Just for the record, Tom: all that I have written here (that isn't deliberately
ironic) is utterly sinceresincere here means, my motives are honourable (at
least as far as I can consciously know them). As for your condemnation of my
writing: style and form of argumentation, I must admit I don't follow you here.
Of course I grant that sometimes my style becomes convoluted and dense, but I
am only trying to track the deepest feelings, the deepest experiences, and the
most complex ideas.
When someone is harshly critical of oneself, there is always the thought: Is
this person right about meor at least partially right? Then, if one poses this
question and tries to be as honest and fearless as one can, one steps outside
of oneself and says: "Are you sure this person hasn't got a hold of an
important truth about you, as painful and traumatizing as it is to contemplate
it?"
And there are (at least as far as I can tell) only four outcomes to this
self-interrogation: 1. denial but silence (a sort of turn the other cheek
response) 2. denial and retaliation (and here there has to be SOME truth in the
negative judgment of oneself) 3. acceptance and regret (wishing what was said
was NOT true, but getting down about it, because of the irresistible sense that
it IS true) 4. acceptance and humility (one learns from the criticism, and
amends one's waysto the extent to which this is possible).
Depending of course on HOW MUCH ACTUAL TRUTH IS GETTING SAID AND THROUGH TO ONE.
The real question, then, becomes, Tom: If I were a third person observing this
point counterpoint (that is, while still being aware that one is in fact the
object of a blanket dismissal of the worth of anything and everything one has
written), where would I come down in terms of my assessment of where the truth
lies?
Mostly on Tom Pall's side? or mostly on Masked Zebra's side? Or a combination
of both (i.e. there is SOME truth in what Tom Pall is saying, but at the same
time the criticism is not entirely justified)?
I will just say to you outright, Tom, that however sincere and passionate you
are in judging my contributions here on FFL to be "shit", I am unable to make
this judgment fit the reality of my experience. And therefore I am leftI hope
not in any defensive or self-serving waywith the overwhelming impression that
you yourself have no notion of where your bitterness or anger or hatred comes
from.
Now I don't mean this necessarily as a personal criticism of you. I only mean
to say that, without sparing myself in my determination to get at where the
truth lies, I find myself unable to arrive at any other conclusionthan that,
in some mysterious way, you havefor a considerable time nowfound yourself in
the act of hating someone (or something) without being able to consciously stay
aware of WHY IT IS YOU ARE DOING THIS.
And on what basis do I reach this conclusion?
Your judgment of me (in the terms at least that you have made it) just does not
apply to the objective truth of the situation. You have missed your man, Tom.
You have got me wrong.
Because (I am repeating myself here) there is not a single subjective response
inside of myself which would suggest I am avoiding taking on this challengeand
mounting a counter-offensive to protect my self-esteem.
I must conclude, therefore, that you are mistaken about me, Tom. And that
therefore you lack any meaningful rationale for the perpetuation of this
antipathy.
You seeI AM COMING TO THE END OF THIS, TOM!If there were the slightest truth
in what you have said about me (I mean in the main: you are full of shit and
your writing is shit, MZ) then, believe it or not, in reading this [what I am
writing here in this very post], at some level at least, YOU WOULD EXPERIENCE
YOURSELF AS A MARTYR. A martyr? Yes, a martyr for the truth.
Because MZ has just tried to pull a fast one here, seeking a kind of false
exoneration. I (Tom Pall) know in my soul: Hey, here is deceit and corruption
('shit') in the service of the ego.: Do you need any more proof than this very
attempt to overthrow my (TP/s) TRUE judgment of this guy?
Yes, if you would go into your death with this conviction, Tom, then somehow I
have 1. misconstrued reality 2. misconstrued you 3. misconstrued the truth.
Now I look forward to seeing your reply to this, having, as best I can, set up
certain criteria that would enable us (and the unsentimental readers on this
blog) to properly evaluate the merits of our respective positions in this
matter. Masked Zebra, he is full of shit. Masked Zebra, he is not full of shit.
No, Tom, I have (excepting the necessary strategic use of irony) written in
good faith. And somehow your experience of me and my writing is not consistent
with reality. Now there very well may be significant, even devastating
criticisms to be madeof me, of my writingbut you have not hit upon what they
are.
--- In [email protected], Tom Pall <thomas.pall@...> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 3:34 AM, Ravi Yogi <raviyogi@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > MZ, ignore Tom - he hates everyone so it's nothing personal.
> >
> > --- In [email protected], Tom Pall <thomas.pall@> wrote:
> > >
> > > RC, don't place limits on yourself like that. Take next week and the week
> > > after and the week after.
> > >
> > > But Nature's already taking its course. You're quickly becoming
> > irrelevant
> > > here just as you've become irrelevant wherever you've squatted. Soon all
> > > that be left behind will be some rotting turds, a God awful stench and
> > > flies.
> > >
> >
> > Quite right. Nothing personal. I actually was looking forward to the time
> when the great legend RC would/could come to visit. I thought he must be a
> really cool dude, having done all of that. But instead he was just another
> Lory, another Ravi: Hey everyone. I'm going to sit at the keyboard and
> free associate, write nothing coherent but make up for the incoherence in
> the volume of non-sequitor words, sentences, paragraphs and pages I
> produce. You see, when you've had experiences like I've had, when you've
> been enlightened, you no longer need to nor can write the in vernacular, no
> longer need to use the idiom of the common, rather highly educated FFLer.
> If we can't make out what you're writing, it's because you are so high above
> us, so very special and well, it's so ineffable that you need to pick random
> words out of philosophy texts as you type along. Maharishi didn't find
> this important. He we call Guru Dev didn't find this important. SSRS,
> Amma, Christ did not find this important. Nor did the God who spoke to
> Abraham. Nor Shankara. Nor Tim Leary. But you are something very special,
> beyond all of those and we need to struggle to just to try to make a bit of
> sense out of what you set down on the screen. The shear struggle we put
> forth might help us climb a bit of the ladder to your level. How
> interesting that we have to struggle our way up the side of a cliff, draw
> ourselves up a steep ladder when it's actually all about getting from here
> to here.
>
> Nothing personal about quantity of words produced. Barry Wright often fills
> pages. Though his messages ever have a slam against TM, Americans (which
> he, BTW, happens to be) and Judy, he writes compelling stuff in prose where
> every sentence is terse and tight, one sentence leads to the next,
> paragraphs tie together, the whole makes sense. But Barry Wright doesn't
> put yourself in your class, Thank God.
>
> I don't care if you had a romance with Maharishi. In fact, I don't care if
> you two walked the beach hand in hand saying sweet nothings to each other.
> Nor that you launched a campaign against Maharishi and his TMO. I actually
> prefer that sort of behavior and history compared to the blissninny postings
> we get here about this or that TMO event.
>
> Yes, I have lots of hates. One hate is someone who comes to a forum where
> people communicate with each other, mostly. The politics can be bizarre,
> the philosophies can be bizarre, the life experiences are vastly different
> and yes, there are the awards for the one line zinger or the succinctly
> worded pithy point summed up in a single sentence.
>
> It truly is nothing personal, RC. I wouldn't care if your name was actually
> Daisy Mae. You, Ravi and Lory are full of shit. Or rather you three write
> shit. Some are impressed with that. Surely each of you are impressed with
> each other's shit.
>
> Why not just hit the delete key or put spam filters in place? Because the
> way these posts and threads work, I'll begin reading what I think is an
> interesting post about XYZ. Turns out it's a response or a response to a
> response to your keyboard diarrhea. Can't filter those out as these
> threads go on forever at times. If I filter a poster to trash, the entire
> thread containing a post by someone I'm filtering all wind up in the
> trash. A lot of fascinating stuff is lost that way, so I wind up going
> through my trash to find the otherwise good stuff.
>
