--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@...> wrote:
Graceless lady you know who I am.
(Lyric from Stones song you sent me)
If you are poised so elegantly and wisely on that Montana fence, why did you
drop the lumber near my feet?
It seemed to me the grazing sheep came too close, and one little lamb jumped
right into your lap.
Without really thinking you sheared him with your unthoughtout mind
Before he was ready to sacrifice his lambness for your love.
But your farewell words, they tell me I should still look after my flock
Seeing as how I am the perfect shepherd of my own duncehood.
Looks as if you still will insist on flowers.
Let's do some living after we die.
(Lyric from Stones song you sent me)
A wall of forest looms above
and sweetly the blackbird sings;
all the birds make melody
over me and my books and things.
There sings to me the cuckoo
from bush-citadels in grey hood.
God's doom! May the Lord protect me
writing well, under the great wood.
St Gall
Dreaming of cow pastures and fences is a metaphor for counting sheep.
One, jump, two, jump, three, jump.
Sleepy gaze as one grazes on the barley.
A fence is not, as Vishnu tells of maintaining.
A fence is not at birth or at death. Transition, balance, keeps me on a fence
to be climbed, if one wishes to venture to the other side, my dear Kanuk pal.
I straddle that lumber using my steady pace.
Border guards could not keep me from climbing the slopes in Montana?
Border guards could not keep me from Moose Jaw.
Wild horses http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07CSyTmA1Ic like fences too.
If you were to unsubscribe, I would turn blue.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> I guess I must have been dreaming, obbajeeba. No sticks and stones. Hey Ravi!
How about insulting, goading, provoking, violating obbajeeba *after she says
this*? :-)
>
> What you have said here is fiction, baby doll.
>
> Your humour mode got the best of you.
>
> Says sourpuss Canadian lad.
>
> You areI'm doing the job of Ravi herequite beautifully sitting on the fence
at al times, obbajeeba. We love you, but your charm just might be treacherous
at any moment.
>
> After getting hit like this, though, obbajeeba, maybe it's time for *me* to
unsubscribe.
>
> What do you say to *that*?
>
> Do I hear some cheers?
>
> Your brilliant humour is your defenceor can be. This was a stupid post,
obbajeeba.
>
> But since "it is not possible to insult, goad, provoke, even violate other
human beings on this forum" then you won't mind putting this to the test.
>
> Love from Robin
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > Pardon me if I point out it is not possible to "insult, goad, provoke, even
violate other human beings on this forum."
> > There is no flesh or blood, or wine or bread.
> > Jesus would agree.
> > Fiction, all the above and all the below. : )
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Ravi,
> > >
> > > You must help me out, Ravi, for I am more perplexed and stymied by a
particular reality than I think I have ever been over anything I have
experienced in my life.
> > >
> > > Now this is going to be a little complicated, but I am going to do my best
to clarify just what my question is to you (which I would like answered), so
that I can resolve this mystery. The mystery, of course, is all about you.
> > >
> > > You see, RaviI am going to say something terribly obvious here, so stay
with me,you do insult, goad, provoke, even violate other human beings on this
forum. Now, whenever someone actually unjustifiably does something like this,
there is always evidenceat least there has always been for me, even when I was
a young childof the malice, hatred, frustration, violence, resentmentor
whatever: something negative in other wordsin the person who does this. Even, I
believe if there in fact is some *justifiable* basis for going after a person;
hardly anyone knows how to do this without exhibiting something deficient or
distorted in themselvesJudy is an exception to this; or at least so I believe.
Whatever Judy's problem iswhich I am not privy toit is not evidently a
personal one. There may be something intrinsically problematic about the
existential Judy, but for all we know, she could be a tough love secular saint.
That's my read on her anyhow. But let me get back to my main point: Ravi, in
your creative confrontationswhat I would like to from here on refer to as the
Ravi Transgressive Mode (RTM)not only do you not exhibit evidence of your own
weakness, envy, jealousy, unhappiness etc etc etc; but more than this: *You
don't give evidence of anything personal at all!* In other words, there is no
disclosure of who the person Ravi is in the act of deploying your RTM. Now no
one knows this; no one asks this question; but, as Maharishi was fond of saying,
everyone *is in the benefit of* this truth: Ravi does not reveal anything about
himself in the very act of being more outrageous and shameless than anyone I
have ever known.
> > >
> > > Now, as I say, Ravi, I have made it a point of conscientious study since I
was a small child to see the projection factor in everyoneonce they go to the
negative side of life. Even if they are engaged in an act of justice or
purportedly righting a wrong: like, say, taking down Saddam. No matter how
inspired or objective one is in seeing something unattractive or corrupt or
false in someone, the very act of redressing this is fraught with peril. Not in
terms of necessarily the final efficacy of the execution of this act; that is,
stinging the person with the trutheither through irony or just logic and
reason; through moral embarrassment or humiliation; or whatever is one's means
of doing thisbut in terms of not drawing out some, however infinitesimally,
unexamined, unresolved, unclarified 'fault' in oneself. When we judge someone
[which presumably is why Christ uttered those words: Judge not that you be not
judged"], we almost inevitablyeven if we are talking about someone as
unredeemable as Charlie Mansonshow something of the underside of ourselves,
perhaps something we have never recognized to ourselves, but it is there.
> > >
> > > Now in your going after various persons at FFLI am not going to be
specific hereyou almost make it impossible for someone who is a witness to the
RTM not to infer that there is something mad, dark, perverted, wrong, negative
about yourself. But here is where, Ravi, it gets interesting. Not one person at
FFLat least based upon my own close inspectionhas, *to their own objectified
and self-evident satisfaction*found the secret mote in Ravi's eye, the cancer
in his heart, the blackguard truth in his soul, the insanity in his mind.
> > >
> > > So, you can anticipate my hypothesis: it is *this*the inability
intuitively or even subconsciously to sense the negative or the insane in youat
a gut levelwhich causes the disorientation, the fury, the anxiety, the
hostility, the righteous indignation in response to your employing the RTM.
Sure, people can focus strictly on the content of what you have said, and
thereby justify their outrage, their retaliation, their sense of having been
violated; but without actually getting a hold of what it is in you which has
some correlation with this interpersonal desecrationyou essentially refuse to
defer even in the very least to the felt integrity and privacy of the other
person: that in fact is the transgressive power of the act: to knowingly ignore
every tacitly understood taboo within your speaking to someone whom you do not
know personally: you go for the ultimate shock; and few persons are ready for
thisI know I wasn't when I first came on FFL":without, then, sensing the
psychological cause or even just the experiential origin of the RTM, people are
left just to lash out in a metaphysical vacuum. Because you have not provided
them with the infallibly known clues to why you are doing this; how you are
doing this; and what they should do when you do this.
> > >
> > > With me up to this point, Ravi Chivukula [you should use that name in my
opinion; it has something aristocratic about its soundfor me anyhow]?
> > >
> > > We get to the whole point of this post: I would like to ask you, Ravi,
whether you can explain to me, to us, what are the mechanics, the secret
mechanics, of your first of all: seeing into people; secondly, how you select
your tactics in approaching or addressing that person; thirdly, what your
experience is of yourself in the act of deploying the RTM [just a reminder to
the reader: that's the Ravi Transgressive Modedeployed in it most extreme and
seemingly indefensible form in one post to raunchydog].
> > >
> > > You see, no one at FFL has figured outI certainly haven'tthe cause and
effect principle of the RTM. Because from a psychological or even metaphysical
level, you leave no trace of yourself when you do this. In fact, *that is the
very secret potency of the act*: that you don't leave any fingerprints at the
crime scene that could be identified as belonging to you. There are no forensics
when it comes to investigating one of Ravi's psychologically illegal acts.
> > >
> > > What I want to know, Ravi, is whether you are simply a witness to this
actjust take one of your posts todayor whether you have access to a means of
remaining hidden and concealed inside this act such that, when you perform it
(the RTM), even you have to realize that while it is going onthe enactment of
this violative performance*you yourself are forbidden any experience inside
yourself*else, if you experienced some thrill or sensation of satisfaction
while in the act, this would be detected by the person who is the object of your
analysis, or at least by some more disinterested observer of this execution of
the RTM.
> > >
> > > I still don't believe my experience when I read one of these posts. Now
there are a number of respectable and even in some cases, honourable, persons on
FFL who either think you mad, or imbalanced, or rude, or id-drivenor whatever:
but there is no intuitively felt consensus whatsoever about this. Of course one
may predicate one's reaction to what you do on the notion of insanity or crazy
enlightenment or uncouthness or vulgarity or sexual frustrationI am sure there
is a specific theory that each person at FFL holds about you; but I doubt that
any are literally identicalalthough there will be amongst some persons, some
politically driven need to categorize you without any willingness to entertain
the complexity of the real factsand I of course believe I am getting to, or
near to, the real facts in this post.
> > >
> > > But this will never do the job of actually *getting to the secret of the
RTM*, let alone the secret of Ravi Chivukula. Just answer this one question,
Ravi: *Are you aware of what is going on here in a way that is consistent with
all or at least some of what I have said here? That is to say, are you conscious
of the secret mechanics of hiddenness of the RTM? Do you know something about
yourself which we could never know?
> > >
> > > And don't go telling me all about that Hindu crap: I refuse to attribute
what you do to the special powers granted or bestowed upon you by your
Awakening*But* should you be able to convince me of your sincerity in doing so,
by all means go ahead and invoke The Beloved, the Existence, the Self of
whatever. *You see, Ravi Chivukula* I am interestedthis is my biasin the
PERSON THAT IS RAVI CHIVUKULA. Because he, so far, remains hidden
altogethercertainly from everyone of us at FFL; and perhaps even from yourself.
I am particularly interested in whether the latter is true. But for that to be
true, means that your unconfused mode of transgression of all Western
Civilization interpersonal protocol, requires you *not to know how you do what
you do*. And this fascinates me: as in: Is it possible, Ravi, that there is an
ontological form of transcendence when you insult someone at FFL, such that you,
in order to do this in the consummate dissonant outrageous way, must yourself be
detached from the experience when it happens to you; and that only after the
factwhen you have finished writing your postare you then permitted the
satisfaction of taking delight in the extraordinary unconditioned act of
interpersonal lawlessness that you have just so perfectly committed?
> > >
> > > You see, according to my having determined that God is omnisubjectiveor
at least he was when he was aroundit must mean that, at all times, you have an
experience of being Ravi. This experience is somewhere known by a certain
intelligence in the universe which is not Ravi Chivukula. And if this is true,
you are having an experience of what it is like to be Ravi when you deploy the
RTM here at FFL. And yetthis is the whole point of this postnot one of us can
detect the evidence that you are in fact *having an experience of what it is
like to be Ravi* while performing this act of ultimate interpersonal
transgression.
> > >
> > > Because, RaviI am sure of thisif you were undergoing an experience
subjectively of being who you arethat is, having a first person ontological
experiencethen I think, with all my obsessive focus on this dimension of a
person, I at least could detect what that experience is. I cannot. And this goes
to the wonderful yet vexing mystery of Ravi.
> > >
> > > You see, even the gods have a first person ontology when they do what they
do. Or at least I can't imagine them not having this kind of subjective
selfhood. I feel with absolute certainty that they do. But in the case of
yourself your first person ontologyat least in this one act of confronting
mercilessly, pitilessly, tenaciously a particular poster at FFLis as if
suspended from existence. And there is the quintessence of what I am am seeking
to clarify here, Ravi Chivukula: what is the experiential context of Ravi
Chvukula when he unabashedly transgresses against the proprietorial privileges
of a given soul, privileges the person even feels that God must respect. And you
don't!
> > >
> > > Nobody at FFL in my estimationNo, not even you, sweet Barrynor you,
puissant Curtishas the slightest notion of what is going on with Ravi
Chivukula. Of course in reading these very words you will reflexively,
involuntarily deny this pointeven without taking it in and using the Negative
Capability which is almost a prerequisite here at FFLif, that is, you want to
*discover anything about yourself* through posting and counter-posting at FFL.
> > >
> > > So, then Ravi, this is the purpose of my post: to uncover the secret
mechanics of how you can act in such a radical and impermissible waymanifestly
doing that which would make people certain of your madness, your id-ness, your
insecurity, your crudeness, your stupidity, your indulgent recklessnessor
whatever: every reader on FFL will have formed his or her theory about Ravi
Chivukula. But there will be no one whoexcept through some arbitrary and
abstract theorycan explain the first person ontological secret of Ravi
Chivukula.
> > >
> > > This letter is my attempt to do a service for myself and for everyone who
has any interest in the Indian yogi living in California: which is to say, track
you down, corner you, and force you to reveal yourself. I will be most
interested in seeing whether in answering this post you actually begin to
disclose something about yourself that so far has remained brilliantly hidden
from all of usand perhaps even hidden from yourself.
> > >
> > > I take your chanting on that video to offer no clues whatsoever as to the
answer to my question. And why do I say that? Because the person there, one
would think, could never do what you do on a regular basis here at FFL. Your
praises, you should knowyour anti-transgressive modeare revelational as to a
person who is deeply thoughtful, humble, open, intelligent, and fair. I wonder
if there is anyone in the worldor has ever been anyone in the worldwho could
so suavely switch from the RTM to the RLMthe Ravi Transgressive Mode to the
Ravi Loving Mode. It is a mindbreakder. Now tell us something about yourself
that none of us know, Ravi Chivukula.
> > >
> > > Robin
> > >
> >
>
