You have to determine the effect of the BATGAP interviews according to who watches it. Francis Bennet told my friend Bill last Sunday that he got a few emails a week inquiring about personal sessions - after his first BATGAP interview he now gets 90 a day.
________________________________ From: "anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 3:23 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fun With IQs (was Re: Tony Nader wife) How many people in the enlightenment business divided by the Earth's human population? BatGap comes out to be 0.00000342% [244 ÷ 7,130,000,000] Muslims are 19% of the Earth's human population and a respectable number of those would like to send us back to a nice mediaeval way of thinking and living that is even more retarded and cruel than the TMO's mediaeval outlook. I was once in the (then) MIU library and on the Internet and found an article on MIU in the New York Times that said if you wanted a mediaeval education you should come to MIU. I bet they never reprinted that one! Proportion Michael, proportion. -------------------- ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : Now a few people might be inclined to assist others in getting to this sort of realisation, A few people?!??! Have you ever taken a look at BATGAP? Most of those jaybirds are selling their particular brand of "hang out with me and get awakened" ________________________________ From: "anartaxius@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 1:24 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fun With IQs (was Re: Tony Nader wife) Probably not very good form. There are no reliable ways to determine if someone is 'enlightened'; the criterion is completely subjective which means only the person who is enlightened could probably tell, and it is possible to mistake various kinds of experiences for 'enlightenment'. The 'awakening' experience, a sudden flash of insight, is fairly common and it can have various depths of clarity and they leave you changed, but its effect can fade away unless it is very clear, and even then the experience is not sustained, its ramifications might be sustained on the level of knowledge. After years of meditation and awakening experiences one can sort of settle in to a perspective in life that I suppose could be called 'enlightenment', but the problem with this is what you experience in a clear awakening is that world is no different at awakening than it was before the experience happened, so there is a paradoxical bind that awakening did not achieve anything at all. It is the realisation you were seeking something you already had in full measure. In that sense enlightenment does not really exist. That knowledge is what sets you free, it changes nothing, gives you nothing, you just stop pursuing the dream called 'enlightenment' and you can stop categorising people as unenlightened because they have nothing less than you do. The whole spiritual trip is really like looking for your eyeglasses while you are wearing them. So what I would say is you naturally stop looking for it at some point, and get used to the idea that there is nothing to seek, and eventually the infatuation with it fades, and you gradually become less of a pompous asshole about it and hopefully become just a regular person again without putting on airs. You do not get to wear a badge that sets you apart from others. Now a few people might be inclined to assist others in getting to this sort of realisation, and I suppose most do not do a very respectable job of it. When such 'assistance' fails really miserably you end up with a religion. Probably the secret of the 'best teachers', if there is such a thing, is people will gravitate to them naturally, and they are honest about what you expect to find — nothing. But then people also seem to gravitate naturally to crafty con artists as well. It is a crap shoot. I think it is not possible to not be conned if you think enlightenment is real, because the con is built into the universe, a most mysterious situation. As Stephen Hawking said (in opposition to Einstein's view), 'God not only throws dice, he throws them where they cannot be seen'. The universe is a certain way always, but the mind is an interpreter of that universe, it creates coarse representations of the universe and how it works. How much you get out of the enlightenment business depends on how much and in what way the mind changes its perspective during the pursuit phase. Some people have really great experiences along the way and others do not. But eventually the pursuit fizzles out one way or another, by realisation or quitting, unless you have made your search into a religion, in which case you have got yourself on an endless treadmill taking you nowhere, that is, the mind's search for resolution of this matter has become stagnant. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : How is it poor form to claim enlightenment? Jim has been doing it for years and most of those yahoos on BATGAP claim to be, tho many use the term "awakened". One of my closest friends had a 2 hour lunch with on of them, Francis Bennet last Sunday. I spent an hour on the phone getting filled in on his impressions. Interesting. ________________________________ From: "Bhairitu noozguru@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 12:07 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Fun With IQs (was Re: Tony Nader wife) It's considered poor form do discuss one's IQ as much as it is to claim one is enlightened. I had no idea I was tested for IQ as a kid and only told that in the 1980s by my mother and what IQ was measured. Sure drugs, sex and age probably take it's toll. :-D On 08/06/2014 03:09 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: >>>Did anyone else try this? Just curious. I thought that the questions were pretty challenging, for an online "IQ Test," especially because I was trying to figure them out after having ingested a couple of 9.5% beers. :-) I was genuinely surprised to have done as well as I did. >>> >>> >>> >>>Still, my results on this test put me according to the website "in the upper 2% of all respondents to the quiz so far," and *that* puzzles me. When I took the actual Mensa tests back in college, I scored much higher than 132, and *expected* after a life of sex, drugs, and rock 'n roll to score lower than I did back then...and I did. But at the same time I *know* that there are people out there MUCH smarter than I am, so did they just not take this test, or what? Surely there have to be a few people out there who scored in the 140s or 150s, right? I'm pondering all of this while sitting -- appropriately enough -- at the Einstein Cafe in Leiden. :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>________________________________ >>> From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" >>> <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> >>>To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> >>>Sent: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 6:13 PM >>>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Fun With IQs (was Re: Tony Nader wife) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" >>><FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> >>> >>> >>>But FYI, if I had designed BarryWorld only to be navigable by those with an IQ over 120, I wouldn't have bothered to post it to Fairfield Life. :-) >>> >>> >>> >>>Just as a fun followup, after jokingly posting this earlier today, just now in this cafe I stumbled upon a web IQ test. Natch, I had to take it. I didn't expect to do very well, having just finished drinking two Westmalle Tripels, and didn't -- only 132. >>> >>> >>>My quick IQ is 132! What's yours? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>My quick IQ is 132! What's yours? >>>Only 1 in 50 is as smart as I am! >>> >>> >>>View on memorado.com Preview by Yahoo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>
