Curtis: > That phrase refers to my opinion of Shankara. > But, the thread was about Patanjali.
You said Patanjali was 'full of it' and his premises are 'bogus'. Why would you be telling Buck that Patanjali was bogus if you wanted to dialog with Buck about Yoga? It doesn't make any sense. Fraqnkly, I expected more from a MUM philosophy major. I mean what, exactly, are Patanjali's premises? You seemed confused that Sankhya was the oldest Indian system and you didn't seem to be able to cite any specifics about Patanjali. Buck: > > > > O what a bunch of evil sophistry. > > > > > > > > This thread reads as careful veiled spiritual hate. > > > > The beating of poor old Patanjali by mob. > > > > turquoiseb: > > > One guy, having fun with an imaginary conversation > > > with a possibly imaginary guy, is a *mob*? And you > > > dare to use the word "sophistry?" :-) > > > Buck: > > Yep, inciting and intending to be incendiary. Oh sure > > it is in mob and violent. You come on here demagogically > > saying something is no good because you don't like it. > > Curtis joins in. Joe and SevenRay pile on and we got > > a regular FFL book and Patanjali-in-effigy strawman > > burning by mob. > > curtis: > I just think he was full of it and that his premises about > reality are bogus... > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/274662 >
