--The five years was possibly influenced by Jerry Jarvis, since it 
took him 5 years to reach CC (he said that's how long it took him) in 
a 1967 lecture) at UCLA.


- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > It would seem that these kinds of back-sliders would
> > > at least offer a public apology and refund the money 
> > > to all those poor students that they lied to for all 
> > > those years. But have you seen any indication that the 
> > > two Barry's, Rick, or anyone else are considering giving 
> > > a refund on a broken promise? I haven't - maybe I missed 
> > >
> > > I mean, if these kinds of people believe in karma,
> > > they are surely going to hell for a long time for 
> > > supporting and diseminating a dangerous cult and 
> > > taking money from the poor.
> > >
> > Don't be silly. Why would you "go to hell" for
> > engaging in activity that, at the time, seemed
> > perfectly reasonable and in fact was quite good. 
> >
> There's nothing good about the intention to tell people
> that they would reach enlightenment in 5-7 years, when
> any intelligent person would know that's not going to happen.
> You're not going to get any more enlightenment than you 
> are going to get, is the truth.
> 
> > It is only in hindsight that our take on a situation is
> > different. If the intent was good, and I'm sure it was
> > with both Rick, Curtis (both whom I know personally) and 
> > the two Barrys no "bad" karma can be generated. It's all 
> > in the intent.
> > 
> So, I didn't miss your apology.
> 
> You mislead the poor people when you promised them 
> enlightenment in 5-7 years, so just return their money, 
> and say you're sorry. You did keep a list of their names, 
> right? 
> 
> You keep a list of your current patient's names and you'd 
> refund their money if you told them some crap about 
> repeating the nick-names of the Hindu demi-Gods to avoid
> neurosis, right?
> 
> But, why should anyone believe a thing you have to say 
> now after misleading them for all those years - that's 
> the question you didn't answer.
>


Reply via email to