--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@...> wrote: > > The Andante Of Snakes > > They weave a slow andante as in sleep, > Scaled yellow, swampy black, plague-spotted white; > With blue and lidless eyes at watch they keep > A treachery of silence; infinite > > Ancestral angers brood in these dull eyes > Where the long-lineaged venom of the snake > Meditates evil; woven intricacies > Of Oriental arabesque awake, > > Unfold, expand, contract, and raise and sway > Swoln heart-shaped heads, flattened as by a heel, > Erect to suck the sunlight from the day, > And stealthily and gradually reveal > > Dim cabalistic signs of spots and rings > Among their folds of faded tapestry; > Then these fat, foul, unbreathing, moving things > Droop back to stagnant immobility. > > Arthur Symons > > > [http://images.clipartof.com/small/1048180-Royalty-Free-RF-Clip-Art-Illu\ > stration-Of-A-Cartoon-Evil-Snake.jpg] > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Dear Vaj, > > > > Look, Vaj: if you can furnish *any* proof that you know me beyond > having (perhaps) been a witness to an hour's conversation in > Washington, DC 25 years ago where I resisted hearing my astrology chart > read aloud to me (being at that time a serious convert to Catholicism, > and having understood the Church's Teaching about the harm of accepting > some mystical determinism as the explanation for the person that I was), > I will promise to support and champion you here at FFL. And why am I > willing to become a Vaj apologist (if you provide the slightest evidence > to back up your claim: "I'd be happy to refresh your memory!")? Because > clearly, if there is any truth whatsoever in this assertion of > yoursnot to mention that indeed you were in fact a TM > initiatorit means that you have decided, even knowing that you are > telling the truth about these things, that you deliberately wish to > arouse suspicion about the veracity of those same claims. And > thisthe motive you have in wanting people to doubt the truth of > what you sayintrigues me, as suggesting you are following some > enigmatic and impenetrable mission, a mission whose success evidently > depends upon your acquiring a reputation as a liar and a mountebank. > > > > What this amounts to, then, is some kind of manipulated martyrdom: you > are in fact a TM initiator; you did in fact have personal contact with > Maharishi; you did practice the Sidhis; and you really did have a > face-to-face conversation with me (even hearing me speak about Michael > Jacksonalthough once I became a Catholic I certainly altered my > idea of everything, including what I took to be somethingat that > time 1984-85angelic about Jackson)but you choose to shroud all > this in doubt and skepticism. What a fascinating strategybut I ask: > to what end? > > > > On the other hand, I have decided if this aforementioned > interpretation is in defiance of the actual facts of the matter, then I, > in all sincerity, Vaj, ask that you seek professional help; or, if that > is considered too infra dig, that you seriously attempt to get control > of your compulsions, your Pinocchio-Walter Mitty Syndrome, through some > act of will. > > > > [The American Heritage Dictionary defines a Walter Mitty as "an > ordinary, often ineffectual person who indulges in fantastic daydreams > of personal triumphs.] > > > > Now I don't of course dismiss your intelligence, nor your knowledge of > various Eastern spiritual practices. And perhaps you are even an > accomplished person in the world. But this hunger to have a purely > imaginary lifeassociating yourself with TM, with Maharishi, with > being a TM initiator, with knowing (and even having confronted) > myselfwhen, as you know in your conscience all this is a lie, well, > it just baffles me. But then when I see you in action here at FFL I > realize that this entire fantasy life has got the better of you; that > you cannot help yourself; that you are powerless to get control of this > behaviour. And therefore I am going to look upon you, Vaj, with mercy > and compassion. You cannot help following out this dream world to the > very end. > > > > That is, assuming the alternate interpretation is invalid: that you > are not gathering intelligence for some secret agency who is paying you > a fortune to have your reputation and honour > besmircheddeliberatelyby making sure you say things that you > are certain others will know cannot be true. > > > > I would, thoughand I realize this is ironic in the > extremelike to share one confidential fact about me: I am married > to Lady GagaNow of course she will deny this if you confront her > with this fact; but the truth is, she has to do this; indeed she is even > supposed not to remember even that we are married. But know, Vaj that > we *are* married. Just ask her to e-mail you offline and *I* will be > happy to refresh her memory. > > > > Robin > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 27, 2011, at 12:41 AM, maskedzebra wrote: > > > > > > > I don't know you at all, Vaj. And you don't know me. That first > sentence of yours, it's your signature move. You are a fantasist. If you > can provide the name of one person from my past who will vouch for your > claim to know me, I will disavow what I say now without equivocation: > you are a liar. I think you could say you travelled with Lenin on the > train to Moscow just before the Revolution. What is this all about, Vaj? > This for me is a dangerous condition. Get a grip. If you overheard > something I said about Michael Jackson back in 1984 you would, without > even trying, convey the context of my experience. This is just something > you picked up second-hand. And it does not communicate, even then (when > I was in my Unity hallucination] what I thought about Michael Jackson. > Vaj you have never once even attempted to establish your bona fides > regarding Maharishi, TM, being a TM teacher, or your personal knowledge > of myself. I am amazed that anyone takes you seriouslythat is, when > you attempt to falsify your personal history. You are a stranger to me, > Vaj. And if you did in fact meet me that one afternoon, I can't recall > you saying anything to me at all. Until you are willing to be honest > with me I will simply reject all your claims to know anything at all > about mefrom personal experience. > > > > > > > > > Great Robin. Email me off list and I'd be happy to refresh your > memory! > >
The Andante Of Snakes They weave a slow andante as in sleep, Scaled yellow, swampy black, plague-spotted white; With blue and lidless eyes at watch they keep A treachery of silence; infinite Ancestral angers brood in these dull eyes Where the long-lineaged venom of the snake Meditates evil; woven intricacies Of Oriental arabesque awake, Unfold, expand, contract, and raise and sway Swoln heart-shaped heads, flattened as by a heel, Erect to suck the sunlight from the day, And stealthily and gradually reveal Dim cabalistic signs of spots and rings Among their folds of faded tapestry; Then these fat, foul, unbreathing, moving things Droop back to stagnant immobility. Arthur Symons --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Dear Vaj, > > Look, Vaj: if you can furnish *any* proof that you know me beyond having > (perhaps) been a witness to an hour's conversation in Washington, DC 25 years > ago where I resisted hearing my astrology chart read aloud to me (being at > that time a serious convert to Catholicism, and having understood the > Church's Teaching about the harm of accepting some mystical determinism as > the explanation for the person that I was), I will promise to support and > champion you here at FFL. And why am I willing to become a Vaj apologist (if > you provide the slightest evidence to back up your claim: "I'd be happy to > refresh your memory!")? Because clearly, if there is any truth whatsoever in > this assertion of yoursnot to mention that indeed you were in fact a TM > initiatorit means that you have decided, even knowing that you are telling > the truth about these things, that you deliberately wish to arouse suspicion > about the veracity of those same claims. And thisthe motive you have in > wanting people to doubt the truth of what you sayintrigues me, as suggesting > you are following some enigmatic and impenetrable mission, a mission whose > success evidently depends upon your acquiring a reputation as a liar and a > mountebank. > > What this amounts to, then, is some kind of manipulated martyrdom: you are in > fact a TM initiator; you did in fact have personal contact with Maharishi; > you did practice the Sidhis; and you really did have a face-to-face > conversation with me (even hearing me speak about Michael Jacksonalthough > once I became a Catholic I certainly altered my idea of everything, including > what I took to be somethingat that time 1984-85angelic about Jackson)but > you choose to shroud all this in doubt and skepticism. What a fascinating > strategybut I ask: to what end? > > On the other hand, I have decided if this aforementioned interpretation is in > defiance of the actual facts of the matter, then I, in all sincerity, Vaj, > ask that you seek professional help; or, if that is considered too infra dig, > that you seriously attempt to get control of your compulsions, your > Pinocchio-Walter Mitty Syndrome, through some act of will. > > [The American Heritage Dictionary defines a Walter Mitty as "an ordinary, > often ineffectual person who indulges in fantastic daydreams of personal > triumphs.] > > Now I don't of course dismiss your intelligence, nor your knowledge of > various Eastern spiritual practices. And perhaps you are even an accomplished > person in the world. But this hunger to have a purely imaginary > lifeassociating yourself with TM, with Maharishi, with being a TM initiator, > with knowing (and even having confronted) myselfwhen, as you know in your > conscience all this is a lie, well, it just baffles me. But then when I see > you in action here at FFL I realize that this entire fantasy life has got the > better of you; that you cannot help yourself; that you are powerless to get > control of this behaviour. And therefore I am going to look upon you, Vaj, > with mercy and compassion. You cannot help following out this dream world to > the very end. > > That is, assuming the alternate interpretation is invalid: that you are not > gathering intelligence for some secret agency who is paying you a fortune to > have your reputation and honour besmircheddeliberatelyby making sure you > say things that you are certain others will know cannot be true. > > I would, thoughand I realize this is ironic in the extremelike to share one > confidential fact about me: I am married to Lady GagaNow of course she will > deny this if you confront her with this fact; but the truth is, she has to do > this; indeed she is even supposed not to remember even that we are married. > But know, Vaj that we *are* married. Just ask her to e-mail you offline and > *I* will be happy to refresh her memory. > > Robin > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 27, 2011, at 12:41 AM, maskedzebra wrote: > > > > > I don't know you at all, Vaj. And you don't know me. That first sentence > > > of yours, it's your signature move. You are a fantasist. If you can > > > provide the name of one person from my past who will vouch for your claim > > > to know me, I will disavow what I say now without equivocation: you are a > > > liar. I think you could say you travelled with Lenin on the train to > > > Moscow just before the Revolution. What is this all about, Vaj? This for > > > me is a dangerous condition. Get a grip. If you overheard something I > > > said about Michael Jackson back in 1984 you would, without even trying, > > > convey the context of my experience. This is just something you picked up > > > second-hand. And it does not communicate, even then (when I was in my > > > Unity hallucination] what I thought about Michael Jackson. Vaj you have > > > never once even attempted to establish your bona fides regarding > > > Maharishi, TM, being a TM teacher, or your personal knowledge of myself. > > > I am amazed that anyone takes you seriouslythat is, when you attempt to > > > falsify your personal history. You are a stranger to me, Vaj. And if you > > > did in fact meet me that one afternoon, I can't recall you saying > > > anything to me at all. Until you are willing to be honest with me I will > > > simply reject all your claims to know anything at all about mefrom > > > personal experience. > > > > > > Great Robin. Email me off list and I'd be happy to refresh your memory! RESPONSE: Found it, raunchydog. I hope that Vaj is not the Andante of Snakes. But I'm afraid "a treachery of silence" does prevail. Vajhowever wonderful a person he may behas decided to enjoy participating on a forum where the vast majority of members are either TM meditators or former TM meditators. And there are among us many initiators (teachers of TM). Most of us have had some contact with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. Vaj has attempted to pass himself off as a TM initiatorbut the very attempt to do so incriminates him, because all of us have been branded in some way by our TM experiences. Having done TM cannot, just in the nature of the case, be faked or contrived. Vaj assumes something that just isn't true: that TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is just another New Age story. He feels he can move in among us acting like any other ex-TMer. But it is obvious in *everything* he says he does not bring along the context of the TM experience. Because no matter if we are hostile and contemptuous as Barry is, or Salvis-a-vis TM and Maharishiall of us bear the impressions of having transcended and having pointed ourselves towards Maharishi as if he were a genuine Master. It is one thing to walk away from all thiseven to be bitter and cynical about it all; but this is very different from posing as an ex-initiatorpretending to have known Maharishi. In the latter case (consisting of set of one) there is no evidence of the real contact with what Transcendental Meditation is, nor who Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was. "Woven intricacies/Of Oriental arabesque awake"Vaj evidently has studied comprehensively the sacred texts of all Eastern spiritual teachings which interest himand he has extended hisintellectual, not empiricalresearch to TM and Maharishi and the Guru Dev. BUT HE HAS NO WOUNDS UPON HIM. He thereforewho knows why?has decided to become a liar, a charlatan, so that he canfrom his detached vantage pointridicule and mock the whole TM-Maharishi enterprise. I wonder if he even knows why he does this. It is one thing if someone who has taught TM attacks Maharishi and TM [as I have done repeatedly]; it is another thing to falsify oneself and the reality of TM and Maharishi by pretending to be speaking from the perspective of real experience and personal history. Whereas in fact the only person on FFL who could argue for the legitimacy of Vaj's claims would be someoneI know of such a personwho thought it served his or her purpose to perpetuate this lie (as if it somehow could be true). "Stagnant immobility": I think so. I just don't get it, raunchydog. Obviously Vaj is intelligent, and I genuinely would like to discuss these religious issues with him. But he is an actor playing a part, inside his own play, writing his own script as he goes along. But where we are existing it is reality. And Vaj, in so far as he is affecting this pose of being a TM initiator, disqualifies himself from saying anything meaningful about TM. Now were he to admit he has never been initiated into TM, then the entire context of his spiritual writings would alterand I for one would listen to him. But as it is, if someone acts as if he is committed to a spiritual vision of the universe, but sees nothing incompatible with lying inside the very conversation about these highest truths, then he refutes himself. Because his conscience condemns him in each act in which he is performing his sham imitation of being an ex-TM initiator. This is not merely a matter of content as suchwhat he says. It is something that goes much deeper than this. It is his very credibility as a human being. And how can he expect to be inspired in anything that he writes, if all the while he is doing this, he is playing false to himself. And after discussing this issue with him as much as I have, it would seem he is determined to perpetuate this fraudeven at the cost of knowing, as he surely must, that he undermines even the possibility of reading what he writes on its own terms. Because all the while we are aware, as his readers, that he is pretending to be a witness to a reality which he never knew. One says to oneself: Oh, well, let's leave the guy alone. Fine. But think of what immeasurable benefit would accrue to his experience of confessing (or just quietly acknowledging) that he never did TM, never was a TM initiator, never knew Maharishiand something else as well (his claim to have confronted the jolly old Unity Consciousness guyand exposed the inauthenticity of his enlightenment). He would be set free! I really feel this, raunchydog. I don't do him any favours by ignoring his elaborate hoax. I wonder what his Teacher thinks of his game. And the really amazing thing is that there is no contact high with regard to TM and Maharishi. Vaj demonstrates transparently that for all the years he has been writing about TM and Maharishi and the TM Movement, *he doesn't know the first thing about it*. It's sort of like sex, Vaj baby. You have to have the experience. Appreciate the poem, raunchydog. And its pertinence.
