--- In [email protected], iranitea wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" authfriend@ wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], iranitea wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], iranitea wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, iranitea, you have the *wrong post* in mind. > > > > > > > > > > So you declare - wrongly. > > > > > > > > No, dear, I'm correcting *you*. You are way, way off track, > > > > into the wild blue yonder. > > > > > > > > > As we are talking of Robins reaction on the 27 Dec, > > > > > > > > *I* was talking of his courteous reply to your challenge > > > > to his integrity that he made on December 19, and your > > > > positive response on December 20. He made that courteous > > > > response *even though he knew you were prejudiced against > > > > him* because of your hostile (yes, it was hostile) post > > > > to him of December 16. And he *saw through* your seemingly > > > > friendly response on December 20, as you went on to > > > > demonstrate in your exchange with Barry a few days later > > > > when you started talking about his mental health. Not a > > > > thing "mysterious" about it. > > > > > > > > Robin to Judy, December 19, 2011 (#299118): > > > > > > > > "I am grateful to you for having understood me so well in my > > > > ambivalent attitude towards Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. It is a > > > > real consolation to know that someone at least on FFL has > > > > grasped the contradiction of my experience of MMY as > > > > accurately as you have. This means a lot to me. > > > > > > > > "So that, when I came to this part of your post, I rejoiced > > > > in the fact that there was a human being who followed > > > > everything I have written about Maharishi and was therefore > > > > able to explain to zarzari_786 the paradox which had so > > > > perturbed and discomfited him. The paradox which, evidently, > > > > he felt constituted proof of my insincerity." > > > > > > So what? There is no seeing through either. > > > > I'm pointing out that he was very well aware of your > > hostility ("proof of my insincerity"). > > > > > My post on the 16 is what he was referring to, > > > > Right, and what you had been saying to me in our > > exchange. > > > > > and he obviously felt concerned about - big deal. > > > It's simply a defense to something I had raised. > > > > I have no idea what that means. > > > > > My later respectful, and grateful post of the 20th did > > > explicitly not take any of that back, as you seem to > > > indicate. > > > > Never suggested it did. I'm referring to the false > > friendliness and respect that was designed to disarm > > him. It didn't work. He knew it was a crock. > > First of all - it wasn't like this. I was genuine in my answer, I didn't take anything back, but I felt the respect I expressed. > > Second, where did he show this? In which post? How?
You didn't answer. So I guess you are referring to the post Robin made on the 27 December, AFTER my borderline post, and AFTER you became all enraged. There is NO indication that Robin KNEW IT ALL ALONG or was right LOOKING THROUGH ME. > > You had > > no intention of engaging with him; you were just > > going to pronounce judgment on his mental health, as > > you did a few days later in your discussion with > > Barry. On the 20 Dec 2011, what I said was genuinely felt at the time. Neither was there any direct contradiction to anything I said before in my post on the 16th. He just narrated his story, and I was impressed by his skill in narration, but as you admit yourself, it did in no way address the more philosophical questions, or give an answer to the ontological problem, his story, his version what his enlightenment was about. Indeed that was never satisfyingly addressed. You are wrong, in your mind-reading about my motivation as well. When I expressed, with intentionally few words, respect for his experience, I had no plan about my post a few days later, on the 26. This was a spontaneous reaction, partly by your over-devotional attitude (in another thread), partly simply by my intention NOT to hide anything, to be completely open, quite the opposite of what you say. Judy, you are soo often so wrong in the way you judge people, a special situation, their supposed intentions etc. I have basically no real interest in Robin. Why I mention it, is that so much things are going on here between US, which is based on a wrong calculation on your side. Why don't you admit, when you were wrong? Why don't you admit that you were wrong, that Robin could 'look through me', neither can you? If you make a mistake, in the timeline or in your judgment, why can't you just say: I'm sorry, I was wrong? You were also wrong when you said, as you did, that I called Robin of having NPD, that was Barry, not me, and at the same time, you called me a liar? And then you get all upset, when I point out a mistaken attribution, to which you had linked. I might not have done that, and not returned here, if you wouldn't have accused me falsely in the first place! I have no problem to say sorry if I am wrong, as I was when made a wrong attribution to Dr. D post last time I was here, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/339572 > > If you have any doubts, read it again. Judy, I really can't know what is going on in your head. > > > > > > > > > > > when I had written already my post on 26 December, the one > > > > > with the borderline that made you all upset. What's the > > > > > necessity of bringing in some posts of December 20? Where > > > > > is his act of 'seeing through me', when he needed to wait > > > > > until December 27, when things were clear? Judy, you are > > > > > getting old, you don't make sense at all. > > > > > > > > Yeah, I'm not the one making all the mistakes, iranitea. > > > > How old are you, by the way? > > > > > > > > > >
