--- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley"
> <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
wrote:
> > 
> > > I assume that the moderators (Rick, Alex, and
> > > whoever) can tell what a poster's real address
> > > is behind their Yahoo address. I hereby give
> > > them permission to "bust" me publicly here if 
> > > their resources show that I (TurquoiseB/Barry) 
> > > am the same poster as Geezerfreak.
> > 
> > Actually, Barry, I can't see your email or IP address because you
> > config'd your subscription with the "Hide my email and IP 
address from
> > the group moderators" option. And, I don't think Rick, the group
> > owner, can see them either. I did look up geezerfreak's IP, and 
it's
> > an AOL IP. I googled the newest post I could find by Uncle 
Tantra on
> > a.m.t (Apr 25 2005), and it originated from out-of.ilog.fr
> >
>   
> Of course, logically speaking, Barry could simply write messages 
to a
> friend in the states who posts them under a yahoo name barry set 
up.
> 
> But the "energy signiture" appears quite different between the 
two. An
> obvious thing Jim appears to have missed. Normally, no harm, no 
foul. 
> 
> But for Jim, who has made (it appears to me) quite definitive and
> fully-confident observations based on his ability to clearly
> distinguish "energy-signitures" of different people, or to "look at
> them a certainway" virtually --not in person --  and "gain specific
> knowledge" of them, as well as the ~"only WE can recognize each 
other"
> phenomenon, it perhaps is significant that his foo foo raydar is
> malfunctioning in the case of Barry and Gezzerfreak. Makes you 
wonder,
> could it also be malfunctioning in other confident observations of 
his?
> 
> Not to pick-on or focus on Jim, but (mis)interpreting ones 
abilities,
> experiences and states is a key issue /hurrdle, IMO. This is one 
of a
> number of examples posted, periodically, where the interpretation 
does
> not fit the circumstances, though to the observer they really 
[really]
> seem to. 
> 
> Thus, perhaps,the value of a Guru who has lived the Supreme state 
for
> 30-40 years, has seen many false claims and false starts, to
> verify and label experiences, and not to solely rely on co-
dependent
> praises from "a circle of friends." [Termed a "circle jerk" by one 
wag".]
> 
> As to states of consciousness that Barry brought up, on the 
surface,
> there appears little connection to the ability to distinguish two
> posters -- and the state of ones consciousness. 
> 
> Unless, if one claims they have special knowledge, insights and
> abilities that stem from their "Enlightenment" -- however defined -
-
> and these special abilities are shown to be only imaginations, 
then it
> does cast some shadows on claims of total Enlightenment. And/or the
> persons correct interpretation of what they experience.
>

Now, if you recall the question I asked of you awhile back, please 
name just one person on the entire planet today who is enlightened. 
Just one. 

It is clear you have doubts about my claim to be enlightened. So put 
me aside for the time being. Please name one enlightened person on 
the planet today. Just one.





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to