[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

I won't be posting to you again, Steve, until you overcome your resistance to 
reading that five-part post to Curtis. I don't believe you can understand what 
I am about until or unless you subject yourself to this mortification. So, 
Canada will stay silent, no matter what you say, until you find the time (with 
all your very real professional and familial responsibilities) to do justice to 
me—given the enthusiasm with which you embraced Curtis's post—by reading 
through carefully all that I say there. You don't have a right to pretend to 
understand me, Steve, if you ignore me when I am all-out, as I was in 
addressing my erstwhile friend Curtis.

And oh, by the way: the 10,000 down to 100 business? That was, are you ready 
for this, Steve: IRONY.

A famous talk-show host was asked why a well-known politician would not come 
onto his show? His answer: "Why does baloney resist the grinder?"

Steve, you are, as another FFL poster recently told me, the "friendliest" of 
persons. I only, from up here in Canada, want to put a little iron in your 
soul—so that you, more expeditiously, can tell criminal nuns to go to hell.

What was your sensation when that guy found the bloody head of his favourite 
horse under the sheets in The Godfather? Did you like that moment, Steve? Or 
would you have rather had FFC cut it?

There comes a moment when, in looking down at the earth, you just have to trust 
your parachute and JUMP.

You see, Steve: I just don't want to be found out by you. Because I keep 
getting vertigo whenever I read how close you are coming to forcing me to face 
reality.

Did you see by any chance the way Tom Brady spiked the ball in the end zone 
after he had quarter-backed sneaked for a touchdown? [This past Sunday in 
Denver]

I have never seen him do that—nor had his teammates—who were pleased.

And why did he do that? To shatter the sentimental context of the TT Cinderella 
effect.

And the integrity of the Patriots prevailed over the beautiful fairy tale.

Am I making any sense, Steve?

You like what you like; sometimes you have to take in what you don't feel you 
would like.

Now you must understand me: I am just trying to prevent you from realizing the 
truth about me—and that's why I resent your taking Vaj seriously. Sure, he's 
nailed me in every way; but still I don't entirely accept my fate here. So I 
just keep calling him names.

There will be, then, Steve, no more wisdom and hilarity from Canada until you 
read what the very redoubtable Curtis forced out of me. Once you have done 
this, I can go on the defensive again with my damned first sin: equivocation.

Don't worry, Steve: I am just a bitter man—but you must forgive me: Vaj, after 
all, has more or less undone me—and it makes me angry. Can you understand this?

Love,

Robin





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > You see, Steve, you don't want to understand the context of those ten
> years; you don't want to have to take into yourself the context of my
> five-part post to Curtis; you only want one thing: something to
> incriminate Robin with.
> 
> Okay, stop right here.  First, let me confess, I did not read the five
> part post to Curtis.  I only read three quarters of the first post, and
> bits and pieces of the rest.   But for you to say, that I want something
> to incriminate  you with, well that is entirely inaccurate.  I like you.
> I view you as a friend.  On the other hand, I do not know you well.  I
> have had other friends that I thought I knew well deceive me.  But that
> has not hardened me.  It has only made me wiser.  An accusation has been
> made against you.  You had an initial response.  Then you revised that
> response.  First you wanted to bet Vaj $10,000 that he didn't have  a
> video reporting to show what he said it showed.  Then it seemed to
> wanted to reduce the bet to $100.00.  If I misread your intentions, I
> apologize.  But I am not in the least bit interested in seeing you
> incriminated is some way.  The standard we seem to have established
> here, at least recently, is if I would cover your back in a dark alley,
> or possibly a safari, and the answer is yes, (in both settings). 
> Although in setting two it might depend on who could run the fastest.  
> Now let me send this post before something happens to it, and I will
> continue reading.
> 
> And I ask you, Steve, in all my posts at FFL is there evidence for me
> acting in some dishonest and cowardly and deceitful way? Or do my posts
> make it unlikely that I would lie—no matter what—here at FFL?
> >
> > Think about that, Seve. Vaj knows whether he has this video of Robin
> or not. I have proposed a means whereby he can vindicate himself in this
> accusation by showing it confidentially to Curtis. If you really are
> keen on proving I am a liar, why don't you urge Vaj to show the tape to
> YOU? That would be an acceptable alternative to me. But you wou

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

Well, here it is.  I would suggest to Vaj that he take you up on your
suggestion Robin, and post the video with a third party, and let that
third party make an evaluation.  I mean if you make an accusation
against someone, if you say  you have incriminating evidence against
someone, and then you refuse to back it up, then I say there is a big
credibility problem.

I know that if I did such a thing, I would feel a compunction to back it
up, otherwise I would be a fraud.  What other conclusion can there be?

Vaj, may I see the video?  I would like to see if the video purports to
be what you say it is.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:08 AM, seventhray1 wrote:
>
> > Thanks as always for your reply. You've brought up some things
> > that I need to think about. I have a tendency to come to some
> > rash conclusuions. Some times I have to back away from them, and
> > some times I hit the mark. But it's not often that we have an
> > opportunity to resolve a claim in a definitive way.
> >
> > You are saying that there is no video, but if there is a video you
> > don't want it posted publicly. Or maybe you are saying that there
> > may be a video but it does not show what Vaj claims it shows, and
> > that you want to preserve the privacy of the inividuals who are in
> > the video.
> >
> > If that is the case, why don't you say so. Otherwise, why not ask
> > Vaj to post the video. That would expose Vaj as a liar if he could
> > not produce the video, or if it clearly did not portray what he
> > says it portrays. These are events that took place 25 years ago.
> > I would think that this might be sufficient time for those
> > portrayed in the video to put events in their proper perspective.
> >
> > Things posted here fade pretty fast. Or in some cases the posts
> > can be deleted if they are determined to be detrimental to a
> > person's well being. And we know Rick's threshold is pretty low
> > for this.
> >
> Just to clarify, I was teasing the Masked Zebra, I would not post it
> for the same reason I removed my old Polaroid: it has other people in
> it who have "moved on" long ago, have grown up and have kids and
> their own lives now. The last thing they need is something like that.
> And the same applies to Robin, if he himself found something
> offensive, I'd have no choice but to make it right.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
> And I ask you, Steve, in all my posts at FFL is there evidence for me
> acting in some dishonest and cowardly and deceitful way? Or do my
posts
> make it unlikely that I would lie—no matter what—here at FFL?
Well first of all, I am not able to read all of your posts in full. 
Second they take time to sort out.  Third, there is nothing to indicate
that you are cowardly,or deceitful, but when it comes to Vaj, I believe
I have seen your response to some of his accusations change over the
course of a few posts.  There is nothing wrong with that, it's just that
sometimes it appears as anomoly in the matrix, and that can spell
trouble.  But overall, I have to say that Vaj has been defeated in his
attempts to smear you.
> > Think about that, Seve. Vaj knows whether he has this video of Robin
> or not. I have proposed a means whereby he can vindicate himself in
this
> accusation by showing it confidentially to Curtis. If you really are
> keen on proving I am a liar, why don't you urge Vaj to show the tape
to
> YOU? That would be an acceptable alternative to me. But you would then
> just have to say: "I have seen the tape, Robin, What Vaj says is
true."
I have thought about that very thing.  I have asked myself, "Steve would
you want to be an arbiter of the truth of this video?"  And the answer I
have come up with is, that, no, I wouldn't care to.  But if someone
asked me to do it, then I guess I would consent.  But I would much
rather have someone like Curtis take on that role.  He has more gravitas
here.
> > I think you will have to settle for this level of satisfaction in
your
> quest to make me appear to be someone other than how I have appeared
> here at FFL so far.
> >
> > Your dogged refusal to open yourself to the context of reality
before
> seizing upon a certain item that quite possibly possesses the power to
> reinforce your: "You scored dude" syndrome, this is much more
> significant than this dispute over how it can be established whether
> Robin physically struck some person who attended one of his seminars.
Let me tell you my exact impression.  I thought Curtis's reply to you
was brilliant.  He shot and he scored.  After that reply of his, in the
little bit I read of your second and third parts at least, I thought you
came off that hard line of attack, or a full court press.  I felt that
some of the tension got let out of the room.  But yes, I thought his
response to you was appropiate.  You were minding someone elses business
IMO.
> > You had no business believing in that nun, Steve, unless you were
> making contact with something about her which contradicted the
> suspicions of those who were going after her. Similarly, you are
> obsessively focusing on a particular 'fact' here—Robin did not
> actually just tell Vaj to go ahead and post the video of Robin hitting
> someone: ergo he must be trying to slip out of the noose.
Perhaps I misunderstand what you said.  But right now, I don't care to
go back and reconstruct it.  You say you didn't, and I am willing to
accept that.  Maybe I will go back, maybe later tonight and revise that
postion.
> > But I have had my say, Steve. There is a simple means for Vaj to
> establish the existence of that tape, and I am happy to have this
matter
> resolved to the point where there will not exist any equivocation
about
> it—and therefore any issue about my own tendency to equivocate,
> which only you, among the posters at FFL, Steve, have thought to
charge
> me with.
I guess this one of the ways I gain knowledge.  I sometimes make rash
judgements which I then have to change.  And often they come with an
apology on my part.  Sometimes I even have to pay money.  I wouldn't
care to lose a friend over it, and I am not being overly sappy  here,
and I am not necessarily referring to you.
> > You have the means to find out whether I am like the dishonest nun.
> Now go out there and get your satisfaction, Steve.
During the day I took a 10 second peak at a post Vaj made.  Something
about "teasing" you about the video. I suppose I will come across this
post shortly.  But the brief time I had to look at it, it seemed rather
odd.
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks as always for your reply. You've brought up some things
that
> I
> > > need to think about. I have a tendency to come to some rash
> > > conclusuions. Some times I have to back away from them, and some
> times
> > > I hit the mark. But it's not often that we have an opportunity to
> > > resolve a claim in a definitive way.
> > >
> > > You are saying that there is no video, but if there is a video you
> don't
> > > want it posted publicly. Or maybe you are saying that there may be
a
> > > video but it does not show what Vaj claims it shows, and that you
> want
> > > to preserve the privacy of the inividuals who are in the video.
> > >
> > > If that is the case, why don't you say s

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> You see, Steve, you don't want to understand the context of those ten
years; you don't want to have to take into yourself the context of my
five-part post to Curtis; you only want one thing: something to
incriminate Robin with.

Okay, stop right here.  First, let me confess, I did not read the five
part post to Curtis.  I only read three quarters of the first post, and
bits and pieces of the rest.   But for you to say, that I want something
to incriminate  you with, well that is entirely inaccurate.  I like you.
I view you as a friend.  On the other hand, I do not know you well.  I
have had other friends that I thought I knew well deceive me.  But that
has not hardened me.  It has only made me wiser.  An accusation has been
made against you.  You had an initial response.  Then you revised that
response.  First you wanted to bet Vaj $10,000 that he didn't have  a
video reporting to show what he said it showed.  Then it seemed to
wanted to reduce the bet to $100.00.  If I misread your intentions, I
apologize.  But I am not in the least bit interested in seeing you
incriminated is some way.  The standard we seem to have established
here, at least recently, is if I would cover your back in a dark alley,
or possibly a safari, and the answer is yes, (in both settings). 
Although in setting two it might depend on who could run the fastest.  
Now let me send this post before something happens to it, and I will
continue reading.

And I ask you, Steve, in all my posts at FFL is there evidence for me
acting in some dishonest and cowardly and deceitful way? Or do my posts
make it unlikely that I would lie—no matter what—here at FFL?
>
> Think about that, Seve. Vaj knows whether he has this video of Robin
or not. I have proposed a means whereby he can vindicate himself in this
accusation by showing it confidentially to Curtis. If you really are
keen on proving I am a liar, why don't you urge Vaj to show the tape to
YOU? That would be an acceptable alternative to me. But you would then
just have to say: "I have seen the tape, Robin, What Vaj says is true."
>
> I think you will have to settle for this level of satisfaction in your
quest to make me appear to be someone other than how I have appeared
here at FFL so far.
>
> Your dogged refusal to open yourself to the context of reality before
seizing upon a certain item that quite possibly possesses the power to
reinforce your: "You scored dude" syndrome, this is much more
significant than this dispute over how it can be established whether
Robin physically struck some person who attended one of his seminars.
>
> You had no business believing in that nun, Steve, unless you were
making contact with something about her which contradicted the
suspicions of those who were going after her. Similarly, you are
obsessively focusing on a particular 'fact' here—Robin did not
actually just tell Vaj to go ahead and post the video of Robin hitting
someone: ergo he must be trying to slip out of the noose.
>
> But I have had my say, Steve. There is a simple means for Vaj to
establish the existence of that tape, and I am happy to have this matter
resolved to the point where there will not exist any equivocation about
it—and therefore any issue about my own tendency to equivocate,
which only you, among the posters at FFL, Steve, have thought to charge
me with.
>
> You have the means to find out whether I am like the dishonest nun.
Now go out there and get your satisfaction, Steve.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thanks as always for your reply. You've brought up some things that
I
> > need to think about. I have a tendency to come to some rash
> > conclusuions. Some times I have to back away from them, and some
times
> > I hit the mark. But it's not often that we have an opportunity to
> > resolve a claim in a definitive way.
> >
> > You are saying that there is no video, but if there is a video you
don't
> > want it posted publicly. Or maybe you are saying that there may be a
> > video but it does not show what Vaj claims it shows, and that you
want
> > to preserve the privacy of the inividuals who are in the video.
> >
> > If that is the case, why don't you say so. Otherwise, why not ask
Vaj
> > to post the video. That would expose Vaj as a liar if he could not
> > produce the video, or if it clearly did not portray what he says it
> > portrays. These are events that took place 25 years ago. I would
think
> > that this might be sufficient time for those portrayed in the video
to
> > put events in their proper perspective.
> >
> > Things posted here fade pretty fast. Or in some cases the posts can
be
> > deleted if they are determined to be detrimental to a person's well
> > being. And we know Rick's threshold is pretty low for this.
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > >
> > > No equivocation at all, Steve. Your nun story breaks down 

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

Vajihad!! I wonder which is worse, being subjected to that, or being Barry'd 
Alive? 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > What exactly is behind Vaj's sadistic anti-Robin campaign
> > that he feels the need to disguise with bullshit
> > rationalizations and "clarifications"? Inquiring minds
> > want to know. Robin has been very open about his agenda;
> > why can't Vaj be open about his? Why is he so intent on
> > destroying Robin's hard-won progress toward well-being?
> > 
> > RESPONSE: Rest assured, Judy, that Vaj cannot affect me in any way. I don't 
> > say this as some kind of defiant boast. I say this as a matter of empirical 
> > fact: Vaj could only touch me where I live were he willing to put his soul 
> > into his posts to me. As it is, I always feel how far off he is [both in 
> > terms of what he is aiming at in me, and in the sense that he is "far off" 
> > from even his own true self], even as I could write some devastating posts 
> > *to myself*. So, until or unless Vaj takes off his mask and becomes humanly 
> > accessible to me—as Curtis always was—I can't even benefit from his 
> > antipathy towards me. I don't believe Vaj can help himself; he is genuinely 
> > caught in a kind of self-made matrix; and there evidently is no way out. He 
> > seems in his last post to Steve to be willing to adhere to his stated 
> > intention: to deal with me within the present—for instance, I do not bring 
> > up his personal relationship to Pol Pot [although I have a video]. I 
> > appreciate that his attacks upon me and my reputation—and my mental 
> > health—have drawn out such a true and sincere concern in you; but I am more 
> > stable than this; else I would never had come onto FFL. Ten years ago, I 
> > would have been in no position to post at FFL. Now I am. I think I finally 
> > know what's driving Vaj, but even before this, I did not get alarmed by 
> > what he was doing. I believe the abuse from Vaj will attenuate into 
> > nothing—unless prompted by one of his cohorts—or his valiant defender, 
> > Steve. Thanks, Judy!
> 
> To be honest, Robin, my post wasn't motivated by
> concern for you. I doubt there's much if anything
> Vaj could throw at you that you wouldn't be able to
> handle, no matter what tactics he was able to pick 
> up from Mr. Pot. 
> 
> I just think it's important to call attention to 
> what appears to be the personal nature of this
> particular vindictive Vajihad. His intent is
> obvious, but he has to hide his reasons, so he ends
> up floundering around like a loose cannon with a
> grudge so heavy it throws off his aim and he gets
> beaned with his own shrapnel.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> What exactly is behind Vaj's sadistic anti-Robin campaign
> that he feels the need to disguise with bullshit
> rationalizations and "clarifications"? Inquiring minds
> want to know. Robin has been very open about his agenda;
> why can't Vaj be open about his? Why is he so intent on
> destroying Robin's hard-won progress toward well-being?
> 
> RESPONSE: Rest assured, Judy, that Vaj cannot affect me in any way. I don't 
> say this as some kind of defiant boast. I say this as a matter of empirical 
> fact: Vaj could only touch me where I live were he willing to put his soul 
> into his posts to me. As it is, I always feel how far off he is [both in 
> terms of what he is aiming at in me, and in the sense that he is "far off" 
> from even his own true self], even as I could write some devastating posts 
> *to myself*. So, until or unless Vaj takes off his mask and becomes humanly 
> accessible to me—as Curtis always was—I can't even benefit from his antipathy 
> towards me. I don't believe Vaj can help himself; he is genuinely caught in a 
> kind of self-made matrix; and there evidently is no way out. He seems in his 
> last post to Steve to be willing to adhere to his stated intention: to deal 
> with me within the present—for instance, I do not bring up his personal 
> relationship to Pol Pot [although I have a video]. I appreciate that his 
> attacks upon me and my reputation—and my mental health—have drawn out such a 
> true and sincere concern in you; but I am more stable than this; else I would 
> never had come onto FFL. Ten years ago, I would have been in no position to 
> post at FFL. Now I am. I think I finally know what's driving Vaj, but even 
> before this, I did not get alarmed by what he was doing. I believe the abuse 
> from Vaj will attenuate into nothing—unless prompted by one of his cohorts—or 
> his valiant defender, Steve. Thanks, Judy!

To be honest, Robin, my post wasn't motivated by
concern for you. I doubt there's much if anything
Vaj could throw at you that you wouldn't be able to
handle, no matter what tactics he was able to pick 
up from Mr. Pot. 

I just think it's important to call attention to 
what appears to be the personal nature of this
particular vindictive Vajihad. His intent is
obvious, but he has to hide his reasons, so he ends
up floundering around like a loose cannon with a
grudge so heavy it throws off his aim and he gets
beaned with his own shrapnel.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

What exactly is behind Vaj's sadistic anti-Robin campaign
that he feels the need to disguise with bullshit
rationalizations and "clarifications"? Inquiring minds
want to know. Robin has been very open about his agenda;
why can't Vaj be open about his? Why is he so intent on
destroying Robin's hard-won progress toward well-being?

RESPONSE: Rest assured, Judy, that Vaj cannot affect me in any way. I don't say 
this as some kind of defiant boast. I say this as a matter of empirical fact: 
Vaj could only touch me where I live were he willing to put his soul into his 
posts to me. As it is, I always feel how far off he is [both in terms of what 
he is aiming at in me, and in the sense that he is "far off" from even his own 
true self], even as I could write some devastating posts *to myself*. So, until 
or unless Vaj takes off his mask and becomes humanly accessible to me—as Curtis 
always was—I can't even benefit from his antipathy towards me. I don't believe 
Vaj can help himself; he is genuinely caught in a kind of self-made matrix; and 
there evidently is no way out. He seems in his last post to Steve to be willing 
to adhere to his stated intention: to deal with me within the present—for 
instance, I do not bring up his personal relationship to Pol Pot [although I 
have a video]. I appreciate that his attacks upon me and my reputation—and my 
mental health—have drawn out such a true and sincere concern in you; but I am 
more stable than this; else I would never had come onto FFL. Ten years ago, I 
would have been in no position to post at FFL. Now I am. I think I finally know 
what's driving Vaj, but even before this, I did not get alarmed by what he was 
doing. I believe the abuse from Vaj will attenuate into nothing—unless prompted 
by one of his cohorts—or his valiant defender, Steve. Thanks, Judy!

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:08 AM, seventhray1 wrote:

> > These are events that took place 25 years ago.   
> > I would think that this might be sufficient time for those  
> > portrayed in the video to put events in their proper perspective.
> >
> > Things posted here fade pretty fast.  Or in some cases the posts  
> > can be deleted if they are determined to be detrimental to a  
> > person's well being.  And we know Rick's threshold is pretty low  
> > for this.
> >
> Just to clarify, I was teasing the Masked Zebra, I would not
> post it for the same reason I removed my old Polaroid:

Or because it doesn't exist; or if it does, it doesn't
show what Vaj claims. If it did and does, how come he
doesn't take Robin's suggestion and send it to an FFLer
he trusts to report back to the group?

> it has other people in it who have "moved on" long ago,
> have grown up and have kids and their own lives now. The
> last thing they need is something like that.

But somehow such humanitarian concerns didn't stop Vaj
from uploading the Polaroid shot in the first place and
leaving it up long enough for everyone to have a good
look at it. And there wasn't anything of interest to be
seen except the "other people" who were in it. It was
the "last thing" they needed, but Vaj insisted on
giving it to them anyway.

What exactly is behind Vaj's sadistic anti-Robin campaign
that he feels the need to disguise with bullshit
rationalizations and "clarifications"? Inquiring minds
want to know. Robin has been very open about his agenda;
why can't Vaj be open about his? Why is he so intent on
destroying Robin's hard-won progress toward well-being?

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

Yeah, in the broader sense Vaj is always here to put down TM and Maharishi. It 
is his core identity. Barry's too.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
>  
> What you say is probably true for Barry who is a prima-donna 
> and a virtual peacock.
> 
> But old Saffy boy seems to have much larger agenda.  To show 
> us the current condition of Robin the TM poster boy ie the 
> net result of TM and MMY.
>  
>  
>  
> From: whynotnow7 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 8:53 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
> 
> 
>  
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Seems like you are bullying Robin because he has a more
> > > public past than you do. What a coward. Shame on you.
> > > You hide, and lob bags of poo at him. In full sight of
> > > us all. That religion you are chained to must give you
> > > much comfort - just don't rub your wrists so much - it
> > > gives away your slavery.
> > 
> > You know, it strikes me as so odd, because Robin's current
> > animus toward TM and MMY is so similar in many respects to
> > what Vaj has been preaching here for years, you'd think Vaj
> > would be cheering Robin on, thrilled to have him as an ally.
> > 
> > There has to be something else going on to explain this
> > vendetta. It can't be just that Robin doesn't believe Vaj's
> > claims to have been a TMer and TM teacher; Vaj has lobbed
> > spitballs at worst toward the rest of us who doubt his TM
> > status, whereas Robin gets nuclear missiles.
> > 
> > I think there must be some acute thirst for vengeance at
> > work, perhaps for a personal injury he feels Robin did him,
> > or someone he's close to, in the past.
> > 
> > That Robin has repudiated and essentially apologized for,
> > regretted, and repented of the damage he did folks in what
> > he considers his enlightened period isn't enough for Vaj.
> > Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> > but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
> >
> What I honestly think?
> 1) It is a dodge for Vaj, getting all excited about MZ, so he doesn't have to 
> deal with his own shit, whatever that may be.
> 2) There is something fundamentally truthful in what MZ says, such that it 
> irritates the hell out of Vaj.
> 3) With MZ around, Vaj can't waltz in anymore, mystically spouting his 
> spiritual-sounding nonsense and have anyone care. Same with Barry - notice 
> how they both hate MZ? Its visceral. He took their stage away without trying, 
> and now all they can do is snarl under it, one feigning spiritual authority, 
> the other, indifference.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[richardatrwilliamsdotus]

> > Who's R? Robin?
> >
authfriend:
> While I'm thinking of it, have you or has anyone 
> heard from do.rflex recently? He hasn't posted 
> here since mid-September.
>
Well, Steve Perino is back, why don't you invite 
John Manning to drop us a line? You already know 
how busy the 'dorkflex' is trashing Mitt Romney on 
that Mormon Fellowship forum. LoL!

Subject: Romney Still Making Millions Off Bain Capital
From: John Manning
Newsgroups: alt.religion.mormon, 
alt.religion, soc.culture.jewish, 
alt.atheism, alt.bible.prophecy
Date: December 19, 2011
http://tinyurl.com/7qg2nhd

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Jason]

 
What you say is probably true for Barry who is a prima-donna 
and a virtual peacock.

But old Saffy boy seems to have much larger agenda.  To show 
us the current condition of Robin the TM poster boy ie the 
net result of TM and MMY.
 
 
 
From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 8:53 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos


 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > Seems like you are bullying Robin because he has a more
> > public past than you do. What a coward. Shame on you.
> > You hide, and lob bags of poo at him. In full sight of
> > us all. That religion you are chained to must give you
> > much comfort - just don't rub your wrists so much - it
> > gives away your slavery.
> 
> You know, it strikes me as so odd, because Robin's current
> animus toward TM and MMY is so similar in many respects to
> what Vaj has been preaching here for years, you'd think Vaj
> would be cheering Robin on, thrilled to have him as an ally.
> 
> There has to be something else going on to explain this
> vendetta. It can't be just that Robin doesn't believe Vaj's
> claims to have been a TMer and TM teacher; Vaj has lobbed
> spitballs at worst toward the rest of us who doubt his TM
> status, whereas Robin gets nuclear missiles.
> 
> I think there must be some acute thirst for vengeance at
> work, perhaps for a personal injury he feels Robin did him,
> or someone he's close to, in the past.
> 
> That Robin has repudiated and essentially apologized for,
> regretted, and repented of the damage he did folks in what
> he considers his enlightened period isn't enough for Vaj.
> Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
>
What I honestly think?
1) It is a dodge for Vaj, getting all excited about MZ, so he doesn't have to 
deal with his own shit, whatever that may be.
2) There is something fundamentally truthful in what MZ says, such that it 
irritates the hell out of Vaj.
3) With MZ around, Vaj can't waltz in anymore, mystically spouting his 
spiritual-sounding nonsense and have anyone care. Same with Barry - notice how 
they both hate MZ? Its visceral. He took their stage away without trying, and 
now all they can do is snarl under it, one feigning spiritual authority, the 
other, indifference. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:08 AM, seventhray1 wrote:

Thanks as always for your reply. You've brought up some things  
that  I need to think about.  I have a tendency to come to some  
rash conclusuions.  Some times I have to back away from them, and  
some times I hit the mark.  But it's not often that we have an  
opportunity to resolve a claim in a definitive way.


You are saying that there is no video, but if there is a video you  
don't want it posted publicly.  Or maybe you are saying that there  
may be a video but it does not show what Vaj claims it shows, and  
that you want to preserve the privacy of the inividuals who are in  
the video.


If that is the case,  why don't you say so.  Otherwise, why not ask  
Vaj to post the video.  That would expose Vaj as a liar if he could  
not produce the video, or if it clearly did not portray what he  
says it portrays.  These are events that took place 25 years ago.   
I would think that this might be sufficient time for those  
portrayed in the video to put events in their proper perspective.


Things posted here fade pretty fast.  Or in some cases the posts  
can be deleted if they are determined to be detrimental to a  
person's well being.  And we know Rick's threshold is pretty low  
for this.


Just to clarify, I was teasing the Masked Zebra, I would not post it  
for the same reason I removed my old Polaroid: it has other people in  
it who have "moved on" long ago, have grown up and have kids and  
their own lives now. The last thing they need is something like that.  
And the same applies to Robin, if he himself found something  
offensive, I'd have no choice but to make it right.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

Look, Steve, just as with the Nun: you have to use more than possible 
contingencies in levelling an accusation against someone. Anyone who reads my 
posts carefully recognizes something that could not be true about me: viz. that 
I fudge, equivocate, avoid, lie. Don't fucking use your stupid logic on me 
without bringing along some 'feel' for the context within which my comments are 
made. And get off this 'prove it to me jag'.

If you knew what these persons underwent—even what I underwent—in those ten 
years, you would understand how many of those formerly associated with me who 
have had children since the big smashup in 1986-87 would not wish to have their 
past history with me something made public—*at this time*. There are a number 
of devout Catholics among these ex-friends of mine, who have assumed prominent 
positions within the Church. Why should they somehow become answerable for 
their pasts through something as subversive as a video? Of course I would be 
quite content to have any videos of myself posted—if it came to a matter of 
truth-telling and settling of the matter of my honesty or dishonesty; my 
equivocation or my sincerity. But I feel I am not in a position to make use of 
our past history together as the means of establishing the integrity of myself 
in  your eyes. If you asked some of the persons who appeared in Vaj's 
photograph of me inside the campus grounds of MIU carrying Guru Dev's portrait, 
they would express their desire that they not become the subject of discussion 
here at FFL.

Now I ask you, Stevie Wonder, what should constitute my greater responsibility: 
to prove to you my good intentions here—and my probity—or attempt to persuade 
you that you are chasing a notion of me which has been thoroughly disproven in 
a fair reading of all my posts at FFL?

You see, Steve, you have to MAKE CONTACT WITH SOMETHING when you use some form 
of inference to put into doubt someone's sincerity. If you had read my five 
part post to Curtis—or even the entire dialogues I had with Curtis before 
this—you would therefore have to hold this context of experience and 
understanding and weigh this against what you think you may have got a hold of 
in my post to Vaj as insinuating that I am equivocating.

I know what I am doing. If I had the permission of these former friends of mine 
to make them the means to prove to Steve that I was not equivocating, then I 
would urge Vaj to post the tape in any way he wishes to. The point really is: 
Did Robin strike someone publicly at a seminar and is there a video of him 
doing this?

You are lusting after the possibility that there just might be some truth in 
this—a truth which would serve your psychological needs big time. Meanwhile Vaj 
knows whether he has indeed such a tape, and it would be impossible for him, if 
he does, to not contradict my claims here by not doing anything to demonstrate 
that I am lying. He is fighting back in the only way he knows how—even as he 
has given a promise not to bring up my more ancient past in order to resolve 
the issues between us that take the form of something completely in the present.

You can confront me with some idea that I am equivocating—and you are insisting 
on still doing this in this post. But you once again do not bear the 
responsibility of taking hold of the entirety of the context of my posts which 
would in any way whatsoever be consistent with this notion that Robin is 
equivocating—i.e. trying to avoid the presentation of, ah! a smoking gun.

Now I was in a very real sense out of control in my enlightenment. I did many 
things which I would never have dreamed of doing had I remained in waking state 
consciousness—anyone who knew me before and then after my enlightenment would 
remark on the dramatic even cataclysmic difference in me. So, if a video was 
played of those ten years (which will happen when I die I believe) I am sure I 
would be embarrassed and ashamed by many of my actions. But for me to have 
struck someone physically during a seminar, this is not something I would have 
done.

You see, Steve, you don't want to understand the context of those ten years; 
you don't want to have to take into yourself the context of my five-part post 
to Curtis; you only want one thing: something to incriminate Robin with. And I 
ask you, Steve, in all my posts at FFL is there evidence for me acting in some 
dishonest and cowardly and deceitful way? Or do my posts make it unlikely that 
I would lie—no matter what—here at FFL?

Think about that, Seve. Vaj knows whether he has this video of Robin or not. I 
have proposed a means whereby he can vindicate himself in this accusation by 
showing it confidentially to Curtis. If you really are keen on proving I am a 
liar, why don't you urge Vaj to show the tape to YOU? That would be an 
acceptable alternative to me. But you would then just have to say: "I have seen 
the tape, Robin, What Vaj says is true."

I think you will have to settle for this le

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

Thanks as always for your reply. You've brought up some things that  I
need to think about.  I have a tendency to come to some rash
conclusuions.  Some times I have to back away from them, and some times
I hit the mark.  But it's not often that we have an opportunity to
resolve a claim in a definitive way.

You are saying that there is no video, but if there is a video you don't
want it posted publicly.  Or maybe you are saying that there may be a
video but it does not show what Vaj claims it shows, and that you want
to preserve the privacy of the inividuals who are in the video.

If that is the case,  why don't you say so.  Otherwise, why not ask Vaj
to post the video.  That would expose Vaj as a liar if he could not
produce the video, or if it clearly did not portray what he says it
portrays.  These are events that took place 25 years ago.  I would think
that this might be sufficient time for those portrayed in the video to
put events in their proper perspective.

Things posted here fade pretty fast.  Or in some cases the posts can be
deleted if they are determined to be detrimental to a person's well
being.  And we know Rick's threshold is pretty low for this.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> No equivocation at all, Steve. Your nun story breaks down in this
response. Vaj has no such video. What is equivocal about having Vajj
share this evidence with someone like Curtis—or Rick Archer? The
point is not to see the video; the point is to confirm that Robin struck
some participant at one of his seminars, something I did not do. You
don't understand context, Steve, or you would never accuse me of
equivocating. You are literalizing me out of the honesty of my response
to Vaj. I appreciate the nun story, but here you are a victim of
something unconsciously mischievous. I am a straight shooter, Steve: you
have no idea what happened in those ten years [when I was enlightened].
Do you not think it significant that not one person who experienced the
power of the context of one of those seminars has ever come onto FFL to
give their own testimony about this? Let that tell you how intense and
complex the reality was. You have a tendency, Steve, to make superficial
what is something deep, and something that asks something more from you
than you are willing to give. Read my responses to Curtis and Vaj and
tell me whether I am someone who equivocates. This is a misreading of
me, Steve, and a serious one at that. I do not equivocate; I will not
equivocate. You have to let reality have some say in your understanding
of something, Steve. Think of how happy you were when Curtis first
turned back my post to him: "You scored, dude. You scored!" And then
consider how you felt upon reading my final five-part response to
Curtis. You liked, you were predisposed to like, Curtis initial post,
but you hated my own post, even though you would never post something
negative about it. Because you couldn't. But this is uncontrollable
prejudice in you: you would much rather I had never responded to Curtis.
You have a problem with me, Steve; I am asking more of you than you wish
to give of yourself.
>
> There is no video, by the way, of me striking someone in a seminar.
>
> But for you re: Robin and Vaj, it all comes down to finding something
about Robin which would disqualify him from criticizing Vaj, and by
golly, you are going to do your darndest to smoke this out. You get me
wrong, Steve.
>
> Neil Young was great.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> > > but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
> > >
> > Well Judy, doesn't Robin equivicate? First he says bring on the
video,
> > then he says, to post it privately. Which is it?
> >
> > Do you really think the people in the video are going to be damaged
by
> > its release? I'm asking. I don't know. Likely it will be a splash
> > for a moment and then fade. I say let's see it. Let's draw our own
> > conclusions.
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Bob Price]

From: turquoiseb 



I agree. Interestingly, hearkening back to the former 
friend I've mentioned recently, who was the head of a 
mental institution, one one of the things he mentioned
to me over coffee was that he had to continually warn 
his staff at the institution about the "communicable
charisma" of patients suffering from certain disorders.
In other words, he had to warn them not to get too close,
because some of the mindstates they were dealing with
were "infectious," and they might be picking up insanity
from their charges, instead of them picking up sanity
from them. I think this was good advice.


***BP: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UqEhUm2B_8

Barry, before we get started, I need to mention a few things; first, kudos for 
getting "yawn" into your
review; I believe an inability to understand irony is no barrier to being
ironic. And secondly, I'm wondering if ZZ would consider this post of yours a 
form of Moonie "love
bombing"; what else should I call a gift like this? 

Although I'm concerned this *friend* of yours seems to have slipped onto a 
"former"
list; I think most of us would agree, a psychiatrist (one would assume he's
attained that qualification if he's running a mental hospital) that thinks
mental illness is "infectious", is a keeper. I mean we all know many
of them think that way, but to get one to actually say it, out loud, that's
impressive. I'm just wondering if you can give us a few more specifics; for
example did he mean insanity is infectious like laughter, or more like venereal
disease, did he have to sleep with the patients or just have a good laugh with
them? Is it something you pick up from kissing or can you get it from a toilet 
seat? 


The possibilities seem endless; I mean, why stop there, if mental illness is
infectious, or, if you prefer, contagious, why can't you pick it up over the
Internet, or more to the point on a forum like FFL? And if that's the case, am
I in danger or are you? And since it seems like we will be skating in hell
before you find something else to do, it's more likely I'm the vulnerable one. 
OMG,
you see what I mean; I hope the hell you have not done a Barry on this guy, and
you're still able to get in touch with him, because I think I speak for a
number of us, when I say: "We have some questions". Do I also
understand correctly that one of your psychiatrists concerns is infection from
charisma, or to put it another way from people with an unnatural amount of 
attractiveness
or charm that can inspire devotion in others, as in: "he enchanted guests
with his charisma"? Is it safe to say you're not infected? 


Barry, this has been a huge help for me, it explains something
I've been wondering about; I've wondered why you constantly use sexual imagery
when describing Maharishi. Is this a way to fight off possible infections?
Although, I guess, and, I don't want to oversimplify here, it's also possible 
that you
just need to get laid?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZucJAkzCNq8


PS: I hope you're as excited as I am about getting to our other posts 
concerning choreography,
and all kinds of other fun stuff, but before I nod off, you really don't think
that 'Pulp Fiction' wasn't musical theater do you? BTW, you might want to look
up what Mandy Patinkin does for a living. More soon!



  

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[cardemaister]

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is  
> > "bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally  
> > "beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?
> >

OMG! Vaj, puhleeze! The noun 'bhaava' is obviously derived
from the root 'bhuu' (to be, become). In that context it most
certainly simply means 'existence', or stuff. Please, stop
embarrassing yourself before it's "too late"... ;D
 
> > Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever you  
> > want to call it.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

No equivocation at all, Steve. Your nun story breaks down in this response. Vaj 
has no such video. What is equivocal about having Vajj share this evidence with 
someone like Curtis—or Rick Archer? The point is not to see the video; the 
point is to confirm that Robin struck some participant at one of his seminars, 
something I did not do. You don't understand context, Steve, or you would never 
accuse me of equivocating. You are literalizing me out of the honesty of my 
response to Vaj. I appreciate the nun story, but here you are a victim of 
something unconsciously mischievous. I am a straight shooter, Steve: you have 
no idea what happened in those ten years [when I was enlightened]. Do you not 
think it significant that not one person who experienced the power of the 
context of one of those seminars has ever come onto FFL to give their own 
testimony about this? Let that tell you how intense and complex the reality 
was. You have a tendency, Steve, to make superficial what is something deep, 
and something that asks something more from you than you are willing to give. 
Read my responses to Curtis and Vaj and tell me whether I am someone who 
equivocates. This is a misreading of me, Steve, and a serious one at that. I do 
not equivocate; I will not equivocate. You have to let reality have some say in 
your understanding of something, Steve. Think of how happy you were when Curtis 
first turned back my post to him: "You scored, dude. You scored!" And then 
consider how you felt upon reading my final five-part response to Curtis. You 
liked, you were predisposed to like, Curtis initial post, but you hated my own 
post, even though you would never post something negative about it. Because you 
couldn't. But this is uncontrollable prejudice in you: you would much rather I 
had never responded to Curtis. You have a problem with me, Steve; I am asking 
more of you than you wish to give of yourself.

There is no video, by the way, of me striking someone in a seminar.

But for you re: Robin and Vaj, it all comes down to finding something about 
Robin which would disqualify him from criticizing Vaj, and by golly, you are 
going to do your darndest to smoke this out. You get me wrong, Steve.

Neil Young was great.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> > but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
> >
> Well Judy, doesn't Robin equivicate?  First he says bring on the video,
> then he says, to post it privately.  Which is it?
> 
> Do you really think the people in the video are going to be damaged by
> its release?  I'm asking.  I don't know.  Likely it will be a  splash
> for a moment and then fade.  I say let's see it.  Let's draw our own
> conclusions.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> > but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
> >
> Well Judy, doesn't Robin equivicate?  First he says bring on the
> video, then he says, to post it privately.  Which is it?

I think it's called "On second thought..." I'm not sure
"equivocate" is the word you want here. And why Robin 
changing his mind should inspire Vaj to want to destroy
him, I haven't the foggiest.

> Do you really think the people in the video are going to be
> damaged by its release?  I'm asking.  I don't know.  Likely
> it will be a  splash for a moment and then fade.  I say let's
> see it.  Let's draw our own conclusions.

I'm inclined to trust Robin's judgment on this. Who the
hell knows what it's all about? Let Vaj and Robin hash
it out. I ain't gonna get in the middle of it.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > Seems like you are bullying Robin because he has a more
> > public past than you do. What a coward. Shame on you.
> > You hide, and lob bags of poo at him. In full sight of
> > us all. That religion you are chained to must give you
> > much comfort - just don't rub your wrists so much - it
> > gives away your slavery.
> 
> You know, it strikes me as so odd, because Robin's current
> animus toward TM and MMY is so similar in many respects to
> what Vaj has been preaching here for years, you'd think Vaj
> would be cheering Robin on, thrilled to have him as an ally.
> 
> There has to be something else going on to explain this
> vendetta. It can't be just that Robin doesn't believe Vaj's
> claims to have been a TMer and TM teacher; Vaj has lobbed
> spitballs at worst toward the rest of us who doubt his TM
> status, whereas Robin gets nuclear missiles.
> 
> I think there must be some acute thirst for vengeance at
> work, perhaps for a personal injury he feels Robin did him,
> or someone he's close to, in the past.
> 
> That Robin has repudiated and essentially apologized for,
> regretted, and repented of the damage he did folks in what
> he considers his enlightened period isn't enough for Vaj.
> Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
>
What I honestly think?
1) It is a dodge for Vaj, getting all excited about MZ, so he doesn't have to 
deal with his own shit, whatever that may be.
2) There is something fundamentally truthful in what MZ says, such that it 
irritates the hell out of Vaj.
3) With MZ around, Vaj can't waltz in anymore, mystically spouting his 
spiritual-sounding nonsense and have anyone care. Same with Barry - notice how 
they both hate MZ? Its visceral. He took their stage away without trying, and 
now all they can do is snarl under it, one feigning spiritual authority, the 
other, indifference. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Barbra Kay Puckett]

 From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 4:27 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
 

  
Flagging (or perhaps flogging) his impotence, so to speak?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > What was he doing in the whorehouse with a limp dick?
> 
> Waving it, like Barry does. ;-)
> 
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> > > 
> > > Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> > > had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> > > in a whorehouse :-)
> > > 
> > > RESPONSE: I think this a most apposite description of Maharishi and I am 
> > > envious of the person who composed it.
> > > 
> > > In fact it had the effect of clearing some of the residual fogginess from 
> > > my Unity Consciousness days—fogginess that I didn't realize was still 
> > > there.
> > > 
> > > I hope that the readers at FFL will take me at my word in this: Barry has 
> > > reached (he often does this) down into his soul to find the most honest 
> > > and revealing means of communicating what is the truth about Maharishi 
> > > Mahesh Yogi.
> > > 
> > > That's what I like about Barry: he goes to where it hurts deepest and the 
> > > most, and draws out his rather staggering wisdom from the beautifulness 
> > > of his suffering.
> > > 
> > > We all feel this.
> > > 
> > > No, if a person wanted to find out the ultimate truth about Maharishi 
> > > Mahesh Yogi—captured in one felicitous phrasing—he could not do better 
> > > than to meditate on what is said here in this post by Barry Wright.
> > > 
> > > And if this doesn't tell the whole story about who Maharishi was and his 
> > > effect on you and your life, then you have obviously have not attuned 
> > > yourself to the personal consciousness which could sum up Maharishi with 
> > > such fidelity to the truth: the truth not just per se but the truth even 
> > > of Barry's own experience at the time, when he was purportedly devoted to 
> > > Maharishi. You see, he knew in his soul even then that a time would come 
> > > when he could tell the world who Maharishi really was. Which he finally 
> > > has. 
> > > 
> > > And it's all here, in this one sentence. I for one find this very 
> > > liberating, and consider this a gift from the one-day-after-his-birthday 
> > > boy in Amsterdam.
> > > 
> > > This even beats the colonoscopy putdown: that was pretty good; this is 
> > > better.
> > > 
> > > Jesus, are you there?
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
>
Well Judy, doesn't Robin equivicate?  First he says bring on the video,
then he says, to post it privately.  Which is it?

Do you really think the people in the video are going to be damaged by
its release?  I'm asking.  I don't know.  Likely it will be a  splash
for a moment and then fade.  I say let's see it.  Let's draw our own
conclusions.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Emily Reyn]

No, she wouldn't...but, of course, my mother wasn't quite like that...she 
believed in conditional love, so I don't have a lot of experience with the 
"unconditional love" paradigm in terms of "a mother for me."  Although my kids 
taught me differently and I defer to their inherent wisdom on this matter, 
always, and try to live up to their example.  

My experience with Amma was fraught with ambivalence.  If it wasn't, I 
certainly would never have landed here at FFL.



>
> From: Vaj 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 6:11 PM
>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
> 
>
>  
>
>
>On Dec 19, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Emily Reyn wrote:
>
>Good...I'll just let that one go :) I experienced her as a powerful being.  
>She scared the crap out of me on several levels and she claims to "know" - I 
>am worried my inauthenticity about accepting her as my guru in order to 
>receive a "mantra" will come back to get me.
>
>Ask yourself the question: would a loving, caring, embracing mother care?
>
>
> 
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

My advice, Robin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG1HY2zLc1s



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> WTF is the spiritual status and authority of a person who would write
with this kind of arrogance, vanity, and self-righteousness? The cold
sneering pridefulness here, it is a disqqualifier—a serious
disqualifier—for any claims that you know the first thing about why
you were created, the nature of ultimate truth, or what is reality. Can
you please cease and desist, Vaj? Sure, let's go offline—if this
will spare us from reading someone as pompous and insolent as you are.
It's a PROBLEM, Vaj: you don't know what humility, innocence, sincerity
even is—The Pinocchio effect. I am very sorry, Vaj: How about if I
promise not to rub your nose in it from now on. Will that deter you from
punishing us with posts like this? How can you claim any kind of
spiritual disinterestedness when you write into the consciousness of
another person at FFL who you have determined is "on your side". If you
calculate this in what you post, then you vitiate any claims to want to
know the truth. Because if truth was your objective you would not
customize your post in such an incestuous way like this.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:15 PM, turquoiseb wrote:
> >
> > > Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
> > > I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
> > > scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
> > > that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
> > > (as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
> > > situation that is made more serious by total belief in
> > > the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.
> >
> > What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so-
> > called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible
> > difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better
> > understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the
> > intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once everyone
> > saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his students,
> > on official video, on the stage - that was the last straw. The
> > emperor of ice cream melted.
> >
> > > People have been taught for decades that their subjec-
> > > tive experience is the holy grail with which to judge
> > > "spiritual experience" or their "evolution" towards
> > > something they've been told is enlightenment. At the
> > > same time, there was no instruction along the way that
> > > taught them how to differentiate between actual spir-
> > > itual experience and overwhelming emotion.
> >
> > Well, as TMers we were not taught to refine attention, let alone
> > master it's balance - but we believed we were anywaysthat's what
> > they said! An institutionalized fear of effort made sure of that
> > never would occur. Hell some TMers still imagine themselves in these
> > exalted samadhis - it's insanely hilarious and insanely sad at the
> > same time.
> >
> > Circa the early 80's many TMers I knew got caught up in 'healing the
> > "emotional body"' thang. The belief that was spread around was that
> > TM was too dry as it transcended the emotional body, thereby
skipping
> > it. So a popular cult arose, combining a mixture of
hyperventilation,
> > focused massage and rebirthing in hot tubs. It was during one of
> > those sessions that the first friend I knew declared his status as
an
> > awakened one. Shortly thereafter, the ex-initiator started his own
> > system - suspiciously based on this bubble diagram-like drawing. We
> > were all encouraged to move to the Southwestern US, as 'that's where
> > all the evolved ones were going'.
> >
> > He did make an interesting first "channel" on how the followers of
> > RWC were actually all reincarnations of an off-split that had caused
> > disciples to leave a legit guru for a false guru.
> >
> > > As a result
> > > (IMO), they get into a manic state, interpret the
> > > overwhelming emotions of it as "spiritual," and
> > > consider what they're going through -- *whatever*
> > > it may be -- synonymous with Truth.
> >
> > They're healing their emotional bodies, can't you SEE? All that
> > emotion's been pent up from all that rounding. TM was just too damn
> > efficient for American nervous systems!
> >
> > > So in a way the manic states become self-replicating.
> > > Having convinced themselves that a previous manic
> > > state was something akin to enlightenment, they
> > > mood-make more of them.
> >
> > Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is
> > "bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally
> > "beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?
> >
> > Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever you
> > want to call it.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> Steve perino says "the last I heard of Robin Carlsen ..his family
committed him to a mental health facility..Oh well I've headr worse
things about Robin..apprently from others Robin had a bad temper"
>
Jason, any idea what happened to Robin?  I heard he's living in Canada
somewhere, and has taken to Catholicism.  Go figure.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Emily Reyn wrote:

> Good...I'll just let that one go :) I experienced her as a powerful being.  
> She scared the crap out of me on several levels and she claims to "know" - I 
> am worried my inauthenticity about accepting her as my guru in order to 
> receive a "mantra" will come back to get me.

Ask yourself the question: would a loving, caring, embracing mother care?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Emily Reyn]

Good...I'll just let that one go :) I experienced her as a powerful being.  She 
scared the crap out of me on several levels and she claims to "know" - I am 
worried my inauthenticity about accepting her as my guru in order to receive a 
"mantra" will come back to get me.



>
> From: Rick Archer 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 1:13 PM
>Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
> 
>
>  
>From:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
>Behalf Of Emily Reyn
>Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 2:32 PM
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
> 
>  
>
>"As for hugs, that's shakti and it can have that effect. Since I've had one of 
>those "hugs" I can attest there was a lot of shakti in it and no it wasn't 
>mood making. It can break lose a lot of stuff. And some people aren't prepared 
>for that."
>
>Very interesting reading this AM.  The Amma "hug" testimonials validate my 
>experience as well.  I wasn't at all prepared and it sent me into a "spin" for 
>sure.  I equated it to some kind of spiritual energetic electro-shock therapy, 
>but I had no context for it.  I was worried for my children, because we did a 
>"family hug" in addition to darshan twice a day for 3 days.  My older daughter 
>left on day 2 (she was very unnerved), my younger daughter wanted more and 
>sobbed when we were leaving late in the evening after the Devi Bhava ceremony. 
> But, months later now, I believe it did start the "breaking loose" process 
>and neither child is the worse for it.  In fact, as a family, there has been 
>much healing.  I am a tiny bit worried that, the last night I took myself 
>through the whole "instant mantra" process out of curiosity versus commitment 
>and was out of integrity on this point.  I'm hoping she'll forgive me as I am 
>also pretty sure my younger
>daughter is going to want to see her again :)
>Whether Amma will forgive you? I don’t think she’ll remember, and wouldn’t 
>have a problem with it if she did.
> 
> 
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Seems like you are bullying Robin because he has a more
> public past than you do. What a coward. Shame on you.
> You hide, and lob bags of poo at him. In full sight of
> us all. That religion you are chained to must give you
> much comfort - just don't rub your wrists so much - it
> gives away your slavery.

You know, it strikes me as so odd, because Robin's current
animus toward TM and MMY is so similar in many respects to
what Vaj has been preaching here for years, you'd think Vaj
would be cheering Robin on, thrilled to have him as an ally.

There has to be something else going on to explain this
vendetta. It can't be just that Robin doesn't believe Vaj's
claims to have been a TMer and TM teacher; Vaj has lobbed
spitballs at worst toward the rest of us who doubt his TM
status, whereas Robin gets nuclear missiles.

I think there must be some acute thirst for vengeance at
work, perhaps for a personal injury he feels Robin did him,
or someone he's close to, in the past.

That Robin has repudiated and essentially apologized for,
regretted, and repented of the damage he did folks in what
he considers his enlightened period isn't enough for Vaj.
Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

Seems like you are bullying Robin because he has a more public past than you 
do. What a coward. Shame on you. You hide, and lob bags of poo at him. In full 
sight of us all. That religion you are chained to must give you much comfort - 
just don't rub your wrists so much - it gives away your slavery.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 3:51 PM, Emily Reyn wrote:
> 
> > Nothing to do with this, but as a side thought and as an outsider (which 
> > may discredit my next thought completely), I saw the photo that Vaj posted 
> > and followed up with an analysis akin to "note the tension in the 
> > crowd...etc., etc."  There was absolutely no way that anything resembling 
> > his analysis was evident from the photo- whether one knew who was in it or 
> > not - IMO of course.
> 
> I guess you had to be there. There was considerable concern, as marching 
> around FF and MIU made us look like loonies - but at least R. insisted on 
> being out front (with the SBS print) - so it wasn't all that bad.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

Vaj is becoming more and more the clown under the spotlight.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is  
> > > "bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally  
> > > "beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?
> > >
> 
> OMG! Vaj, puhleeze! The noun 'bhaava' is obviously derived
> from the root 'bhuu' (to be, become). In that context it most
> certainly simply means 'existence', or stuff. Please, stop
> embarrassing yourself before it's "too late"... ;D
>  
> > > Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever you  
> > > want to call it.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Yifu]

MMY had more Shakti than a Columbian pack-mule.
http://www.cgarena.com/gallery/3d/details/characters/shivaian082010.html

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Flagging (or perhaps flogging) his impotence, so to speak?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > >
> > > What was he doing in the whorehouse with a limp dick?
> > 
> > Waving it, like Barry does. ;-)
> > 
> >  
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> > > >  
> > > > Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> > > > had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> > > > in a whorehouse :-)
> > > > 
> > > > RESPONSE: I think this a most apposite description of Maharishi and I 
> > > > am envious of the person who composed it.
> > > > 
> > > > In fact it had the effect of clearing some of the residual fogginess 
> > > > from my Unity Consciousness days—fogginess that I didn't realize was 
> > > > still there.
> > > > 
> > > > I hope that the readers at FFL will take me at my word in this: Barry 
> > > > has reached (he often does this) down into his soul to find the most 
> > > > honest and revealing means of communicating what is the truth about 
> > > > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
> > > > 
> > > > That's what I like about Barry: he goes to where it hurts deepest and 
> > > > the most, and draws out his rather staggering wisdom from the 
> > > > beautifulness of his suffering.
> > > > 
> > > > We all feel this.
> > > > 
> > > > No, if a person wanted to find out the ultimate truth about Maharishi 
> > > > Mahesh Yogi—captured in one felicitous phrasing—he could not do better 
> > > > than to meditate on what is said here in this post by Barry Wright.
> > > > 
> > > > And if this doesn't tell the whole story about who Maharishi was and 
> > > > his effect on you and your life, then you have obviously have not 
> > > > attuned yourself to the personal consciousness which could sum up 
> > > > Maharishi with such fidelity to the truth: the truth not just per se 
> > > > but the truth even of Barry's own experience at the time, when he was 
> > > > purportedly devoted to Maharishi. You see, he knew in his soul even 
> > > > then that a time would come when he could tell the world who Maharishi 
> > > > really was. Which he finally has. 
> > > > 
> > > > And it's all here, in this one sentence. I for one find this very 
> > > > liberating, and consider this a gift from the 
> > > > one-day-after-his-birthday boy in Amsterdam.
> > > > 
> > > > This even beats the colonoscopy putdown: that was pretty good; this is 
> > > > better.
> > > > 
> > > > Jesus, are you there?
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

Flagging (or perhaps flogging) his impotence, so to speak?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > What was he doing in the whorehouse with a limp dick?
> 
> Waving it, like Barry does. ;-)
> 
>  
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> > >  
> > > Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> > > had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> > > in a whorehouse :-)
> > > 
> > > RESPONSE: I think this a most apposite description of Maharishi and I am 
> > > envious of the person who composed it.
> > > 
> > > In fact it had the effect of clearing some of the residual fogginess from 
> > > my Unity Consciousness days—fogginess that I didn't realize was still 
> > > there.
> > > 
> > > I hope that the readers at FFL will take me at my word in this: Barry has 
> > > reached (he often does this) down into his soul to find the most honest 
> > > and revealing means of communicating what is the truth about Maharishi 
> > > Mahesh Yogi.
> > > 
> > > That's what I like about Barry: he goes to where it hurts deepest and the 
> > > most, and draws out his rather staggering wisdom from the beautifulness 
> > > of his suffering.
> > > 
> > > We all feel this.
> > > 
> > > No, if a person wanted to find out the ultimate truth about Maharishi 
> > > Mahesh Yogi—captured in one felicitous phrasing—he could not do better 
> > > than to meditate on what is said here in this post by Barry Wright.
> > > 
> > > And if this doesn't tell the whole story about who Maharishi was and his 
> > > effect on you and your life, then you have obviously have not attuned 
> > > yourself to the personal consciousness which could sum up Maharishi with 
> > > such fidelity to the truth: the truth not just per se but the truth even 
> > > of Barry's own experience at the time, when he was purportedly devoted to 
> > > Maharishi. You see, he knew in his soul even then that a time would come 
> > > when he could tell the world who Maharishi really was. Which he finally 
> > > has. 
> > > 
> > > And it's all here, in this one sentence. I for one find this very 
> > > liberating, and consider this a gift from the one-day-after-his-birthday 
> > > boy in Amsterdam.
> > > 
> > > This even beats the colonoscopy putdown: that was pretty good; this is 
> > > better.
> > > 
> > > Jesus, are you there?
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[cardemaister]

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is  
> > "bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally  
> > "beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?
> >

OMG! Vaj, puhleeze! The noun 'bhaava' is obviously derived
from the root 'bhuu' (to be, become). In that context it most
certainly simply means 'existence', or stuff. Please, stop
embarrassing yourself before it's "too late"... ;D
 
> > Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever you  
> > want to call it.
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Bhairitu]

On 12/19/2011 12:42 PM, Alex Stanley wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>>
>> This is EXACTLY the reason that many traditions DON'T give agni
>> mantras to the general public.  The claim is they can make some
>> people crazy.
> Crazy is probably better than the kalpa in hell that awaits me for having the 
> Gayatri Mantra running in my head a lot of the time.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/8347

Yeah, but you are kapha and it is a good mantra for kapha types.  Stuck 
outside on a cold winter day?  Meditate on the Gayatri mantra to warm up.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 3:51 PM, Emily Reyn wrote:

> Nothing to do with this, but as a side thought and as an outsider (which may 
> discredit my next thought completely), I saw the photo that Vaj posted and 
> followed up with an analysis akin to "note the tension in the crowd...etc., 
> etc."  There was absolutely no way that anything resembling his analysis was 
> evident from the photo- whether one knew who was in it or not - IMO of course.

I guess you had to be there. There was considerable concern, as marching around 
FF and MIU made us look like loonies - but at least R. insisted on being out 
front (with the SBS print) - so it wasn't all that bad.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> What was he doing in the whorehouse with a limp dick?

Waving it, like Barry does. ;-)

 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> >  
> > Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> > had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> > in a whorehouse :-)
> > 
> > RESPONSE: I think this a most apposite description of Maharishi and I am 
> > envious of the person who composed it.
> > 
> > In fact it had the effect of clearing some of the residual fogginess from 
> > my Unity Consciousness days—fogginess that I didn't realize was still there.
> > 
> > I hope that the readers at FFL will take me at my word in this: Barry has 
> > reached (he often does this) down into his soul to find the most honest and 
> > revealing means of communicating what is the truth about Maharishi Mahesh 
> > Yogi.
> > 
> > That's what I like about Barry: he goes to where it hurts deepest and the 
> > most, and draws out his rather staggering wisdom from the beautifulness of 
> > his suffering.
> > 
> > We all feel this.
> > 
> > No, if a person wanted to find out the ultimate truth about Maharishi 
> > Mahesh Yogi—captured in one felicitous phrasing—he could not do better than 
> > to meditate on what is said here in this post by Barry Wright.
> > 
> > And if this doesn't tell the whole story about who Maharishi was and his 
> > effect on you and your life, then you have obviously have not attuned 
> > yourself to the personal consciousness which could sum up Maharishi with 
> > such fidelity to the truth: the truth not just per se but the truth even of 
> > Barry's own experience at the time, when he was purportedly devoted to 
> > Maharishi. You see, he knew in his soul even then that a time would come 
> > when he could tell the world who Maharishi really was. Which he finally 
> > has. 
> > 
> > And it's all here, in this one sentence. I for one find this very 
> > liberating, and consider this a gift from the one-day-after-his-birthday 
> > boy in Amsterdam.
> > 
> > This even beats the colonoscopy putdown: that was pretty good; this is 
> > better.
> > 
> > Jesus, are you there?

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[whynotnow7]

What was he doing in the whorehouse with a limp dick?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
>  
> Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> in a whorehouse :-)
> 
> RESPONSE: I think this a most apposite description of Maharishi and I am 
> envious of the person who composed it.
> 
> In fact it had the effect of clearing some of the residual fogginess from my 
> Unity Consciousness days—fogginess that I didn't realize was still there.
> 
> I hope that the readers at FFL will take me at my word in this: Barry has 
> reached (he often does this) down into his soul to find the most honest and 
> revealing means of communicating what is the truth about Maharishi Mahesh 
> Yogi.
> 
> That's what I like about Barry: he goes to where it hurts deepest and the 
> most, and draws out his rather staggering wisdom from the beautifulness of 
> his suffering.
> 
> We all feel this.
> 
> No, if a person wanted to find out the ultimate truth about Maharishi Mahesh 
> Yogi—captured in one felicitous phrasing—he could not do better than to 
> meditate on what is said here in this post by Barry Wright.
> 
> And if this doesn't tell the whole story about who Maharishi was and his 
> effect on you and your life, then you have obviously have not attuned 
> yourself to the personal consciousness which could sum up Maharishi with such 
> fidelity to the truth: the truth not just per se but the truth even of 
> Barry's own experience at the time, when he was purportedly devoted to 
> Maharishi. You see, he knew in his soul even then that a time would come when 
> he could tell the world who Maharishi really was. Which he finally has. 
> 
> And it's all here, in this one sentence. I for one find this very liberating, 
> and consider this a gift from the one-day-after-his-birthday boy in Amsterdam.
> 
> This even beats the colonoscopy putdown: that was pretty good; this is better.
> 
> Jesus, are you there?
>

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of Emily Reyn
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 2:32 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

 

  


"As for hugs, that's shakti and it can have that effect. Since I've had one of 
those "hugs" I can attest there was a lot of shakti in it and no it wasn't mood 
making. It can break lose a lot of stuff. And some people aren't prepared for 
that."

Very interesting reading this AM.  The Amma "hug" testimonials validate my 
experience as well.  I wasn't at all prepared and it sent me into a "spin" for 
sure.  I equated it to some kind of spiritual energetic electro-shock therapy, 
but I had no context for it.  I was worried for my children, because we did a 
"family hug" in addition to darshan twice a day for 3 days.  My older daughter 
left on day 2 (she was very unnerved), my younger daughter wanted more and 
sobbed when we were leaving late in the evening after the Devi Bhava ceremony.  
But, months later now, I believe it did start the "breaking loose" process and 
neither child is the worse for it.  In fact, as a family, there has been much 
healing.  I am a tiny bit worried that, the last night I took myself through 
the whole "instant mantra" process out of curiosity versus commitment and was 
out of integrity on this point.  I'm hoping she'll forgive me as I am also 
pretty sure my younger
daughter is going to want to see her again :)

Whether Amma will forgive you? I don’t think she’ll remember, and wouldn’t have 
a problem with it if she did.

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Emily Reyn]

Nothing to do with this, but as a side thought and as an outsider (which may 
discredit my next thought completely), I saw the photo that Vaj posted and 
followed up with an analysis akin to "note the tension in the crowd...etc., 
etc."  There was absolutely no way that anything resembling his analysis was 
evident from the photo- whether one knew who was in it or not - IMO of course.



>
> From: maskedzebra 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 12:38 PM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
> 
>
>  
>No. I have a better idea, Vaj. Find one person at FFL whom you trust, and let 
>them see the video. Then that person can testify to the truth that i am lying 
>when i say that you are lying. Does this seem reasonable? I would certainly 
>have you post it here or elsewhere; but I am concerned—*theoretically*—about 
>persons who have gone on with their lives, have had children, and do not wish 
>to be associated with myself. So out of respect for them—I have told you about 
>this principle before Vaj—I would ask you simply to share this video with some 
>poster here at FFL. How about Curtis? With all our intense disagreements, I 
>know he is a person of honour and would not countenance turning himself into a 
>false witness. So, if you have access to this tape—*or anything which could 
>verify the truth of what you have said*—give Curtis this evidence, and then he 
>can simply say: "I have seen the tape. Essentially what Vaj says is true, 
>Robin."
>
>That will be enough for me, Vaj. How 'bout it?
>
>In anticipation of the resolution of this controversy, I am
>
>your faithful friend Robin
>
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> On Dec 19, 2011, at 3:05 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
>> 
>> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>> >
>> > Vaj: What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of 
>> > a so-called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible 
>> > difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better 
>> > understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the 
>> > intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once 
>> > everyone saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his 
>> > students, on official video, on the stage - that was the last 
>> > straw. The emperor of ice cream melted.
>> >
>> > Robin: I know of no such video. I remember no such incident. Could 
>> > you please, for the sake of my own much needed further humiliation, 
>> > provide some source for this claim of yours, Vaj? Until or unless 
>> > you do, I shall go on the record as denying that such a tape 
>> > exists, that such a incident happened. That is, to say, I am 
>> > calling you a liar.
>> >
>> > "Of course once everyone saw the videos of 'the enlightened man' 
>> > beating one of his students, on official video, on the stage"—What 
>> > about the persons who witnessed this live, Vaj? They would be even 
>> > more disturbed. No, Vaj: you are making something up again. I am 
>> > prepared to face my past and all that I have done. But this, this 
>> > is a lie.
>> >
>> > And given that I am denying this, you can imagine what good it 
>> > would do me to be confronted by something I did which I do not 
>> > remember doing and which I have officially said I didn't do on this 
>> > forum. I think you have a serious moral responsibility to make 
>> > available to me the evidence of this claim of yours, Vaj. So please 
>> > follow through on this.
>> 
>> 
>> Maybe you were dissociating?
>> 
>> Should I post it here or on YouTube?
>>
>
>
> 
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> 
> This is EXACTLY the reason that many traditions DON'T give agni
> mantras to the general public.  The claim is they can make some
> people crazy.  

Crazy is probably better than the kalpa in hell that awaits me for having the 
Gayatri Mantra running in my head a lot of the time.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/8347

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

No. I have a better idea, Vaj. Find one person at FFL whom you trust, and let 
them see the video. Then that person can testify to the truth that i am lying 
when i say that you are lying. Does this seem reasonable? I would certainly 
have you post it here or elsewhere; but I am concerned—*theoretically*—about 
persons who have gone on with their lives, have had children, and do not wish 
to be associated with myself. So out of respect for them—I have told you about 
this principle before Vaj—I would ask you simply to share this video with some 
poster here at FFL. How about Curtis? With all our intense disagreements, I 
know he is a person of honour and would not countenance turning himself into a 
false witness. So, if you have access to this tape—*or anything which could 
verify the truth of what you have said*—give Curtis this evidence, and then he 
can simply say: "I have seen the tape. Essentially what Vaj says is true, 
Robin."

That will be enough for me, Vaj. How 'bout it?

In anticipation of the resolution of this controversy, I am

your faithful friend Robin

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 3:05 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > Vaj: What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of  
> > a so-called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
> > difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
> > understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
> > intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once  
> > everyone saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his  
> > students, on official video, on the stage - that was the last  
> > straw. The emperor of ice cream melted.
> >
> > Robin: I know of no such video. I remember no such incident. Could  
> > you please, for the sake of my own much needed further humiliation,  
> > provide some source for this claim of yours, Vaj? Until or unless  
> > you do, I shall go on the record as denying that such a tape  
> > exists, that such a incident happened. That is, to say, I am  
> > calling you a liar.
> >
> > "Of course once everyone saw the videos of 'the enlightened man'  
> > beating one of his students, on official video, on the stage"—What  
> > about the persons who witnessed this live, Vaj? They would be even  
> > more disturbed. No, Vaj: you are making something up again. I am  
> > prepared to face my past and all that I have done. But this, this  
> > is a lie.
> >
> > And given that I am denying this, you can imagine what good it  
> > would do me to be confronted by something I did which I do not  
> > remember doing and which I have officially said I didn't do on this  
> > forum. I think you have a serious moral responsibility to make  
> > available to me the evidence of this claim of yours, Vaj. So please  
> > follow through on this.
> 
> 
> Maybe you were dissociating?
> 
> Should I post it here or on YouTube?
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Emily Reyn]

"As for hugs, that's shakti and it can have that effect. Since I've had one of 
those "hugs" I can attest there was a lot of shakti in it and no it wasn't 
mood making. It can break lose a lot of stuff. And some people aren't prepared 
for that."

Very interesting reading this AM.  The Amma "hug" testimonials validate my 
experience as well.  I wasn't at all prepared and it sent me into a "spin" for 
sure.  I equated it to some kind of spiritual energetic electro-shock therapy, 
but I had no context for it.  I was worried for my children, because we did a 
"family hug" in addition to darshan twice a day for 3 days.  My older daughter 
left on day 2 (she was very unnerved), my younger daughter wanted more and 
sobbed when we were leaving late in the evening after the Devi Bhava ceremony.  
But, months later now, I believe it did start the "breaking loose" process and 
neither child is the worse for it.  In fact, as a family, there has been much 
healing.  I am a tiny bit worried that, the last night I took myself through 
the whole "instant mantra" process out of curiosity versus commitment and was 
out of integrity on this point.  I'm hoping she'll forgive me as I am also 
pretty sure my younger
 daughter is going to want to see her again :)




>
> From: Bhairitu 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 9:47 AM
>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
> 
>
>  
>On 12/19/2011 09:15 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>>> On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:01 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
>>>> On another note (and I assume because you didn't comment
>>>> on it that you haven't been following the series), I was
>>>> quite taken with "Homeland" because of episode 11.
>>> I really liked it too, but I would have preferred an
>>> Episode 12 with an exploding vest scene!
>> Me, too. That would have fucked with the audience's
>> minds big time.
>>
>>>> In it,
>>>> Claire Danes did literally the best job of portraying
>>>> onscreen someone suffering from bipolar disorder I've
>>>> ever seen. I've been there. I've had personal friends
>>>> who were bipolar, and have seen what they're like in
>>>> their manic periods. *Having* been there done that, I
>>>> tend to avoid certain Internet personalities whom I
>>>> suspect of being similarly afflicted. But she just
>>>> *nailed* it.
>>> She also nailed the sometimes quick cycling to severe depression
>>> (not all BPD patients cycle that fast) which made me wonder about
>>> a certain internet personality's disappearance and if someone
>>> with a connection to him could lovingly check in on him? It's
>>> concerning to me.
>> As it should be.
>>
>>>> It's positively SCARY the extent to which people beset
>>>> by an episode of mania *believe* in the reality of what
>>>> they are subjectively experiencing, to the extent of
>>>> losing all contact with how they might be perceived by
>>>> others around them. I have found this behavior common
>>>> enough in spiritual environments to lead me to think
>>>> that it may not be a coincidence.
>>> What they also did well was how the inner torment instantly
>>> ages the person. If ever there was evidence of a mind-body
>>> connection it is the rapid change of appearance in mental
>>> illness.
>> That's interesting. I'd never really thought about that,
>> but in recollection that seems like an accurate perception
>> to me.
>>
>>> Interestingly (to me) the yogic tradition describes certain
>>> imbalanced kundalini risings that "cycle" and strongly resemble
>>> a Bipolar etiology.
>> That's what I was suggesting, yes.
>>
>> The person we are concerned about is (sorry, Rick) not
>> the first person I've met who became somewhat unhinged
>> after a hug from Amma. I knew a women in France who
>> flipped out completely and had to be institutionalized
>> for some months. When I met her she still professed
>> love for Amma, but wouldn't go within 1000 yards of
>> her on a bet. She described her experience in terms
>> I could only associate with watching people go through
>> the cyclic manic-depressive stages of bipolar disorder.
>>
>> Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
>> I am no neuroscientist, or even a 

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> >
Steve perino says "the last I heard of Robin Carlsen ..his family committed him
to a mental health facility..Oh well I've headr worse things about
Robin..apprently from others Robin had a bad temper"

RESPONSE: I escaped from the loony bin a little while ago. But I don't have a 
"bad temper". We have yet to hear of a single voice on FFL who had anything to 
do with me when I was enlightened and was creating my live theatre of infinite 
purposefulness and individuation [I call it that because that is what I 
believed it was: so did others]. These persons, and there were quite a few of 
them, have exercised their own judgment about posting at FFL and have chosen to 
abstain. I understand this; I accept this. But until someone who knew me 
personally actually posts here at FFL I will reserve the right to speak on my 
own behalf about what I did and what I didn't do. And besides, I do not look 
uncritically at those ten years of Unity Consciousness. I was deceived in my 
consciousness, and I was deceived because of all the things that were wrong 
with me, which my enlightenment concealed—even from others (with the notable 
exception of Vaj: he saw through me where no one else could: in DC in 1985). I 
don't know who Steve Perino is, but he does not know me, and what he says here 
is false. I have sworn the doctors and patients at that asylum to silence: as 
in: Tell everyone I wasn't there.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 3:05 PM, maskedzebra wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:

Vaj: What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of  
a so-called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once  
everyone saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his  
students, on official video, on the stage - that was the last  
straw. The emperor of ice cream melted.


Robin: I know of no such video. I remember no such incident. Could  
you please, for the sake of my own much needed further humiliation,  
provide some source for this claim of yours, Vaj? Until or unless  
you do, I shall go on the record as denying that such a tape  
exists, that such a incident happened. That is, to say, I am  
calling you a liar.


"Of course once everyone saw the videos of 'the enlightened man'  
beating one of his students, on official video, on the stage"—What  
about the persons who witnessed this live, Vaj? They would be even  
more disturbed. No, Vaj: you are making something up again. I am  
prepared to face my past and all that I have done. But this, this  
is a lie.


And given that I am denying this, you can imagine what good it  
would do me to be confronted by something I did which I do not  
remember doing and which I have officially said I didn't do on this  
forum. I think you have a serious moral responsibility to make  
available to me the evidence of this claim of yours, Vaj. So please  
follow through on this.



Maybe you were dissociating?

Should I post it here or on YouTube?

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
>  
> Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> in a whorehouse :-)


Interestingly that's excactly what I've felt when physically close to the dolly 
Lama :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

WTF is the spiritual status and authority of a person who would write with this 
kind of arrogance, vanity, and self-righteousness? The cold sneering 
pridefulness here, it is a disqqualifier—a serious disqualifier—for any claims 
that you know the first thing about why you were created, the nature of 
ultimate truth, or what is reality. Can you please cease and desist, Vaj? Sure, 
let's go offline—if this will spare us from reading someone as pompous and 
insolent as you are. It's a PROBLEM, Vaj: you don't know what humility, 
innocence, sincerity even is—The Pinocchio effect. I am very sorry, Vaj: How 
about if I promise not to rub your nose in it from now on. Will that deter you 
from punishing us with posts like this? How can you claim any kind of spiritual 
disinterestedness when you write into the consciousness of another person at 
FFL who you have determined is "on your side". If you calculate this in what 
you post, then you vitiate any claims to want to know the truth. Because if 
truth was your objective you would not customize your post in such an 
incestuous way like this.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:15 PM, turquoiseb wrote:
> 
> > Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
> > I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
> > scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
> > that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
> > (as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
> > situation that is made more serious by total belief in
> > the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.
> 
> What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so- 
> called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
> difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
> understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
> intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once everyone  
> saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his students,  
> on official video, on the stage - that was the last straw. The  
> emperor of ice cream melted.
> 
> > People have been taught for decades that their subjec-
> > tive experience is the holy grail with which to judge
> > "spiritual experience" or their "evolution" towards
> > something they've been told is enlightenment. At the
> > same time, there was no instruction along the way that
> > taught them how to differentiate between actual spir-
> > itual experience and overwhelming emotion.
> 
> Well, as TMers we were not taught to refine attention, let alone  
> master it's balance - but we believed we were anywaysthat's what  
> they said! An institutionalized fear of effort made sure of that  
> never would occur. Hell some TMers still imagine themselves in these  
> exalted samadhis - it's insanely hilarious and insanely sad at the  
> same time.
> 
> Circa the early 80's many TMers I knew got caught up in 'healing the  
> "emotional body"' thang. The belief that was spread around was that  
> TM was too dry as it transcended the emotional body, thereby skipping  
> it. So a popular cult arose, combining a mixture of hyperventilation,  
> focused massage and rebirthing in hot tubs. It was during one of  
> those sessions that the first friend I knew declared his status as an  
> awakened one. Shortly thereafter, the ex-initiator started his own  
> system - suspiciously based on this bubble diagram-like drawing. We  
> were all encouraged to move to the Southwestern US, as 'that's where  
> all the evolved ones were going'.
> 
> He did make an interesting first "channel" on how the followers of  
> RWC were actually all reincarnations of an off-split that had caused  
> disciples to leave a legit guru for a false guru.
> 
> > As a result
> > (IMO), they get into a manic state, interpret the
> > overwhelming emotions of it as "spiritual," and
> > consider what they're going through -- *whatever*
> > it may be -- synonymous with Truth.
> 
> They're healing their emotional bodies, can't you SEE? All that  
> emotion's been pent up from all that rounding. TM was just too damn  
> efficient for American nervous systems!
> 
> > So in a way the manic states become self-replicating.
> > Having convinced themselves that a previous manic
> > state was something akin to enlightenment, they
> > mood-make more of them.
> 
> Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is  
> "bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally  
> "beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?
> 
> Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever you  
> want to call it.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:

Vaj: What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so-called 
"enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible difference between 1983 
and 2011 - except I have a better understanding now of mental illness, back 
then it was just the intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course 
once everyone saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his 
students, on official video, on the stage - that was the last straw. The 
emperor of ice cream melted.

Robin: I know of no such video. I remember no such incident. Could you please, 
for the sake of my own much needed further humiliation, provide some source for 
this claim of yours, Vaj? Until or unless you do, I shall go on the record as 
denying that such a tape exists, that such a incident happened. That is, to 
say, I am calling you a liar.

"Of course once everyone saw the videos of 'the enlightened man' beating one of 
his students, on official video, on the stage"—What about the persons who 
witnessed this live, Vaj? They would be even more disturbed. No, Vaj: you are 
making something up again. I am prepared to face my past and all that I have 
done. But this, this is a lie.

And given that I am denying this, you can imagine what good it would do me to 
be confronted by something I did which I do not remember doing and which I have 
officially said I didn't do on this forum. I think you have a serious moral 
responsibility to make available to me the evidence of this claim of yours, 
Vaj. So please follow through on this.
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Bhairitu]

On 12/19/2011 10:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>>> On Behalf Of turquoiseb
>>>
>>> The person we are concerned about is (sorry, Rick) not
>>> the first person I've met who became somewhat unhinged
>>> after a hug from Amma. I knew a women in France who
>>> flipped out completely and had to be institutionalized
>>> for some months. When I met her she still professed
>>> love for Amma, but wouldn't go within 1000 yards of
>>> her on a bet. She described her experience in terms
>>> I could only associate with watching people go through
>>> the cyclic manic-depressive stages of bipolar disorder.
>> No need to apologize. Amma's "hugs" can be powerful, and
>> we've seen since Mallorca that not everyone can handle
>> spiritual voltage.
> True that. You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
> had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
> in a whorehouse :-), but Rama definitely had some phwam!,
> as did a number of others I've met since him. And I've
> seen students go off the deep end after spending time with
> them. Each in different ways, but the common denominator
> seems to be that they don't *know* that they've gone off
> the deep end. They firmly believe that they are in the
> throes of some "enlightenment experience." At least two
> people I've known felt this even as the men in the white
> coats were leading them off to a protracted stay in a
> padded room.
>
>> There are probably lots of people in mental institutions,
>> or who have committed suicide, who had Kundalini awakenings
>> they couldn't handle, or didn't get proper guidance for, etc.
> I agree. Interestingly, hearkening back to the former
> friend I've mentioned recently, who was the head of a
> mental institution, one one of the things he mentioned
> to me over coffee was that he had to continually warn
> his staff at the institution about the "communicable
> charisma" of patients suffering from certain disorders.
> In other words, he had to warn them not to get too close,
> because some of the mindstates they were dealing with
> were "infectious," and they might be picking up insanity
> from their charges, instead of them picking up sanity
> from them. I think this was good advice.
>
> I don't know what the relationship of bipolar disorder
> is to what some call enlightenment or awakening (or even
> minor bursts of kundalini), but I do suspect that there
> is a relationship.

People who are manic most likely have thoughts firing off like crazy in 
their mind.  Enlightenment is the state of having a quiet mind. 
Ayurvedically, manic is vata and depressive is kapha.  I often wonder if 
the manics just need a little licorice or even chamomile  every day to 
calm down rather than making them brain dead which is the effect of the 
pharmaceutical psychotropics.  And shock therapy seems to be like taking 
a sledgehammer to kill a gnat.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
 
Barry Wright: You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
in a whorehouse :-)

RESPONSE: I think this a most apposite description of Maharishi and I am 
envious of the person who composed it.

In fact it had the effect of clearing some of the residual fogginess from my 
Unity Consciousness days—fogginess that I didn't realize was still there.

I hope that the readers at FFL will take me at my word in this: Barry has 
reached (he often does this) down into his soul to find the most honest and 
revealing means of communicating what is the truth about Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.

That's what I like about Barry: he goes to where it hurts deepest and the most, 
and draws out his rather staggering wisdom from the beautifulness of his 
suffering.

We all feel this.

No, if a person wanted to find out the ultimate truth about Maharishi Mahesh 
Yogi—captured in one felicitous phrasing—he could not do better than to 
meditate on what is said here in this post by Barry Wright.

And if this doesn't tell the whole story about who Maharishi was and his effect 
on you and your life, then you have obviously have not attuned yourself to the 
personal consciousness which could sum up Maharishi with such fidelity to the 
truth: the truth not just per se but the truth even of Barry's own experience 
at the time, when he was purportedly devoted to Maharishi. You see, he knew in 
his soul even then that a time would come when he could tell the world who 
Maharishi really was. Which he finally has. 

And it's all here, in this one sentence. I for one find this very liberating, 
and consider this a gift from the one-day-after-his-birthday boy in Amsterdam.

This even beats the colonoscopy putdown: that was pretty good; this is better.

Jesus, are you there?

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Jason]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:15 PM, turquoiseb wrote:
> 
> > Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
> > I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
> > scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
> > that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
> > (as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
> > situation that is made more serious by total belief in
> > the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.
> 
> What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so- 
> called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
> difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
> understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
> intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once everyone  
> saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his students,  
> on official video, on the stage - that was the last straw. The  
> emperor of ice cream melted.
> 
> > 
Steve perino says "the last I heard of Robin Carlsen ..his family committed him 
to a mental health facility..Oh well I've headr worse things about 
Robin..apprently from others Robin had a bad temper"

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Bhairitu]

On 12/19/2011 10:32 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Vaj
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 12:31 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> This is EXACTLY the reason that many traditions DON'T give agni mantras
> to the general public. The claim is they can make some people crazy.
>
>
>
> Are TM mantras agni  mantras?

Yes, some of them are.  Any mantra for a goddess is an agni mantra. 
That's why other traditions give out shanti and Shiva mantras for 
meditation techniques for the general public.  Remember that TM claims 
to be stimulating and probably a bit much for some.  I saw this when I 
checked people (over 200 before I went to TTC).

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

Maybe they mean Ravi, thinking he's "disappeared" because
they aren't aware he overposted last week and had to take
this week off? Supposedly the person they're referring to
flipped out after "a hug from Amma."

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > 
> > On Dec 19, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
> [Vaj wrote:]
> > (But seriously, someone who's friendly with R. should make
> > sure he's OK. It IS the reasonable thing to do).
> > 
> > Who's R? Robin? If so, I'm in touch with him and he sounds
> > fine to me.
> 
> Robin's right here. He left a post late last night and
> another one this morning.
> 
> Vaj and Barry were initially talking about someone who
> was said to have *disappeared*. Vaj wrote:
> 
> "She [a different person] also nailed the sometimes quick
> cycling to severe depression (not all BPD patients cycle
> that fast) which made me wonder about a certain internet
> personality's disappearance and if someone with a connection
> to him could lovingly check in on him? It's concerning to me."
> 
> While I'm thinking of it, have you or has anyone heard
> from do.rflex recently? He hasn't posted here since
> mid-September.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 1:42 PM, turquoiseb wrote:


Unless it pays off in real-world benefits that are visible
to everyone, not just the person claiming such moods, I
remain unconvinced of the benefit.



Of course the only trend I see is a universal disruption of those  
around them - usually to the point of avoidance.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> 
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
[Vaj wrote:]
> (But seriously, someone who's friendly with R. should make
> sure he's OK. It IS the reasonable thing to do).
> 
> Who's R? Robin? If so, I'm in touch with him and he sounds
> fine to me.

Robin's right here. He left a post late last night and
another one this morning.

Vaj and Barry were initially talking about someone who
was said to have *disappeared*. Vaj wrote:

"She [a different person] also nailed the sometimes quick
cycling to severe depression (not all BPD patients cycle
that fast) which made me wonder about a certain internet
personality's disappearance and if someone with a connection
to him could lovingly check in on him? It's concerning to me."

While I'm thinking of it, have you or has anyone heard
from do.rflex recently? He hasn't posted here since
mid-September.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:15 PM, turquoiseb wrote:
> >
> > Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
> > I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
> > scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
> > that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
> > (as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
> > situation that is made more serious by total belief in
> > the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.
> 
> What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so- 
> called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
> difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
> understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
> intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once 
> everyone saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one 
> of his students, on official video, on the stage - that was 
> the last straw. The emperor of ice cream melted.

I don't know who or what you're referring to, but I can
say from experience that "the last straw" wouldn't have
happened for true TBs even at that point. They'd have
found ways to "explain it away."

> > People have been taught for decades that their subjec-
> > tive experience is the holy grail with which to judge
> > "spiritual experience" or their "evolution" towards
> > something they've been told is enlightenment. At the
> > same time, there was no instruction along the way that
> > taught them how to differentiate between actual spir-
> > itual experience and overwhelming emotion.
> 
> Well, as TMers we were not taught to refine attention, let alone  
> master it's balance - but we believed we were anywaysthat's 
> what they said! An institutionalized fear of effort made sure 
> of that never would occur. Hell some TMers still imagine 
> themselves in these exalted samadhis - it's insanely hilarious 
> and insanely sad at the same time.

More sad than hilarious for me these days.

> Circa the early 80's many TMers I knew got caught up in 
> 'healing the "emotional body"' thang. The belief that was 
> spread around was that TM was too dry as it transcended the 
> emotional body, thereby skipping it. So a popular cult arose, 
> combining a mixture of hyperventilation, focused massage and 
> rebirthing in hot tubs. It was during one of those sessions 
> that the first friend I knew declared his status as an  
> awakened one. Shortly thereafter, the ex-initiator started 
> his own system - suspiciously based on this bubble diagram-
> like drawing. We were all encouraged to move to the Southwestern 
> US, as 'that's where all the evolved ones were going'.

Well, that's where I went, so he may have been onto
something.  :-)

> He did make an interesting first "channel" on how the followers 
> of RWC were actually all reincarnations of an off-split that had 
> caused disciples to leave a legit guru for a false guru.

I might characterize it more as "trading down," from
one charlatan to another, but I get the gist of what
you're saying.  :-)

> > As a result
> > (IMO), they get into a manic state, interpret the
> > overwhelming emotions of it as "spiritual," and
> > consider what they're going through -- *whatever*
> > it may be -- synonymous with Truth.
> 
> They're healing their emotional bodies, can't you SEE? All 
> that emotion's been pent up from all that rounding. TM was 
> just too damn efficient for American nervous systems!

Damned no-caste nobodies!  :-)

> > So in a way the manic states become self-replicating.
> > Having convinced themselves that a previous manic
> > state was something akin to enlightenment, they
> > mood-make more of them.
> 
> Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is  
> "bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally  
> "beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?
> 
> Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever 
> you want to call it.

Unless it pays off in real-world benefits that are visible
to everyone, not just the person claiming such moods, I
remain unconvinced of the benefit. 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Vaj
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 12:31 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

 

  

 

On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Bhairitu wrote:





This is EXACTLY the reason that many traditions DON'T give agni mantras 
to the general public. The claim is they can make some people crazy. 

 

Are TM mantras agni  mantras?

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Vaj
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 12:25 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

 

On Dec 19, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Rick Archer wrote:





No need to apologize. Amma's "hugs" can be powerful, and we've seen since
Mallorca that not everyone can handle spiritual voltage. There are probably
lots of people in mental institutions, or who have committed suicide, who
had Kundalini awakenings they couldn't handle, or didn't get proper guidance
for, etc.

 

I've been told numerous times here that these type of things don't occur in
TM. I must've been seeing something no one else had ever seen - or if it was
happening it was rare or only happened to people who were already mussed up.

 

Mallorca was a nut house. There have been plenty of flipouts on plenty of
long rounding courses.

 

I was rather surprised to hear it in the Amma context though, as I don't
believe I'd heard that before. I received rather vigorous shaktipat from
Amma several times, and actually found it incredibly helpful.

 

Sure, but you could handle it. She has an open-door policy, and naturally
attracts folks from all frequencies of the sanity spectrum. 

 

(But seriously, someone who's friendly with R. should make sure he's OK. It
IS the reasonable thing to do).

 

Who's R? Robin? If so, I'm in touch with him and he sounds fine to me.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

This is EXACTLY the reason that many traditions DON'T give agni  
mantras

to the general public. The claim is they can make some people crazy.


Well thank god that never happened with TM, just a little occasional  
unstressing, and refining of the nervous system. And sometimes knives  
just slip, that's just a sign that it's time to go meditate.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Rick Archer wrote:

No need to apologize. Amma’s “hugs” can be powerful, and we’ve seen  
since Mallorca that not everyone can handle spiritual voltage.  
There are probably lots of people in mental institutions, or who  
have committed suicide, who had Kundalini awakenings they couldn’t  
handle, or didn’t get proper guidance for, etc.


I've been told numerous times here that these type of things don't  
occur in TM. I must've been seeing something no one else had ever  
seen - or if it was happening it was rare or only happened to people  
who were already mussed up.


I was rather surprised to hear it in the Amma context though, as I  
don't believe I'd heard that before. I received rather vigorous  
shaktipat from Amma several times, and actually found it incredibly  
helpful.


(But seriously, someone who's friendly with R. should make sure he's  
OK. It IS the reasonable thing to do).

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:15 PM, turquoiseb wrote:


Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
(as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
situation that is made more serious by total belief in
the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.


What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so- 
called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once everyone  
saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his students,  
on official video, on the stage - that was the last straw. The  
emperor of ice cream melted.



People have been taught for decades that their subjec-
tive experience is the holy grail with which to judge
"spiritual experience" or their "evolution" towards
something they've been told is enlightenment. At the
same time, there was no instruction along the way that
taught them how to differentiate between actual spir-
itual experience and overwhelming emotion.


Well, as TMers we were not taught to refine attention, let alone  
master it's balance - but we believed we were anywaysthat's what  
they said! An institutionalized fear of effort made sure of that  
never would occur. Hell some TMers still imagine themselves in these  
exalted samadhis - it's insanely hilarious and insanely sad at the  
same time.


Circa the early 80's many TMers I knew got caught up in 'healing the  
"emotional body"' thang. The belief that was spread around was that  
TM was too dry as it transcended the emotional body, thereby skipping  
it. So a popular cult arose, combining a mixture of hyperventilation,  
focused massage and rebirthing in hot tubs. It was during one of  
those sessions that the first friend I knew declared his status as an  
awakened one. Shortly thereafter, the ex-initiator started his own  
system - suspiciously based on this bubble diagram-like drawing. We  
were all encouraged to move to the Southwestern US, as 'that's where  
all the evolved ones were going'.


He did make an interesting first "channel" on how the followers of  
RWC were actually all reincarnations of an off-split that had caused  
disciples to leave a legit guru for a false guru.



As a result
(IMO), they get into a manic state, interpret the
overwhelming emotions of it as "spiritual," and
consider what they're going through -- *whatever*
it may be -- synonymous with Truth.


They're healing their emotional bodies, can't you SEE? All that  
emotion's been pent up from all that rounding. TM was just too damn  
efficient for American nervous systems!



So in a way the manic states become self-replicating.
Having convinced themselves that a previous manic
state was something akin to enlightenment, they
mood-make more of them.


Well it's interesting because the Sanskrit word for "mood" is  
"bhava". The words for TM are bhavatita-dhyana, that is literally  
"beyond moods meditation". But what is it they get enlightened in?


Moods. Or mood management. Or lack of mood management. Whatever you  
want to call it.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> > On Behalf Of turquoiseb
> > 
> > The person we are concerned about is (sorry, Rick) not
> > the first person I've met who became somewhat unhinged
> > after a hug from Amma. I knew a women in France who
> > flipped out completely and had to be institutionalized
> > for some months. When I met her she still professed
> > love for Amma, but wouldn't go within 1000 yards of
> > her on a bet. She described her experience in terms
> > I could only associate with watching people go through
> > the cyclic manic-depressive stages of bipolar disorder.
> 
> No need to apologize. Amma's "hugs" can be powerful, and 
> we've seen since Mallorca that not everyone can handle 
> spiritual voltage. 

True that. You know me...I honestly feel that Maharishi
had all the shakti or "spiritual voltage" of a limp dick
in a whorehouse :-), but Rama definitely had some phwam!,
as did a number of others I've met since him. And I've
seen students go off the deep end after spending time with
them. Each in different ways, but the common denominator
seems to be that they don't *know* that they've gone off
the deep end. They firmly believe that they are in the
throes of some "enlightenment experience." At least two
people I've known felt this even as the men in the white 
coats were leading them off to a protracted stay in a
padded room.

> There are probably lots of people in mental institutions, 
> or who have committed suicide, who had Kundalini awakenings 
> they couldn't handle, or didn't get proper guidance for, etc.

I agree. Interestingly, hearkening back to the former 
friend I've mentioned recently, who was the head of a 
mental institution, one one of the things he mentioned
to me over coffee was that he had to continually warn 
his staff at the institution about the "communicable
charisma" of patients suffering from certain disorders.
In other words, he had to warn them not to get too close,
because some of the mindstates they were dealing with
were "infectious," and they might be picking up insanity
from their charges, instead of them picking up sanity
from them. I think this was good advice.

I don't know what the relationship of bipolar disorder 
is to what some call enlightenment or awakening (or even
minor bursts of kundalini), but I do suspect that there
is a relationship. 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of turquoiseb
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 11:16 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

 

  

The person we are concerned about is (sorry, Rick) not
the first person I've met who became somewhat unhinged
after a hug from Amma. I knew a women in France who
flipped out completely and had to be institutionalized
for some months. When I met her she still professed
love for Amma, but wouldn't go within 1000 yards of
her on a bet. She described her experience in terms
I could only associate with watching people go through
the cyclic manic-depressive stages of bipolar disorder.

No need to apologize. Amma's "hugs" can be powerful, and we've seen since
Mallorca that not everyone can handle spiritual voltage. There are probably
lots of people in mental institutions, or who have committed suicide, who
had Kundalini awakenings they couldn't handle, or didn't get proper guidance
for, etc.

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Bhairitu]

On 12/19/2011 09:15 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>> On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:01 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
>>> On another note (and I assume because you didn't comment
>>> on it that you haven't been following the series), I was
>>> quite taken with "Homeland" because of episode 11.
>> I really liked it too, but I would have preferred an
>> Episode 12 with an exploding vest scene!
> Me, too. That would have fucked with the audience's
> minds big time.
>
>>> In it,
>>> Claire Danes did literally the best job of portraying
>>> onscreen someone suffering from bipolar disorder I've
>>> ever seen. I've been there. I've had personal friends
>>> who were bipolar, and have seen what they're like in
>>> their manic periods. *Having* been there done that, I
>>> tend to avoid certain Internet personalities whom I
>>> suspect of being similarly afflicted. But she just
>>> *nailed* it.
>> She also nailed the sometimes quick cycling to severe depression
>> (not all BPD patients cycle that fast) which made me wonder about
>> a certain internet personality's disappearance and if someone
>> with a connection to him could lovingly check in on him? It's
>> concerning to me.
> As it should be.
>
>>> It's positively SCARY the extent to which people beset
>>> by an episode of mania *believe* in the reality of what
>>> they are subjectively experiencing, to the extent of
>>> losing all contact with how they might be perceived by
>>> others around them. I have found this behavior common
>>> enough in spiritual environments to lead me to think
>>> that it may not be a coincidence.
>> What they also did well was how the inner torment instantly
>> ages the person. If ever there was evidence of a mind-body
>> connection it is the rapid change of appearance in mental
>> illness.
> That's interesting. I'd never really thought about that,
> but in recollection that seems like an accurate perception
> to me.
>
>> Interestingly (to me) the yogic tradition describes certain
>> imbalanced kundalini risings that "cycle" and strongly resemble
>> a Bipolar etiology.
> That's what I was suggesting, yes.
>
> The person we are concerned about is (sorry, Rick) not
> the first person I've met who became somewhat unhinged
> after a hug from Amma. I knew a women in France who
> flipped out completely and had to be institutionalized
> for some months. When I met her she still professed
> love for Amma, but wouldn't go within 1000 yards of
> her on a bet. She described her experience in terms
> I could only associate with watching people go through
> the cyclic manic-depressive stages of bipolar disorder.
>
> Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
> I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
> scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
> that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
> (as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
> situation that is made more serious by total belief in
> the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.
>
> People have been taught for decades that their subjec-
> tive experience is the holy grail with which to judge
> "spiritual experience" or their "evolution" towards
> something they've been told is enlightenment. At the
> same time, there was no instruction along the way that
> taught them how to differentiate between actual spir-
> itual experience and overwhelming emotion. As a result
> (IMO), they get into a manic state, interpret the
> overwhelming emotions of it as "spiritual," and
> consider what they're going through -- *whatever*
> it may be -- synonymous with Truth.
>
> So in a way the manic states become self-replicating.
> Having convinced themselves that a previous manic
> state was something akin to enlightenment, they
> mood-make more of them.
>
> Or not. Like I said, it beats me. I'm just addicted
> to watching it all go down, and occasionally commenting
> on what I see, as I see it. Others' mileage may vary.

This is EXACTLY the reason that many traditions DON'T give agni mantras 
to the general public.  The claim is they can make some people crazy.  
Having the properties of agni they are heating and "heat up" the nervous 
system.  They will make the person more "yin" and of course produce a 
manic state.  Of course then such techniques done carefully may benefit 
someone who clinically depressed or overweight.  As for hugs, that's 
shakti and it can have that effect.  Since I've had one of those "hugs" 
I can attest there was a lot of shakti in it and no it wasn't mood 
making.  It can break lose a lot of stuff.  And some people aren't 
prepared for that.

I agree with "Homeland" going out with a bang but then you would have a 
villain of the season thing that Cary would have go after and we've seen 
that before.  I agree with Vaj on the religious context of "Dexter" this 
season, though it did allow exploration of some interesting situations.  
Speaking of "24" you do know that Manny Coto has been at the he

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:01 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> >
> > On another note (and I assume because you didn't comment
> > on it that you haven't been following the series), I was
> > quite taken with "Homeland" because of episode 11.
> 
> I really liked it too, but I would have preferred an 
> Episode 12 with an exploding vest scene!

Me, too. That would have fucked with the audience's 
minds big time.

> > In it,
> > Claire Danes did literally the best job of portraying
> > onscreen someone suffering from bipolar disorder I've
> > ever seen. I've been there. I've had personal friends
> > who were bipolar, and have seen what they're like in
> > their manic periods. *Having* been there done that, I
> > tend to avoid certain Internet personalities whom I
> > suspect of being similarly afflicted. But she just
> > *nailed* it.
> 
> She also nailed the sometimes quick cycling to severe depression 
> (not all BPD patients cycle that fast) which made me wonder about 
> a certain internet personality's disappearance and if someone 
> with a connection to him could lovingly check in on him? It's 
> concerning to me.

As it should be. 

> > It's positively SCARY the extent to which people beset
> > by an episode of mania *believe* in the reality of what
> > they are subjectively experiencing, to the extent of
> > losing all contact with how they might be perceived by
> > others around them. I have found this behavior common
> > enough in spiritual environments to lead me to think
> > that it may not be a coincidence.
> 
> What they also did well was how the inner torment instantly 
> ages the person. If ever there was evidence of a mind-body 
> connection it is the rapid change of appearance in mental 
> illness.

That's interesting. I'd never really thought about that,
but in recollection that seems like an accurate perception
to me. 

> Interestingly (to me) the yogic tradition describes certain  
> imbalanced kundalini risings that "cycle" and strongly resemble 
> a Bipolar etiology.

That's what I was suggesting, yes. 

The person we are concerned about is (sorry, Rick) not
the first person I've met who became somewhat unhinged
after a hug from Amma. I knew a women in France who
flipped out completely and had to be institutionalized
for some months. When I met her she still professed
love for Amma, but wouldn't go within 1000 yards of
her on a bet. She described her experience in terms
I could only associate with watching people go through
the cyclic manic-depressive stages of bipolar disorder.

Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
scientist. All I know is that if some of the states 
that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
(as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
situation that is made more serious by total belief in
the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.

People have been taught for decades that their subjec-
tive experience is the holy grail with which to judge
"spiritual experience" or their "evolution" towards
something they've been told is enlightenment. At the
same time, there was no instruction along the way that
taught them how to differentiate between actual spir-
itual experience and overwhelming emotion. As a result 
(IMO), they get into a manic state, interpret the
overwhelming emotions of it as "spiritual," and
consider what they're going through -- *whatever*
it may be -- synonymous with Truth. 

So in a way the manic states become self-replicating.
Having convinced themselves that a previous manic
state was something akin to enlightenment, they
mood-make more of them. 

Or not. Like I said, it beats me. I'm just addicted
to watching it all go down, and occasionally commenting
on what I see, as I see it. Others' mileage may vary.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Vaj]

On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:01 AM, turquoiseb wrote:


On another note (and I assume because you didn't comment
on it that you haven't been following the series), I was
quite taken with "Homeland" because of episode 11.


I really liked it too, but I would have preferred an Episode 12 with  
an exploding vest scene!



In it,
Claire Danes did literally the best job of portraying
onscreen someone suffering from bipolar disorder I've
ever seen. I've been there. I've had personal friends
who were bipolar, and have seen what they're like in
their manic periods. *Having* been there done that, I
tend to avoid certain Internet personalities whom I
suspect of being similarly afflicted. But she just
*nailed* it.


She also nailed the sometimes quick cycling to severe depression (not  
all BPD patients cycle that fast) which made me wonder about a  
certain internet personality's disappearance and if someone with a  
connection to him could lovingly check in on him? It's concerning to me.



It's positively SCARY the extent to which people beset
by an episode of mania *believe* in the reality of what
they are subjectively experiencing, to the extent of
losing all contact with how they might be perceived by
others around them. I have found this behavior common
enough in spiritual environments to lead me to think
that it may not be a coincidence.


What they also did well was how the inner torment instantly ages the  
person. If ever there was evidence of a mind-body connection it is  
the rapid change of appearance in mental illness.


Interestingly (to me) the yogic tradition describes certain  
imbalanced kundalini risings that "cycle" and strongly resemble a  
Bipolar etiology.

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 9:02 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> >
> > But for real drama (as opposed to the faux kind), my
> > kudos go to "Dexter" and "Homeland" for the season
> > finales of the year. Dexter ended with *exactly* the
> > scene I thought it would, but it took its time getting
> > there, while filling in the proper emotional content
> > to give it the big payoff it deserved. Good performances
> > from Michael C. Hall (as always) and Jennifer Carpenter
> > (ditto), plus a surprisingly good performance by Colin
> > Hanks. Not nearly up to the standard set in season four,
> > but good, and a perfect setup for what I hear will be
> > Dex's last season next year.
> 
> While I still enjoy Dexter, I was disappointed by the 
> Revelation-End Times theme. Although it may appeal to 
> the Christian horde, it's been endlessly used in the 
> cinema (my fave being Stigmata, which features my 
> favorite biblical text).

I know what you mean, because that's how I felt about
the low-budget "11/11/11." I watched it mainly because
it was set in Barcelona, and I was feeling homesick. :-)

But by now you probably know a little about me, and what
I find interesting. I have lost almost all interest in
spiritual teachers per se, whatever their denomination
or spiel. Ho fucking hum. 

But their *followers*? Them I find endlessly fascinating. 
It's not what some supposed teacher reveals of the Word 
Of God or The Truth or the dharma that I find interesting,
it's what the people in the cheap seats *make* of it.

In "Dexter" this season, I liked the juxtaposition of
Gellar and his TB student Travis to Dex and Brother Sam.
Gellar was a fanatic whose visions of God And What He
Wanted Done had no more relationship to reality than
Dex's serial killings. But I also liked how Dex reacted
to Brother Sam, a former killer who had found some 
semblance of inner peace by following the same God 
that Gellar did. Dex, of course, found his own Way
amongst all the madness. Not that he isn't a total
head case himself...just that he avoided the temptation
to settle for the weak tea of "truth" offered up to him
by either self-annointed Voice Of God.

I'm looking forward to next season, in which the two
obvious primaries are going to be Dex (Michael C. Hall)
and Deb (Jennifer Carpenter), who was until two weeks
ago Hall's real-life wife. Can you say "potential for 
great acting?" I think you can.

On another note (and I assume because you didn't comment
on it that you haven't been following the series), I was
quite taken with "Homeland" because of episode 11. In it,
Claire Danes did literally the best job of portraying
onscreen someone suffering from bipolar disorder I've
ever seen. I've been there. I've had personal friends
who were bipolar, and have seen what they're like in
their manic periods. *Having* been there done that, I
tend to avoid certain Internet personalities whom I 
suspect of being similarly afflicted. But she just
*nailed* it. 

It's positively SCARY the extent to which people beset
by an episode of mania *believe* in the reality of what
they are subjectively experiencing, to the extent of 
losing all contact with how they might be perceived by
others around them. I have found this behavior common
enough in spiritual environments to lead me to think
that it may not be a coincidence.