> > --- "emptybill" <emptybill@> wrote: > <snip> > > Someone who continually accuses someone else by scathingly > > addressing them as being a "you" is an obsessed dualist by > > definition and anything they discuss (even if it appears > > rational) is just being used as a personal support for > > their fixation upon their own feeling of "me" in opposition > > to "you". > > > > --- "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > Like this, you mean? > > "Then you are just an old fuck - waiting to die. > > "However, maybe you can get appointed to one of > the British-like death panels that are inevitable. > > "That way they won't vote so quickly that you too > must lie down with the lambs on the gallow-gurnies > just to liberate the 30 something from the yoke > of your indulgence." >
No, what he meant is that Maharishi is the mother elephant and you are a baby elephant, who follows him nose to tail. Robin's posts generaly imply that he was controlled by some intelligence and not the other way around as you interpert. --- "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > Or this? > > "Last time you couldn't even tell your own fortune - > much less the fortune of someone else. > > "Better go get a checking Herschmann - before you > blunder down the same trails of your old buddies with > their twisted-cross." > > Or this? > > "Chaim you are grandstanding again. > > "Is this your new Palace of the Occult? > > "Are you still on that stage even here?" > > <guffaw> > > > Robins apes Maharishi's schema even when oppossing > > it but is laughingly > > (You meant to write "laughably," I suspect.) > > > ignorant about Shankara's Advaita. > > Non sequitur. > > Robin was a devotee of Maharishi, not of Shankara. As > far as he was concerned MMY was the font of all wisdom > concerning enlightenment. He's never mentioned Shankara's > teaching or Advaita in any of his posts here (just in > case you were hoping to mislead readers to believe he > had made mistakes about Shankara's Advaita). > > You're running on empty, bill. >
