Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael
I don't take the amount of money or fame someone has as an edict to do what they recommend. If I did, I would have Donal Trump as my guru From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 5:10 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael Michael, I'm genuinely curious: how do you reconcile all that you believe about TM with the fact that someone as smart and successful and healthy as Dr. Oz practices TM and endorses it? I'm thinking that for famous people like Lynch and Paul McCartney, Howard Stern and Seinfeld, etc. they're just grateful to have found a technique that enables them to not only survive but thrive in the very demanding entertainment field. PS to Emily, thanks for your reply smile. From: salyavin808 fintlewoodle...@mail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 3:40 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: How about Jack Forem? He just got added at the top. From NYTimes page: Jack Forem Boise, Idaho I recently released an updated version of a book on TM written in the 1970s. I thought the update would take me a couple of months, but the process of sorting through the vast amount of published, top-quality, peer-reviewed scientific research, and the number of compassionate and helpful programs such as those cited in the article on David Lynch's foundation, kept me engaged in research and writing for two years. I have practiced TM since 1967, taught it, and helped to train TM teachers. Yet I must say I was overwhelmed – and I do not use that word lightly – by the extent and depth of the benefits I uncovered in my research. From greatly improved health, better educational outcomes, stress reduction, and the awakening to higher states of consciousness, to replicated interventions in war-torn areas that resulted in calm and peace, the benefits of TM are thoroughly demonstrated and truly extraordinary. I find it sad that some misinformed and/or angry people find it necessary to attack such a good thing, that has helped, and is helping, so many. I would urge them to investigate more deeply and re-think their position. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/david-lynch-transcendental-meditation.html?pagewanted=all_r=1; But all of these angry people are TMers for whom it didn't work or who got fed up with the way the organisation operated after working there for years and thus can't really be said to be misinformed. But their story was somehow neglected from his research?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
Emily, what is it you hate to say? And why? From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across. From: Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily Emily, what is it you hate to say? And why? From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across. From: Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Emily, what is it you hate to say? Leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across. I wonder why that part of her post didn't show up for you. And why? Just a wild guess: Because the TM critics on FFL are likely to find her observation annoying. I'm sure she'll correct me if I'm wrong. From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across.  From: Michael Jackson mjackson74@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. I'm wrong again. Figure of speech would have been my second wild guess, though. ;-) From: Share Long sharelong60@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily  Emily, what is it you hate to say? And why? From: Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across.  From: Michael Jackson mjackson74@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
Or, maybe I said it that way because I was responding to Michael who has been critical - I was more acknowledging the benefits that seem apparent from the practice itself, separate from the org or guru who spearheaded the movement. I could have saidI will say, that the benefits of TM come across... From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:37 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily Emily, what is it you hate to say? And why? From: Emily Reyn emilymae.r...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across. From: Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
Goodness Judy, that's twice you've been wrong in the recent past. Smiley face. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. I'm wrong again. Figure of speech would have been my second wild guess, though. ;-) From: Share Long To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily  Emily, what is it you hate to say? And why? From: Emily Reyn To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across.  From: Michael Jackson To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Goodness Judy, that's twice you've been wrong in the recent past. Smiley face. Ain't it awful? If I'm to maintain my average, it means I can't be wrong again for another two years. )-: From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. I'm wrong again. Figure of speech would have been my second wild guess, though. ;-) From: Share Long To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily àEmily, what is it you hate to say?àAnd why? From: Emily Reyn To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back àI read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across. àFrom: Michael Jackson To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back àOh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael
Michael, I'm genuinely curious: how do you reconcile all that you believe about TM with the fact that someone as smart and successful and healthy as Dr. Oz practices TM and endorses it? I'm thinking that for famous people like Lynch and Paul McCartney, Howard Stern and Seinfeld, etc. they're just grateful to have found a technique that enables them to not only survive but thrive in the very demanding entertainment field. PS to Emily, thanks for your reply smile. From: salyavin808 fintlewoodle...@mail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 3:40 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: How about Jack Forem? He just got added at the top. From NYTimes page: Jack Forem Boise, Idaho I recently released an updated version of a book on TM written in the 1970s. I thought the update would take me a couple of months, but the process of sorting through the vast amount of published, top-quality, peer-reviewed scientific research, and the number of compassionate and helpful programs such as those cited in the article on David Lynch's foundation, kept me engaged in research and writing for two years. I have practiced TM since 1967, taught it, and helped to train TM teachers. Yet I must say I was overwhelmed – and I do not use that word lightly – by the extent and depth of the benefits I uncovered in my research. From greatly improved health, better educational outcomes, stress reduction, and the awakening to higher states of consciousness, to replicated interventions in war-torn areas that resulted in calm and peace, the benefits of TM are thoroughly demonstrated and truly extraordinary. I find it sad that some misinformed and/or angry people find it necessary to attack such a good thing, that has helped, and is helping, so many. I would urge them to investigate more deeply and re-think their position. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/david-lynch-transcendental-meditation.html?pagewanted=all_r=1; But all of these angry people are TMers for whom it didn't work or who got fed up with the way the organisation operated after working there for years and thus can't really be said to be misinformed. But their story was somehow neglected from his research?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael
Just for the record, as a comment. Dr. Oz bugs the crap out of me. From the beginning, I've never made it through a single show of his. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael Michael, I'm genuinely curious: how do you reconcile all that you believe about TM with the fact that someone as smart and successful and healthy as Dr. Oz practices TM and endorses it? I'm thinking that for famous people like Lynch and Paul McCartney, Howard Stern and Seinfeld, etc. they're just grateful to have found a technique that enables them to not only survive but thrive in the very demanding entertainment field. PS to Emily, thanks for your reply smile. From: salyavin808 fintlewoodle...@mail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 3:40 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: How about Jack Forem? He just got added at the top. From NYTimes page: Jack Forem Boise, Idaho I recently released an updated version of a book on TM written in the 1970s. I thought the update would take me a couple of months, but the process of sorting through the vast amount of published, top-quality, peer-reviewed scientific research, and the number of compassionate and helpful programs such as those cited in the article on David Lynch's foundation, kept me engaged in research and writing for two years. I have practiced TM since 1967, taught it, and helped to train TM teachers. Yet I must say I was overwhelmed – and I do not use that word lightly – by the extent and depth of the benefits I uncovered in my research. From greatly improved health, better educational outcomes, stress reduction, and the awakening to higher states of consciousness, to replicated interventions in war-torn areas that resulted in calm and peace, the benefits of TM are thoroughly demonstrated and truly extraordinary. I find it sad that some misinformed and/or angry people find it necessary to attack such a good thing, that has helped, and is helping, so many. I would urge them to investigate more deeply and re-think their position. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/david-lynch-transcendental-meditation.html?pagewanted=all_r=1; But all of these angry people are TMers for whom it didn't work or who got fed up with the way the organisation operated after working there for years and thus can't really be said to be misinformed. But their story was somehow neglected from his research?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
Ahhh ha ha ha. Well, not and admit it anyway. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 2:04 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Goodness Judy, that's twice you've been wrong in the recent past. Smiley face. Ain't it awful? If I'm to maintain my average, it means I can't be wrong again for another two years. )-: From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. I'm wrong again. Figure of speech would have been my second wild guess, though. ;-) From: Share Long To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.comfairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily  Emily, what is it you hate to say? And why? From: Emily Reyn To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.comfairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  I read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across.  From: Michael Jackson To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.comfairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  Oh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Michael, I'm genuinely curious: how do you reconcile all that you believe about TM with the fact that someone as smart and successful and healthy as Dr. Oz practices TM and endorses it? Oz has a large and enthusiastic following, but he's come in for some very serious criticism lately for touting unproven therapies. I wouldn't use him as a poster boy for TM. I'm thinking that for famous people like Lynch and Paul McCartney, Howard Stern and Seinfeld, etc. they're just grateful to have found a technique that enables them to not only survive but thrive in the very demanding entertainment field.
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Michael, I'm genuinely curious: how do you reconcile all that you believe about TM with the fact that someone as smart and successful and healthy as Dr. Oz practices TM and endorses it? How do you reconcile being 64 years old and still being idiotic enough to believe that something is good because someone famous does it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily and Michael
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Michael, I'm genuinely curious: how do you reconcile all that you believe about TM with the fact that someone as smart and successful and healthy as Dr. Oz practices TM and endorses it? How do you reconcile being 64 years old and still being idiotic enough to believe that something is good because someone famous does it? This is odd; Barry read smart and successful and healthy and thought it said famous.
[FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: Goodness Judy, that's twice you've been wrong in the recent past. Smiley face. Ain't it awful? If I'm to maintain my average, it means I can't be wrong again for another two years. )-: Oh, but at least you admit it when you are wrong. This is a long way from what lots of others are capable of. Being wrong and admitting it makes you endearingly human. (Barry?) From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:42 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Just a figure of speech, conversational, if I really hated to say it, I wouldn't have said it. Smile. I'm wrong again. Figure of speech would have been my second wild guess, though. ;-) From: Share Long To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Emily àEmily, what is it you hate to say?àAnd why? From: Emily Reyn To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back àI read it and the comments last night; hate to say, but leaving Maharishi and the TMO out, benefits from TM come across. àFrom: Michael Jackson To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back àOh by the way, why not go visit the New York Times magazine article on Raja David and his band of con artists again and see how many post there are. From: authfriend To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:10 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: While I do not want to get into this particular sparring match between MJ and JS about whether TM is a devotional practice or not, What Michael and I are actually sparring about is Michael's unwillingness--or inability--to address the case emptybill made that TM is not a devotional practice. the following link points to a few pages of Maharishi's Theory of Spiritual development from 1955, which is the earliest document I know of that describes his system of meditation. Actually the link doesn't point to anything. It doesn't work (HTTP 404). This is a PDF document, an excerpt from 'Beacon Light of the Himalayas'. And I'll just bet it's the excerpt in which Maharishi says: ...We find that any sound can serve our purpose of training the mind to become sharp. But we do not select any sound like 'mike', flower, table, pen, wall etc. because such ordinary sounds can do nothing more than merely sharpening the mind; whereas there are some special sounds which have the additional efficacy of producing vibrations whose effects are found to be congenial to our way of life. This is the scientific reason why we do not select any word at random. For our practice we select only the suitable mantras of personal Gods. Such mantras fetch to us the grace of personal Gods and make us happier in every walk of life. Right? Because the TMO did not exist then, and this was published without a copyright, I will assume it is in the public domain. http://bit.ly/YQmNKW
