Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fry at MUM
On May 2, 2009, at 9:27 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: "If a man insisted always on being serious, and never allowed himself a bit of fun and relaxation, he would go mad or become unstable without knowing it." - Herodotus "The most wasted of all days is one without laughter." - e e cummings "Time's Fun when you're having Flies" - Kermit the Frog "The human race has only one effective weapon --and that is laughter." - Mark Twain "We don't stop playing because we turn old, but turn old because we stop playing" - Satchel Paige "An hour of play is worth a lifetime of conversation." - Plato "The word 'silly' derives from the Greek 'selig' meaning 'blessed.' There is something sacred in being able to be silly." - Paul Pearsall "You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what you're doing is work or play". - Warren Beatty "The more fun you have, the greater your value to yourself and to your society. The more fun you share with others, the more fun you have." - unknown "For every Way there's a way of following that Way that's fun" - one Zen master or another "Necessity may be the mother of invention, but play is certainly the father". - Roger von Oech "Man is most nearly himself when he achieves the seriousness of a child at play". - Heraclitus "Fun is better than winning." - Uncle Tantra "And well have fun fun fun now that daddy took the t-bird away (fun fun fun now that daddy took the t-bird away) And well have fun fun fun now that daddy took the t-bird away (fun fun fun now that daddy took the t-bird away)" -The Beachboys Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fry at MUM
Eat a chicken sandwich, have hot sweaty sex for a few hours and bask in the joyous abundance of God. Yeah baby! Sent from my iPhone On Apr 30, 2009, at 9:56 AM, "raunchydog" wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: Vaj, I've noticed two types of longterm TMer's. There's the type you describe, gray, washed-out, no will and then there are the vital ones that look great. One difference I found between the two groups is that the washed-out ones have become very passive (read tamasic) in that they "want to get enlightened" but they don't do any thing other than spend hours meditating and avoiding authentic contact with any other aspect of their life. The other group might meditate long hours, but there is an authentic engagement with the relative aspect of their life. They're present, engaged, strong. They love life in both its relative and absolute qualities. They also are not afraid. So many of the washed-out group are terrified of life. Having sex...oh no!! Eating some meatoh no! Getting pissed-off at some asshole...oh n! They are terrified of "getting stress" oh n! True adharma. Peter, the Greys didn't pay attention to Charlie Lutz's warning to stay off the cigar shaped flying saucers. They had the crap scared out of them and the blood drained from their capillaries. My theory is that half the Greys have OCD. Having ritualized the routine of the TMS program, they feel controlled by it. The other half, are "Peter Pans" afraid to grow up and take risks in love and responsibility. Fear rules their lives. The Pinks knew better than to get on the flying saucers, don't feel controlled by the TMS program and have a healthy life balanced with rest and activity. They can fall in love at the drop of a hat with beauty, children, people, cats and dogs. Love rules their lives. They are fearless. What makes the difference between the Greys and the Pinks? Childhood experiences, perhaps. I have met Pink Purushas and some Greys. The Grey ones are straining to be on the program, yet they stay for years. In any case, other than a chicken sandwich, I can't judge what is best for anyone taking a run at "enlightenment." Whether ruled by fear or love, I just chalk it up to karma and as Maharishi has said, "Karma is unfathomable," so go figure. --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Vaj wrote: From: Vaj Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fry at MUM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 5:44 PM On Apr 28, 2009, at 10:54 AM, Hugo wrote: Early the next morning I watch the rush of studentry to the main dome. They have to get there by eight o'clock to swipe their cards through a machine, pad into the hall and meditate for twenty minutes, which gives them course credits. If they miss more than a few of these daily rituals, they will be fined and docked their credits. I find this all very creepy. The film crew says that they think the students look too pale, too thin and too unhealthy. It just dawned on me the probable mechanics for this--something I've often wondered about in long-term TMers. Why do they look so flat and pale? Yogic science already establishes why Long-term TMers are affectively flat, but why would they look so...gray? It's said in Ayurveda that the thing that gives you that "sparkle" is your "tejas". If your tejas is diminished you look flat, lackluster. Check out someone who just took a psychedelic and you'll see this same flatness, this lack of "shine". Psychedelic depletes tejas. Deep, authentic meditation gives you tejas. This is why so many saints have this shimmer about them that everyone notices. So what does it tell you when a long-term meditator is gray or flat- looking (check out the visage of ole Doc Travis in Alex's video for a great example). Instead of being replenished transcendentally of tejas, they're languishing in a tamasic swoon. To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fry at MUM
TurquoiseB wrote: > This discussion has been a valuable one IMO because > it has touched on what the *real* reason is for the > lack of interest in TM. It's not "the times." It's > not Kali Yuga. It's not "not having enough pundits > yet." IT'S THE TM'ers, STUPID! > The "marshybots" as I have labeled them? The ones that can't explain enlightenment in their own words and have to parrot phrases? It is probably the result of practicing a technique with no Omkara as Om centers. And it is also the result of teaching some techniques known to stimulate rather than calm. Most yogic meditations for the public are for calming not stimulation. I think Rick was right when he postulated that MMY changed from more traditional techniques to the current system to be "unique." Otherwise Indians would have laughed at him charging for mantras as there would be plenty of yogis who would teach that for free or a small donation. > Just LOOK at the people that the TMO "trots out" to > represent "200% of life." Anyone looking at them is > going to see closer to "10%," if that. Most are going > to react as Stephen Fry did, and with reason. > > Let's face it -- most of us started TM because we ran > into a TM teacher who had some phwam!, some energy. > Whether it was Jerry Jarvis or Paul Horn or one of > the TM "golden boys" or just your run-of-the-mill > initiator still excited about TM and *showing* that > excitement, that is what people in the audiences at > intro lectures saw. And they WANTED SOME OF IT. > Well not everyone came to TM because of that. I didn't because I had read of other traditions and TM was a more accessible system where you didn't go on some wild weekend "intensive" nor dance around on the street in pajamas. The "honky Hindu" thing came along with the Sidhis. > Who would actually WANT any of what is radiated by > the representatives of the TM movement today? > Makes one wonder if TM really was a failed attempt by the Freemasons to create a new religion? :-D > I mean, let's face it...the best they can come up > with is David Fucking Lynch. That's sad. I like David's films but he is pretty naive about Indian philosophy. Now that is sad.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fry at MUM
On Apr 30, 2009, at 4:54 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > In other words, it was FUN. Fun was, in fact, an > integral part of the Way. It was Rama's contention, > and remains mine, that if you are heavily involved > with a spiritual path and you are *not* having fun, > then there is something wrong. It may not be the > path for you. His contention was that FUN is the > body's way of telling you that you are *open* to > higher spiritual energies and that they are flowing > through you, whereas a *lack* of fun is your body's > way of telling you the opposite. I still agree with > this 100%. > > Yes, the Rama trip was a cult, too, in its way. And > yes, over time, some of the fun turned sour and I > wound up walking away from that spiritual trip, too. Barry, this is what I've noticed in both of the spiritual (so-called) groups I've been involved with after the TMO-- sooner or later, controlling personalities take over, and it's no longer much fun any more. The same thing seems to happen every time. > But for most of the time I was involved with it, > the organization *was* fun, and the students were > obviously *having* fun. And that fun and energy > were apparent to others; it was commented on by > many people in other spiritual trips.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fry at MUM
On Apr 29, 2009, at 5:06 PM, Alex Stanley wrote: Here's version I created in iMovie: http://alex.natel.net/ffl/video/stephen_fry_in_fairfield.m4v Alex, your version opened for me in iTunes! Played perfectly. Sal
