--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "WillyTex" <willytex@...> wrote:
Yes you are right I meant Patanjali. > > > > 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 > > >
