Has your subscription to the Enquirer lapsed, Share? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote :
turq, I've always assumed that Fleetwood's dawn name meant something like enlightened sunrise. From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 4:21 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] All Beings Enlightened Isn't it fascinating that after all these years Jim Flanegin STILL can't admit that he posed as a woman here on Fairfield Life for several months, posting as "enlightened_dawn" all that time? One *really* has to wonder 1) what the fuck he was *thinking* doing that, and for so long, and 2) what is wrong with his "supporters" that they manage to ignore it. It's really the biggest "elephant in the room" display of denial and cognitive dissonance in the history of the forum, even bigger than Robin Carlsen trying to continue denying that he'd hit his students, immediately after having admitted it. The only sense that I can make of it is that Jim had a total mental breakdown during that period, and actually believed he *was* a woman. When you think about it, that's no weirder than convincing himself he's enlightened. Whatever. Bottom line is that it's probably a good thing he's living way out in the boonies now, where he can't hurt anyone if he has another similar breakdown. From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> I Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] All Beings Enlightened From: "anartaxius@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> One of the things mentioned about Buddha's enlightenment is that at that moment he said that 'all beings were simultaneously enlightened with his awakening'. The phrase is translated in different ways but they all basically say the same thing, that with awakening all beings were perceived as enlightened. I presume Jim can clarify what this means. To be honest, I'd rather hear him expostulate on what value posing as a woman for several months had in helping him realize his enlightenment. Is this a technique he would suggest to other people interested in becoming enlightened? And if so, should they cross-dress only when posting on the Internet, or should they dress in drag when at work, shopping, going to church, and on other occasions? I think that many who are interested in enlightenment would also be interested in why, once he achieved his enlightenment by pretending to be a woman for so long, he's never admitted to having done it. One would think that an enlightened being who has come up with such an innovative sadhana as "Cross-Dressing For Enlightenment" would want to talk it up to all who would listen. What serious seeker would *not* want to know, for example, how Jimbo managed to conceal his occasional dhoti-tents while dressed as a woman. I'm sure they'd also be fascinated to hear how he made his decisions about which public restroom to use, how to dress when swimming in public, etc. It just doesn't feel right that a person who owes his enlightenment to such a revolutionary technique as pretending to be a member of the opposite sex "clams up" and refuses to talk about it every time the subject comes up. It's almost as if by doing this he's saying, "Hey...cross-dressing worked for *me* and was one of the key techniques that allowed me to become so much better and more evolved than all of you. But if you think I'm going to share the secrets of my patented Drag Queen Yoga™ with you for free, fuggedaboudit. You'll have to shell out the big bucks, just like Catholics do when seeking advice from the guys in *that* church who wear dresses."
