--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:43 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >>
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:43 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
wrote:
> >>
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparai
On Jan 8, 2007, at 1:43 PM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig wrote:
Yeah, you know ALL about MMY and what he is or isn't...
Thanks I have
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" jyouells@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" jyouells@
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" jyouells@
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > I don't understand why you would *ever* have been
> > (presumably unpleasantly) surprised to learn that MMY
> > sought out input from others. If you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" jyouells@
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
>
> > > > There is so much hidden in the TMO, that unless we know
> > > > from our ow
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
>
> > yoga means union with God, so all you can say is you don't believe
> > Maharishi is in union with God.
>
> I thought it was TM True Believers wh
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > > There is so much hidden in the TMO, that unless we know
> > > from our own experience, we're just guessing...
> >
> > Or unless of course you knew and talked
On Jan 9, 2007, at 12:25 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:56 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
relationship
with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he kn
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
> >
> > > The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
> > > relationship
> > > wit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
>
> > The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
> > relationship
> > with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he knows. Just taking what
> > has
> > come
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
>
> > yoga means union with God, so all you can say is you don't believe
> > Maharishi is in union with God.
>
> I thought it was TM True Believers wh
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> yoga means union with God, so all you can say is you don't believe
> Maharishi is in union with God.
I thought it was TM True Believers who were supposed
to be the ones to mistake their beliefs for facts.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "larry.potter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Original Message -
> From: "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:38 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of
Original Message -
From: "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:38 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "larry.potter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Fr
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "larry.potter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> From: "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:58 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
>
>
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
>
> > The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
> > relationship
> > with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he knows. Just taking what
> > has
> > c
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" jstein@
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > > . [
deserves his peace as well
.
Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:30:45 -0500
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
Or unless of course you knew and talked with one of M's closest
confidants who helped set up SCI and the birth of the sidh
a nice quote that describes the sanyama and P' Sutra process:
"The parallel between the quantum field theory of effortless
creation and Maharishi's theory of sanyama continues in that both
involve spontaneous symmetry breaking. The creation of a Goldstone
boson takes place in a quantum field
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
>
> > The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
> > relationship
> > with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he knows. Just taking
what
> > has
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
>
> > The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
> > relationship
> > with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he knows. Just taking
what
> > has
> >
But, what is the definition of 'flying'.??
Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:05:03 -0500
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
Samyama's good side is that it helps fine-tune and hone our ability to
discriminate finer
ct: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
Or unless of course you knew and talked with one of M's closest confidants
who helped set up SCI and the birth of the sidhi program... :-)
Having done that you'd know that he knew none of this stuff, but had to seek
it out with cou
On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:00 PM, jyouells2000 wrote:
The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
relationship
with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he knows. Just taking what
has
come out here about Maharishi it's obvious that we only know what he
presents
publically. Teac
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "larry.potter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> From: "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:58 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
>
>
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The problem is, Jim, that unless someone(s) here has a personal
> relationship
> with Maharishi we (they) don't know what he knows. Just taking what
has
> come out here about Maharishi it's obvious that we only know
From: "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stages of samaadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroup
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" jstein@
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > . [...]
> > >
> > > Samyama's good side is that it helps fine-tune and hone our
> ab
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> . [...]
> >
> > Samyama's good side is that it helps fine-tune and hone our
ability
> > to discriminate finer aspects of awareness, it's downside is
that if
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, you know ALL about MMY and what he is or isn't...
> >
> > Thanks I have all the evidence I nee
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, you know ALL about MMY and what he is or isn't...
> >
> > Thanks I have all the evidence I nee
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
. [...]
>
> Samyama's good side is that it helps fine-tune and hone our ability
> to discriminate finer aspects of awareness, it's downside is that if
> it is used for siddhis (e.g. yogic flying) we become more outward,
> m
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:15 PM, cardemaister wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister
> > wrote:
> >>
> >
>
> Yes, exactly my point. It's mishra: mixed. Not pure.
> >>
> >> Vyaasa doesn't s
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Samyama's good side is that it helps fine-tune and hone our
ability
> to discriminate finer aspects of awareness, it's downside is that
if
> it is used for siddhis (e.g. yogic flying) we become more
outward,
> more mater
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >>
> >
> > Of course, you've spoken with people like Anoop Chandola, whose
> > uncle was part of the
> > group that s
On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:15 PM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Yes, exactly my point. It's mishra: mixed. Not pure.
Vyaasa doesn't seem to agree with you:
yathaa yathaa saMyamaH sthirapado bhavati tathaa tatheshvara-
p
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig wrote:
> > Yeah, you know ALL about MMY and what he is or isn't...
>
> Thanks I have all the evidence I need, had it years ago and I've
> talked to all the people I need to. For me t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister
wrote:
> >
>
> > > >
> > > > Yes, exactly my point. It's mishra: mixed. Not pure.
> >
> > Vyaasa doesn't seem to agree with you:
> >
>
> > yathaa yathaa saMya
On Jan 8, 2007, at 11:23 AM, sparaig wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:36 AM, sparaig wrote:
>>
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
> wr
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Yes, exactly my point. It's mishra: mixed. Not pure.
>
> Vyaasa doesn't seem to agree with you:
>
> yathaa yathaa saMyamaH sthirapado bhavati tathaa tatheshvara-
> prasaadaat *samaadhi-prajñaa ***VISHA
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:36 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >>
> >>> wrote:
>
> Vaj writes:
> Actually he
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> > It is mentioned in Vyasa's comment to YS 3:5 9( jayat).
> > That's what Cardemeister was quoting.
> >
> > In v. 8 commentary he says that the "trinity" (trayam)
On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:36 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
wrote:
Vaj writes:
Actually he says you must *conquer* ("jayAt") samyama. This is
because samyama is mixed with chains of dhyana an
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Vaj writes:
> >> Actually he says you must *conquer* ("jayAt") samyama. This is
> >> because samyama is mixed with chains of dhyana and dharana. It is
> >>
On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Vaj writes:
Actually he says you must *conquer* ("jayAt") samyama. This is
because samyama is mixed with chains of dhyana and dharana. It is
considered "external" to seedless samadhi. Seedless samadhi only
occurs when the t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It is mentioned in Vyasa's comment to YS 3:5 9( jayat). That's what
> Cardemeister was quoting.
>
> In v. 8 commentary he says that the "trinity" (trayam) of samyama
> must be absent for seedless (pure) samadhi to occur.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:52 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:00 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
> >>
> >>> cardemaister wrote:
> > Yoga-suutra m
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Vaj writes:
> Actually he says you must *conquer* ("jayAt") samyama. This is
> because samyama is mixed with chains of dhyana and dharana. It is
> considered "external" to seedless samadhi.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:21 AM, cardemaister wrote:
>
> > Vyaasa doesn't seem to agree with you:
> >
> > tasya saMyamasya jayaat samaadhiprajñaayaa bhavatyaaloko
> > yathaa yathaa saMyamaH sthirapado bhavati tathaa tatheshvar
On Jan 8, 2007, at 12:52 AM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:00 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
cardemaister wrote:
Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
nirbii
On Jan 8, 2007, at 3:21 AM, cardemaister wrote:
Vyaasa doesn't seem to agree with you:
tasya saMyamasya jayaat samaadhiprajñaayaa bhavatyaaloko
yathaa yathaa saMyamaH sthirapado bhavati tathaa tatheshvara-
prasaadaat *samaadhi-prajñaa ***VISHAARADII*** bhavati*
Actually he says you must *
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:00 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
> >
> > > cardemaister wrote:
> > >>> Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > >>> The ma
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:00 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
>
> > cardemaister wrote:
> >>> Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> >>> The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
> >>> nirbiija-samaadhi. The highe
On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:00 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
cardemaister wrote:
Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
nirbiija-samaadhi. The highest stage is, I guess,
dharma-megha-samaadhi.
I wonder what stage "typically"(?) is the one menti
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I feel no need
> to postulate a creator or a sentient being
> "behind" any of these phenomena; every single
> one of them could have come about as a result
> of nothing more than the eternal dance of karma
> and the free
cardemaister wrote:
> > Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
> > nirbiija-samaadhi. The highest stage is, I guess,
> > dharma-megha-samaadhi.
> > I wonder what stage "typically"(?) is the one mentioned
> > in Vibhuuti-paada (third book).
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> jim_flanegin wrote:
> > I barely know anything about religion.
> >
> Jim - You seem to be interested in religion, this topic concerns the
> stages of samadhi. I'm just trying to point out that the word sam
jim_flanegin wrote:
> I barely know anything about religion.
>
Jim - You seem to be interested in religion, this topic concerns the
stages of samadhi. I'm just trying to point out that the word samadhi
pertains to the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali - one of the main scriptures
of the Indian Six Systems
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
> wrote:
> >
> > jim_flanegin wrote:
> > > I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
> >
> > Which Buddha?
>
> Any ol' Buddha. My logic was that to
sparaig wrote:
> You assume that the universe would even
> exist without some uber-deity.
>
Maybe the world is an appearance only.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > jim_flanegin wrote:
> > > > I'd like to hear your definition of B
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
> wrote:
> >
> > jim_flanegin wrote:
> > > I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
> > >
> > Which Buddha?
>
> Any ol' Buddha. My logic was that to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > jim_flanegin wrote:
> > > > I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
> > > >
> > > Which Buddha?
> >
> > Any ol' Buddha.
> >
> The historical Buddha?
Beats me. I barely know anything about religion
> > jim_flanegin wrote:
> > > I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
> > >
> > Which Buddha?
>
> Any ol' Buddha.
>
The historical Buddha?
> My logic was that to deny the existence of God while
> following someone who because of their perfected nature
> (what I would call their Divine nat
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> jim_flanegin wrote:
> > I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
> >
> Which Buddha?
Any ol' Buddha. My logic was that to deny the existence of God while
following someone who because of their perfecte
authfriend wrote:
> Heck, Jim, there's a bunch of chimpanzees who
> have transcended this limitation and are holding
> forth on this very forum.
>
It's all about Barry, isn't it?
jim_flanegin wrote:
> I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
>
Which Buddha?
The historical Buddha taught causation. The Buddhist teaching on karma
is entailed in the Buddha's sermon on the 'Second Watch of the Night'
when the Gotama described his attainment of enlightenment.
In the 'First
sparaig wrote:
> The sentience of the Whole may be so incomprensible as to be
> undetectable by any of the sentient parts, so it may not matter,
> but why assume that there is or isn't such a "thing?"
>
It's not at all that complicated. If you read the Yoga Sutras,
Patanjali makes it dirt simple:
TurquoiseB wrote:
> I'm a Buddhist
>
Which one?
> who doesn't even believe that God exists.
>
You've mentioned this numerous times, as if it were a badge of honer,
being an athiest, and using that to impress other respondents. But
there is no evidence that the historical Buddha was an athiest. O
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Heck, Jim, there's a bunch of chimpanzees who
> have transcended this limitation and are holding
> forth on this very forum.
>
> ;-)
Shucks, Bonzo, she's found us out. Time to scram.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ca
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > wrote:
>
> > > I would say instead that you *assumed* they were not
> > > available to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> wrote:
> > I would say instead that you *assumed* they were not
> > available to you. Therefore they weren't.
>
> Hang on-- Broadening the discussion beyond
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Can't comment on that. I'm a Buddhist who doesn't
> > > even believe that
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 5, 2007, at 1:59 PM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 5, 2007, at 5:28 AM, cardemaister wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of sama
On Jan 5, 2007, at 1:59 PM, sparaig wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 5, 2007, at 5:28 AM, cardemaister wrote:
Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
nirbiija-samaadhi. The highest sta
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 5, 2007, at 5:28 AM, cardemaister wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Yoga-suutra m
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Can't comment on that. I'm a Buddhist who doesn't
> > > even believe that G
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 5, 2007, at 5:28 AM, cardemaister wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > > The main distinction seems to be sabi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> wrote:
> >
> > Can't comment on that. I'm a Buddhist who doesn't
> > even believe that God exists. :-)
>
> Really? If Buddha-->Buddhism-->Buddhist exists, how
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Can't comment on that. I'm a Buddhist who doesn't
> even believe that God exists. :-)
Really? If Buddha-->Buddhism-->Buddhist exists, how can God not
exist? I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha.
> > This pro
On Jan 5, 2007, at 7:57 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister
wrote:
Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > > The main distinction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 5, 2007, at 5:28 AM, cardemaister wrote:
>
> >
> > Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
> > nirbiija-samaadhi. The highest stage is, I guess,
> > dharma-
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yoga-suut
> > > I think there is a distinction to be made here, between
> > > making some sort of value judgment about one state of
> > > consciousness vs. another, and recognizing the valid
> > > attributes of each state of consciousness, and that
> > > enjoyment grows with the attainment of each succes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > wrote:
> > > Just as fodder for discussion, if anyone's on that
> > > wavelength, it seems to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> wrote:
> > Just as fodder for discussion, if anyone's on that
> > wavelength, it seems to me that the Vedic/Hindu
> > approach to these different types of samadh
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Just as fodder for discussion, if anyone's on that
> wavelength, it seems to me that the Vedic/Hindu
> approach to these different types of samadhi
> interprets them as "stages" because they're stuck
> in a hierarchic
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote:
> > >
> > > Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > > The main distinction seems
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> > The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
> > nirbiija-samaadhi. The highest stage is, I gu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Yoga-suutra mentions several stages of samaadhi.
> The main distinction seems to be sabiija- vs.
> nirbiija-samaadhi. The highest stage is, I guess,
> dharma-megha-samaadhi.
> I wonder what stage "typically"(?) is
96 matches
Mail list logo
