Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Yes, I agree - I have become aware, through all of this, of a past life, pointing in this direction - prior meditation experience, and life as a monk. As developed as my meditation was then, the whole 'monk' thing was premature, to say the least - From what little I recall, I knew my father then too, as a fellow monk. At some point I was exposed to Western culture, in Tokyo, probably, 1920's or so, and was completely intoxicated by its modern and sensual aspects - that was also when I met my current wife ( though we have both obviously reincarnated, since). In any case, all of this has shown me, more than ever, that enlightenment is a life lived fully, both inside (Eastern) and out (Western). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Enlightenment is hardly a picnic, but personally, I couldn't think of another goal on the planet, as challenging, or as rewarding - what'cha gunna do?? Thanks Jim, I think this really captures it
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
I rarely reply to your posts since most of them are so inane, but in case you missed it I was not posting a list of athletes who bowed to guru devs pic after puja - I was posting a few long lived athletes and made the comment that none of them had done TM From: 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:53 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing On 5/21/2014 11:29 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: The list goes on and on and not a goddamn one of 'em ever did TM. For someone who claims to know how to use a computer, your search capabilities really suck. Go figure. List of athletes who have learned TM: Arthur Ashe, professional tennis player Buddy Biancalana, Major League Baseball Larry Bowa, Major League Baseball Pete Broberg, Major League Baseball Mark Bunn, Australian rules footballer Steve Carlton, Major League Baseball Paul Dimattina, Australian Football League Jerry Grote, Major League Baseball Jim Lonborg, Major League Baseball player Pete Maravich, NBA player Brent Mayne, Major League Baseball Willie McCovey, Major League Baseball Joe Namath, professional football player Martina Navratilova, tennis professional Bill Robinson, Major League Baseball Del Unser, Major League Baseball player Willie Stargell, Major League Baseball This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
That's neat Jim. It is always interesting when one can connect the dots. And, from what you have described about growing up in the Asian part of the world, it sure seems to make sense. Thanks for sharing that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Yes, I agree - I have become aware, through all of this, of a past life, pointing in this direction - prior meditation experience, and life as a monk. As developed as my meditation was then, the whole 'monk' thing was premature, to say the least - From what little I recall, I knew my father then too, as a fellow monk. At some point I was exposed to Western culture, in Tokyo, probably, 1920's or so, and was completely intoxicated by its modern and sensual aspects - that was also when I met my current wife ( though we have both obviously reincarnated, since). In any case, all of this has shown me, more than ever, that enlightenment is a life lived fully, both inside (Eastern) and out (Western). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Enlightenment is hardly a picnic, but personally, I couldn't think of another goal on the planet, as challenging, or as rewarding - what'cha gunna do?? Thanks Jim, I think this really captures it
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Sure - My only problem has been, trying to clean up all the loose ends, redefine the goal, and get there, in just one life-time - efficiency to the max, and, boy, has it been max. As I remarked to a friend recently, that is why I am now living in a trailer park, ten miles from Paradise - Paradise, CA is a popular retirement area, close by - I found it a little too rustic, for my tastes. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : That's neat Jim. It is always interesting when one can connect the dots. And, from what you have described about growing up in the Asian part of the world, it sure seems to make sense. Thanks for sharing that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Yes, I agree - I have become aware, through all of this, of a past life, pointing in this direction - prior meditation experience, and life as a monk. As developed as my meditation was then, the whole 'monk' thing was premature, to say the least - From what little I recall, I knew my father then too, as a fellow monk. At some point I was exposed to Western culture, in Tokyo, probably, 1920's or so, and was completely intoxicated by its modern and sensual aspects - that was also when I met my current wife ( though we have both obviously reincarnated, since). In any case, all of this has shown me, more than ever, that enlightenment is a life lived fully, both inside (Eastern) and out (Western). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Enlightenment is hardly a picnic, but personally, I couldn't think of another goal on the planet, as challenging, or as rewarding - what'cha gunna do?? Thanks Jim, I think this really captures it
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/22/2014 7:06 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I rarely reply to your posts since most of them are so inane, You failed to mention that there are a number of famous athletes who have practiced TM. You failed to inform, because of your your bias. You suck as an informant. It's not complicated. but in case you missed it I was not posting a list of athletes who bowed to guru devs pic after puja - I was posting a few long lived athletes and made the comment that none of them had done TM *From:* 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:53 PM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing On 5/21/2014 11:29 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com mailto:mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: The list goes on and on and not a goddamn one of 'em ever did TM. For someone who claims to know how to use a computer, your search capabilities really suck. Go figure. List of athletes who have learned TM: Arthur Ashe, professional tennis player Buddy Biancalana, Major League Baseball Larry Bowa, Major League Baseball Pete Broberg, Major League Baseball Mark Bunn, Australian rules footballer Steve Carlton, Major League Baseball Paul Dimattina, Australian Football League Jerry Grote, Major League Baseball Jim Lonborg, Major League Baseball player Pete Maravich, NBA player Brent Mayne, Major League Baseball Willie McCovey, Major League Baseball Joe Namath, professional football player Martina Navratilova, tennis professional Bill Robinson, Major League Baseball Del Unser, Major League Baseball player Willie Stargell, Major League Baseball http://www.avast.com/ This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Without statistics about how many professional athletes there, how many learned TM when they were kids vs after they became adults vs never learned at all, etc, you can't conclude anything at all about TM and athletes, any more than you can about TM and deep sea divers. What you CAN do is look at the long-term physiological effects of TM and see what highly sucessful non-TMing athletes look like vs not-so-sucessful athletes. Such a study was done a few years ago comparing the EEG alpha coherence, and how people respond to the question describe your self in two groups: athletes who compete in world-level events like Olympics and world-cup, and score in the top-10 every competition for 3 years in a row vs athletes who compete in world-level events, but never break out of the bottom 50 percent. That's top 10 (not top 10%) vs bottom 50%, so if there's less than 20 competitors, its a bit odd. The results were that people in teh world champion category are far more likely to have an EEG signature that approaches the TM enlightenment EEG signature than people in the bottom 50%. Both groups compete in teh same world-level games, and both groups spend at least 1,000 hours practicing every year. The same difference holds for how they describe their self: world-champions are more abstract in their description, and non-world-champions are more concrete in their description. Interesting, eh? L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : I rarely reply to your posts since most of them are so inane, but in case you missed it I was not posting a list of athletes who bowed to guru devs pic after puja - I was posting a few long lived athletes and made the comment that none of them had done TM From: 'Richard J. Williams' punditster@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:53 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing On 5/21/2014 11:29 AM, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... mailto:mjackson74@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: The list goes on and on and not a goddamn one of 'em ever did TM. For someone who claims to know how to use a computer, your search capabilities really suck. Go figure. List of athletes who have learned TM: Arthur Ashe, professional tennis player Buddy Biancalana, Major League Baseball Larry Bowa, Major League Baseball Pete Broberg, Major League Baseball Mark Bunn, Australian rules footballer Steve Carlton, Major League Baseball Paul Dimattina, Australian Football League Jerry Grote, Major League Baseball Jim Lonborg, Major League Baseball player Pete Maravich, NBA player Brent Mayne, Major League Baseball Willie McCovey, Major League Baseball Joe Namath, professional football player Martina Navratilova, tennis professional Bill Robinson, Major League Baseball Del Unser, Major League Baseball player Willie Stargell, Major League Baseball This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
I'm glad you're being philosophical about it Lawson old chap. May I ask what elective surgery means? I'm hoping it means they'll do it next week, free of charge but I fear there might be a catch to that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I dont' count myself as terribly enlightened, but after 40 years of TM, it turns out that I'm pretty flexible. I just got out of the hospital, after going into the ER with a severe infection (bad enough that when a friend in Holland who is graduating as a dentist soon and requested to see my infection, started screaming over Skype GO TO THE ER IMMEDIATELY over and over again until I stopped arguing and went to the ER). After my checkin, I was put in a tiny, single-occupancy room with a TV (no schedule) and some pretty boring shows. No volume on the computer, so surfing the web didn't allow me to watch videos, either dramas/cartoons, or lectures. My only activities were eating, dreaming, sleeping, meditating and reading The Structure of Scientific Resolutions by Thomas Kuhn, which I've owned for 35 years but never read (3 pages left, by the way). I wasn't bored in the slightest nor terribly worried, even when I thought I might be dying. I knew that my cats were being fed and soon found that I didn't have cancer, and that my hernia, while horribly bad, is still elective surgery. Sleep, meditate, let them poke me with needles, eat, read, let them poke me with needles, read, eat, meditate, read, let them poke me with needles. Rinse and repeat for 3 days. No biggie. My entire infected region is numb due to nerve damage from the hernia + being over weight. I definitely need to exercise and loose weight, which they reminded me. Got home, and there's no real transition from the hospital, except I have more lifestyle options, like watching lectures, reading more stuff, have more eating choices, and the like. No matter where I go, there I am. Whee... L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
I'm not being philosophical about it. One part of me was marveling at how unconcerned I was, even when I had some concern it might be a sign of advanced cancer. I made sure that someone had witnessed me saying that my once-and-future son's mom was heir, beneficiary of my estate AND trustee, and resolved to put that in writing before any kind of surgery. I knew that my cats were being fed and that I had no other real issues that needed taking care of. Given my rather odd circumstances, I find that I'm remarkably at peace. No idea what would have been my reaction if they DID tell me it was all a sign of major cancer, but oh well. And elective surgery just means that it is not life-threatening. I have no idea if Medicaid covers it or not. I know that, by itself, no matter how bad a hernia gets, you can't get put on disability merely for having it, so perhaps Medicaid won't cover the corrective surgery, either. My weight, my inability to work, my ongoing ADD/OCD/depression (just because I'm not afraid of dying doensn't mean I'm not depressed), all may qualify me for permanent disability, and maybe even a 1.5 foot area of total numbness in the region of the hernia might combine to qualify me, but not the hernia. Waiting for the results of my application. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : I'm glad you're being philosophical about it Lawson old chap. May I ask what elective surgery means? I'm hoping it means they'll do it next week, free of charge but I fear there might be a catch to that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I dont' count myself as terribly enlightened, but after 40 years of TM, it turns out that I'm pretty flexible. I just got out of the hospital, after going into the ER with a severe infection (bad enough that when a friend in Holland who is graduating as a dentist soon and requested to see my infection, started screaming over Skype GO TO THE ER IMMEDIATELY over and over again until I stopped arguing and went to the ER). After my checkin, I was put in a tiny, single-occupancy room with a TV (no schedule) and some pretty boring shows. No volume on the computer, so surfing the web didn't allow me to watch videos, either dramas/cartoons, or lectures. My only activities were eating, dreaming, sleeping, meditating and reading The Structure of Scientific Resolutions by Thomas Kuhn, which I've owned for 35 years but never read (3 pages left, by the way). I wasn't bored in the slightest nor terribly worried, even when I thought I might be dying. I knew that my cats were being fed and soon found that I didn't have cancer, and that my hernia, while horribly bad, is still elective surgery. Sleep, meditate, let them poke me with needles, eat, read, let them poke me with needles, read, eat, meditate, read, let them poke me with needles. Rinse and repeat for 3 days. No biggie. My entire infected region is numb due to nerve damage from the hernia + being over weight. I definitely need to exercise and loose weight, which they reminded me. Got home, and there's no real transition from the hospital, except I have more lifestyle options, like watching lectures, reading more stuff, have more eating choices, and the like. No matter where I go, there I am. Whee... L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I'm not being philosophical about it. One part of me was marveling at how unconcerned I was, even when I had some concern it might be a sign of advanced cancer. Well, you're a trooper at any rate! I made sure that someone had witnessed me saying that my once-and-future son's mom was heir, beneficiary of my estate AND trustee, and resolved to put that in writing before any kind of surgery. I knew that my cats were being fed and that I had no other real issues that needed taking care of. Given my rather odd circumstances, I find that I'm remarkably at peace. No idea what would have been my reaction if they DID tell me it was all a sign of major cancer, but oh well. That's a funny thing I noticed about TM, I get a more developed heart and more refined awareness of my emotional state but I also get that settled acceptance and flexibility you mention. It seems like it would be a contradiction. But I'm only like that about things I can't change, everything else stresses me out in the normal fashion... And elective surgery just means that it is not life-threatening. Well that's something! I have no idea if Medicaid covers it or not. I know that, by itself, no matter how bad a hernia gets, you can't get put on disability merely for having it, so perhaps Medicaid won't cover the corrective surgery, either. My weight, my inability to work, my ongoing ADD/OCD/depression (just because I'm not afraid of dying doensn't mean I'm not depressed), all may qualify me for permanent disability, and maybe even a 1.5 foot area of total numbness in the region of the hernia might combine to qualify me, but not the hernia. Waiting for the results of my application. I think there's something seriously wrong when someone can't get a bit of help from society when they are down. UK has been going that way too but you can still get incapacity benefit if you're prepared to go to the appeals court with some sort of expert to argue your case. Good luck with it. Depression is enough to cope with as it is. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : I'm glad you're being philosophical about it Lawson old chap. May I ask what elective surgery means? I'm hoping it means they'll do it next week, free of charge but I fear there might be a catch to that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I dont' count myself as terribly enlightened, but after 40 years of TM, it turns out that I'm pretty flexible. I just got out of the hospital, after going into the ER with a severe infection (bad enough that when a friend in Holland who is graduating as a dentist soon and requested to see my infection, started screaming over Skype GO TO THE ER IMMEDIATELY over and over again until I stopped arguing and went to the ER). After my checkin, I was put in a tiny, single-occupancy room with a TV (no schedule) and some pretty boring shows. No volume on the computer, so surfing the web didn't allow me to watch videos, either dramas/cartoons, or lectures. My only activities were eating, dreaming, sleeping, meditating and reading The Structure of Scientific Resolutions by Thomas Kuhn, which I've owned for 35 years but never read (3 pages left, by the way). I wasn't bored in the slightest nor terribly worried, even when I thought I might be dying. I knew that my cats were being fed and soon found that I didn't have cancer, and that my hernia, while horribly bad, is still elective surgery. Sleep, meditate, let them poke me with needles, eat, read, let them poke me with needles, read, eat, meditate, read, let them poke me with needles. Rinse and repeat for 3 days. No biggie. My entire infected region is numb due to nerve damage from the hernia + being over weight. I definitely need to exercise and loose weight, which they reminded me. Got home, and there's no real transition from the hospital, except I have more lifestyle options, like watching lectures, reading more stuff, have more eating choices, and the like. No matter where I go, there I am. Whee... L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Not likely. Here in the US hernia surgery is a $20,000 affair, and that doesn't include the surgeon's fee or the anesthesiologists fee either. From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 3:43 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing I'm glad you're being philosophical about it Lawson old chap. May I ask what elective surgery means? I'm hoping it means they'll do it next week, free of charge but I fear there might be a catch to that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : I dont' count myself as terribly enlightened, but after 40 years of TM, it turns out that I'm pretty flexible. I just got out of the hospital, after going into the ER with a severe infection (bad enough that when a friend in Holland who is graduating as a dentist soon and requested to see my infection, started screaming over Skype GO TO THE ER IMMEDIATELY over and over again until I stopped arguing and went to the ER). After my checkin, I was put in a tiny, single-occupancy room with a TV (no schedule) and some pretty boring shows. No volume on the computer, so surfing the web didn't allow me to watch videos, either dramas/cartoons, or lectures. My only activities were eating, dreaming, sleeping, meditating and reading The Structure of Scientific Resolutions by Thomas Kuhn, which I've owned for 35 years but never read (3 pages left, by the way). I wasn't bored in the slightest nor terribly worried, even when I thought I might be dying. I knew that my cats were being fed and soon found that I didn't have cancer, and that my hernia, while horribly bad, is still elective surgery. Sleep, meditate, let them poke me with needles, eat, read, let them poke me with needles, read, eat, meditate, read, let them poke me with needles. Rinse and repeat for 3 days. No biggie. My entire infected region is numb due to nerve damage from the hernia + being over weight. I definitely need to exercise and loose weight, which they reminded me. Got home, and there's no real transition from the hospital, except I have more lifestyle options, like watching lectures, reading more stuff, have more eating choices, and the like. No matter where I go, there I am. Whee... L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
In fact, there's evidence that athletes, especially those in teh extremely aerobic categories DO have shorter lifespans. How much is due to heart-strain from aerobic exercise or stress due to accumulated injuries, is another question, but current research suggests *moderation* in exercise, is the most healthy way to go. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Seems clear to me - I remember very clearly the Movement claiming in the 1970's that TM made athletes perform more efficiently, yet Marshy was privately telling TM'ers exercise shortens one's life. And since Nabby is a person who believes every word that ever came out of Marshy Mahesh's mouth, I want to know if he thinks all the athletes in the world need to stop performing and stop exercising and just walk around and do TM. I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : In fact, there's evidence that athletes, especially those in teh extremely aerobic categories DO have shorter lifespans. How much is due to heart-strain from aerobic exercise or stress due to accumulated injuries, is another question Steroids or EPO is my guess, cyclists in particular seem to die young. , but current research suggests *moderation* in exercise, is the most healthy way to go. Agreed. I limit myself to 100 hilly miles a day and 4 hours on the weights when I get back, with only a brief pause to post stuff to FFL. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Seems clear to me - I remember very clearly the Movement claiming in the 1970's that TM made athletes perform more efficiently, yet Marshy was privately telling TM'ers exercise shortens one's life. And since Nabby is a person who believes every word that ever came out of Marshy Mahesh's mouth, I want to know if he thinks all the athletes in the world need to stop performing and stop exercising and just walk around and do TM. I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Athletes live longer: Study Athletes live longer: Study The study featuring in the July 2010 issue of The Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (JSAMS), published by Sports Medicine Australia, examined the mortality and longevity of elite athletes to understand the association between exercise training and survival rates. View on www.news-medical.net Preview by Yahoo From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:00 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : In fact, there's evidence that athletes, especially those in teh extremely aerobic categories DO have shorter lifespans. How much is due to heart-strain from aerobic exercise or stress due to accumulated injuries, is another question Steroids or EPO is my guess, cyclists in particular seem to die young. , but current research suggests *moderation* in exercise, is the most healthy way to go. Agreed. I limit myself to 100 hilly miles a day and 4 hours on the weights when I get back, with only a brief pause to post stuff to FFL. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Seems clear to me - I remember very clearly the Movement claiming in the 1970's that TM made athletes perform more efficiently, yet Marshy was privately telling TM'ers exercise shortens one's life. And since Nabby is a person who believes every word that ever came out of Marshy Mahesh's mouth, I want to know if he thinks all the athletes in the world need to stop performing and stop exercising and just walk around and do TM. I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Esther Williams - 3 US National Championships in freestyle and breaststroke swimming - died at 91 Johnny Weissmuller - 5 Olympic gold medals in swimming - died age 79 Jim Thorpe - Olympic gold medalist and football player - died age 64 Hank Aaron - still alive at age 80 Joe Dimaggio - baseball star - died age 85 The list goes on and on and not a goddamn one of 'em ever did TM. From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:00 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : In fact, there's evidence that athletes, especially those in teh extremely aerobic categories DO have shorter lifespans. How much is due to heart-strain from aerobic exercise or stress due to accumulated injuries, is another question Steroids or EPO is my guess, cyclists in particular seem to die young. , but current research suggests *moderation* in exercise, is the most healthy way to go. Agreed. I limit myself to 100 hilly miles a day and 4 hours on the weights when I get back, with only a brief pause to post stuff to FFL. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Seems clear to me - I remember very clearly the Movement claiming in the 1970's that TM made athletes perform more efficiently, yet Marshy was privately telling TM'ers exercise shortens one's life. And since Nabby is a person who believes every word that ever came out of Marshy Mahesh's mouth, I want to know if he thinks all the athletes in the world need to stop performing and stop exercising and just walk around and do TM. I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/21/2014 11:29 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: The list goes on and on and not a goddamn one of 'em ever did TM. For someone who claims to know how to use a computer, your search capabilities really suck. Go figure. List of athletes who have learned TM: Arthur Ashe, professional tennis player Buddy Biancalana, Major League Baseball Larry Bowa, Major League Baseball Pete Broberg, Major League Baseball Mark Bunn, Australian rules footballer Steve Carlton, Major League Baseball Paul Dimattina, Australian Football League Jerry Grote, Major League Baseball Jim Lonborg, Major League Baseball player Pete Maravich, NBA player Brent Mayne, Major League Baseball Willie McCovey, Major League Baseball Joe Namath, professional football player Martina Navratilova, tennis professional Bill Robinson, Major League Baseball Del Unser, Major League Baseball player Willie Stargell, Major League Baseball --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/21/2014 9:42 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Oooo, beautiful pool, Richard. You'll have to throw a pool party for FFL (-: We put our house in San Antonio up for sale and moved into a two-bedroom apartment - east-facing entrance, ground floor, across from the pool. It's nice, but /the rent is too damn high!/ Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/21/2014 6:33 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: You know as well as I do that Marshy would say one thing in private, and something else very different in public to make sales. So, how many times did you meet with MMY in private? Apparently zero - go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 5/21/2014 6:33 AM, Michael Jackson mjackson74@... mailto:mjackson74@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: You know as well as I do that Marshy would say one thing in private, and something else very different in public to make sales. So, how many times did you meet with MMY in private? Apparently zero - go figure. Richard's cooking with gas lately. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Ahh, I had forgotten about the obsession with drinking warm water all the time. From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 2:50 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Come on Steve, what kind of walking did Marshy recommend? Brisk walking that's good for the heart? Or the lazy walk and talks we all remember from our residence courses? From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
You realize, I am sure Michael, that anywhere you go, the mall, the office, everyone has their bottle of water. Now, do you happen to know whether or not drinking warm water would be something beneficial? In my case, I admit, I am addicted, yes, I'd say addicted, to drinks, (non alcoholic) with a lot of ice. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Ahh, I had forgotten about the obsession with drinking warm water all the time. From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 2:50 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Come on Steve, what kind of walking did Marshy recommend? Brisk walking that's good for the heart? Or the lazy walk and talks we all remember from our residence courses? From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. Then this is excellent news for the couch potato Bawee. He must have a subliminal need to follow the MMY non exercise instructions and is still on the bandwagon today - just like everything else he spouts here he doesn't realize he is doing one thing and claiming he's doing another. Somebody buy the guy a mirror, not the fun house type though.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 1:50 AM, salyavin808 wrote: The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. The MMY magic can't really compare to the Fred Lenz magic. Apparently Barry was so addicted to the mood-making that he went over to the Zen Master Rama for the full dose - REAL levitation. Yes, you would think that Barry would have known better after working for the TMO for fifteen years. But, Curtis should have know better at the end of his MUM Philosophy 101 course, if not before. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. Look what happened to Curtis and Barry - almost totally mixed up - can't even define witnessing or consciousness, much less being able to fly or levitate. Reduced to a trance-induction state and some mere butt-bouncing - and, apparently Barry sucked at that! Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 7:03 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Ahh, I had forgotten about the obsession with drinking warm water all the time. Addressing the important issues! It's an obsession only if you insist on drinking Ozarka filtered spring water, out of a plastic screw-cap bottle, bought by the case at Safeway, and the empties discarded into the town dump. That's what I'm saying. Room temperature would be probably the ideal temperature for drinking water. That way, you don't have to cause global warming by using a refrigerator or a stove, and cause harm to the environment. In fact, drinking room temperature water is Ayer-Vedic. Most yogis just use their hands as drinking cups or just dunk their heads into the river. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 7:07 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Come on Steve, what kind of walking did Marshy recommend? Brisk walking that's good for the heart? Or the lazy walk and talks we all remember from our residence courses? According to Helen Olsen, when Charlie took MMY to Disneyland, MMY walked for hours, to the point where everyone in the party was almost totally exhausted. It is well known that MMY could out-walk, out-talk, and do just about everything to run a multi-billion dollar corporation, 24 x 7, without even blinking an eye. There are stories about MMY skin-boys that got so tired out trying to keep up with MMY that they could only work in that position for just a few months at a time. /The guy was simply amazing with energy and stamina!/ That can't compare to the energy-level of MJ, Barry, or Sally! Barry even got out of the house recently to sit on a grassy knoll and have a picnic by the canal. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. /Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle./ Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Richard, Dr. Mercola markets a little gadget that beeps every fifteen minutes. He recommends that those who sit a lot should get up and exercise every 15 minutes. he says other kinds of exercising are not adequate if one is sitting at a computer all day long. On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:58 PM, 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle. Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 7:54 AM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? Not /ALL/ the athletes in the world should stop exercising - that would be a contradiction in terms, since sports /is/ exercise. What they should do, is add basic TM to their workout, like Joe Namath, the New York Jets quarterback. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Share, do you have one of these? What kind of exercise are you talking about - walking? How long should the breaks be? Have you ever tried what you are forwarding from Dr. Mercola? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Richard, Dr. Mercola markets a little gadget that beeps every fifteen minutes. He recommends that those who sit a lot should get up and exercise every 15 minutes. he says other kinds of exercising are not adequate if one is sitting at a computer all day long. On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:58 PM, 'Richard J. Williams' punditster@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle. Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Emily, no I don't have a timer. I'm thinking of getting on my rebounder every 15 minutes. But probably I should also do some weight lifting and stretching... On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:06 PM, emilymae...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, do you have one of these? What kind of exercise are you talking about - walking? How long should the breaks be? Have you ever tried what you are forwarding from Dr. Mercola? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Richard, Dr. Mercola markets a little gadget that beeps every fifteen minutes. He recommends that those who sit a lot should get up and exercise every 15 minutes. he says other kinds of exercising are not adequate if one is sitting at a computer all day long. On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:58 PM, 'Richard J. Williams' punditster@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle. Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Well Share, I have been exposed to a timer that went off every 15 minutes and I can assure you that it is the most irritating, annoying thing ever. Just go outside, dear, and take a walk. Bring 1 or 2 pound weights with you. Breathe deeply. Join a gentle stretching class. You will be fine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, no I don't have a timer. I'm thinking of getting on my rebounder every 15 minutes. But probably I should also do some weight lifting and stretching... On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:06 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, do you have one of these? What kind of exercise are you talking about - walking? How long should the breaks be? Have you ever tried what you are forwarding from Dr. Mercola? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Richard, Dr. Mercola markets a little gadget that beeps every fifteen minutes. He recommends that those who sit a lot should get up and exercise every 15 minutes. he says other kinds of exercising are not adequate if one is sitting at a computer all day long. On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:58 PM, 'Richard J. Williams' punditster@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle. Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Thanks, Emily. Supposedly rebounders are good for improving bone density and strength of the immune system. Plus it's fun! I walk lots of places like the post office and library and there are lots of beautiful trees along the way. I am not only fine, I am blessed. imho... On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:30 PM, emilymae...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well Share, I have been exposed to a timer that went off every 15 minutes and I can assure you that it is the most irritating, annoying thing ever. Just go outside, dear, and take a walk. Bring 1 or 2 pound weights with you. Breathe deeply. Join a gentle stretching class. You will be fine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, no I don't have a timer. I'm thinking of getting on my rebounder every 15 minutes. But probably I should also do some weight lifting and stretching... On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:06 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, do you have one of these? What kind of exercise are you talking about - walking? How long should the breaks be? Have you ever tried what you are forwarding from Dr. Mercola? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Richard, Dr. Mercola markets a little gadget that beeps every fifteen minutes. He recommends that those who sit a lot should get up and exercise every 15 minutes. he says other kinds of exercising are not adequate if one is sitting at a computer all day long. On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:58 PM, 'Richard J. Williams' punditster@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle. Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Yes, I remember when those came back into vogue in the alternative/health and wellness industry. My mother has one and tried to sell me on it. Someone gave the kids one and it lasted a fair amount of time out in the back yard. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Thanks, Emily. Supposedly rebounders are good for improving bone density and strength of the immune system. Plus it's fun! I walk lots of places like the post office and library and there are lots of beautiful trees along the way. I am not only fine, I am blessed. imho... On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:30 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well Share, I have been exposed to a timer that went off every 15 minutes and I can assure you that it is the most irritating, annoying thing ever. Just go outside, dear, and take a walk. Bring 1 or 2 pound weights with you. Breathe deeply. Join a gentle stretching class. You will be fine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, no I don't have a timer. I'm thinking of getting on my rebounder every 15 minutes. But probably I should also do some weight lifting and stretching... On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:06 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, do you have one of these? What kind of exercise are you talking about - walking? How long should the breaks be? Have you ever tried what you are forwarding from Dr. Mercola? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Richard, Dr. Mercola markets a little gadget that beeps every fifteen minutes. He recommends that those who sit a lot should get up and exercise every 15 minutes. he says other kinds of exercising are not adequate if one is sitting at a computer all day long. On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:58 PM, 'Richard J. Williams' punditster@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: On 5/20/2014 7:30 AM, steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. It has already been established how long some of the informants on this list sit around not exercising or walking - the messages here are all time-stamped. Unless they are keyboarding at the same time they are jogging or on the treadmill or on the stationary bicycle. Go figure. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. That's what I'm saying. There is one respondent who works out of a home office. Another guy works out of his bedroom, and another guy works out of a spare room - they sit around for hours working on their computers, ostensibly writing, correcting, tuning, or fixing computers. So, so we know pretty much who is doing the walking and who is doing the talking. It's not complicated. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Wonderful...life has just begun. I am kind of anti-social I think; those RV spots are typically way too closely spaced for my comfort zone. :) However, not during all months. If you haven't been to Utah, Highway 12 (Escalante) up to Capital Reef National Park is a little less populated than other routes and is spectacular. I went in September - a good month. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Hi 'M, I responded earlier, but perhaps hit cancel instead of send, so, like I said - Pick-axe - next to a sledge hammer, my favorite demo tool - have taken out some serious root systems with one. And, yes, I am living in a trailer park, in my RV, in Chico, which I enjoy - it is like living in a houseboat, very compact, except I can't dive off the roof. :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : P.S. Are you in your RV? Staying at a private campground? Or, what the reference to trailer park a joke re: your stick house. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Wellyes.I could be.but...I haven't applied my entrepreneurial spirit yet in life. Instead, I dug up a large fern. This is easier typed than it was to accomplish. After an hour of digging with two types of shovels, lopping, and using one of those digging forks, I enlisted my neighbor's advice and they offered me their pick axe. That is a heavy tool. The poor fern looked like it was on death's door and has for a long time; it's roots and a nearby tree's roots were all entwined under the surface though. Then, my neighbors looked at the rest of my yard and offered me their hedge trimmer to help with the pruning. I'm looking forward to using it tomorrow, if I can lift my arms. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Hey, you live in Washington state, and could be planting, well...anything... I have to trim the grass on my little plot, here at the trailer park, so I went out and bought a cordless trimmer. Once the batteries charge up, its garden party time! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Share, I'm not judging you for speculating nonsense. *You* used a concrete number (99%) to indicate that meant not completely. You stated you don't know enough about fMRI machines, to put forth a science-based guess (smile). A walk outside helps to ground one to the natural earth, that which Ann describes so beautifully and it also helps clear the mental fog. Or, do some planting. That's my task for today. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I said I was speculating for the fun of it. To me speculation is different than nonsense. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 4:15 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, you crack me up. You have just effectively stated in your own words that you are aware that you were spouting complete nonsense, for the fun of it. Do spend more time outside. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I say 99% because I don't think 100% is possible. Other than that, I don't know enough about fMRI machines. I simply mean that in such people I think we would find that the vast majority of their brain, etc. I'm just speculating for fun... On Sunday, May 18, 2014 1:15 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Yep - this is a (non)mobile home park, so the spaces are larger, but I still felt very exposed the first couple of weeks - in fact I have a large enough lawn to maintain, I bought a cordless weed whacker and keep running out of batteries before all the cutting is done - I let it go for about 3 weeks, before my kindly neighbor let me know it was MY responsibility - oops. Thanks for the tip on the roadtrip! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Wonderful...life has just begun. I am kind of anti-social I think; those RV spots are typically way too closely spaced for my comfort zone. :) However, not during all months. If you haven't been to Utah, Highway 12 (Escalante) up to Capital Reef National Park is a little less populated than other routes and is spectacular. I went in September - a good month. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Hi 'M, I responded earlier, but perhaps hit cancel instead of send, so, like I said - Pick-axe - next to a sledge hammer, my favorite demo tool - have taken out some serious root systems with one. And, yes, I am living in a trailer park, in my RV, in Chico, which I enjoy - it is like living in a houseboat, very compact, except I can't dive off the roof. :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : P.S. Are you in your RV? Staying at a private campground? Or, what the reference to trailer park a joke re: your stick house. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Wellyes.I could be.but...I haven't applied my entrepreneurial spirit yet in life. Instead, I dug up a large fern. This is easier typed than it was to accomplish. After an hour of digging with two types of shovels, lopping, and using one of those digging forks, I enlisted my neighbor's advice and they offered me their pick axe. That is a heavy tool. The poor fern looked like it was on death's door and has for a long time; it's roots and a nearby tree's roots were all entwined under the surface though. Then, my neighbors looked at the rest of my yard and offered me their hedge trimmer to help with the pruning. I'm looking forward to using it tomorrow, if I can lift my arms. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Hey, you live in Washington state, and could be planting, well...anything... I have to trim the grass on my little plot, here at the trailer park, so I went out and bought a cordless trimmer. Once the batteries charge up, its garden party time! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Share, I'm not judging you for speculating nonsense. *You* used a concrete number (99%) to indicate that meant not completely. You stated you don't know enough about fMRI machines, to put forth a science-based guess (smile). A walk outside helps to ground one to the natural earth, that which Ann describes so beautifully and it also helps clear the mental fog. Or, do some planting. That's my task for today. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I said I was speculating for the fun of it. To me speculation is different than nonsense. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 4:15 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, you crack me up. You have just effectively stated in your own words that you are aware that you were spouting complete nonsense, for the fun of it. Do spend more time outside. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I say 99% because I don't think 100% is possible. Other than that, I don't know enough about fMRI machines. I simply mean that in such people I think we would find that the vast majority of their brain, etc. I'm just speculating for fun... On Sunday, May 18, 2014 1:15 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Seems clear to me - I remember very clearly the Movement claiming in the 1970's that TM made athletes perform more efficiently, yet Marshy was privately telling TM'ers exercise shortens one's life. And since Nabby is a person who believes every word that ever came out of Marshy Mahesh's mouth, I want to know if he thinks all the athletes in the world need to stop performing and stop exercising and just walk around and do TM. I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
The key word is residence course. MMY was never a fan of extreme sports, obviously, but perhaps you missed teh memo: latest thinking on aerobics is that too much is detrimental to your health. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Come on Steve, what kind of walking did Marshy recommend? Brisk walking that's good for the heart? Or the lazy walk and talks we all remember from our residence courses? From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who doesn't seem to have much of a clue about anything really. It would be easy to say it's their own stupid fault for taking it too seriously and following a leader who puts his religious beliefs before the science he claimed to be inspired by, but that was all part of the Marshy magic. I'm just glad I managed to keep a sane head through it all. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? If the only exercise you get is carrying a flask of hot water around you are asking for trouble in future. That's a fact. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 9:15 PM, lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] wrote: MMY was never a fan of extreme sports, obviously, but perhaps you missed teh memo: latest thinking on aerobics is that too much is detrimental to your health. Never let it be said that MMY didn't know how to organize a yoga camp! It's complicated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/20/2014 7:41 PM, Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. Which is more important - /attaining the enlightened state/ or making a lot of money playing sports for material gain? In your case, you seem to have neither, unless you want to count practicing Kung Fu fighting and repairing computers sitting down. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Michael, there were all kinds of things in the Vedic and Hindu tradition that were brought up. And just because they were brought up and discussed, doesn't mean that they were prescribed. The initiative with athletes was a major push. I believe the teacher who was at the forefront of that was Don Leopold, and a video was made of the athletes who practiced the technique and it was one of the better videos the movement made IMO. But you are as they say, conflating the issues. In my experience this limited number of breaths was never a big deal. But others may have a different recollection about it. But what was and is, prescribed by the Vedic or Hindu tradition is spending the second 25 years of your life engaging in activity and being a householder. That would imply an active life. It surprises me how you eagerly you jump on these apparent inconsistencies to find yet another gotcha I admit, there are plenty of gotchas, but just not under every stone you happen to turn over. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Seems clear to me - I remember very clearly the Movement claiming in the 1970's that TM made athletes perform more efficiently, yet Marshy was privately telling TM'ers exercise shortens one's life. And since Nabby is a person who believes every word that ever came out of Marshy Mahesh's mouth, I want to know if he thinks all the athletes in the world need to stop performing and stop exercising and just walk around and do TM. I mean, he claims the evidence on exercise is controversial, so he must think, based on what Marshy the fake guru said that all athletes should stop being athletic. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme? From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing History will prove Maharishi to be right on this issue, again. Health benefits of jogging or heavy exercise is highly controversial. Joggers certainly don't live any longer and there as been some reports of the opposite. According to Maharishi Ayurveda 15 minutes of brisk walking is good for you. They don't recommend getting sweaty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Probably just a normal gait. He never really specified. At any rate, even a lazy walk might be more than is done by the general population. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing What you say is fine. Again, I was well aware of this limited number of breaths things. It never stopped me, or anyone I knew from engaging in rigorous activity. In my case, during my MIU years and after, playing tennis, or other sport that met my fancy. So, it may be that you are making the exception the rule, at least as far as some people avoiding anything that may raise their breath rate. And of course, you discount the fact that walking was always something recommended by MMY. You feel the need to make a condescending comment about it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. Does it suit them? Or do they just go along with it because they were told they'd get enlightened quicker? Maybe you just find the anaemic, osteoporosis look irresistable. Go figure. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. The only judgement I would make here is that they have a role model they trust utterly who
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : You really make some strange connections sometimes Michael. Or are they linkages. I don't know, but I think you are somewhat alone in not being able to make distinctions along these lines. As I have said, MJ is a literalist, or at least hopes we will be when he points these things out the way he does. What is so funny is that as much as you or I or Joe Shmoe insists their viewpoint is right I don't think a single person here has, fundamentally, changed their mind about anything they believe no matter how many times someone tries to change it for them. Hilarious actually. Just sayin' ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : So much for the old excellence in action baloney the Movement used to use to target athletes to get 'em doing TM. So are you saying then that all the soccer athletes, the rugby players and all the other athletes in the world should give up their chosen lives, stop exercising and just do TM and take lazy walks while praying to Marshy and Benjy Creme?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
From: curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Curtis is an amateur philosopher, we knew that already. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 5/17/2014 8:29 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Yes, I *do* agree with him in believing that Maharishi was WAY off in coming up with any meaningful interpretations of and descriptions of consciousness and what it means. If MMY was way off, then you'd have to disagree with Immanuel Kant, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Arthur Schopenhauer and the whole of German idealism. This would be a monumental task for anyone, even someone with the intellect and training of Curtis. In addition, you'd have to argue against the Adi Shankara's Advaita Vedanta AND Vasubandhu's Vajrayana. And, that's without even knowing what Curtis means to argue about when he says that knowledge isn't structured in consciousness. Go figure. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
jeez, turq, if you think I'm a True Believer, then you must have a very different definition of it than I do. As for me, I don't worry or fantasize about getting enlightened or whatever. I find that life is pretty rich as it is. On Monday, May 19, 2014 1:32 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. Again, this BS of yours - you have experienced enlightenment for two weeks out of your life - not only that, it was under specialized conditions, not in real life. So quit trying to insinuate yourself as an expert here, when you have not yet achieved your first step, as a seeker - established silence, witnessing 24 x 7. It embarrasses us all, to watch you act like this, both arrogant, and empty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/19/2014 3:49 AM, nablusoss1008 wrote: Curtis is an amateur philosopher, we knew that already. We have not seen any evidence that MUM produces good philosophers, by Curtis's own account. Do they even teach Eastern systems of philosophy such as the Six Systems? Go figure. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 5/17/2014 8:29 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Yes, I *do* agree with him in believing that Maharishi was WAY off in coming up with any meaningful interpretations of and descriptions of consciousness and what it means. If MMY was way off, then you'd have to disagree with Immanuel Kant, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Arthur Schopenhauer and the whole of German idealism. This would be a monumental task for anyone, even someone with the intellect and training of Curtis. In addition, you'd have to argue against the Adi Shankara's Advaita Vedanta AND Vasubandhu's Vajrayana. And, that's without even knowing what Curtis means to argue about when he says that knowledge /isn't/ structured in consciousness. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Richard wrote: 'If MMY was way off, then you'd have to disagree with Immanuel Kant, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Arthur Schopenhauer and the whole of German idealism. This would be a monumental task for anyone, even someone with the intellect and training of Curtis. In addition, you'd have to argue against the Adi Shankara's Advaita Vedanta AND Vasubandhu's Vajrayana. And, that's without even knowing what Curtis means to argue about when he says that knowledge isn't structured in consciousness. Go figure.' Probably not a good idea to mix philosophers like this. Here is, for example, what Schopenhauer wrote concerning Hegel: 'Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to achieve the intellectual corruption of an whole generation.'
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Ann, There is a certain etiquette regarding 'enlightenment'. I think it is OK to attempt to describe one's own experiences, but it is a mine field to try to characterise someone else's because there is the always present probability of misunderstanding the language they are using to describe something that cannot really be described except inadequately by metaphor. One problem that happens when people 'wake up' is for a while it like being drunk, and there is the ever present chance (which happens in most cases) the ego co-ops the experience to some extent. Then one goes through a period of pontificating on what one knows and feeling superior to the peons 'who obviously don't know what enlightenment is'. In Zen this is called the 'stink of enlightenment', and it can last anywhere from 5 to 15 years or so. This kind of behaviour also results from spectacular mystical experiences, where one's knowledge of what is happening is even less. No one seems to escape this, and being an ass hole can last well into 'Brahman consciousness' (this label is really the only real 'state' of consciousness, and everybody has it to the same degree, just not the same degree of understanding). So if one is going to describe experiences, tell one's own tale and whatever flack one gets from doing that will come or not come. But using that experience to pigeon hole some one else's as beneath your own appraisal of your station is a trap, because it sets you up as if you are others' lord and master', and that may not be the case at all. That there are so many brawls here indicates that the tacit agreement that one is learning from someone else here simply is not the case here on FFL. I have fallen into this trap many times. Others here seem to have fallen in as well, but were I to get specific, once again I will be trapped as well. You can discuss this with someone if the trust is mutual, but no good results comes of jousting egos. I do not think Barry has escaped the trap, but he does seem to clearly recognise that it exists, and that is a positive step, is the essential step, to know that this is happening, and if he gives flack to others for slipping up this way, that is their due. Ideally we try to recognise it in ourselves first. I have never heard this discussed in the TM movement. But I only have a limited knowledge of what TM teachers might have experienced on long courses with Maharishi. I was never on long TM rounding courses, at most just one week. On the other hand if someone is acting like a jerk, without mentioning enlightenment, one can launch a personal attack, although as we see here, after years passing, that that does no good either. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
From: anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.comTo: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Ann, There is a certain etiquette regarding 'enlightenment'. I think it is OK to attempt to describe one's own experiences, but it is a mine field to try to characterise someone else's because there is the always present probability of misunderstanding the language they are using to describe something that cannot really be described except inadequately by metaphor. One problem that happens when people 'wake up' is for a while it like being drunk, and there is the ever present chance (which happens in most cases) the ego co-ops the experience to some extent. Then one goes through a period of pontificating on what one knows and feeling superior to the peons 'who obviously don't know what enlightenment is'. In Zen this is called the 'stink of enlightenment', and it can last anywhere from 5 to 15 years or so. This kind of behaviour also results from spectacular mystical experiences, where one's knowledge of what is happening is even less. No one seems to escape this, and being an ass hole can last well into 'Brahman consciousness' (this label is really the only real 'state' of consciousness, and everybody has it to the same degree, just not the same degree of understanding). So if one is going to describe experiences, tell one's own tale and whatever flack one gets from doing that will come or not come. But using that experience to pigeon hole some one else's as beneath your own appraisal of your station is a trap, because it sets you up as if you are others' lord and master', and that may not be the case at all. That there are so many brawls here indicates that the tacit agreement that one is learning from someone else here simply is not the case here on FFL. I have fallen into this trap many times. Others here seem to have fallen in as well, but were I to get specific, once again I will be trapped as well. You can discuss this with someone if the trust is mutual, but no good results comes of jousting egos. I do not think Barry has escaped the trap, but he does seem to clearly recognise that it exists, and that is a positive step, is the essential step, to know that this is happening, and if he gives flack to others for slipping up this way, that is their due. Ideally we try to recognise it in ourselves first. Indeed. Part of my point in making the kinds of posts I make is to draw attention to the phenomenon you bring up, and the knee-jerk *reactivity* it engenders in those who are unaware that it exists, even though they perfectly represent it. I have never heard this discussed in the TM movement. But I only have a limited knowledge of what TM teachers might have experienced on long courses with Maharishi. I was never on long TM rounding courses, at most just one week. On the other hand if someone is acting like a jerk, without mentioning enlightenment, one can launch a personal attack, although as we see here, after years passing, that that does no good either. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
likely to bite. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
it. He is a blind man. He is negative and this negativity is what blinds him at times, at other times he is simply too lazy to think and articulate so he insults instead. I won't even go into the dreary repetitiveness of it all. In the case of Jim, he is simply playing, toying with Barry. He knows it gets to him. I don't think Jim takes himself that seriously and if you read his recent posts he is simply taking it over the top to push the envelope to see what comes out of others - an alleged favourite tactic of Barry's. I have never heard this discussed in the TM movement. But I only have a limited knowledge of what TM teachers might have experienced on long courses with Maharishi. I was never on long TM rounding courses, at most just one week. On the other hand if someone is acting like a jerk, without mentioning enlightenment, one can launch a personal attack, although as we see here, after years passing, that that does no good either. Thanks for the post Xeno. I always enjoy talking to you because you aren't likely to bite. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
story. He is contradictory and a colossal hypocrite which is fine except that he just doesn't see it. He is a blind man. He is negative and this negativity is what blinds him at times, at other times he is simply too lazy to think and articulate so he insults instead. I won't even go into the dreary repetitiveness of it all. In the case of Jim, he is simply playing, toying with Barry. He knows it gets to him. I don't think Jim takes himself that seriously and if you read his recent posts he is simply taking it over the top to push the envelope to see what comes out of others - an alleged favourite tactic of Barry's. I have never heard this discussed in the TM movement. But I only have a limited knowledge of what TM teachers might have experienced on long courses with Maharishi. I was never on long TM rounding courses, at most just one week. On the other hand if someone is acting like a jerk, without mentioning enlightenment, one can launch a personal attack, although as we see here, after years passing, that that does no good either. Thanks for the post Xeno. I always enjoy talking to you because you aren't likely to bite. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
, but no good results comes of jousting egos. There are egos here, Xeno, but ego is just another word for human being. I do not think Barry has escaped the trap, but he does seem to clearly recognise that it exists, and that is a positive step, is the essential step, to know that this is happening, and if he gives flack to others for slipping up this way, that is their due. Ideally we try to recognise it in ourselves first. Barry is someone here who probably has the least insight into himself than anyone. He writes and writes all the while thinking he is one thing while his words tell a different story. He is contradictory and a colossal hypocrite which is fine except that he just doesn't see it. He is a blind man. He is negative and this negativity is what blinds him at times, at other times he is simply too lazy to think and articulate so he insults instead. I won't even go into the dreary repetitiveness of it all. In the case of Jim, he is simply playing, toying with Barry. He knows it gets to him. I don't think Jim takes himself that seriously and if you read his recent posts he is simply taking it over the top to push the envelope to see what comes out of others - an alleged favourite tactic of Barry's. I have never heard this discussed in the TM movement. But I only have a limited knowledge of what TM teachers might have experienced on long courses with Maharishi. I was never on long TM rounding courses, at most just one week. On the other hand if someone is acting like a jerk, without mentioning enlightenment, one can launch a personal attack, although as we see here, after years passing, that that does no good either. Thanks for the post Xeno. I always enjoy talking to you because you aren't likely to bite. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Funny thing this, I do TM twice a day and have never felt demeaned by a Barry rap on the TMO, in fact I agree with a lot of it as I worked there too and saw much unwitting (perhaps) cultish behaviour and plain gullibility and stupidity from my fellow devotees. Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
But Judy, don't you see the pious little halo above his head? I love it when he pulls his Saint Barry trip - the last resort. Let's see, he's tried shooting the messenger, flip-flopping like a fish on a boat bottom, doubling down, reversing course, reloading, and shooting the messenger, again, calling it all BS and he never believed it anyway, reloading a third time, trying to buddy up with anybody who will listen, and now, finally, this, the pious little schoolboy, who is only trying to generously share his life's wisdom, and never meant anyone anything more than the sweet truth, as sweet as sugar, to spread amongst ourselves. Really nauseating. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Barry is hardly the one to be pointing fingers at others, because of their life-style or behavior. Sure the TMO is screwed up in some ways. We all know that. However, Barry just uses that as an excuse to trot out the same old crap. The beef I have with him, is, he is badly confused with regards to his understanding, and experience, of enlightenment - established silence, Being - and his arrogance and ignorance in dealing with the subject, publicly, needs to be called out, in my opinion. He is a BSer, with little relevant experience, masquerading as something quite different. A phony. After he acknowledges that, explicitly, he can say whatever he wants to, on here, without interference from me. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Funny thing this, I do TM twice a day and have never felt demeaned by a Barry rap on the TMO, in fact I agree with a lot of it as I worked there too and saw much unwitting (perhaps) cultish behaviour and plain gullibility and stupidity from my fellow devotees. Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Demeaning the TMO is one thing. Demeaning the TMers here is quite another. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Funny thing this, I do TM twice a day and have never felt demeaned by a Barry rap on the TMO, in fact I agree with a lot of it as I worked there too and saw much unwitting (perhaps) cultish behaviour and plain gullibility and stupidity from my fellow devotees. Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Hi 'M, I responded earlier, but perhaps hit cancel instead of send, so, like I said - Pick-axe - next to a sledge hammer, my favorite demo tool - have taken out some serious root systems with one. And, yes, I am living in a trailer park, in my RV, in Chico, which I enjoy - it is like living in a houseboat, very compact, except I can't dive off the roof. :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : P.S. Are you in your RV? Staying at a private campground? Or, what the reference to trailer park a joke re: your stick house. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Wellyes.I could be.but...I haven't applied my entrepreneurial spirit yet in life. Instead, I dug up a large fern. This is easier typed than it was to accomplish. After an hour of digging with two types of shovels, lopping, and using one of those digging forks, I enlisted my neighbor's advice and they offered me their pick axe. That is a heavy tool. The poor fern looked like it was on death's door and has for a long time; it's roots and a nearby tree's roots were all entwined under the surface though. Then, my neighbors looked at the rest of my yard and offered me their hedge trimmer to help with the pruning. I'm looking forward to using it tomorrow, if I can lift my arms. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : Hey, you live in Washington state, and could be planting, well...anything... I have to trim the grass on my little plot, here at the trailer park, so I went out and bought a cordless trimmer. Once the batteries charge up, its garden party time! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote : Share, I'm not judging you for speculating nonsense. *You* used a concrete number (99%) to indicate that meant not completely. You stated you don't know enough about fMRI machines, to put forth a science-based guess (smile). A walk outside helps to ground one to the natural earth, that which Ann describes so beautifully and it also helps clear the mental fog. Or, do some planting. That's my task for today. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I said I was speculating for the fun of it. To me speculation is different than nonsense. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 4:15 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, you crack me up. You have just effectively stated in your own words that you are aware that you were spouting complete nonsense, for the fun of it. Do spend more time outside. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I say 99% because I don't think 100% is possible. Other than that, I don't know enough about fMRI machines. I simply mean that in such people I think we would find that the vast majority of their brain, etc. I'm just speculating for fun... On Sunday, May 18, 2014 1:15 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. For some reason there are always a few people who choose to forgive the shallowness, the rudeness, the repetition and the lying. Why that is, God only knows. But I'm not one of them. I think these kind of people are called enablers. Well, Bawwy has some enablers, some help, a small cheering section. It's what, apparently, keeps him fueled and ready for more action - he's getting the occasional cheer from the peanut gallery. Maybe in his world this is manna from heaven or the only real attention and stroking he gets. Maybe I should just let him be so he can gobble up the occasional scrap thrown his way.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it? Perhaps you don't realize Barry that you have your own version of shoot the messenger which is, they are desperately trying to get me to argue with them, or they've gotten their buttons pushed, when in reality, they, or I are just presenting a different point of view. That sort of gives you an easy out. But, we've kind of gotten used to it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. The term is *intentionally* vague, so that the True Believer can fit any fantasy of What life will be like when I'm finally enlightened into it. Again, I reiterate my contention that those who seem to have the most fixed ideas of What enlightenment is on this forum are those who have never in their lives experienced it, only been told about it and fantasized about it. And your contention is, as usual, insulting and demonstrates your need to continually put others down. You act now like you claim MMY did - squelch those who either claim they experience aspects of enlightenment or, as in this case, those merely expressing ideas about it. You'd have made an exemplary tyrant, Baweee, thank God you will never be in any position of poser -er, I mean power.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Much of B's three posts on the subject today rang true, I know people still who don't do exercise because they think it will stress them in some way. I knew people who believe the secret to long life is not breathing too much. And so what. They've chosen a certain lifestyle that suits them. You're the one making a judgement about what they are doing. And really you probably have no idea if rigorous exercise is better than just taking a walk. Was MMY against walking as well? Seems to me that you can believe whatever crap you like about meditation and enlightenment, it won't make it any more or less likely. You've got it or you haven't I suspect. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The reason you get attacked, Barry, is that you're so fucking nasty in sharing your great wisdom with us. You make all kinds of gratuitously demeaning assumptions about the TMers here, many if not most of which are simply not true; and you consistently exalt yourself as superior. Plus which, many of your ideas are shallow and poorly thought out, not to mention repeated over and over and OVER again. You pretend to be doing all this to be helpful, but that's bullshit. You do it because you get off on insulting people. You may have earned the right to challenge ideas, but you haven't earned the right to dump on the people who hold them. Here's the FFL dynamic, as I see it. I and a few others labeled as critics make a few statements challenging the sense of elitism and entitlement and specialness that TMers have been taught to feel about themselves. They react *not* to the actual points we raise, but by attacking us personally, and trying to get us. And by trying to encourage others to attack us, too. We challenge *ideas*, and they try to attack *us*. I am merely presenting alternative points of view on a number of subjects relative to the world of meditation, self discovery, and pursuit of that crazy thing some call enlightenment. They are in fact often my points of view, although they are not always my *only* points of view on the subjects. I feel I have *earned* these points of view on the basis of long experience with TM, the TMO, with other spiritual traditions, and as the result of a lifetime's worth of questioning pretty much *everything* and attempting to see it in new and interesting ways. I contend that trying to shoot the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself is a pretty puny and lazy-ass way of presenting oneself as spiritual. If that's the only intellectual tool these TMers have in their arsenal after all these decades of practice, it really doesn't say much about the value of the TM technique and philosophy, does it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
I had trouble picking which tirade to respond to so i landed on this one by
default. The messages from you are pretty much the same and provide a nice
writing prompt. I will respond from two perspectives, from Maharishi's teaching
POV and my own.
You are attempting to launch an unpleasant campaign based on a few assumptions
that I believe are erroneous within the context of what Maharishi taught. I was
in a position to evaluate the experiences of many guys like you in my tenure at
the rollicking DC center as well as when I worked the door at the CNL in DC. I
don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective
experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that
Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you
provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and
claims match up. It is not the first time you have gone off on me and I'll bet
it wont be the last. Your projecting your authority issues onto Barry and me
don't surprise me at all. I suspect being judged by your behavior by movement
representatives was not a pleasant thing for you.
The second point is about what I will refer to as high contrast witnessing.
Maharishi spoke for hours on the topic of witnessing and I have heard hours
more participating in experience meetings with Maharishi and his experience
representatives like Nankashore. It is not my interest to sort out the mishash
you are making of his theory of the development of higher states of
consciousness, but I will point out that what your are presenting is not his
brand. Your perspective is all self-serving-Jim. You are trying to assume the
role of an authority for his system without having put in the time necessary to
represent what he taught accuratey. You are making it up as you go along. And
you are welcome to do so here as I am welcome to point it out.
For all my disagreements with Maharishi's conclusions, I recognize that he
presented a very specific teaching and POV. High contrast witnessing in his
system is a {hopefully} brief stage of development into more integrated styles
of functioning. Trying to use that as a bellwether test for anything is not a
part of Maharishi's teaching.That is all you and it is my opinion that you have
mislabeled something else.
Finally on a personal note. I do not accept Maharishi's perspective on human
development as authoritative, but I do recognize it as a specific POV. I have
come to different conclusions about many things in his teaching and my
observations are based on my experiences with his programs over many years. I
am not representing myself here as you are projecting on me. I represent my own
POV. Although I have pointed out factual errors with presentations of his
teaching you have made, my conclusions about what it all means are just my
personal opinions and anyone is welcome to challenge anything I say, but not my
right to make them here. Your behavior has been trollish and unpleasant, but in
the end, revealing.
Nuff said.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote :
I'd be embarrassed too, Curtis, if I were you, and looking for any possible
way for a washed up ex-TM teacher to try to get people to take him seriously,
again. This ain't about me, remember??
You and Barry, both, are spending an awful lot of time, trying to make me look
bad. Why not just both admit that neither is enlightened? That you speak with
the authority of fantasy? That you missed the boat spiritually?
All of these pages and pages both of you write, instead of simply admitting
your ego-bound bullshittery (thanks for that word - suits the situation,
perfectly).
Oh, well, time to go back to watching both of squirm. Sigh.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote :
Yes it was an interesting ride since I was trapped for two days setting up my
new laptop. snip
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
--In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Comments below... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. Actually, I was quoting something Barry wrote. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. Yes, you see, I disagree with how Maharishi managed the path, whatever that means in this context. Barry apparently did too back when he wrote what I quoted, or at least was considering the possibility that Maharishi got it wrong. It goes without saying that people should be judged on their behavior regardless of their state of consciousness. But by the same token, their state of consciousness cannot be judged on the basis of their behavior, if one has nothing to do with the other. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Comments below... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. Actually, I was quoting something Barry wrote. C: In the context of what I wrote. His quote has nothing to do with what I stated. They are separate issues in Maharishi's system In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. Yes, you see, I disagree with how Maharishi managed the path, whatever that means in this context. C: Practically it means that he tried to keep unstable people off courses. J:Barry apparently did too back when he wrote what I quoted, or at least was considering the possibility that Maharishi got it wrong. C: Again, they are not the same context, you are mixing them up. J: It goes without saying that people should be judged on their behavior regardless of their state of consciousness. But by the same token, their state of consciousness cannot be judged on the basis of their behavior, if one has nothing to do with the other. C: I think there is an imprecision terms causing this discrepancy. There is a more ultimate sense that it was taught that behavior is uncoupled from behavior. I believe this teaching was to get the gurus off the hook for bad behavior. But int he context I was writing about people's internal state was not evaluated on a scale of enlightenment, but on roughness and instability which is one of the biggest criteria for evaluating people for courses. It is self reported internal states (which were also evaluated) combined with behavior (through the filter of roughness and stability which often translated into compliance) that is how the movement evaluates members. Maharishi's teaching is vague and self contradictory in the case of the enlightened. He supported both views depending on convenience and how it served him personally. The Vedic scriptures also present contradictory teachings about this.It was written by guys who, not surprisingly, were the beneficiaries of this contradiction. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
A note: witnessing ala the research on Cosmic Consciousness is a state that appears to be highly unusual. It is associated with coherent alpha-1 EEG in the frontal lobes of the brain. There's no way that I am aware of to induce coherent alpha-1 EEG in someone. Researchers have induced higher levels of gamma EEG during dream-sleep, leading to induced lucid dreaming, but no-one, nowhere has ever induced coherent alpha-1 EEG that I am aware of. And witnessing of the type you are talking about is likely the dissociative disorder that all modern forms of meditation other than TM seem to induce: a functional disconnect between the self-centers of the brain and the rest of the brain. We TMers celebrate our highly stable sense of self as a sign of growing enlightenment. Everyone else either ignores the existence of this unique aspect of TM practice, or denounces it as wrong/bad/stupid/worthless/etc. OTOH, a few Zen and Ch'an studies have also found this kind of pattern, but only a few. L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Lawson, you are trying to define the *subjective* experience of witnessing in terms of a few isolated measurements taken by TM researchers who were looking for some way to prove the dogma they had been taught to believe. Researchers very much CAN induce witnessing in a lab in terms of subjective experience, both during waking and during dreaming. If the person is experiencing it, even if they didn't display the same brain wave patterns as the TM subjects did, they're still experiencing it. Who is to say that *their* brain wave patterns might not be even more interesting? Certainly not the TM researchers, who simply aren't *interested* in studying anything that can't be used to sell TM. Besides, as I've pointed out, the *only* reason these TM researchers are looking into it in the first place is because they believed Maharishi when he told them that witnessing was meaningful in terms of some kind of higher state of consciousness. What if it has NOTHING TO DO with any kind of higher SoC, and is just a brain fart of some kind. All of your TM subjects are in that case just sitting around congratulating themselves for brain flatulence. From: lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 5:50 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing A note: witnessing ala the research on Cosmic Consciousness is a state that appears to be highly unusual. It is associated with coherent alpha-1 EEG in the frontal lobes of the brain. There's no way that I am aware of to induce coherent alpha-1 EEG in someone. Researchers have induced higher levels of gamma EEG during dream-sleep, leading to induced lucid dreaming, but no-one, nowhere has ever induced coherent alpha-1 EEG that I am aware of. And witnessing of the type you are talking about is likely the dissociative disorder that all modern forms of meditation other than TM seem to induce: a functional disconnect between the self-centers of the brain and the rest of the brain. We TMers celebrate our highly stable sense of self as a sign of growing enlightenment. Everyone else either ignores the existence of this unique aspect of TM practice, or denounces it as wrong/bad/stupid/worthless/etc. OTOH, a few Zen and Ch'an studies have also found this kind of pattern, but only a few. L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Of course, you may be right. On the other hand, modern science is very much materialistic. If two different physical states give rise to the same self-report, modern science calls them two different physical states that happen to give rise to the same self-report, not two different ways of arriving at the same place. The map is not the territory. The finger pointing at the moon shouldn't be confused with the moon itself. I can be standing the street corner Hollywood and Vine in some other city besides Hollywood. I conce met a couple in the UK who wryly noted they had once gotten a great tourism package to Nashville. Imagine their disappointment when they gotg of the plane and discovered that it was Nashville, Florida, not Nashville, Tennessee... Of course, one man's Florida is another man's Tennessee. It all depends on what you deem is important. But to assert that it is commonsensical (for something along those lines is how I perceive you to be claiming) that as long as the same words can be used to describe two physically distinct objects or states, that they are both the same, is to present something that runs counter to what I consider to be a valid perspective. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Lawson, you are trying to define the *subjective* experience of witnessing in terms of a few isolated measurements taken by TM researchers who were looking for some way to prove the dogma they had been taught to believe. Researchers very much CAN induce witnessing in a lab in terms of subjective experience, both during waking and during dreaming. If the person is experiencing it, even if they didn't display the same brain wave patterns as the TM subjects did, they're still experiencing it. Who is to say that *their* brain wave patterns might not be even more interesting? Certainly not the TM researchers, who simply aren't *interested* in studying anything that can't be used to sell TM. Besides, as I've pointed out, the *only* reason these TM researchers are looking into it in the first place is because they believed Maharishi when he told them that witnessing was meaningful in terms of some kind of higher state of consciousness. What if it has NOTHING TO DO with any kind of higher SoC, and is just a brain fart of some kind. All of your TM subjects are in that case just sitting around congratulating themselves for brain flatulence. From: LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 5:50 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing A note: witnessing ala the research on Cosmic Consciousness is a state that appears to be highly unusual. It is associated with coherent alpha-1 EEG in the frontal lobes of the brain. There's no way that I am aware of to induce coherent alpha-1 EEG in someone. Researchers have induced higher levels of gamma EEG during dream-sleep, leading to induced lucid dreaming, but no-one, nowhere has ever induced coherent alpha-1 EEG that I am aware of. And witnessing of the type you are talking about is likely the dissociative disorder that all modern forms of meditation other than TM seem to induce: a functional disconnect between the self-centers of the brain and the rest of the brain. We TMers celebrate our highly stable sense of self as a sign of growing enlightenment. Everyone else either ignores the existence of this unique aspect of TM practice, or denounces it as wrong/bad/stupid/worthless/etc. OTOH, a few Zen and Ch'an studies have also found this kind of pattern, but only a few. L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
turq, there is a lot of behavior that wouldn't be ok with me whether or not the person was established in Being. I've said many times here that I assess a person and what they say and do by how their energy feels to me. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't feel good if they were attempting to kill me! WRT your first comment, we have laws that cover a wide range of human behavior. I'm content to follow most of those laws. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:24 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
From: lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:39 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. I can tell that you really believe this garbage, so I will merely roll my eyes and feel pity for you. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. Maharishi never became enlightened. Last I checked, he never even claimed he had. I think what you're trying to say is that YOU believe he was enlightened, based on your need to believe in fairy tales. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Share, can you please define what you mean by FULLY developed human? You talk of this fairly often - what is it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Emily, I use the phrase fully developed human to avoid using words like enlightened, realized and awakened. I think these three words carry a lot of useless baggage with them. Taking a science perspective, my guess is that if we were to do an fMRI or similar measure on a fully developed human, we would find that 99% of their brain is functioning in a very healthy way. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 12:08 PM, emilymae...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, can you please define what you mean by FULLY developed human? You talk of this fairly often - what is it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Thanks, I get it - I still don't know how you are defining it, but I get that you equate it with the other three, minus the baggage. What does functioning in a very healthy way mean to you in terms of something that could be determined using an fMRI? Where do you get the 99% criteria? I googled it and came up with this article that is interesting on the limits of the fMRI. Computing the missing 99 percent http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/brain/function/dark_energy_raichle_2006.html http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/brain/function/dark_energy_raichle_2006.html Computing the missing 99 percent http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/brain/function/dark_energy_raichle_2006.html paleoanthropology, genetics and evolution View on johnhawks.net http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/brain/function/dark_energy_raichle_2006.html Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I use the phrase fully developed human to avoid using words like enlightened, realized and awakened. I think these three words carry a lot of useless baggage with them. Taking a science perspective, my guess is that if we were to do an fMRI or similar measure on a fully developed human, we would find that 99% of their brain is functioning in a very healthy way. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 12:08 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, can you please define what you mean by FULLY developed human? You talk of this fairly often - what is it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : snip Besides, as I've pointed out, the *only* reason these TM researchers are looking into it in the first place is because they believed Maharishi when he told them that witnessing was meaningful in terms of some kind of higher state of consciousness. What if it has NOTHING TO DO with any kind of higher SoC, and is just a brain fart of some kind. All of your TM subjects are in that case just sitting around congratulating themselves for brain flatulence. Well, what if it does? But irregardless, I don't think I have have witnessing 24/7. I don't know if I have it all. But I feel I have something, and don't even care to try to define it. Well, maybe I'd call if greater silence in activity, that allows me to be a little more perceptive and therefore efficient in activity. But whatever I may have has been something that has developed over time. To call it a brain fart, seems sort of silly. I've never heard of fart that goes on like that. From: LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 5:50 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing A note: witnessing ala the research on Cosmic Consciousness is a state that appears to be highly unusual. It is associated with coherent alpha-1 EEG in the frontal lobes of the brain. There's no way that I am aware of to induce coherent alpha-1 EEG in someone. Researchers have induced higher levels of gamma EEG during dream-sleep, leading to induced lucid dreaming, but no-one, nowhere has ever induced coherent alpha-1 EEG that I am aware of. And witnessing of the type you are talking about is likely the dissociative disorder that all modern forms of meditation other than TM seem to induce: a functional disconnect between the self-centers of the brain and the rest of the brain. We TMers celebrate our highly stable sense of self as a sign of growing enlightenment. Everyone else either ignores the existence of this unique aspect of TM practice, or denounces it as wrong/bad/stupid/worthless/etc. OTOH, a few Zen and Ch'an studies have also found this kind of pattern, but only a few. L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. But as far as the conscious and unconscious minds go, I see no evidence that mediation improves anyone's direct access to the unconscious mind or that this woud even be desireable. I do believe that meditation has a place in allowing us to notice things from our unconscious minds sooner, but it is not really in the model of the mind Maharishi was claiming. For example when I leave for gig with many many items I need for my show, I don't put on the radio when I start out to let my unconscious mind catch up with a reminder of something I have forgotten. That way I can catch it at the first light and come home without too much time added. It i so weird that a part of me knows what I am missing outside my consciousness and has to catch up. So I work around it. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Hi Share, I don't follow the discussion on scientific research that goes on here, but I used to have that assumption as well about the brain functioning of an fully developed or enlightened individual. But I am revisiting my opinion about it. Now, maybe this has been discussed here, and I missed it, but my current thinking is that if there are physiological correlates for that state, they might be too subtle to show up. And again, I do relate this to my own experience which I feel has blossomed somewhat in the last year or so. And I ask myself, does anything in my physiology feel different, and it certainly does not seem to be the case. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I use the phrase fully developed human to avoid using words like enlightened, realized and awakened. I think these three words carry a lot of useless baggage with them. Taking a science perspective, my guess is that if we were to do an fMRI or similar measure on a fully developed human, we would find that 99% of their brain is functioning in a very healthy way. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 12:08 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, can you please define what you mean by FULLY developed human? You talk of this fairly often - what is it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/17/2014 8:29 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: The phenomenon of witnessnessing can be *generated*, merely by stimulating the proper areas of the brain. Furthermore, once the subject has experienced it via stimulation, it is possible for them to bring on that experience again just by making a mood of it. Of course the brain can be stimulated to mimic or to create any sensation or experience for a human being. Where do you think experience comes from anyway? Empirical consciousness is related to the physical world and is dependent on it - pure consciousness on the other hand is not. Only self-consciousness can know itself, by itself, through the Self-consciousness alone. In the Indian perspective this type of Self-knowledge is pure consciousness - /gnosis/: knowledge that is structured in consciousness. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
On 5/17/2014 8:29 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Yes, I *do* agree with him in believing that Maharishi was WAY off in coming up with any meaningful interpretations of and descriptions of consciousness and what it means. If MMY was way off, then you'd have to disagree with Immanuel Kant, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and Arthur Schopenhauer and the whole of German idealism. This would be a monumental task for anyone, even someone with the intellect and training of Curtis. In addition, you'd have to argue against the Adi Shankara's Advaita Vedanta AND Vasubandhu's Vajrayana. And, that's without even knowing what Curtis means to argue about when he says that knowledge /isn't/ structured in consciousness. Go figure. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. I think the nature of human beings is to be incomplete or, at least, the condition in which we exist as humans means means we will never, in a human body, attain perfection or completeness. There is no such thing as a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. You've been calling Share dumb an awful lot today. I found it interesting to note your earlier response to her regarding the dentist qualifications and Curtis' which appeared about one minute after. Take a look if you haven't already. I am sure Share was pretty aware of the difference. But then, she takes a whole lot more shit from you than I ever would. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days, would you? I happen to favor this understanding of enlightenment myself, one of Barry's and my rare points of agreement. C: You are mixing up levels here. In traditional systems it is emphasized that there is a wide range of possible behaviors for the so called enlightened. I am referring to how Maharishi managed the path. The issue is confused further by Jim self proclaiming himself as enlightened within a system that has broken down. The inmates are now running the TM prison. But in the context of the movement itself there would be no recognition of Jim's self proclaimed status. Authority in the organization is gained through time served or lots of cash, not subjective claims for experience. In my view, because I do not assume that discrete states of enlightenment exist or that it means anything concerning how the world works, I am judging people just on their words and deeds. No one gets an enlightenment pass for bad behavior including the so called gurus. I've been saying this the whole time here. I completely agree. Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 5/17/2014 8:29 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: The phenomenon of witnessnessing can be *generated*, merely by stimulating the proper areas of the brain. Furthermore, once the subject has experienced it via stimulation, it is possible for them to bring on that experience again just by making a mood of it. Of course the brain can be stimulated to mimic or to create any sensation or experience for a human being. Where do you think experience comes from anyway? Empirical consciousness is related to the physical world and is dependent on it - pure consciousness on the other hand is not. Only self-consciousness can know itself, by itself, through the Self-consciousness alone. In the Indian perspective this type of Self-knowledge is pure consciousness - gnosis: knowledge that is structured in consciousness. While you inhabit a human body you still need a brain to experience any of this, honey. This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Steve, that's an interesting point about the physiological changes being too subtle to show up. But I'm hoping I'll notice it if digestion gets better, which is one prediction (-: I'd say for me what I notice is a change in my energy state, which has become more settled over time. And I admit I give FFL a lot of credit for that! On Sunday, May 18, 2014 5:27 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hi Share, I don't follow the discussion on scientific research that goes on here, but I used to have that assumption as well about the brain functioning of an fully developed or enlightened individual. But I am revisiting my opinion about it. Now, maybe this has been discussed here, and I missed it, but my current thinking is that if there are physiological correlates for that state, they might be too subtle to show up. And again, I do relate this to my own experience which I feel has blossomed somewhat in the last year or so. And I ask myself, does anything in my physiology feel different, and it certainly does not seem to be the case. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Emily, I use the phrase fully developed human to avoid using words like enlightened, realized and awakened. I think these three words carry a lot of useless baggage with them. Taking a science perspective, my guess is that if we were to do an fMRI or similar measure on a fully developed human, we would find that 99% of their brain is functioning in a very healthy way. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 12:08 PM, emilymaenot@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, can you please define what you mean by FULLY developed human? You talk of this fairly often - what is it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
Ever had to return to the abode more than once? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Lawson, Curtis and others, do you think a FULLY developed human has an unconscious or subconscious? I think that such a person would be fully conscious of their entire inner world. C: The term fully developed is not meaningful for me. It is in the same class and the concept of being saved for me. But as far as the conscious and unconscious minds go, I see no evidence that mediation improves anyone's direct access to the unconscious mind or that this woud even be desireable. I do believe that meditation has a place in allowing us to notice things from our unconscious minds sooner, but it is not really in the model of the mind Maharishi was claiming. For example when I leave for gig with many many items I need for my show, I don't put on the radio when I start out to let my unconscious mind catch up with a reminder of something I have forgotten. That way I can catch it at the first light and come home without too much time added. It i so weird that a part of me knows what I am missing outside my consciousness and has to catch up. So I work around it. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:39 AM, LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It really doesn't matter if she is OK with it or not, as not matter what, that person is going to decide to behave appropriately. Of course, someone in CC doesn't decide to behave appropirately. Their self merely watches. It is the thought processes, and other decision-making processes, both conscioius and unconscious, that ultimately determine what an enlightened person does. Maharishi believed that once CC was attained, all thoughts and actions would be in accord with the Laws of Nature, but in fact, it is impossible for thoughts and actions NOT to be in accord with the Laws of Nature anyway. The only real difference is that the person in CC is less-stressed than the same person not-in-CC would be, and so, their actions are going to be those of a less-stressed person. HOPEFULLY that's going to lead to something good on some grand scale, but who knows? Maharishi became enlightened within a religious tradition and his interpretation of his own enlightenment is entirely shaped by that. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : So you're perfectly OK with someone else deciding for him or herself whether it is appropriate behavior, and living accordingly? Even though he or she could be deliberating whether to kill you? People who say dumb stuff like what you said about the Gita and its lessons are always thinking about the out it gives them for their *own* bad behavior. They never seem to look at it the other way and think that some blue-skinned guy might be telling his followers to kill *them*. I presume that being killed by someone established in Being is just fine with you. From: Share Long sharelong60@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 6:15 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing Ann wrote: Of course, one would also have to define bad behavior beyond the obvious. Share replies: It's an interesting exercise when you consider that in the Gita Lord Krishna was basically telling Arjuna to kill people. But to do so established in Being. I think the ultimate consequence of such a teaching is to encourage each seeker to decide for himself or herself what is acceptable behavior and what is not and to live accordingly. And I think this is a sign of a fully developed human. On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:36 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues@... wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Just for da record... I don't need to go into any detail here but just can mention that subjective experiences were never evaluated separated from behavior. I believe that Maharishi got that right. I don't need to say any more about that because you provided more than enough information for people to judge if your behavior and claims match up. What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior? --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t You'd never know Barry had ever entertained this perspective the way he links behavior and enlightenment these days
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
LOL - This is Hilarious, Barry! HA! I wouldn't be so quick to denigrate witnessing, something you were lording over the rest of us, on FFL, just recently. If witnessing means so damned little to you, why does everyone on this forum, know how long you lasted, with your very limited witnessing, many years ago, before it faded? I hate to say it, but sometimes you are just...slow. You and Curtis, a couple of washed up ex-TM teachers, who never learned the techniques, they were teaching others. A real couple of lugnuts, you two, acting all high and mighty with that ex-TM teacher badge on, and you don't even know what it meant. Sure, witnessing NOW has no value - Hah, what a dopey strategy of yours. What will you decide next, that watching TV is a sure sign of enlightenment?? Probably. Look, Barry, let's stop kidding ourselves. You know, and I know, and everyone reading this knows, that when you say you have no witnessing, no established silence, and try to make this a positive, you look like a complete fool. People on this forum weren't born yesterday, and you, my friend, are getting more and more exposed, by the minute. The ex-TM teacher with no clothes. Good night, unless you have more to embarrass yourself with. Oh, and Barry? Put up, or shut up. I'll wait. - lol! :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : A rap for Curtis, now that the Jim-bot has shouted himself out and probably fallen asleep. For obvious reasons, I didn't want to get involved with Jim while he was busy doing his Biff Tanner imitation. He's clearly-out-of-control angry over the fact that he can't get me to react to his taunts, and that out-of-control-ness amuses me, so I'll allow him to continue to rant later when when he wakes up with a Boy-I-sure-shouted-them-down-didn't-I hangover. :-) But I do wish to comment on some of Curtis' comments, to add in my two centimes. Yes, I *do* agree with him in believing that Maharishi was WAY off in coming up with any meaningful interpretations of and descriptions of consciousness and what it means. And one of the key indicators of this to me is his reliance on a phenomenon that is seen as so meaningless in other meditation traditions that it is almost never spoken about, let alone suggested as a criterion for enlightenment. I am speaking, of course, of witnessing. In Tibetan and other more traditional forms of meditation teaching, this phenomenon is so commonplace and is considered so meaningless that it is almost never mentioned, except with a passing warning. The warning is to not get hung up on it, because it's so easy to (in MMY terminology) mood make the sensation to convince oneself that they're more advanced than they really are. That, interestingly enough, is the same finding that neuroscientists have gleaned from lab experiments. The phenomenon of witnessnessing can be *generated*, merely by stimulating the proper areas of the brain. Furthermore, once the subject has experienced it via stimulation, it is possible for them to bring on that experience again just by making a mood of it. That's what I honestly think happened to the Jim-bot. He had some minor experiences of witnessing, and having a shitload of ego problems and wanting some attention, he kept mood-making the experience again so that he could use it to justify his oneupsmanship games. This is *exactly* why teachers in more legitimate traditions don't focus on witnessing as anything more than a beginner's perception, and don't try to convince students it's meaningful. The phenomenon is so easy to simulate subjectively that people get themselves in trouble *trying* to simulate it, and wind up wandering around in a state of classical psychological dissociation, unable to tell fantasy from reality. I might suggest that this pattern is very evident in the Jim-bot. Surely most people have noticed his compulsion to always try to one-up anyone in the realm of what he feebly considers spiritual experience. Someone mentions an experience on Batgap or FFL, and he *can't help himself* and has to come roaring in claiming to have had that experience years ago. I've often been tempted to make up some experience that Maharishi supposedly talked about out of whole cloth and post it, just to see how long it would take Jimbo to claim he'd had the made-up experience, too. :-) Anyway, my point is that this compulsion to play oneupsmanship games with one's supposed advanced consciousness is considered by older, more established meditation traditions as *pretty much what happens* when one emphasizes witnessing and pretends that it's anything but the fleeting, everyday, beginner's experience it is. Witnessing is so easy to mood-make that these teachers don't want their students going down that path and losing themselves in delusion. Jim is the perfect example of what happens when they do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Curtis, on witnessing
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : A rap for Curtis, now that the Jim-bot has shouted himself out and probably fallen asleep. For obvious reasons, I didn't want to get involved with Jim while he was busy doing his Biff Tanner imitation. He's clearly-out-of-control angry over the fact that he can't get me to react to his taunts, and that out-of-control-ness amuses me, so I'll allow him to continue to rant later when when he wakes up with a Boy-I-sure-shouted-them-down-didn't-I hangover. :-) But I do wish to comment on some of Curtis' comments, to add in my two centimes. Yes, I *do* agree with him in believing that Maharishi was WAY off in coming up with any meaningful interpretations of and descriptions of consciousness and what it means. And one of the key indicators of this to me is his reliance on a phenomenon that is seen as so meaningless in other meditation traditions that it is almost never spoken about, let alone suggested as a criterion for enlightenment. I am speaking, of course, of witnessing. In Tibetan and other more traditional forms of meditation teaching, this phenomenon is so commonplace and is considered so meaningless that it is almost never mentioned, except with a passing warning. The warning is to not get hung up on it, because it's so easy to (in MMY terminology) mood make the sensation to convince oneself that they're more advanced than they really are. That, interestingly enough, is the same finding that neuroscientists have gleaned from lab experiments. The phenomenon of witnessnessing can be *generated*, merely by stimulating the proper areas of the brain. Furthermore, once the subject has experienced it via stimulation, it is possible for them to bring on that experience again just by making a mood of it. Of course the brain can be stimulated to mimic or to create any sensation or experience for a human being. Where do you think experience comes from anyway? Out of nothing and nowhere and we just spontaneously experience something with no equipment necessary to do so? All input comes through the brain (if you've got one) and witnessing can be triggered by something as simple as fear or when you are in the midst of some very strange situation. You said yourself you witnessed for days after having been mugged or almost mugged years ago, I remember that because I have had the same thing happen in similar circumstances, where one is thrown into a different mode of functioning because of either danger or threat. That's what I honestly think happened to the Jim-bot. He had some minor experiences of witnessing, and having a shitload of ego problems and wanting some attention, he kept mood-making the experience again so that he could use it to justify his oneupsmanship games. This is *exactly* why teachers in more legitimate traditions don't focus on witnessing as anything more than a beginner's perception, and don't try to convince students it's meaningful. The phenomenon is so easy to simulate subjectively that people get themselves in trouble *trying* to simulate it, and wind up wandering around in a state of classical psychological dissociation, unable to tell fantasy from reality. I might suggest that this pattern is very evident in the Jim-bot. Surely most people have noticed his compulsion to always try to one-up anyone in the realm of what he feebly considers spiritual experience. Someone mentions an experience on Batgap or FFL, and he *can't help himself* and has to come roaring in claiming to have had that experience years ago. I've often been tempted to make up some experience that Maharishi supposedly talked about out of whole cloth and post it, just to see how long it would take Jimbo to claim he'd had the made-up experience, too. :-) Anyway, my point is that this compulsion to play oneupsmanship games with one's supposed advanced consciousness is considered by older, more established meditation traditions as *pretty much what happens* when one emphasizes witnessing and pretends that it's anything but the fleeting, everyday, beginner's experience it is. Witnessing is so easy to mood-make that these teachers don't want their students going down that path and losing themselves in delusion. Jim is the perfect example of what happens when they do. Oh dumbo, you do exactly what you are accusing Jim of doing - get all uppity and holier-than-thou and big for your britches when it comes to not only spiritual know-how but just about everything from living in the best country, eating at the best cafes and living the life only brilliant and creative people would dare and are capable of living. You are the ultimate bullshit machine here and Jim's just pushing the envelope to make you squirm. Don't you get it now? (Please don't think I want an answer - as of yet you haven't revealed anything I didn't already know about life and you're hardly going to be able to do so now.)
