guru' Bhakti. I seriously doubt that he has ever had a teacher that he loved. From what I've read, Barry has has an antagonistic relationship with all his teachers: Marshy and the Rama Lenz. So, it's not surprising that he has so many questions and misconceptions, and it's also pretty obvious that he doesn't intend on discussing this subject in a meaningful way - it's just another Barry setup, to see what Judy says. For Barry, it's all about Judy - that's why he is here. Road Trip Mind: http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Two simple questions for the bhakti supporters Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: Sun, Mar 16 2003 http://tinyurl.com/cz92zq These questions aren't necessarily trolls, by the way. They are just two rather fundamental questions that never seem to come up in and around spiritual organizations that believe strongly in the value of bhakti... From: Uncle Tantra Subject: Bhakti II Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: Tues, Mar 18 2003 http://tinyurl.com/dgvq2t This is a repost because it doesn't seem to have made it to Google, despite the fact that several later posts have, and I'm kinda curious how Judy will answer... From: Judy Stein Subject: Re: Two simple questions for the bhakti supporters Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: Sun, Mar 16 2003 http://tinyurl.com/cz92zq Amazing. He thanks those who have commented on bhakti for their interesting comments, so presumably he's *read* those comments, yet he still asks two questions that are utterly meaningless *in light of* those comments...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- The Double-Edged Sword
if you get off on the idea of enlightenment more than you get off on the other things in your life, then by all means you should pursue it. And you should pursue it one-pointedly, if that's how you think such things should be done. But I'm going to pass on that one. Been there, done that, didn't find there that much different or better than here. I'm going to focus on appreciating here, and now, and leave pursuit of something that lies in their future to those who like that sorta thing. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Since it appears that the only person on this forum who noticed the caveats that I put into my posts on the subject of guru-bhakti in big capital letters that Judy (typically) mistook for shouting, I will spell out what my insertion of the phrase ON ONE LEVEL meant. It meant that there are MANY ways of viewing and interpreting the practice of guru-bhakti, NONE of them the truth, NONE of them the definitive definition of the practice. ON ONE LEVEL, I think that anyone who can't see that the thousands of years of men in monasteries ragging on women and describing them as temptresses whose only function in life is to lure men away from the true path to God and righteousness as...uh...more than a little gay has got their head firmly up the orifice leading to their lowest chakra. ON ANOTHER LEVEL, I can see that bhakti has some positive benefits for the beginning spiritual seeker. By encouraging such beginners to project all of their most positive fantasies onto the teacher, those students are trained to *focus* on these positive qualities. True, NONE of these qualities may actually be present in the teachers they project them onto, or may exist in them only to the same extent they exist in us, but focusing on the positive qualities has merit, and may in the long run have some kind of lasting spiritual benefit. HOWEVER (that was not a shout, Judy...merely emphasis), such projection also has a substantial *drawback* in my opinion because it is by definition *externalization* of these positive qualities. By following the tenets of guru-bhakti and projecting them onto one's teacher, one is effectively raising the teacher on a pedestal of projected good qualities. And that's cool, I guess, if you get off on that sorta thing, except that the higher you make the pedestal via the projection of these good qualities, the further your teacher is away from you. And the higher the pedestal, the lower by comparison you become. I think that a more possibly valuable practice of bhakti might involve skipping the guru component entirely and projecting these high and noble qualities onto OURSELVES. They are all WITHIN us. They are NOT merely external, embodied only in the people who have convinced us that they embody them and that we do not. Bhakti cuts both ways. The more you project these higher qualities of life onto a guru-figure, the more you project those qualities outward, *away* from yourself. And the more that you train yourself to see them only in an external being, separate from your self, the less able you are to see those same qualities in your self, and thus recognize it as inseparable from your Self. So bhakti yourself silly, if that's what gets you off. Me, I think it's wiser to treat the teachers in our lives as our EQUALS, not our superiors. I think it's wiser to think of them as residing on the same level that we do, not up on some idealized pedestal. I think it's wiser to realize that we cannot even *imagine* something in these teachers that is not *already* present in ourselves. And if it's already present, why externalize it? Why not just realize it and live it? Your mileage may vary.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. Actually, I'm just reading him right now [shalimar the clown ] therefore no time to give you an extensive answer to your clichee-loaded and very selective compilation ;-) Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. Actually, I'm just reading him right now [shalimar the clown ] therefore no time to give you an extensive answer to your clichee-loaded and very selective compilation ;-) Whatever. The top quote is from Amma. The other paraphrases are from equally-famous or infamous teacher/guru/religious leader types. The bottom line is that *every one* of the people who treated the words of these teachers as if they were orders believed thoroughly that they were following *good* orders. Maybe, but that has nothing to do with what I was talking about - the sentiment of Bhakti. Not Bhakti as path, with all its specifics as you wrongly believe. It really has nothing to do with me at all. I don't see anything in this whole random collection but another attempt to dump Bhakti, most of the things have nothing to do with Bhakti anyway. There is just this vague pretense of concern and warning, hardly a disguise for your anti-Bhakti sentiment. And how would you know what Bhakti is, as you just admitted that it's not your path (not that it should be your path, but you also seem to have no use for the sentiment of it.) But some were, and some weren't. I know you don't really have to deal with this, because after all you believe that the universe really runs everything, and that no one really makes any decisions anyway, but hey dude... Not that one again... why do you continue to talk of things you really didn't get right? First you accuse me of preaching you, and then you bring it up ad neaseum.It's obvious you can't deal with an impersonal perspective. if the universe was running Jonestown and the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it's really fucked up. :-) Rushdie surely made some mistakes. He is very cynical, yet he is a genial writer. Midnight Children is really grant. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For t3rinity, a second post on bhakti: The following is a direct quote from a teacher that quite a few people on this forum admire, on the subject of bhakti and the ideal relationship of a disciple to the guru: Take even the most insignificant word of the guru as an order and obey it. Now ponder the following insignificant words (paraphrased), spoken to students by modern spiritual teachers and gurus: * Treat others the way you would want to be treated. Very sane general advice. Like Kants categorial imperative * If you want to continue teaching the technique of meditation I once certified you to teach, you have to quit your job, pay my organization several thousand dollars to recertify you, and be willing to live anywhere on the planet I tell you to live. Otherwise you're history. Not an original phrasing and as such wrong. Not my cup of tea anyway. * Spend as much of your time as possible working for the welfare of other sentient beings. Good ideal. * Our enemies are coming to destroy us. The only thing you can do about it is to give this poisoned Kool-Aid to your children and then drink it yourself. It's grouping insane advises like this, with wisdom which really shows your nasty approach to the subject. Shame on you. * Be tolerant of the beliefs of others. Of course. And dump on them whenever you can. * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. * Meditation is important; practice it every day. Not a bad advice, though not true for everybody. * Meditation is so important that if you do *not* prac- tice it every day you will be dismissed from my university. * Sex is good...practice it lovingly with someone you love. True for most people * Sex is bad. Give it up entirely if you want to continue studying with me. Good for some who want it that way. * Sex is bad unless it's with me. Other men use sex to drain your personal power; I don't. Tell your husband you are leaving him and meet me at the airport at noon...we are going to Hawaii for the weekend. Blah, blah, blah * Making money is a good thing because it enables you to help other people; never forget your obligation to assist those less fortunate than you are. Insightful of course. * Money is the root of all evil. The only way to protect yourself from its evil influence is to sign over all your assets to our organization and allow us to dis- tribute it wisely. Here you go again, warming up your cynical clichees * Take this suitcase full of money and sneak it out of the country for me. Don't declare it...we follow Natural Law, not the laws of any country. Nothing I am involved with. So why should I care? * Doubt is an integral part of the spiritual process. Never be afraid to bring up any doubts you have about me or my teachings. Do not sit and worry about these things in the darkness; ask me about them openly. But you can ask only if you have confidence. * Doubt is poison; never focus on negativity. * If you feel that I am making a mistake, *tell* me about it...don't sit there like a rock. * I am enlightened, and thus all of my actions are perfect; it is impossible for me to make a mistake. Therefore, do what I say without question. Haven't heard this from anybody. For the bhaktis in our midst, if these insignificant words had been spoken to you by your spiritual teacher, how many of them would you consider an order? How many of the instructions would you follow without question? It's not in my world. I was always given freedom, complete freedom. The problem with bhakti as total surrender is that it is based on the assumptions that 1) the teacher knows what he or she is doing, 2) the teacher always has the welfare of the student in mind, and 3) the teacher is not a total, out of control whack job. Sure. But real Bhakti is total surrender to the Self, not to another ego, not for the sake of the ego or any advantage the ego expects by such an act. Its a unique mystic happening, and nothing of the sort you insinuate. Sadly, as history teaches us, these assumptions are not always true. Therefore, believing the quote at the top of this post is a path somewhat fraught with danger. If the teacher is cool, treating his or her words as if each one was an order might lead you to the light. Yet I never said this. I never said that you should treat each word of a teacher as an order. But I believe in an emotional alignment with a teacher one trusts - just the same way you fall in love. You say: Falling in love can lead to suicide, therefore don't fall in love. Same logic. If the teacher is *not* cool, doing the same thing might lead
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. Actually, I'm just reading him right now [shalimar the clown ] therefore no time to give you an extensive answer to your clichee-loaded and very selective compilation ;-) Whatever. The top quote is from Amma. The other paraphrases are from equally-famous or infamous teacher/guru/religious leader types. The bottom line is that *every one* of the people who treated the words of these teachers as if they were orders believed thoroughly that they were following *good* orders. Maybe, but that has nothing to do with what I was talking about - the sentiment of Bhakti. Not Bhakti as path, with all its specifics as you wrongly believe. Ok, *you* define bhakti. You've already tried to keep people here from dealing with it critically. That's not going to work, any more than it did with Rushdie or with the Muslim cartoons. And now when someone *does* deal with it critically, the self-appointed defender of bhakti just claims that the critic doesn't understand it and bails. It really has nothing to do with me at all. I don't see anything in this whole random collection but another attempt to dump Bhakti... Exactly. That's what I've been saying all along. That is how *you* see it. That's not the *only* way to see it. The way I see it is that bhakti has its plusses, and its benefits. It also has its perils. You seem to want me and others to focus only on the benefits without considering the perils. ...most of the things have nothing to do with Bhakti anyway. As you define it, which you won't. :-) There is just this vague pretense of concern and warning, hardly a disguise for your anti-Bhakti sentiment. Again, that's the way *you* interpret things. I would say that my little test is pretty pragmatic, and brings up a question that any bhakti should be able to deal with without emotion and reactivity. And how would you know what Bhakti is, as you just admitted that it's not your path... It's not my path now. I've given it a shot in the past, when it seemed relevant. (That is, when my feeling for a teacher was such that I really had no choice.) But that is not relevant now. ...(not that it should be your path... Oh? You've changed your tune. Just a few posts ago, you were saying that the absence of bhakti in my posts and in my life revealed a terrible *lack* in that life. ...but you also seem to have no use for the sentiment of it.) Dude, what you want is for people to respect the sentiment of bhakti while ignoring the practical implications of bhakti. But some were, and some weren't. I know you don't really have to deal with this, because after all you believe that the universe really runs everything, and that no one really makes any decisions anyway, but hey dude... Not that one again... why do you continue to talk of things you really didn't get right? First you accuse me of preaching you, and then you bring it up ad neaseum. Hey, you're the one who is on record as saying that no one makes any decisions in life, and that it's the universe that runs everything. Live with it. :-) It's obvious you can't deal with an impersonal perspective. It's equally obvious that you can't deal with the *implications* of your impersonal perspective, any more than you can with the *implications* of your contention that bhakti is a good thing. if the universe was running Jonestown and the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it's really fucked up. :-) Rushdie surely made some mistakes. He is very cynical, yet he is a genial writer. Midnight Children is really grant. And yet, only a few posts ago, you were agreeing with those who say that people should not write critically about Islam because it disturbs the sensibilities of those who are on an Islamic bhakti path. Seems to me you want the ability to live in the *theoretical* realm of the things you believe in, while consistently ignoring the *practical* implications of the things you believe in. That's fine, but if you want to be taken seriously by someone who lives in the real world, I think you should be able to do both. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
Thanks for taking the time away from your heavy reading schedule to reply. :-) I have no further comments, except to point out that you found a way to ignore all of the situations you didn't like, when the point of the exercise was to comment on what *you* would have done if *your* spiritual teacher, the person with whom *you* have developed an emotional alignment with someone you trust, had asked you to do something like kill an infidel or poison your kids or smuggle money. You've got an emotional alignment with this teacher. You trust them completely. You have that bhakti sentiment going for them in spades. And now they ask you to do these things. What ya gonna do, eh? You won't answer, except to claim that a real teacher like yours would never ask such a thing. But they do. Far too often. And the commonly-taught dogma about bhakti, as exemplified by the Amma quote below, tells seekers that *when* the teacher asks them to do something like this, they should consider it an order. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: For t3rinity, a second post on bhakti: The following is a direct quote from a teacher that quite a few people on this forum admire, on the subject of bhakti and the ideal relationship of a disciple to the guru: Take even the most insignificant word of the guru as an order and obey it. Now ponder the following insignificant words (paraphrased), spoken to students by modern spiritual teachers and gurus: * Treat others the way you would want to be treated. Very sane general advice. Like Kants categorial imperative * If you want to continue teaching the technique of meditation I once certified you to teach, you have to quit your job, pay my organization several thousand dollars to recertify you, and be willing to live anywhere on the planet I tell you to live. Otherwise you're history. Not an original phrasing and as such wrong. Not my cup of tea anyway. * Spend as much of your time as possible working for the welfare of other sentient beings. Good ideal. * Our enemies are coming to destroy us. The only thing you can do about it is to give this poisoned Kool-Aid to your children and then drink it yourself. It's grouping insane advises like this, with wisdom which really shows your nasty approach to the subject. Shame on you. * Be tolerant of the beliefs of others. Of course. And dump on them whenever you can. * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. * Meditation is important; practice it every day. Not a bad advice, though not true for everybody. * Meditation is so important that if you do *not* prac- tice it every day you will be dismissed from my university. * Sex is good...practice it lovingly with someone you love. True for most people * Sex is bad. Give it up entirely if you want to continue studying with me. Good for some who want it that way. * Sex is bad unless it's with me. Other men use sex to drain your personal power; I don't. Tell your husband you are leaving him and meet me at the airport at noon...we are going to Hawaii for the weekend. Blah, blah, blah * Making money is a good thing because it enables you to help other people; never forget your obligation to assist those less fortunate than you are. Insightful of course. * Money is the root of all evil. The only way to protect yourself from its evil influence is to sign over all your assets to our organization and allow us to dis- tribute it wisely. Here you go again, warming up your cynical clichees * Take this suitcase full of money and sneak it out of the country for me. Don't declare it...we follow Natural Law, not the laws of any country. Nothing I am involved with. So why should I care? * Doubt is an integral part of the spiritual process. Never be afraid to bring up any doubts you have about me or my teachings. Do not sit and worry about these things in the darkness; ask me about them openly. But you can ask only if you have confidence. * Doubt is poison; never focus on negativity. * If you feel that I am making a mistake, *tell* me about it...don't sit there like a rock. * I am enlightened, and thus all of my actions are perfect; it is impossible for me to make a mistake. Therefore, do what I say without question. Haven't heard this from anybody. For the bhaktis in our midst, if these insignificant words had been spoken to you by your spiritual teacher, how many of them would you consider an order? How many of the instructions would you follow without question?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. Actually, I'm just reading him right now [shalimar the clown ] therefore no time to give you an extensive answer to your clichee-loaded and very selective compilation ;-) Whatever. The top quote is from Amma. The other paraphrases are from equally-famous or infamous teacher/guru/religious leader types. The bottom line is that *every one* of the people who treated the words of these teachers as if they were orders believed thoroughly that they were following *good* orders. But some were, and some weren't. I know you don't really have to deal with this, because after all you believe that the universe really runs everything, and that no one really makes any decisions anyway, but hey dude...if the universe was running Jonestown and the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it's really fucked up. :-) As MMY says, the laws of nature around here are really stupid... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
I haven't followed this thread closely but: Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just never seen bhakti practices or attitudes promoted by the tmo. How many of the tm people here who think they're bhaktis have been in the same room with MMY in the past 20 yrs? Ever? What personal instruction have you gotten from him recently? (I mean directly, not in your sleeping or waking dreams). Stalkers of celebrities probably think they're bhaktis of them too. I can see someone being devoted to MMY if they do what he asks, but how many of the tm bhaktis here are on purusha, done millionaire courses, or even done the minimum by being recertified? Do you live in an s-ved home? How exactly are you a bhakti of MMY if you're not doing what he explicitly asks? Apparently this thread earlier dealt with MDG being a bhakti of MMY. There's no way Michael would be allowed to represent the mov't in any way whatsoever given his various extracurriculars. How are you a bhakti of a guru when that guru and his mov't won't allow you near their movement? I know, I know, these types think they're the real devotees, not the people who the guru actually has with him. That's what robin carlson used to always say, until MMY sent the tape to the court saying carlson was an idiot. I'm not saying MDG is doing anything wrong, and he can love MMY inside all he wants, but I don't think you can be a bhakti of a guru if you don't do what he says and put yourself completely outside the guru's rules/regs. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for taking the time away from your heavy reading schedule to reply. :-) I have no further comments, except to point out that you found a way to ignore all of the situations you didn't like, when the point of the exercise was to comment on what *you* would have done if *your* spiritual teacher, the person with whom *you* have developed an emotional alignment with someone you trust, had asked you to do something like kill an infidel or poison your kids or smuggle money. You've got an emotional alignment with this teacher. You trust them completely. You have that bhakti sentiment going for them in spades. And now they ask you to do these things. What ya gonna do, eh? You won't answer, except to claim that a real teacher like yours would never ask such a thing. But they do. Far too often. And the commonly-taught dogma about bhakti, as exemplified by the Amma quote below, tells seekers that *when* the teacher asks them to do something like this, they should consider it an order. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: For t3rinity, a second post on bhakti: The following is a direct quote from a teacher that quite a few people on this forum admire, on the subject of bhakti and the ideal relationship of a disciple to the guru: Take even the most insignificant word of the guru as an order and obey it. Now ponder the following insignificant words (paraphrased), spoken to students by modern spiritual teachers and gurus: * Treat others the way you would want to be treated. Very sane general advice. Like Kants categorial imperative * If you want to continue teaching the technique of meditation I once certified you to teach, you have to quit your job, pay my organization several thousand dollars to recertify you, and be willing to live anywhere on the planet I tell you to live. Otherwise you're history. Not an original phrasing and as such wrong. Not my cup of tea anyway. * Spend as much of your time as possible working for the welfare of other sentient beings. Good ideal. * Our enemies are coming to destroy us. The only thing you can do about it is to give this poisoned Kool-Aid to your children and then drink it yourself. It's grouping insane advises like this, with wisdom which really shows your nasty approach to the subject. Shame on you. * Be tolerant of the beliefs of others. Of course. And dump on them whenever you can. * The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him; if you do you will be rewarded financially in this life and earn eternal life in heaven. * Meditation is important; practice it every day. Not a bad advice, though not true for everybody. * Meditation is so important that if you do *not* prac- tice it every day you will be dismissed from my university. * Sex is good...practice it lovingly with someone you love. True for most people * Sex is bad. Give it up entirely if you
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't followed this thread closely but: Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just never seen bhakti practices or attitudes promoted by the tmo. How many of the tm people here who think they're bhaktis have been in the same room with MMY in the past 20 yrs? Ever? What personal instruction have you gotten from him recently? (I mean directly, not in your sleeping or waking dreams). Stalkers of celebrities probably think they're bhaktis of them too. I can see someone being devoted to MMY if they do what he asks, but how many of the tm bhaktis here are on purusha, done millionaire courses, or even done the minimum by being recertified? Do you live in an s-ved home? How exactly are you a bhakti of MMY if you're not doing what he explicitly asks? Apparently this thread earlier dealt with MDG being a bhakti of MMY. There's no way Michael would be allowed to represent the mov't in any way whatsoever given his various extracurriculars. How are you a bhakti of a guru when that guru and his mov't won't allow you near their movement? I know, I know, these types think they're the real devotees, not the people who the guru actually has with him. That's what robin carlson used to always say, until MMY sent the tape to the court saying carlson was an idiot. I'm not saying MDG is doing anything wrong, and he can love MMY inside all he wants, but I don't think you can be a bhakti of a guru if you don't do what he says and put yourself completely outside the guru's rules/regs. In The Last Samarai, who was more devoted to the emperor, the pro- West courtiers, or the conservative samarai? Perhaps they were both equally devoted but in different ways? MMY once was quoted by the Press concerning the Beatles: as long as they practice my meditation, they are mine. I'm sure there are other ways of looking at the situation also. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have no further comments, except to point out that you found a way to ignore all of the situations you didn't like, when the point of the exercise was to comment on what *you* would have done if *your* spiritual teacher, the person with whom *you* have developed an emotional alignment with someone you trust, had asked you to do something like kill an infidel or poison your kids or smuggle money. Well,I do the exercises I like to do, and not the one's you design for me, especially not if the contain a heavy load of insinuations. You've got an emotional alignment with this teacher. You trust them completely. You have that bhakti sentiment going for them in spades. And now they ask you to do these things. What ya gonna do, eh? You won't answer, except to claim that a real teacher like yours would never ask such a thing. Exactly. How did you know? But they do. Far too often. And the commonly-taught dogma about bhakti, as exemplified by the Amma quote below, tells seekers that *when* the teacher asks them to do something like this, they should consider it an order. But I am not a follower of Amma. And trusting here means, trusting that they wouldn't ask things like this. That they are not in the category you mix them in. Life can be simple if you see things clearly, but you like to see things complicated, with all kinds of hypothetical problems and conflicts. If conflicts come, at each stage, you have to resolve them with a good dose of common sense. I have done that often. In that sense you get a good idea about your teacher. My sense of Bhakti is well summed up by this quote of Llewellyn Vaughan-Lee: http://www.goldensufi.org/A-InterviewMCaplan.html LVL: They know somewhere within. It depends how strong the longing is in the human being, and how much pushes them from within. It is said that even until the last initiation, the teacher does not know what choice the disciple will make. The disciple can say yes, or the disciple can say no. It has to be like that. Q: What is the function of the teacher? LVL: People make the mistake of thinking that spiritual power is about telling somebody what to do. Spiritual power is about being able to take a human soul and turn it back to God, to be given the authority to work with the soul of a human being, to work in the secret places of the heart that belong only to God. That is real authority. And that requires tremendous humanity. In the West, individuality is so important and we project that into this relationship with the teacher and make a mess of it. We stir it up and get confused, and fight imaginary demons, but the teacher wants nothing from the disciple, because the teacher is free. How can the teacher want anything from a disciple? If they do, they're not a teacher because they're not free. But the disciple projects into this empty space of the teacher all of their psychological dramas. They find something that the teacher said that they disagree with, and then they fight about it and go off and say, The teacher said this and this and this. Maybe the teacher did and maybe the teacher didn't. It really doesn't matter. The disciple is given the opportunity to play out all of their dramas, all of their psychological problems, and some people get stuck in the psychology of it all. And I've seen that happen. They walk away angry and resentful. And that's fine too, because human beings are free. Those who don't walk away who begin to see that there is something else underneath start to find what is there. They get a little bit closer to themselves, to their own true nature. They walk another few steps on the path and the teacher just watches. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote: snip ...but you also seem to have no use for the sentiment of it.) Dude, what you want is for people to respect the sentiment of bhakti while ignoring the practical implications of bhakti. And you want to deal *only* with the (negative) practical implications of bhakti while ignoring the sentiment. But some were, and some weren't. I know you don't really have to deal with this, because after all you believe that the universe really runs everything, and that no one really makes any decisions anyway, but hey dude... Not that one again... why do you continue to talk of things you really didn't get right? First you accuse me of preaching you, and then you bring it up ad neaseum. Hey, you're the one who is on record as saying that no one makes any decisions in life, and that it's the universe that runs everything. Live with it. :-) As Michael says, you don't get it. You make what Ken Wilber calls a category mistake, trying to make a perspective from one state of consciousness apply to a different state. It's obvious you can't deal with an impersonal perspective. It's equally obvious that you can't deal with the *implications* of your impersonal perspective, No, that's the category mistake again. The impersonal perspective has *no* practical implications. In other contexts, you're able to make this distinction, indeed you insist on it. As with so many of your arguments, your position appears to depend on your need to come up with a putdown. That's part of your intellectual dishonesty I referred to in another post. It makes communication and understanding impossible, but of course that's what it's *designed* to do. You want whatever *you* say to be the only possible way to understand whatever you're talking about at the moment, so you deliberately use various strategems to attempt to short-circuit understanding of the other guy's position and portray it (and the person) as ridiculous. But the positions you take in order to accomplish this aren't consistent from one putdown to another. And when this is pointed out, you claim that consistency *itself* is ridiculous and low-vibe, and imply that your inability to be consistent is somehow a virtue, when in fact it's simply a dishonest debating tactic. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't followed this thread closely but: Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just never seen bhakti practices or attitudes promoted by the tmo. There is promoted and then there is promoted. The people in the TMO who tend to relate to MMY in a bhakti fashion *also* tend to be promoted to positions of leadership within the organization. This presents an unspoken but very powerful promotion of the bhakti approach. And, of course, the negative side of bhakti that I've been discussing (which is *not* its only side) is very evident in the TM movement. *Don't* do exactly what the teacher says, and you tend to be history. How many of the tm people here who think they're bhaktis have been in the same room with MMY in the past 20 yrs? A good point. Ever? An even better point. :-) What personal instruction have you gotten from him recently? Or ever? Stalkers of celebrities probably think they're bhaktis of them too. Best line in the discussion so far. :-) :-) :-) I'll leave it at that... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't followed this thread closely but: Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just never seen bhakti practices or attitudes promoted by the tmo. I think one could say that it's more or less unofficially promoted by the bhaktis who speak for the TMO, but it's certainly not *required*. You can take it or leave it. And it's certainly not *explained* in such a way as to integrate it into the intellectual teaching, at least not for the rank and file. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't followed this thread closely but: Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? No, definitely not. How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just never seen bhakti practices or attitudes promoted by the tmo. That's what I meant: The Bhakti *attitude*, that is reverence and appreciation of the teacher in this case. Not explicitely a Bhakti practise. As many great teachers have said, and as it is my own experience, Bhakti and Jnana complement each other and melt into each other ultimately. As Irmeli found fault with MDG style of *idealization* and saw it as an act of *egotism* I accused her of dumping the Bhakti attitude. How many of the tm people here who think they're bhaktis have been in the same room with MMY in the past 20 yrs? Ever? What personal instruction have you gotten from him recently? (I mean directly, not in your sleeping or waking dreams). Stalkers of celebrities probably think they're bhaktis of them too. I can see someone being devoted to MMY if they do what he asks, but how many of the tm bhaktis here are on purusha, done millionaire courses, or even done the minimum by being recertified? Do you live in an s-ved home? How exactly are you a bhakti of MMY if you're not doing what he explicitly asks? Never mind, you could easily have Bhakti for him, if you love him and have a sense of appreciation. Its an internal thing. Apparently this thread earlier dealt with MDG being a bhakti of MMY. There's no way Michael would be allowed to represent the mov't in any way whatsoever given his various extracurriculars. How are you a bhakti of a guru when that guru and his mov't won't allow you near their movement? Ask Michael. But I think its very well possible. Bhakti to me is an internal thing. Never heard of the inner Guru? I know, I know, these types think they're the real devotees, not the people who the guru actually has with him. That's what robin carlson used to always say, until MMY sent the tape to the court saying carlson was an idiot. I'm not saying MDG is doing anything wrong, and he can love MMY inside all he wants, but I don't think you can be a bhakti of a guru if you don't do what he says and put yourself completely outside the guru's rules/regs. I'm sure there are different ways of having Bhakti. I define the term more broadly than you do. Bhakti can have many forms. In MDG case he is not working with MMY closely together, so the question of doing his bidding simply doesn't arise. Still he can have Bhakti. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 markmeredith@ wrote: I haven't followed this thread closely but: Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just never seen bhakti practices or attitudes promoted by the tmo. There is promoted and then there is promoted. The people in the TMO who tend to relate to MMY in a bhakti fashion *also* tend to be promoted to positions of leadership within the organization. This presents an unspoken but very powerful promotion of the bhakti approach. But only if being promoted to a position of leadership within the organization is something one *wants*. For that matter, I suspect that a willingess to do MMY's bidding simply on an intellectual basis, because you think he knows what he's doing, is sufficient to be promoted within the organization. The surrender component on an emotional level isn't required. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apparently this thread earlier dealt with MDG being a bhakti of MMY. There's no way Michael would be allowed to represent the mov't in any way whatsoever given his various extracurriculars. Michael D. Goodman could still be a good man in the movement, he would need to complete the Maharishi BDSM Programme®, currently only taught in England. You provide the bliss, we provide the pain. To satisfy his polyamorous leanings, he could easily become a Raja and take as many wives as he chose. A very popular choice among the trust-fund set! Jai Guru Dev Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In The Last Samarai, who was more devoted to the emperor, the pro- West courtiers, or the conservative samarai? Perhaps they were both equally devoted but in different ways? MMY once was quoted by the Press concerning the Beatles: as long as they practice my meditation, they are mine. I'm sure there are other ways of looking at the situation also. Personally I like your attitude on the issue, sparaig. Just lately I haven't heard MMY talk like that, (or even mention tm for that matter). Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Bhakti -- the double-edged sword
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, *you* define bhakti. Through my life. You've already tried to keep people here from dealing with it critically. As if I could. But I don't have your missionary zest. snip As you define it, which you won't. :-) I take your advice.. snip It's not my path now. I've given it a shot in the past, when it seemed relevant. Here we come to the core of the matter. You were messed up before and now project it on to everybody. But listen: I did not say, that nothing can go wrong, and that people couldn't do stupid things (obviously you know what you are talking about), but I pointed out that bashing Bhakti *as such*, just the sentiment of it, when ever you see it is wrong. Not that you have to follow it - you follow whatever you like. I just point out, that not knowing the sentiment yourself (or obviously having a problem with it), you will not recognize it in others, and your interperetation of their words tend to be one-dimensional stereotypes. As Irmeli mistook MDG tone of reverence for egoism. (That is, when my feeling for a teacher was such that I really had no choice.) Hear, hear... ;-) But that is not relevant now. Thats all I am really saying: You have nothing to do with Bhakti right now. ...(not that it should be your path... Oh? You've changed your tune. Just a few posts ago, you were saying that the absence of bhakti in my posts and in my life revealed a terrible *lack* in that life. You haven't claimed complete enlightenment yet... Therefor a lack is permissable ...but you also seem to have no use for the sentiment of it.) Dude, what you want is for people to respect the sentiment of bhakti while ignoring the practical implications of bhakti. Yes I want you to respect the sentiment of Bhakti *despite* your preconceptions of possible misuse. Like I would ask you to respect the sentiment of Love despite for its multiple possible misuses. Its rather very simply. It's equally obvious that you can't deal with the *implications* of your impersonal perspective, any more than you can with the *implications* of your contention that bhakti is a good thing. Actually I can very well live with both. if the universe was running Jonestown and the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it's really fucked up. :-) Rushdie surely made some mistakes. He is very cynical, yet he is a genial writer. Midnight Children is really grant. And yet, only a few posts ago, you were agreeing with those who say that people should not write critically about Islam because it disturbs the sensibilities of those who are on an Islamic bhakti path. Right. As I said, Rushdie made mistakes. That I admire his style doesn't mean that I have to agree with him on too many subjects. Unlike you I can differentiate. Seems to me you want the ability to live in the *theoretical* realm of the things you believe in, while consistently ignoring the *practical* implications of the things you believe in. Blah blah That's fine, but if you want to be taken seriously by someone who lives in the real world, I think you should be able to do both. First prove that you are living in the real world. When is your book being published? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
