--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote:
>
> Hey, all
>
> According to Mantreshwar, an ancient jyotish author, my birth chart
> has a yoga for being a sanyasi, practicing a form of Buddhism. As a
> practicing TM meditator, I was at first puzzled by this observation.
> However, a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymo
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymo
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > I think your one-up-manship is perfect, because
on 6/28/05 12:45 AM, TurquoiseB at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Agreed. Concepts are useful tools. I see arguing over
>>> who invented
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Agreed. Concepts are useful tools. I see arguing over
> > who invented/discovered the concept as a little
> > fruitless unless you're w
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > I think your one-up-manship is perfect, because it is who you are,
> its
> > your nature -- to see as far as you can see.
>
> Cool, I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bbrigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> OK, that's it -- I'm turning your unlicensed dogma into the
Fairfield
> authorities:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/bf9d4
*lol* Thanks, Bob :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://grou
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I think your one-up-manship is perfect, because it is who you are,
its
> your nature -- to see as far as you can see.
Cool, I can live with that :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
h
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> >
> > > (I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
> >
> > It's just the facts m'am!
>
> Ju
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > > No, I am simply reading my lines. I didn't say My perfect-here-now
> > > resolution would look perfect-here-now, to You -- on
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It sounds as if you are describing the Natural State--which is a
form
> of meditation but it is also a non-meditation. There is a path for
this
> form of meditation. I describe it as "meditation isn't, getting used
to
> is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "uns_tressor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ...and presumably with God - a risk I would be most
> reluctant to take.
> Uns.
To paraphrase Pogo, we have met the Divinity and S/He is Us.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http:/
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > No, I am simply reading my lines. I didn't say My perfect-here-now
> > resolution would look perfect-here-now, to You -- only to Me.
You're
> > responsible for your own perceptions of perfection, here, now, as
It sounds as if you are describing the Natural State--which is a form
of meditation but it is also a non-meditation. There is a path for this
form of meditation. I describe it as "meditation isn't, getting used to
is". But yes it is a path, has a view and has a result...that is of
course if you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > However, path gives folks something to do with
> > > > > > themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
> > > > > > probably better than fighting wars or whacking off.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Yes (though o
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed. Concepts are useful tools. I see arguing over
> who invented/discovered the concept as a little
> fruitless unless you're working on your doctoral
> dissertation. Then by all means split the split of the
> spli
--- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Maya" is a useful concept used to explain
> something
> > in a particular condition/state/level of
> > consciousness.
>
> And *to* a particular condition/state/leve
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > > Am I missing something here? If
> > > so, I appreciate your patience in attempting to explain it to me.
> It
> > > must be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, so this long-lost post finally made it "home"! Must have
> detoured too close to a black-hole. Talk about postcards from
> the edge...
It's been happening a lot lately, on a lot of the Yahoo
groups. Posts taking
Wow, so this long-lost post finally made it "home"! Must have detoured
too close to a black-hole. Talk about postcards from the edge...
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > So you are seeking a better "later" by resolving your blindspot?
--- In F
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > However, path gives folks something to do with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > Am I missing something here? If
> > so, I appreciate your patience in attempting to explain it to me.
It
> > must be a pretty huge blindspot, because I am definitely not
getting
> > it.
>
> So you are seekin
> > > > > However, path gives folks something to do with
> > > > > themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
> > > > > probably better than fighting wars or whacking off.
> > > > >
> > > > Yes (though one might argue that one can play with a path *and*
> > > > play with oneself simultane
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > However, path gives folks something to do with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> > However, path gives folks something to do with
> > themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
> > probably better than fighti
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> However, path gives folks something to do with
> themselves until that realization dawns. And it's
> probably better than fighting wars or whacking off.
>
Yes (though one might argue that one can play with a path *a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
> > > any "path" is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Maya" is a useful concept used to explain something
> in a particular condition/state/level of
> consciousness.
And *to* a particular condition/state/level of
consciousness. If one is at the point where
maya is se
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> >> Post hoc ergo propter hoc, no?
> >
> >
> > The question would be: is MMY's translation ad hoc? If it is
accurate,
> > than the claim that "maya" is a buddhist invention se
(First post delayed or lost; trying again)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> So you are seeking a better "later" by resolving your blindspot?
No, I am merely reading my lines. My appreciation of perfection-here-
now is not necessarily going to be Y
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
> > > any "path" is g
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
>
> > Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
> > any "path" is going to take us anywhere other than here, and so I
> > don't think Buddhahood can be "ach
"Maya" is a useful concept used to explain something
in a particular condition/state/level of
consciousness.
--- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >
> > >> Post hoc e
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> Yes, I guess this is where we differ -- I honestly don't think
> any "path" is going to take us anywhere other than here, and so I
> don't think Buddhahood can be "achieved" at all. Rather, "we" do
> what "we" do until "we" don't, if you see what I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > > > Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the
great
> > > > > spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove
their
On Jun 27, 2005, at 12:08 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> Clearly, if the story you refer to is true, that
> was not true for Shankara, and for his tradition.
Wasn't Shankara's debate trip about Dvaita vs. Advaita?
Arguably his most famous work, the Brahma-sutra-bhasya, is all about
how he feels every
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My point is that there are many spiritual traditions
> on the planet that would never even *conceive* of
> entering into a debate with another tradition to
> "prove their understanding of enlightenment false"
> (or,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > > Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
> > > > spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
> > > > understanding of enlightenment false (or something).
> > >
> > > Explains
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> >> Post hoc ergo propter hoc, no?
> >
> >
> > The question would be: is MMY's translation ad hoc? If it is
accurate,
> > than the claim that "maya" is a buddhist invention se
> > > Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
> > > spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
> > > understanding of enlightenment false (or something).
> >
> > Explains a lot about the TM approach to other
> > forms of spiritual development, n'est-ce pas?
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:15 AM, sparaig wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:36 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>>
>>> Oh yea, this from a guy that posts some California dude with his toy
>>> EEG machine showing his empty mind.
>>
>>
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:37 AM, sparaig wrote:
>> Post hoc ergo propter hoc, no?
>
>
> The question would be: is MMY's translation ad hoc? If it is accurate,
> than the claim that "maya" is a buddhist invention seems strained...
Well I never said that it was "an invention". I merely pointed out th
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
> > spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
> > understandi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:22 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > MMY's translation of the Richo Akshare verse:
> >
> > "The verses of Veda exist in the collapse of fullness in the
> > transcendental field, in which reside all the impul
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:22 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > MMY's translation of the Richo Akshare verse:
> >
> > "The verses of Veda exist in the collapse of fullness in the
> > transcendental field, in which reside all the impul
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It would be even more interesting to look at the pool who simply see
> things as they are.
Of course, but if you are looking specifically to eliminate pro-TM
bias, you might want to select from anti-TM those-who-see-things
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I guess you would have to find someone like that. I think your
issue is that when responses are made in regards to a particular
path you are assuming that is what I "Vaj" or someone else believes.
Paths are relative. Dif
On Jun 27, 2005, at 11:22 AM, authfriend wrote:
> MMY's translation of the Richo Akshare verse:
>
> "The verses of Veda exist in the collapse of fullness in the
> transcendental field, in which reside all the impulses of creative
> intelligence, the laws of Nature, responsible for the whole manif
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[...]
> There's some good research in TM and some really
> crappy research in TM. Most of the crappy research
> comes about because pilot studies are being done with
> marginal research designs because the researcher is
> looking for some effect
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The concept of Maya is clearly stated in the Rig
> > Veda Richo Akshare
> > verse, and many other places. It is a constant
> > theme, and to say
> > that Buddha i
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I actually have a friend who is licensed to give that test and I
took
> the long test (as opposed to the short ones you see on the net). I
> guess the results are broken down into four pairs. I fell in the
middle
> on all
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> --- off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Peter Sutphen wrote:
>
> > Good assessment instruments for self-report measures
> > take a good amount of time to develop because of the
> > above problems. The questions need to have low face
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:36 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> > Oh yea, this from a guy that posts some California dude with his toy
> > EEG machine showing his empty mind.
>
> Well Off, it's a casual experiment, I would hope y
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[...]
> Good assessment instruments for self-report measures
> take a good amount of time to develop because of the
> above problems. The questions need to have low face
> validity (i.e., it is not self-evident what is a
> "good" or a "bad " resp
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:54 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Pretty hard person to find.
>
> Well for starters one might look at the rather large pool of
> disaffected ex-TMers, particuarly ones exhibiting strong anti-TM bias,
> and exam
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:48 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
>> personality test? I am wondering if you (and Bob Brigante) might be
>> something like a --TJ, as oppose
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >>
> >>> You have no idea what "accumulations of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I actually have a friend who is licensed to give that test and I
took
> the long test (as opposed to the short ones you see on the net). I
> guess the results are broken down into four pairs. I fell in the
middle
> on all
--- Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Peter Sutphen wrote:
>
> > Good assessment instruments for self-report
> measures
> > take a good amount of time to develop because of
> the
> > above problems. The questions need to have low
> face
> > validity (i.e., it is
--- off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > -But if you're not a Buddhist you can't
> rightly say though.
> > > Moreover, there is not j
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pretty hard person to find.
Well for starters one might look at the rather large pool of
disaffected ex-TMers, particuarly ones exhibiting strong anti-TM bias,
and examine some of them for signs of "enlightenment" :-)
To
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Peter Sutphen wrote:
> Good assessment instruments for self-report measures
> take a good amount of time to develop because of the
> above problems. The questions need to have low face
> validity (i.e., it is not self-evident what is a
> "good" or a "bad " response).
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
> personality test? I am wondering if you (and Bob Brigante) might be
> something like a --TJ, as opposed to an --FP, for example...
I ask this as I am temp
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:36 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
> Oh yea, this from a guy that posts some California dude with his toy
> EEG machine showing his empty mind.
Well Off, it's a casual experiment, I would hope you wouldn't take it
as any more than that. The most interesting thing is that he c
--- Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >>
> >>> You have no idea what "accumulations of merit
> and wisdom" the
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shankara traditionally is said to have debated all the great
> spiritual leaders/gurus of his time in order to prove their
> understanding of enlightenment false (or something).
Explains a lot about the TM approach to o
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:33 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
>>
>>> (I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
>>
>> It's just the facts m'am!
>
> Just out of curiosity -- did you ever tak
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >>
> >>> You have no idea what "accumulations o
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
>
> > (I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
>
> It's just the facts m'am!
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
personality test? I am wondering if
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
>
> > (I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
>
> It's just the facts m'am!
Just out of curiosity -- did you ever take the Keirsey/Jung
personality test? I am wondering if
On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:07 AM, sparaig wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
>>
>>> You have no idea what "accumulations of merit and wisdom" the
> long-term
>>> witnessing folk show.
>>
>> Then tell. I'm lis
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
>
> > (I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
>
> It's just the facts m'am!
Facts? We don't need no stinking facts! :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:15 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> >
> > No, that is a myth. Made up. No historical evidence. They barely
> > noticed his few hundred followers.
>
> Isn't that kinda like saying people barely noticed S
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > You have no idea what "accumulations of merit and wisdom" the
long-term
> > witnessing folk show.
>
> Then tell. I'm listening.
Researchers at MUM had subjects fill out v
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:56 AM, Rory Goff wrote:
> (I love the smell of dogma in the morning)
It's just the facts m'am!
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble
> truths
> > or bodhichitta, therefore it would not qualify :-) Since it has
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble
truths
> or bodhichitta, therefore it would not qualify :-) Since it has not
> created any Buddhas it could not be considered a path to
> enlightenment--after
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:15 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> >
> > No, that is a myth. Made up. No historical evidence. They barely
> > noticed his few hundred followers.
>
> Isn't that kinda like saying people barely noticed S
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > -But if you're not a Buddhist you can't rightly say though.
> > Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist meditation.
> >
>
> What's interesting, at
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:15 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> No, that is a myth. Made up. No historical evidence. They barely
> noticed his few hundred followers.
Isn't that kinda like saying people barely noticed Shankara's four
followers?
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:11 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:23 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>>
>>> This is not true.
>>> Bevin the Buddha.
>>
>> If you see him by the road, swerve.
>>
>> ...but you might wa
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, sparaig wrote:
> You have no idea what "accumulations of merit and wisdom" the long-term
> witnessing folk show.
Then tell. I'm listening.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join T
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, considering that Gautama was a prince in Vedic kingdom,
> > trained by Brahmin priests and who learned Sanskrit and the
Ve
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:23 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
>
> > This is not true.
> > Bevin the Buddha.
>
> If you see him by the road, swerve.
>
> ...but you might want to make sure you are in a Hummer first :-)
But if you s
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:03 AM, Llundrub wrote:
-But if you're not a Buddhist you can't rightly say though. Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist meditation.
What's interesting, at very least as history, is that it appears Advaita Vedanta--both that of Shankara and his paramguru G
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
> >
> > > It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would
consider
> > > TM as a f
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, considering that Gautama was a prince in Vedic kingdom,
> > trained by Brahmin priests and who learned Sanskrit and the Ved
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 7:46 AM, sparaig wrote:
>
> > What accumulations are those? Is Zen a non-buddhist technique?
>
> The accumulations of a Buddha, merit and wisdom.
>
> Re: Zen, go to Google, put in the words 'Zen Buddhis
It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
TM as a form of Buddhist practice.Regards,John R.
-But if you're not a Buddhist you can't
rightly say though. Moreover, there is not just one form of Buddhist
meditation.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL
On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:42 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> However, once he was safely dead, they had a "change
> of heart" and claimed that the same guy they'd been
> demonizing had miraculously become an incarnation of
> Vishnu.
Also Shiva depending on who you talk to.
To subscribe, send a message to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, considering that Gautama was a prince in Vedic kingdom,
> trained by Brahmin priests and who learned Sanskrit and the Vedas
> in depth, it is not surprising that what he taught (or rather what
> his disci
On Jun 27, 2005, at 8:23 AM, off_world_beings wrote:
> This is not true.
> Bevin the Buddha.
If you see him by the road, swerve.
...but you might want to make sure you are in a Hummer first :-)
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fairf
Well, considering that Gautama was a prince in Vedic kingdom,
trained by Brahmin priests and who learned Sanskrit and the Vedas in
depth, it is not surprising that what he taught (or rather what his
disciples taught) was a form of Vedic knowledge. It is like the
difference between Catholicism
On Jun 27, 2005, at 7:46 AM, sparaig wrote:
> What accumulations are those? Is Zen a non-buddhist technique?
The accumulations of a Buddha, merit and wisdom.
Re: Zen, go to Google, put in the words 'Zen Buddhism' and click
"search".
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
>
> > It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
> > TM as a form of Buddhist practice.
>
> If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble
t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 1:14 AM, John wrote:
>
> > It appears that Mantreshwar, if he were alive today, would consider
> > TM as a form of Buddhist practice.
>
> If he were he would be wrong. TM does not teach the four noble tr
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
