--- In [email protected], maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: > > seventhray1: Incredible post zarzari. Just incredible. The window seems to > have > opened a little for Judy to possibly see things differently. I hope she > will take your advice to heart, and not retreat into the same old, same > old. Well done. >
Scary, I find this response confusing, it reminds me of a short story I once read "the man who sold his dreaming". C'mon gimme your first person ontology, throw it on to me, it'll increase my share of Godhead > RESPONSE: Incredible post seventhray1. Just incredible. The window seems to > have slammed shut completely for seventhray to possibly see things > differently. I hope he will take this judgment to heart, and not retreat into > the same old, same old. Well done. Your prejudice, your blindness, your > imperviousness is shocking, Steve. Are you even beyond the prayers of your > "very devout Catholic" wife? I hope not. She must find you at times terribly > mischievous and irritating. You have NEVER taken in the amount of reality and > truth that would permit you to make the judgments you make. You are > perversely selective in almost everything you say [except in telling us about > your children]. There is no willingness to let realty have some play inside > of you, to lead you, to inspire you in your responses. You will never travel > into the unknown. You don't surround an issue with your heart and mind. You > are looking always, in every instance, to feed your own predetermined point > of view. It is an outrage. It is a tragedy. I feel deeply sorry for you, > Steve. But evidently there is nothing you can do about this. Your niceness is > poisoned at its tip. Of course you don't know anything about all this I am > telling you, but this does not in any way make it less true. But there is no > telling you anything, Steve, and you have already got your mind in working > order to make some response to this which will miss entirely the impact of > what I have said. You won't let anything hit you, Steve. You are innocently > conning yourself out of grappling with the issues here honestly and > existentially. You are ant-existential ini your approach: intellectually and > morally. This has nothing to with my view of anyone you have discussed by the > way. I am notit is hard even to find myself telling you thisattempting to > respond to you out of our differences of point of view. I accept your point > of view *in principle*. But what I find so disappointing and killing to the > soul is your strange personal methodology of examining the character of > another person. Your experience is so fixed and unchangeable that it will not > tolerate the notion of *discovery*, of experimental knowledge. Everything you > read at FFL is only read from the perspective of the extent to which it > reinforces your prior determinative way of seeing someone. Steve, I am sorry, > but you don't get a passing grade at all. Do you want to get into all this? > It's not worth itnot for me, not for you. You do have a pulse, right? > > Your loving friend, > Robin > > --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > > > > > Incredible post zarzari. Just incredible. The window seems to have > > opened a little for Judy to possibly see things differently. I hope she > > will take your advice to heart, and not retreat into the same old, same > > old. Well done. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], zarzari_786 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" jstein@ wrote: > > > > > > > > Responding to two of zarzari's posts here: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], zarzari_786 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > The moment you drop some turd on Barry, you have already > > > > > got 100 points with Judy. Next do some love-bombing, and > > > > > tell her that her logic is irrefutable, or even further, > > > > > tell her that she understands very subtle points about > > > > > enlightenment / God etc, you name it, nobody on FFL is yet > > > > > ready to 'get', and she throws her underwear at you. > > > > > > > > "Judy, your post was brilliant, and I never had a doubt that your > > > > intellect is among the sharpest here, and that's why I can say to > > > > you, I have the clear feeling, there is some love-bombing going on > > > > here."--zarzari, #298524 > > > > > > > > "Judy, already there was so much praise about this post of yours, > > > > and I agree with that! that I hardly dare to answer you."--zarzari, > > > > #298541 > > > > > > > > "Just imagine, you got a new lover, with whom you are deeply in > > > > romantic love, and after three years you notice, that he is utterly > > > > stupid, and you can't even talk to him, because he wouldn't even > > > > understand. What a shame for somebody with your brilliant > > intellect." > > > > --zarzari, #298541 > > > > > > > > "This is a very clear and beautiful explanation here > > Judy."--zarzari, > > > > #299795 > > > > > > Judy, glad you found the above references, indeed demonstrations of my > > love bombing to you as per your verdict. (I'm putting on my best Ravi > > voice:) You can frame it and put it on to your largest wall, and look at > > the picture I have drawn of you - how nice. > > > > > > And, you know, Judy, I stand by those quotes, for the reasons and in > > the circumstances I quoted them. That's one Judy I know. > > > > > > Judy, in the past, when you have been criticized here, I sometimes > > wondered at all the characterizations you have received. I sometimes > > wondered, how it would be to be on the 'other' side, the Non-Judy side. > > To understand those characterizations, you have to be on the other side, > > and then you discover a Judy that is not even trying to be objective, > > she is mind-reading, knowing what the other persons motives are, knowing > > if the person is lying or making something up. She is getting AT people, > > wanting to PROVE they are wrong, and goes on in endless nitpicking > > dialogues, that even your greatest admirers have seen as an unproductive > > indulgence, yes also me in the past, fully of sticky emotions, anger > > etc. > > > > > > So, for example, Barry is very often providing a bird eyes view, not > > getting into those nitpicking things, and he certainly reveals aspects > > that are true and valuable. But you don't get it, you concentrate only > > on the negatives. That he exaggerates and uses abusive or drastic > > language is not a secret, but yet, you do the same, once you 'recognize' > > someone as your adversary. Same with Vaj, he has a lot to give, in a > > certain way, given his background, he is more similar to me, but for you > > he is only a 'liar'. You are judgmental, negative and angry a lot of the > > time. You 'call out' people for things! WTF! What gives? How spiritual > > are you? What is this, all these judgments? > > > > > > This is, you should also understand, not only a waste of time, of > > yours and all the others, but also a misuse of intellect. > > > > > > How do you know, if a person can not be well meaning to another person > > who is angry on him, and even in disagreement wish her well? What is > > intellectual dishonest about it, and what impells you to insinuate that > > here? Do you really think, all people have to feel like you do, and that > > you therefore can conclude about their mind-state? > > > > > > Did you not read, how I tried to console you, at the end of our > > private exchange, even though you said you were glad that I > > unsubscribed? I recommend you read the post I wrote in reply to Robin > > and Emily, and I can assure you that I am honest about what I said about > > you there. All your allegations about my being 'dishonest' and slimy is > > your mind-reading, not true at all. You should doubt your reading of > > other peoples emotions. Your logic starts to become repetitive and > > underwhelming, stale, standard allegations we have seen you bestow on > > about anyone you dislike. You do not know peoples minds and hearts and > > have no reason to make the judgments you do. > > > > > > So sorry I didn't remember your 'rotten human' being, so 'objectively' > > I am *proven* wrong by you using the word evil!! OMG, big deal. This is > > the kind of dialogues you engage in. > > > > > > If you cannot understand, that a person may wish another person well, > > even in disagreement, this is a major human flaw. I just got a shock, > > how quickly I got the get-at-Barry treatment after this disagreement. > > let Robin talk for himself. He is smart enough. Now he came back, and I > > seriously, honestly was happy for you, but see what you do! > > > > > > This conflict with Barry has become your whole life, this anger you > > constantly project on him, has become the whole content of your life, he > > has become the template, you are ready to use for anyone now. I still > > wish you well! I still wish you a happy new year (and I do mean it) I > > feel embarrassed that I have to talk to you like a child. > > > > > > Judy, I didn't have to write this here, nobody else here will care, > > and I certainly wouldn't even consider wasting my time answering ( I > > even typed it all two times, as I lost everything the first time) See, I > > don't have to do this. I write it only to you, because I care about you. > > And I am not trying to regain your alliance, I am not in your box > > anymore, let others play this role. > > > > > > So, as Robin says quite right, but I don't think you will accept this, > > you have to soften your hard and stale heart. You have to cease to be so > > judgemental about people, and so condemning. I never understood, that > > you call somebody a 'rotten human being', how can anybody agree with > > language like this? There is something fundamentally wrong in this. > > > > > > > I checked my records, zarzari, and I don't seem to have any > > > > underpants signed out to you. Perhaps I just forgot to mark > > > > down the transaction when I threw them at you. If so, in > > > > light of your present position, if you do have a pair, I'd > > > > be much obliged if you'd return them so I can throw them at > > > > someone else who will truly appreciate them. I'm sure Barry > > > > will be more than willing to replace the ones you have with > > > > a pair of his own. > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > I have also tried to post things here in the past, to add > > something, > > > > > to contribute something of substance, some memories of movement > > > > > history, some context of various traditions, some out-of-the-box > > > > > experiences. We do get this also from Barry 2, from Barry, from > > Vaj, > > > > > from Curtis. I would be hardpressed to think of anything of Judy, > > > > > which was not either coming from FFL informants itself, or is > > usual > > > > > TM meditator last weekend-course talk. > > > > > > > > Selective reading and memory-wiping can be very effective > > > > in reinforcing one's preferred perceptions of the moment. > > > > > > > > I'm surprised you find my weekend-course talk to be so up > > > > to date. My last weekend course, as it happens, was in 1995. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], zarzari_786 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > Absolutely. To say that she is neutral about people and only > > > > > addresses issues is absolute hypocrisy > > > > > > > > Straw man. Nobody has said this that I'm aware of. I certainly > > > > haven't. > > > > > > > > The issue here was Barry's claim that when I go after him or > > > > Curtis or Vaj, it's because they're TM critics, even if what > > > > I'm on them about has nothing to do with TM. > > > > > > > > That's what Raunchy was addressing. In her phrase, what I do > > > > here is to "confront bullshit," whoever it emanates from, > > > > whatever it's about. That doesn't mean I refrain from > > > > criticizing the bullshitter. > > > > > > > > > all the LABELS (Emily take note) like 'master of unintended > > irony', > > > > > or calling Vaj a notorious liar are from her. > > > > > > > > Of course, those weren't the kind of labels Emily was > > > > referring to. > > > > > > > > > She 'picks her fights' as she says > > > > > > > > You missed the context on that one. I was actually > > > > quoting Curtis. > > > > > > > > >, and she loves fights, that is obvious, and she > > > > > thoroughly believes that you Barry are evil, she said so several > > > > > times, (Can be here or in a private exchange, but she believes it) > > > > > > > > I have never said Barry was "evil," nor do I believe it. > > > > What I have said and do believe is that he's a thoroughly > > > > rotten human being. "Evil" applies to somebody like Hitler > > > > or Pol Pot or Stalin, not a chickensh*t like Barry. > > > > > > > > > It's visible since decades. Many people in the past, including > > > > > myself, who had a general positive view of her abilities and her > > > > > attitude, have seen this as her basic weakness, and actually tried > > > > > to persuade her from refraining from this behaviour, which is > > > > > mainly motivated by anger. > > > > > > > > In fact, it's rarely motivated by anger. It's usually > > > > disgust and contempt. > > > > > > > > > If she would only be neutral, making points and pointing out > > > > > logical flaws as raunchydog wants to make us believe > > > > > > > > Again, that isn't the point Raunchy was making. > > > > > > > > > why, I ask you, anyone, is she unable to wish a happy birthday > > > > > to her main adversary. She thinks she would be hypocritical if > > > > > she did so. > > > > > > > > No, that isn't what I said. In response to Rick's assertion > > > > on Barry's birthday that Barry's detractors had a chance "to > > > > shower him with love and kisses," I replied, "I'm not that > > > > enlightened, sorry. My love is still conditional on being > > > > treated like a human being." > > > > > > > > Now, if I had had a lengthy, mutually angry argument with > > > > someone that ended without resolution, and they had > > > > concluded by wishing me a happy birthday--or, you know, a > > > > happy New Year--I might well say I couldn't return the wish > > > > because I was still angry and it would therefore be > > > > hypocritical. Implicit in that remark would be that I > > > > considered it hypocritical for the other person to have > > > > wished *me* a happy birthday or happy New Year. > > > > > > > > Just a wee bit different from what you tried to put > > > > over here. > > > > > > > > > She thinks it would be some kind of moodmaking, as her > > > > > FEELINGS are really the opposite. So much for her > > > > > balanced and neutral view. > > > > > > > > Straw man, again. I don't claim to have a "balanced and > > > > neutral view" (I do try to be as balanced as possible, but > > > > I'm far from perfect); and I have FEELINGS just like > > > > anybody else. I don't like it when people don't treat me > > > > as a human being. I dislike it even more when people don't > > > > treat *others* as human beings. I find it difficult to > > > > express good wishes toward such people; I don't like to be > > > > insincere. > > > > > > > > Apparently being insincere doesn't bother you at all. > > > > > > > > > Barry, Vaj and Curtis, all say valuable things here, all > > > > > make good posts here, they may go overboard in the extend > > > > > they make a point IMHO, but it is simply wrong to not see > > > > > the validity of what they have to say. > > > > > > > > Curtis often says valuable things. In my opinion, Barry > > > > rarely does, and Vaj almost never does. > > > > > > > > > So Judy too has her good points, I can clearly see that, > > > > > she also makes good posts, once she pots with someone she > > > > > has a positive view of. > > > > > > > > I also make good points when I post with someone of whom I > > > > have a negative view. > > > > > > > > > But the main intercations are unfortunately these fights, and > > > > > she definitely has a list of adversaries, if it is a LIST or > > > > > simply a mental list doesn't matter, > > > > > > > > Everyone has "mental lists" of people they don't like, > > > > and I'm certainly no different. That's not the same as > > > > having an "Enemies List" as Barry uses the term. > > > > > > > > > and I know it, she makes a certain switch at some point, and > > > > > you are an adversary. > > > > > > > > I have been known to make a switch when someone I have > > > > previously respected and had a cordial relationship with > > > > does something inexcusable and not only refuses to > > > > even consider any criticism but goes on and on with > > > > elaborate and dishonest self-justification. > > > > > > > > I made a switch with you when you decided to engage in > > > > slimy speculation about Robin's mental health. You made > > > > a switch with me when I criticized you for doing so. > > > > > > > > Since then you've made something like 10 posts to others > > > > dumping on me. As with your remarks about Robin, you > > > > didn't have the guts to wait till I returned and confront > > > > me directly. > > > > > > > > > I don't want to complain, I can live with it, but I do see her > > > > > modus operanti. > > > > > > > > Poor victimized zarzari, he really doesn't *want* to > > > > complain, but he just couldn't help himself. > > > > > > > > > >
