The presidential race

[Guest guest]

Re: Bush. I feel that the approach towards " loving " him is a bit off.

 

Loving him because you feel it is better for you is not the selfless

act of love, it is a technique of self-improvement.

 

Loving him because he has inherited a large karmic debt is not the

selfless act of love, it is a technique of feeling superiority and

trusting implicitly that karma will be kinder to you than him. (On a

somewhat side note, I also feel that claiming you can read the karmic

debt of someone else, based on your own judgment of their actions, is

the same as claiming to understand the mind of God - i.e. the height

of spiritual ego and spiritual ignorance.)

 

I believe that loving George Bush falls into the same exact category

as loving anybody or anything. It is a recognition that everything is

One and that we are not separate from One. It is a recognition that

we have no self which separates us from others, so we have no

distinction through which to judge him. He is loved not because of or

in spite of his actions, but as God, the entirety of God. Any other

type of " love " is not a recognition of infinity in all things with the

related humility for the illusion of " self " - it is just neuroses

trying to be fulfilled.

 

Personally, I have not achieved enlightened love (though I have

experienced glimpses), nor do I have any proof that anyone has ever

achieved that state, though many have claimed as such. So I have no

qualms saying - I despise George Bush, and would rejoice at his being

jailed for life for his many documented war crimes.

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam, WaheGuru,

 

I look at this not as judgment others, be it any candidate, but rather

as a Fruit Inspector. Its better I be a fruit inspector than a judge.

 

Thank you for the insight.

 

~Ron (Bhakti)

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " Michael Telanoff AKA Dharam

Khalsa " <michael.telanoff wrote:

>

> Re: Bush. I feel that the approach towards " loving " him is a bit off.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam Dharam

 

 

 

 

> Re: Bush. I feel that the approach towards " loving " him is a bit

off.

>

> Loving him because you feel it is better for you is not the selfless

> act of love, it is a technique of self-improvement.

 

None of us are perfect or we would not be living the human

experience. All of us are here to " achieve " the perfect union. This

example of putting a picture on someone's altar that one has a hard

time loving is merely recognizing that one is not loving universally

as one is capable of loving and doing something about it. I would

not say Ram Das or anyone else is doing it because it is better for

him or a self improvement technique (although it is), it is the the

recognition and the action taken to remedy the situation. I would

think this would be selfless. It is easier not to do anything about

it and more selfish not to do anything about it.

 

> Loving him because he has inherited a large karmic debt is not the

> selfless act of love, it is a technique of feeling superiority and

> trusting implicitly that karma will be kinder to you than him. (On

a

> somewhat side note, I also feel that claiming you can read the

karmic

> debt of someone else, based on your own judgment of their actions,

is

> the same as claiming to understand the mind of God - i.e. the height

> of spiritual ego and spiritual ignorance.)

 

Who said anything about loving anyone because they have a large

karmic debt. I do not know the reason and I don't think you or

anyone else does. Only the individual knows

..

> I believe that loving George Bush falls into the same exact category

> as loving anybody or anything. It is a recognition that everything

is

> One and that we are not separate from One. It is a recognition that

> we have no self which separates us from others, so we have no

> distinction through which to judge him. He is loved not because of

or

> in spite of his actions, but as God, the entirety of God.

 

I would agree with this.

 

Any other

> type of " love " is not a recognition of infinity in all things with

the

> related humility for the illusion of " self " - it is just neuroses

> trying to be fulfilled.

 

How do you know how people think, how they love, their inner being?

 

 

>

> Personally, I have not achieved enlightened love (though I have

> experienced glimpses), nor do I have any proof that anyone has ever

> achieved that state, though many have claimed as such. So I have no

> qualms saying - I despise George Bush, and would rejoice at his

being

> jailed for life for his many documented war crimes.

>

No comment on how you feel about Bush. I am not exactly a fan of

Bush but it is possible to separate how one loves and how one feels

about one's actions. We can love Bush (or anyone else) but dislike

their actions.

 

Blessings

GuruBandhu

[Guest guest]

> None of us are perfect or we would not be living the human

> experience.

 

That is a theory, not a fact, and one with which I disagree.

Evolution shows quite clearly that humans are nothing special - just

the most currently advanced member of the apes (yes, scientifically we

are apes). We are living the human experience because of evolution.

That is fact. Everything else is opinion and theory, and should be

treated therefore with humility.

 

> Who said anything about loving anyone because they have a large

> karmic debt.

 

The post to which I was replying said that. Perhaps you should read it.

 

> How do you know how people think, how they love, their inner >being?

 

I am a person, so I have some expert, personal, long standing

experience in this arena. I am also familiar with psychology.

 

You seem to take this very personally. If I struck a nerve, rather

than send negativity my way, maybe you should look internally at the

nerve that got struck.

 

> No comment on how you feel about Bush. I am not exactly a fan of

> Bush but it is possible to separate how one loves and how one feels

> about one's actions. We can love Bush (or anyone else) but dislike

> their actions.

 

I disagree. If you are loving an individual, that is not love. To

modify my favorite quote from a man I once knew, " If you cannot see

Love in all, you cannot see Love at all " . And Kabir " To find fault

with one part of the creation is to find fault with the entire creation. "

 

>

> Blessings

> GuruBandhu

 

Sincerely,

Michael

>

[Guest guest]

Anything that is voiced in words immediately becomes imperfect.

Therefore we are all doing the best we can. Anyone who says their

opinions are fact is just really holding on to unreality very hard.

Let's all get along

Love and Blessings

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " dharam_khalsa "

<michael.telanoff wrote:

>

> > None of us are perfect or we would not be living the human

> > experience.

>

> That is a theory, not a fact, and one with which I disagree.

> Evolution shows quite clearly that humans are nothing special - just

> the most currently advanced member of the apes (yes, scientifically

we

> are apes). We are living the human experience because of

evolution.

> That is fact. Everything else is opinion and theory, and should be

> treated therefore with humility.

>

> > Who said anything about loving anyone because they have a large

> > karmic debt.

>

> The post to which I was replying said that. Perhaps you should

read it.

>

> > How do you know how people think, how they love, their inner

>being?

>

> I am a person, so I have some expert, personal, long standing

> experience in this arena. I am also familiar with psychology.

>

> You seem to take this very personally. If I struck a nerve, rather

> than send negativity my way, maybe you should look internally at the

> nerve that got struck.

>

> > No comment on how you feel about Bush. I am not exactly a fan

of

> > Bush but it is possible to separate how one loves and how one

feels

> > about one's actions. We can love Bush (or anyone else) but

dislike

> > their actions.

>

> I disagree. If you are loving an individual, that is not love. To

> modify my favorite quote from a man I once knew, " If you cannot see

> Love in all, you cannot see Love at all " . And Kabir " To find fault

> with one part of the creation is to find fault with the entire

creation. "

>

> >

> > Blessings

> > GuruBandhu

>

> Sincerely,

> Michael

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, stating opinion as fact is a step towards fascism.

 

Stating fact as fact is a step towards science.

 

Coming from a Jewish background, robust argument and discussion is

seen as THE path to God and understanding. If the suggestion is to

pretend we all agree, and therefore avoid any topics of discord, I

must disagree.

 

I can think of no great man or woman of peace that achieved their aims

without great confrontation - Mandela, Woody Guthrie, Bishop Tutu.

Clearly confrontation is not anathema to the path of peace and

understanding, and should not be viewed with fear. Animus on the

other hand, may be.

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam Ji Everyone!!

 

Isn't there a way to leave politics out of this site?? What ever happened to the old separation of "church and state."

 

When I saw the post for Spiritual Leaders, listing their names, holding whatever to insure Obama's wining, I was nauseated. I would have felt the same it they were doing it for McCain.

 

Please leave politics at the door. I am sure there are many other venues to vent opinions.

 

Thank you.

 

Sat Nam,

Samantha/Ardas K

[Guest guest]

But we're not a church. We don't do religion. We do yoga. :-)

 

 

 

 

In Kundalini-Yoga , " Samantha " <star44 wrote:

 

 

Sat Nam Ji Everyone!!

 

Isn't there a way to leave politics out of this site?? What ever

happened

to the old separation of " church and state. "

 

Thank you.

 

Sat Nam,

Samantha/Ardas K

[Guest guest]

-It'll be over in about a month. There was something creepy and

off-putting about all those spiritual folks pushing for obama.

Remember the old saying, be careful what you wish for, you might get

it. The stock market seems to be predicting a big obama win, which

isn't so good for those of us who work for a living. A dem president

and congress- the last time that happened, Clinton promptly forgot

about his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. Probably

because by world standards, if you're middle class in our country, you

are RICH, RICH, RICH!

[Guest guest]

Kundalini Yoga is not a religion, so a concept of church and state

would not apply here.

 

More importantly, Kundalini Yoga is not to be used as an escape from

the world - this is one of its core messages. Using the benefits of

Kundalini Yoga to provide a greater ability to affect the world

positively is a core tenet of Kundalini Yoga.

 

Right now, the most important decision any individual citizen in the

U.S. can make is who will be the next president. It will have a

direct effect on the lives of every human being on the planet, in

terms of global warming, global warfare and global disease.

 

If one believes that this choice will have a profound effect on these

issues - will help curb the spread of AIDS in Africa for example, or

stop a war that has killed over one million (by many estimations)

non-combatants in Iraq, I fail to see how a Kundalini Yogi can be silent.

 

I believe, and I believe that Yogi Bhajan's clear message, is that

Kundalini Yoga is not just to make yourself feel better and less

stressed - it is part of the process of recognizing our connection to

all things on this planet and then - not sitting in a cave meditating

- but engaging directly with the world.

 

Politics, like money, is just a medium. And discussing politics will

not make you nearly as sick to your stomach, I would bet, as the

mercury and pharmaceuticals now flooding your waters.

 

All politics is local.

[Guest guest]

Clinton - 300 billion dollar surplus when he left office. Wages for

the middle class increased by over $7,500. Poverty decreased.

 

Bush - 1.5 trillion dollar deficit projected this year (a tax on you

and your children and your children's children. Wages for the middle

class declined. Poverty increased.

 

Those of us who work for a living can't afford another Republican

president.

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " lightandgrace "

<surfgirl1112 wrote:

>

> -It'll be over in about a month. There was something creepy and

> off-putting about all those spiritual folks pushing for obama.

> Remember the old saying, be careful what you wish for, you might get

> it. The stock market seems to be predicting a big obama win, which

> isn't so good for those of us who work for a living. A dem president

> and congress- the last time that happened, Clinton promptly forgot

> about his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. Probably

> because by world standards, if you're middle class in our country, you

> are RICH, RICH, RICH!

>

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam,

 

Starhawk would disagree with you. She's a feminist and a 'witch' who

reclaimed that word for women and others who practice pagan

spiritualities which often deal with how we affect the planet, and

each other in our lives on a microcosmic and macrocosmic level. In

that way I think that politics should be part of any spirituality,

that someones spirituality should reflect their politics. For example

no witch should ever vote for Sarah Palin, or feminist for that

matter. On the other hand I also agree that it does get to be 'low'

energy when we vy for our candidates. I think its ok to talk politics

if we can just talk issues and facts rather than opinions about the

characters of these candidates. But then again, that may be very

difficult.

 

Sat Nam

Ek Ong Kar Singh

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " Samantha " <star44 wrote:

>

> Sat Nam Ji Everyone!!

>

> Isn't there a way to leave politics out of this site?? What ever

happened

> to the old separation of " church and state. "

>

> When I saw the post for Spiritual Leaders, listing their names,

holding

> whatever to insure Obama's wining, I was nauseated. I would have

felt the

> same it they were doing it for McCain.

>

> Please leave politics at the door. I am sure there are many other

venues to

> vent opinions.

>

> Thank you.

>

> Sat Nam,

> Samantha/Ardas K

>

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam dear Nirvair Kaur,

 

Dud!! I totally realize we are not a church. Did you not notice the quotation marks??

 

The state is yoga and the "church" are those spiritual leaders, and if I am wrong here forgive me, who would use their influence as spiritual leader to influence another to vote one way or another. If they want to have a gathering or meeting to insure the winning of one candidate over another, great, but don't do it using their title to influence others, I cannot abide by.

 

Sat Nam Ji,

Samantha/Ardas

[Guest guest]

Sat Nam, Ardas,

 

Yes, I did see the quotation marks, but since you didn't specify what

entity you were correlating with which, I and apparently some other

folks misinterpreted your meaning.

 

If yoga is the state, who are the spiritual leaders, from " the church " ,

whom you are refering to? I thought that your comments were directed

toward those in the yoga community who were endorsing candidates, and

that you were saying you didn't approve of yoga folks attempting to

influence people to vote one way or another.

 

Nirvair

 

PS: I think you meant " Duh! " , not " Dud! " :-)

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " Samantha " <star44 wrote:

>

> Sat Nam dear Nirvair Kaur,

>

> Dud!! I totally realize we are not a church. Did you not notice the

> quotation marks??

>

> The state is yoga and the " church " are those spiritual leaders, and if

I am

> wrong here forgive me, who would use their influence as spiritual

leader to

> influence another to vote one way or another. If they want to have a

> gathering or meeting to insure the winning of one candidate over

another,

> great, but don't do it using their title to influence others, I cannot

abide

> by.

>

> Sat Nam Ji,

> Samantha/Ardas

>

[Guest guest]

So a doctor endorsing a candidate should not call himself Dr. Fixalot,

but Mr. Fixalot, because using titles is somehow anathema to politics?

 

I don't understand. First, because I don't put stock in spiritual

leaders. If I didn't elect them, they aren't my leader.

 

Second, if they believe that their actions will support their beliefs,

then they have a duty to make that known publicly. It is the right of

every citizen to support the policies with which they agree and to use

robust debate and communication to influence others. That is the core

of democracy.

 

I don't think an American citizen should be silent just because some

may not want to hear what they have to say. That is antithesis to our

make-up.

 

I always find it funny when people like Hannity talk about how bad it

is for actors to use their influence to affect politics. " What right

do they have? " The answer is always the same - they are American

citizens and the Constitution gives them that right and duty to engage

in the political process.

[Guest guest]

One poor lonely-at-the-top smuck is not responsible for much of the

current situation. Crucifying him accomplishes nothing. Clinton was

ineffective at responding to escalating radical muslim attacks on

Americans. A few months into Bush's presidency, the 9/11/2001 attacks

knocked the economy off its a.., and the Fed dropped rates

precipitously. Money managers reaching for yield invested in

increasingly risky investments. Nothing much bad happened for years,

so risky investment behavior racheted upwards. Greenspan and Bernake

didn't see any bubbles and could have raised rates and increased

margin requirements. Existing regs were ignored by regulators. The

biggest five investment banks lobbied their regulators to radically

reduce capital requirements so they could leverage up 40-1. Fannie

and Freddie, big Obama supporters, were leveraged 100-1, and Congress

passed legislation encouraging or requiring mortgage lenders to make

loans to people who couldn't afford the real estate, with the aid of

lenders and appraisers and zero down. It took an unholy allegiance of

big government and big business to create this train wreck. Etc, etc,

etc. Robert Prechter, Elliot wave theorist, has been predicting this

debt-bomb for years, but he was way early, so people quit listening.

 

We have to have frequent tax cuts just to keep the government's take

relatively level- what they take this year, as % of GNP and actual $

amount is much higher than when Bush came into office or even 4 years

ago because of bracket creep. " Starve the beast " of big government

seems to be the only way to stop Congress from wasting our money on

earmarks, etc. So Clinton was lucky enough to inherit a great economy

from Reagun. The Democratic Congress didn't manage to kill it with

their tax hikes before they were turned out for a Republican majority

a few years later, who cut some taxes, and now Clinton is remembered

for good economic times.

 

The solution is probably not to elect an anti-American who has

accomplished nothing in the senate except to garner the presidential

nomination.

[Guest guest]

Funny but the senator you mentioned has accomplished significat

legislation, one which dealt with keeping the nukes out of

terrorist's hands. He is an amazing phenomena capable of raising the

US to Hope, of instilling confidence and he embodies the american

dream. (just get over the fact his dad was a Foreignur uhuhhuh!).

Sheesh! You have to input as much as you output to balance a budget

and trickle down does not work. The witchhunt against the republicans

is just an unfortunate lucky circumstance that will elect Obama

despite his newness and depsite racism and the unethical Republican

Lee Atwater strategy.

 

Anyone seeing Palin rilinig up crowds that respond

with 'Terrorist!' 'Killhim!'. Do we want people like this in the

white house. Open your heart!

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " reedsmyth " <nrross wrote:

>

> One poor lonely-at-the-top smuck is not responsible for much of the

> current situation. Crucifying him accomplishes nothing. Clinton

was

> ineffective at responding to escalating radical muslim attacks on

> Americans. A few months into Bush's presidency, the 9/11/2001

attacks

> knocked the economy off its a.., and the Fed dropped rates

> precipitously. Money managers reaching for yield invested in

> increasingly risky investments. Nothing much bad happened for

years,

> so risky investment behavior racheted upwards. Greenspan and

Bernake

> didn't see any bubbles and could have raised rates and increased

> margin requirements. Existing regs were ignored by regulators. The

> biggest five investment banks lobbied their regulators to radically

> reduce capital requirements so they could leverage up 40-1. Fannie

> and Freddie, big Obama supporters, were leveraged 100-1, and

Congress

> passed legislation encouraging or requiring mortgage lenders to

make

> loans to people who couldn't afford the real estate, with the aid

of

> lenders and appraisers and zero down. It took an unholy allegiance

of

> big government and big business to create this train wreck. Etc,

etc,

> etc. Robert Prechter, Elliot wave theorist, has been predicting

this

> debt-bomb for years, but he was way early, so people quit

listening.

>

> We have to have frequent tax cuts just to keep the government's

take

> relatively level- what they take this year, as % of GNP and actual

$

> amount is much higher than when Bush came into office or even 4

years

> ago because of bracket creep. " Starve the beast " of big government

> seems to be the only way to stop Congress from wasting our money on

> earmarks, etc. So Clinton was lucky enough to inherit a great

economy

> from Reagun. The Democratic Congress didn't manage to kill it with

> their tax hikes before they were turned out for a Republican

majority

> a few years later, who cut some taxes, and now Clinton is

remembered

> for good economic times.

>

> The solution is probably not to elect an anti-American who has

> accomplished nothing in the senate except to garner the

presidential

> nomination.

>

[Guest guest]

Obama loves america and inspires hope. If you cannot feel it after

his speechs or just feeling out who this man is, then you need to do

more K Yoga and open your intution. he is a fantastic man and McCain

is the only anti-american I see here. His Country-First is a lie, a

hypocritical joke and practically everything he says about O is about

Him! Cindy McCain was a hypocrite crying about Obama not voting for

the troops when McCain did the same thing (both centered around

timetables). McCain just wants to win. Obama was asked to run by

people and then a pehnomena began.

 

 

 

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " reedsmyth " <nrross wrote:

>

> One poor lonely-at-the-top smuck is not responsible for much of the

> current situation. Crucifying him accomplishes nothing. Clinton

was

> ineffective at responding to escalating radical muslim attacks on

> Americans. A few months into Bush's presidency, the 9/11/2001

attacks

> knocked the economy off its a.., and the Fed dropped rates

> precipitously. Money managers reaching for yield invested in

> increasingly risky investments. Nothing much bad happened for

years,

> so risky investment behavior racheted upwards. Greenspan and

Bernake

> didn't see any bubbles and could have raised rates and increased

> margin requirements. Existing regs were ignored by regulators. The

> biggest five investment banks lobbied their regulators to radically

> reduce capital requirements so they could leverage up 40-1. Fannie

> and Freddie, big Obama supporters, were leveraged 100-1, and

Congress

> passed legislation encouraging or requiring mortgage lenders to

make

> loans to people who couldn't afford the real estate, with the aid

of

> lenders and appraisers and zero down. It took an unholy allegiance

of

> big government and big business to create this train wreck. Etc,

etc,

> etc. Robert Prechter, Elliot wave theorist, has been predicting

this

> debt-bomb for years, but he was way early, so people quit

listening.

>

> We have to have frequent tax cuts just to keep the government's

take

> relatively level- what they take this year, as % of GNP and actual

$

> amount is much higher than when Bush came into office or even 4

years

> ago because of bracket creep. " Starve the beast " of big government

> seems to be the only way to stop Congress from wasting our money on

> earmarks, etc. So Clinton was lucky enough to inherit a great

economy

> from Reagun. The Democratic Congress didn't manage to kill it with

> their tax hikes before they were turned out for a Republican

majority

> a few years later, who cut some taxes, and now Clinton is

remembered

> for good economic times.

>

> The solution is probably not to elect an anti-American who has

> accomplished nothing in the senate except to garner the

presidential

> nomination.

>

[Guest guest]

Hannity is a scarey anti-semite...or at least his associations point to

that. See recent crictism of this guy.

[Guest guest]

LOL

 

Troll much?

 

Clinton balanced the budget after seven years by raising taxes and

cutting spending. That means the budget was balanced 11 years after

Reagan left office (remember that first Bush in the middle?), who left

a sprawling deficit. But somehow it was Reagan's economy?

 

The President is the most influential person on the state of the

economy, bar none.

 

Fannie and Freddie are big Obama supporters? You do know that

McCain's campaign manager was on the payroll until they were

nationalized, right?

 

The " Obama doesn't have experience " meme doesn't hold up anymore, does

it? He has been running a nation-wide organization (presidential

campaign) for two years now, which by every account is bereft of

internal division, focused on long-term strategic goals, extremely

successful financially and so far completely successful at its main

objectives. He defeated, with this organization, the former most

successful brand in politics, in their own backyard - the Clintons.

 

His opponent, who like him had no previous executive experience, has

run a haphazard campaign, full of internal division, which struggled

financially and which lumbers from one short-term tactic and gimmick

to another (We are the experienced ones! Now we are the agents of

change! The economy is strong! The economy is in crises!), and whose

current campaign is focused on avoiding discussion of the most

pertinent issue of the day, our economy.

 

You are right. The choice is very clear.

 

Kundalini-Yoga , " reedsmyth " <nrross wrote:

>

> One poor lonely-at-the-top smuck is not responsible for much of the

> current situation. Crucifying him accomplishes nothing. Clinton was

> ineffective at responding to escalating radical muslim attacks on

> Americans. A few months into Bush's presidency, the 9/11/2001 attacks

> knocked the economy off its a.., and the Fed dropped rates

> precipitously. Money managers reaching for yield invested in

> increasingly risky investments. Nothing much bad happened for years,

> so risky investment behavior racheted upwards. Greenspan and Bernake

> didn't see any bubbles and could have raised rates and increased

> margin requirements. Existing regs were ignored by regulators. The

> biggest five investment banks lobbied their regulators to radically

> reduce capital requirements so they could leverage up 40-1. Fannie

> and Freddie, big Obama supporters, were leveraged 100-1, and Congress

> passed legislation encouraging or requiring mortgage lenders to make

> loans to people who couldn't afford the real estate, with the aid of

> lenders and appraisers and zero down. It took an unholy allegiance of

> big government and big business to create this train wreck. Etc, etc,

> etc. Robert Prechter, Elliot wave theorist, has been predicting this

> debt-bomb for years, but he was way early, so people quit listening.

>

> We have to have frequent tax cuts just to keep the government's take

> relatively level- what they take this year, as % of GNP and actual $

> amount is much higher than when Bush came into office or even 4 years

> ago because of bracket creep. " Starve the beast " of big government

> seems to be the only way to stop Congress from wasting our money on

> earmarks, etc. So Clinton was lucky enough to inherit a great economy

> from Reagun. The Democratic Congress didn't manage to kill it with

> their tax hikes before they were turned out for a Republican majority

> a few years later, who cut some taxes, and now Clinton is remembered

> for good economic times.

>

> The solution is probably not to elect an anti-American who has

> accomplished nothing in the senate except to garner the presidential

> nomination.

>