TurquoiseB wrote:
Since it appears that the only person on this
forum who noticed the caveats that I put into
my posts on the subject of guru-bhakti in big
capital letters that Judy (typically) mistook
for shouting, I will spell out what my insertion
of the phrase ON ONE LEVEL meant...
if you get off on the idea of enlightenment more than you get off on the other
things in your life, then by all means you should pursue it. And you should
pursue it one-pointedly, if that's how you think such things should be done.
But I'm going to pass on that one. Been there, done that,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy
Prophet. You not only have our blessing to kill him;
if you do you will be rewarded financially in this
life and earn eternal life in heaven.
Actually, I'm
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
* The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy
Prophet. You not only have
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For t3rinity, a second post on bhakti:
The following is a direct quote from a teacher that quite
a few people on this forum admire, on the subject of bhakti
and the ideal relationship of a disciple to the guru:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
* The infidel
Thanks for taking the time away from your heavy reading
schedule to reply. :-)
I have no further comments, except to point out that
you found a way to ignore all of the situations you
didn't like, when the point of the exercise was to
comment on what *you* would have done if *your*
spiritual
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@
wrote:
* The infidel Salman Rushdie has insulted our Holy
Prophet. You not only have
I haven't followed this thread closely but:
Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti? How
odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate
or be devoted to MMY, just like you can with anyone, but I've just
never seen bhakti practices or attitudes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't followed this thread closely but:
Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti?
How
odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate
or be devoted to MMY,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have no further comments, except to point out that
you found a way to ignore all of the situations you
didn't like, when the point of the exercise was to
comment on what *you* would have done if *your*
spiritual
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity no_reply@ wrote:
snip
...but you also seem to have no use for the
sentiment of it.)
Dude, what you want is for people to respect the
sentiment of bhakti while
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't followed this thread closely but:
Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as
being bhakti? How odd. What's remotely bhakti about
it? Of course one can appreciate or be devoted to MMY,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't followed this thread closely but:
Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti?
How odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can
appreciate or be devoted to MMY,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't followed this thread closely but:
Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as being bhakti?
No, definitely not.
How
odd. What's remotely bhakti about it? Of course one can appreciate
or
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002
markmeredith@ wrote:
I haven't followed this thread closely but:
Do people see the tm mov't and or its techniques as
being bhakti? How odd. What's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, markmeredith2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Apparently this thread earlier dealt with MDG being a bhakti of MMY.
There's no way Michael would be allowed to represent the mov't in any
way whatsoever given his various extracurriculars.
Michael D. Goodman
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In The Last Samarai, who was more devoted to the emperor, the pro-
West courtiers, or the conservative samarai?
Perhaps they were both equally devoted but in different ways?
MMY once was quoted by the Press
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, *you* define bhakti.
Through my life.
You've already tried to keep people here from
dealing with it critically.
As if I could. But I don't have your missionary zest.
snip
As you define it, which you won't.
19 matches
Mail list logo
