--- In [email protected], maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> You know, Ravi Yogi, Rick Archer invited me to post on this blog. When I
> looked over the blog, it seemed pretty dangerousthat is, as I said to RA, I
> might get eaten alive by the sacred monsters on this blog. Perhaps for my own
> good, I don't know. But I was somewhat apprehensive about posting here
> because it seemed from my first impression that I might really be in for it.
> But I posted several times; no problem. Then, this morning, I discover YOUR
> POSTS. What I lack (I am sincere here, believe me) is some context within
> which to understand your dismissal of me in the terms you have used: Prodigal
> Pimp. Who knows? maybe it fits perfectly, but it's just I haven't come across
> this characterization of myself. Perhaps, after being eviscerated on this
> blog by Ravi Yogi I will beat a hasty retreat. It depends on whether you can
> substantiate this judgment of me (PP) or not. Meantime I will (you will
> understand this) have to resort to the most disguised as well as the most
> blatant irony in order to protect my reputation in my own eyes. After all,
> it's not what other people choose to think about you, it's what you think
> about yourself. I just want to defend myself to the utmost (on behalf of
> myself) so as to put off as long as possible the possible impact of this
> indictment. The indictment implied in your unflattering estimation of me.
> Should I take this personally, Ravi Yogi? Or should I just play along with
> you, seeing whether you really will knock me off of this blog? Could it beI
> am just speculating herethat you, as a born Hindu, assume as a given an
> assumption about the validity of the Eastern view of reality which itself
> needs to be challenged? But I don't know nothing, Ravi. I am only (as you can
> see) taking the measure of this opposition which has suddenly come out into
> the open. I don't relish one of them food fights that sometimes get started
> on this blog. If you are going to deliver the real intellectual ordinance,
> why then I'll have to anticipate possible permanent injury. And I will step
> away and nurse my wounds, hoping they don't prove fatal.
>
> No, really, Ravi Yogi, I am a nice guy. I think you've got me wrong. Give me
> a chance, will you?
>
> --- In [email protected], "Ravi Yogi" <raviyogi@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jun 17, 2011, at 2:06 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > >
> > > > RESPONSE: Not a single person in my lifetime has demonstrated
> > > > impeccably and infallibly that such a "ground of all being" even
> > > > exists. That is, if I am to go by his/her claim to become the
> > > > embodiment of such an irreducible level of reality. In fact, I
> > > > would go further: I have not observed a single person who even
> > > > gives evidence that they have made contact with such a fundamental
> > > > form of reality. For me the "home of all the laws of nature" is a
> > > > metaphysical fiction. Sure, the EXPERIENCE seems to verify this
> > > > reality (via TM), but, given how wonderfully convincing one's
> > > > initial experiences are of TM (the auguring of everything MMY
> > > > promises), the final pay-off (nothing to show for it, an
> > > > extraordinarily disappointing trajectory of 'progress' in one's
> > > > 'evolution' over decades of doing TM), logically forces one to
> > > > conclude: THESE EXPERIENCES ARE FALSE; that is, they DO NOT
> > > > COINCIDE WITH REALITY. There IS no such thing as Enlightenment.
> > >
> > >
> > > Well perhaps for the TM system, which seems to induce novel forms of
> > > psychosis and ego inflation, but you cannot exclude every awakening
> > > tradition, can you?
> > >
> >
> > OMG, He IS, can't you tell....? You look like you are begging him -
> > c'mon... Vakradhatu, the one trick parrot, the proponent of the
> > Vakragita begging the Prodigal Pimp Maskedzebra for acknowledgement?
> > Read his puke again - you will see he ranked MMY higher than HHDL, don't
> > ask me why - I don't know, I guess his hobby is to compare
> > "non-enlightened" people trying to teach the "non-existent"
> > "enlightenment" to ignorant masses?
> >
>
