dear Dan, I guess I should elaborate (-: I know you're a New Man. As such I was hoping you could calm the troubled waters of turq and MJ.
On Saturday, September 6, 2014 10:11 AM, danfriedman2002 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote : What is it about these anti TMers, always with the violent images?! First turq was nuking Richard. Now MJ is having Ann fall off her horse! Forget Dr. Pete! Where is Dan when we need him? Sorry, I abhor violence. I'm like a New Man. On Saturday, September 6, 2014 9:55 AM, "Michael Jackson mjackson74@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote: Aw come on Ann - Barry has irritated you to the degree you are genuinely obsessed with him. If any of your horse competition rivals ever knew that, all they would have to do is "Barry's right!" as you were in the middle of your ride and you would fall out of the saddle right there on the competition grounds. Thereby giving your competitors the win. ________________________________ From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2014 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reading or Not Reading Posts ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote : ________________________________ From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2014 2:58 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reading or Not Reading Posts Wow Xeno, for a guy who has seen a few years, transcended a time or two and who ploddingly, dryly picks apart most subjects you certainly seem to miss the proverbial boat a lot. Do you ever break out of a shamble? Does red blood pump around in blue veins? Do you get angry, excited, passionate about anything? Bawee and MJ do NOT bring to light anyone's "samskaras" except what might exist as their own. These two are not catalysts for bringing to light anything but their own hanging on to past injury and perceived injustices which have resulted in anger and disappointment disguised as righteous desire to shake people up. Whatever they are doing simply pinpoints their own hanging on and resentment and for you to encourage or congratulate them is to illustrate your own limitations. Check the fluff box now. Thanks for the reply Xeno but I must beg to differ on some viewpoints here (or are they opinions born of samskaras?) The 'fluff' box is where your messages presently reside. Samskaras are the main reason people act with passion, indignation. Maybe in some cases but to characterize every act of passion or indignation to be the result of a samskara is religious hoodoo. This assertion does not sound or feel like it comes from anything but either book learning or a Xeno-type analytic idea of something. Passion and indignation are something I value in others because they come from a deeper place of giving a shit or, at least, not dwelling in a mental space of apathy or surrender. If what you say is true then dispassion and emotional passivity are the result of freedom from samskaras. You know which one I'd choose. I have them too, I just do not have as many as I used to and some are more attenuated than formerly. If you push someone enough, you should be able to activate some of them and get a response. If you push someone enough it may result in response - red-blooded human response that has all the attributes of being sensitive and alive. You make it sound as if to be stimulated is a weakness. It is not. We humans, as bodies, are stimulus-response machines, the gunk in the machine determines the output from a given input. A conditioned response. Of course some people are more conditioned than others, the "gunk in the machine" can be lack of objectivity or lack of self awareness where knee jerk responses just come flowing out. FFL is full of that. FFL is a microcosm of the larger sampling of humanity residing on this planet. There is not a soul here who doesn't occasionally show their instinctual side which is to bond with those with whom they agree and slot all others into fluff boxes or into the 'do not read' category. My seemingly dispassionate responses are my conditioned responses, your passionate ones are yours, Barry's and Michael's are theirs. I disagree. Conditioned responses imply no self awareness and I think much of what I choose to respond to and how I choose to respond is based on a lot more than just conditioning. I think it is the same for the others too. For you to identify it as "conditioning" is far too simplistic. How do you compare "conditioning" to "samskaras" and how do they relate or not relate to each other? Conditioning sounds like learned behaviour in this lifetime while samskaras surely imply something far older and deeper that resides at virtually the molecular level of people. Or? Now to my mind, Barry seems to have more awareness of his samskaras, his engrams, than most here even if he does not think of his behaviour in those terms. I have never felt Barry's so-called anger is real, whereas I have always felt that Judy's and yours is. Correct me if I am wrong about my surmise about you. The samskaras we need to worry about are the one's that cripple our ability function in the world and to form clear interpretations of what is going on in the world. PTSD is an example of samskaras that can cripple. Of course, for any of this to make sense to me I have to first believe in such a thing as samskaras. I am not sure that I do. When I appear to be angry then I probably am. I don't play games in terms of representing my feelings in a way which are true to me, apparent for others to see and feel. You speak as if anger is always a bad thing. You speak as if the lack of "reality" or truthfulness behind a person's emotion is a good thing. I can't agree with you. If you are talking about bawee and anger then you need to look closer. The fact that he continually dismisses, refuses to interact with those here who disagree with his world view is a pretty good indication of not only his fragile ego but of his continual tendency to hold grudges and remain furious with others. But enough of bawee - he is a bore. I am not really interested in people as psyches, personalities. I am interested in experience, and in ideas about experience, and in how the world works, or seems to work (we may never really know how it works). The soap opera of personal interaction does not interest me, though I do enjoy person interactions, but really personal interactions are not possible when many functioning samskaras are running their routine because the essence of the person is not there, just the overly reactive conditioned responses. Phew! How do you break out, separate "experience" from human interaction? You are lumping human interaction into a fluff box of the soap opera. This makes me wonder about your life and what you have experienced within the personal and intimate interaction with others. It makes me think you have been disappointed by them - hurt. It makes me think you have withdrawn away from emotion and the follies and frivolities that seem to characterize the human race for you. You know that quote by Eleanore Roosevelt 'great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people', and while I do not have a particularly great mind, I do like ideas over events and people. It's the proportion that counts, as it is impossible to go through a day without encountering events or people and what they are like. A tremendous amount of time is spent on FFL discussing people's behaviour; it's gossipy and shallow. It even happens with me, I am not immune. A tremendous amount of time at FFL is spent unearthing the nature of human beings. You don't have to be talking about spiritual realms of deep learning to see all there is to see, in fact you often see more when people are het up, hot under the collar, bickering. It is fascinating and no more or less revealing and interesting and profound than talking about states of consciousness or what Yogi or path of teaching someone studied for years. I enjoy Barry's and Michael's posts because they dredge up conditioned responses. So now you do like human observation and all of the soap opera -y stuff you just said you disliked. But let me let you in to a secret here. Very few of the objections to bawee or MJ's continual harping on about the TM movement are based in passion or anger. Most here aren't upset by these two on this subject, they are bored or amused. You need to figure out the difference. And again, your observation that people here are showing their "conditioned" responses is to miss so much of what human interaction and the impulse to respond is about. This happens even if I am not interested or even know what their intent was in making the post. That is private in them. For example, I initially on coming to FLL had some of my samskaras activated by Barry, and I tried to figure him out. That turned out to be mostly a waste of time, figuring him out. Definitely gotta agree with you on that one. Mac's got it figured though. What turned out to be more valuable was figuring 'me' out, figuring out why I would react a certain way to what he said. Same with Judy. Now maybe Barry does the same thing, but that is for him to say. How often do you analyse your reactions to what life presents? All the time. Every moment. When we can consciously do this we can undermine our conditioned responses and experience a bit more freedom. When we are not aware, the world entraps us, conditions us. It is ironic that organisations, such as the TMO, verbally dedicated to liberation, freedom, always end up entrapping us by the creation of systems designed to condition our minds to a herd mentality. Quite a few here, Barry, Michael, and even you are aware of this. Don't sleep too much; you are going after the wrong prey, by looking outside for the source of your discontent. I only have the "inside" to live, to deal with, Xeno. But I am not afraid to let my inside travel outside. I am not worried that my passion, my joy, my anger is the result of some crippling "samskara". I don't live by definitions of words and concepts. I rejoice and revel in all of the tremblings, the shatterings, the foibles that are me and I don't relegate these things into boxes.
