--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@...> wrote:
>
> Ann's question should really have been directed at Xeno, since, as Share
> accurately states here, she was "reflecting back" to him "what he himself
> expressed." So it was his idea, not Share's, so Share is not being at all
> evasive in not answering it.
Oh, please, feste, have some self-respect. Ann asked Share
how she felt about the issue, Share responded with an
evasive non sequitur and a deliberately obscure implied
accusation, and then she blamed Ann for "not getting" her.
You're too smart not to have noticed that this is typical
behavior for Share.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I was reflecting back to Xeno what he himself expressed.
> >
> > You must not have read Ann's question. It was, "And you
> > really, experientially believe that?"
> >
> > > Nice try though.
> >
> > What does that mean? Try to what?
> >
> > > Face it, Ann, you and Emily just don't get me at all.
> >
> > Face it, Share, if folks "don't get" you it's because you
> > refuse to reply directly and without evasion when they ask
> > you about something, as Ann just did and as both Emily and
> > Ann have countless times. You *make sure* they don't "get
> > you" and then pretend it's somehow their fault.
> >
> > > And probably I don't get you two either. That's why I
> > > generally choose not to engage with you two.
> >
> > If you were willing to engage honestly, you might find
> > that they would "get" you and you would "get" them. Why
> > are you so afraid to do that? What are you trying to
> > hide? What don't you want them to "get"?
> >
> > > It's pointless.
> >
> > You make sure it's pointless.
> >
> > Now I have a question (which you won't answer). Why do you
> > frequently leave out articles ("Glad result was nonmalignant")?
> > Do you think it makes you look smart or cool, or what? It isn't
> > just to save time, because it doesn't take that much time to
> > type in three letters--and because you often *do* use articles.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: Ann <awoelflebater@>
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:48 PM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Capitalization, on FFL
> > >
> > >
> > > Â
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Glad result was non malignant.ÃÂ Even though on one level malignant
> > > > would have been ok too
> > >
> > > And you really, experientially believe that? That you could pull off that
> > > statement when faced with that kind of grim diagnosis? I say very, very
> > > few people could stand there and shrug it off, no corresponding shot of
> > > adrenaline hitting you like a sledgehammer as you hear those words. Just
> > > standing there with a sublime, accepting beatific expression on your face
> > > thinking, "This is ok too..."
> > > >
> > > > For me that not worrying is also a kind of almost dumb trustingness.ÃÂ
> > > > So there is an emotional quality to it but not mushy gushy emotions
> > > > like before.ÃÂ Because every emotion contains its opposite.ÃÂ Like
> > > > two waves canceling each other out.ÃÂ They both are still there, only
> > > > still, vibrating with possibility.ÃÂ At first it can seem very odd
> > > > indeed, but then it's fun.ÃÂ And a blessing.ÃÂ What a great gift it
> > > > has been for me to have a sense of humor emerge just as the body is
> > > > falling apart (-:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:10 PM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Capitalization, on FFL
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ÃÂ
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Xeno, I bet you can appreciate this: last week my best friend and
> > > > > > I were laughing our heads off because we both thought we were
> > > > > > having heart attacks. On the same day!
> > > > >
> > > > > > But you perhaps unintentionally raise a good question: is it
> > > > > > better to live miserably or die happily? Meanwhile I say enjoy the
> > > > > > cunning philosophers who think up such questions to entertain the
> > > > > > body mind on a wintry day.
> > > > >
> > > > > > But Xeno what about this sentence: The cat is the cat. Such a
> > > > > > sentence seems to be self contained and thus not needing any
> > > > > > sensory experience to support its validity. Its internal logic
> > > > > > validates it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, this is a tautology. A statement that is always true. Self
> > > > > validating. The form is 'x = x'. X can be anything, real or
> > > > > imaginary. It is not a proposition because it expresses nothing. It
> > > > > is empty. Like enlightenment, 'selling water by the river' as the Zen
> > > > > master said. True, but nothing to it.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Which is kind of what happens with Beingness. It is self
> > > > > > validating. There is simply the living of it. Yes, it is very
> > > > > > difficult to put into words. And I do think a lot of long term
> > > > > > TMers are at this stage now. They are simply living Beingness.
> > > > > > With little or no thinking about it. And they are experiencing it
> > > > > > as the most ordinary thing there is. The most transparent thing
> > > > > > there is. Both the most strong and the most vulnerable thing there
> > > > > > is. And then one can only laugh one's head off at the absurdity of
> > > > > > it all. Which I think FFL perfectly mirrors (-:
> > > > >
> > > > > Indeed.
> > > > >
> > > > Additionally (I wrote something earlier and Yahoo's software sent my
> > > > response into the aether and giving me an error message), there is the
> > > > phrase 'The Absolute Being' (appropriately and imposingly captialised),
> > > > which as we become spiritually aware, instigates a search far and wide
> > > > for that which is at all times in plain sight, hidden in total
> > > > obviousness, as we puff ourselves up with our discoveries along the
> > > > path which we think is there. Finally, the bubble bursts and all is
> > > > well.
> > > >
> > > > Speaking of heart attacks. I was in the hospital the other week. A
> > > > biopsy. The following week I went to the doctor's office, as they had
> > > > not called. A nurse, the 'clinical supervisor' had to figure out the
> > > > results from the report as the doctor was on vacation. I do not know
> > > > what she was thinking, but I was just standing there knowing that the
> > > > result was either malignant or not malignant, but it did not matter
> > > > which because one result or the other was the only outcome, and which
> > > > ever one, the course that followed was inevitable and there was no
> > > > arguing with either way. This is why it is called 'the absolute being'.
> > > > As it turned out, it was not malignant, but still there might be some
> > > > consequences, which I have not yet been told. The mind did not go into
> > > > a routine like 'oh no, I hope it is not that'. I was just standing
> > > > there thinking, 'this is really fascinating, I wonder which way it will
> > > > be!', as if there was some new discovery about life to unfold.
> > > >
> > > > The absence of worry about the future seems to be one of the major
> > > > benefits of spirituality as it matures, not because you believe
> > > > something will be a certain way, but because there really is no choice
> > > > about which way will manifest. You just get to live the way it goes,
> > > > and the mind no longer imposes its interpretation (at least most of the
> > > > time), on the situation coming forward. Rather the mind becomes a tool
> > > > to navigate what is happening rather than an obstacle to what is
> > > > happening, resiting what is transpiring in an attempt to maintain an
> > > > unrealistic world view.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
