This post demonstrates why Barry deserves no attention here other than scorn for being Remarkably Stupid or a Stupid Liar, or both.
--- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: <snip> > > > The attempt here is to make it appear that his "two > > > teachings" were contradictory, so one of them must have > > > been "insincere." But if that's the case Curtis wants to > > > make, he's got to do a lot better job of it than pointing > > > to this particular statement. > > > > I get this point. I have spent quite a lot of time in the > > past trying to make this case with other examples. But it > > seems like a bit of a fools errand now. > > Pursued compulsively by...uh...fools, who seem to > have gotten their buttons pushed because Maharishi > got caught in a contradiction. :-) See how Remarkably Stupid Barry is? I was one of those *insisting* there was a contradiction. Barry has convinced himself he's much too smart to have to bother to read the discussions he barges in on in order to make a relevant or sensible comment. He's not anywhere near that smart, so he consistently makes himself look like an utter fool. <snip> > Other than using the word 'narcissism' in place of 'over- > confidence,' I agree with Curtis here. *In addition to* > being a lazy thinker spiritually, BWAHAHAHA. Barry calling somebody else a "narcissist" and a "lazy thinker." Master of Inadvertent Irony, once again. <snip> > > > His approach was holistic no matter who he was > > > talking to. He'd emphasize either the physical or the > > > metaphysical (although he hated that word) depending on the > > > occasion, but never one to the exclusion of the other, at > > > least that I ever heard, and I've been in both types of > > > audience. > > Actually, you have not. You never sat in *any* audience > with Maharishi. I point this out because you consistently > attempt to imply otherwise on this forum, as you do above. And here's the Stupid Liar demonstration. I didn't say above that I had been in an audience *with Maharishi*. That was Barry's addition. In fact, Maharishi had and continues to have far more audiences for his videotapes than he ever did "live." And because, far from ever attempting to imply I've spent time with Maharishi, I've made it explicit innumerable times that I have not, everyone here, including Barry, knows what kind of audience I was referring to. So he's not "pointing out" anything but what a Stupid Liar he is. Not that we haven't realized that long since. Which makes it particularly ironic... <snip> > My honest suspicion, Curtis, is that you are *much* more > serious -- and honest -- about your inquiry into the nature > of reality than Maharishi ever was. You can accept that you > don't "know," or that you can be wrong about things you > assume. He could not. Never. That is why I class him as > a religious fanatic and you as an honest thinker. ...that Barry believes he is in a position to criticize anybody else for what he claims is dishonesty. Barry is convinced it's perfectly OK for him to lie; he does it constantly, without a second thought. And Barry is the *least honest thinker* I've ever encountered, by far. He consistently projects his own personality flaws onto others here; now he's projecting them onto Maharishi.
