Here is Yin and Yang used for fortune telling ... http://www.fortuneangel.com/5EBasic.htm
Gives you shivers, doesn't it. joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist) frank + lyn - mc + El + roy go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm call me 646 279 2309 SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote: > > > Ying and Yang are two clowns hanging out in a Bejiing disco. > > No, babycheeks they are not. > > > It doesn't matter how you want to define them, > > Yin and yanga re not defined. They simply are. > Nor do we "want". We lack desires of such sort. > Nor do we DEFINE. > > > or how they have been defined in the past. > > They haven't been "defined in the past". > They simply ARE. > > > They are proproganda for an ancient worldview... > > No babycheeks. They are not propaganda. > It is not a worldview.. no matter how much you wishful project > it'sa worldview.. Nor is it 'ancient'. > > > I reject them.. > > You have no capacity to "reject" objective reality babycheeks. > Do you "reject" the sun? You are simply knee-jerking > pseudo-rebelliously. "I reject, I reject". > You have no awareness of them at all. > > > >.perhaps I would be interested in a dynamic variation that grew up recently. > > Yes, reality would revolve around your dictatorial ape brain. > Yin and yang are perfectly dynamic, love. > > > You, however, think > > No babycheeks. We DONT think. No matter how much you froth at the > mouth and project, project, we will not start thinking :) > > > > you have found reality in failed viewpoints of the past. > > How lovely. The IGNORANT dictatorial ape keeps dictating > its IGNORANT wishful projection as if it is reality. > Yin and Yang in itself is not a viewpoint. > It is not an opinion babycheeks. And it's not failed. > You are not capable of judging these things. > > > This just makes you a > > failure, ineffective, and ridiculous. > > No babycheeks. The only "failure, ineffective, and ridiculous" > here is you. You are acting on par with a sub-mediocre high school > idiot. 'I don't get it, so I will rebel'. Add on some peer pressure > "it makes you look funny" "it makes you a failure". > > Infantile ape. > > > What especially makes you seem ludicrous > > No dearest. We DO NOT seem ludicrious. And we are NOT ludicrous. > > > is choosing to resort to "YOUR FAT" in your attempt to hurt me. > > Dearest we didnt RESORT to "you are fat". You are FAT. > It's a fact. And if you had any mastery or understanding > of YIn and YANg you WOULDN'T be. But it's just so easy > to REJECt and Self-DESTRUCT than do the right thing is it not? > > Nor were we interested in hurting you. > We have no such desires or intent. > We stated that. > > > Are you going to shoot spitballs at me next? > > No, that is what YOu are doing, love. > "I REJECT YIN AND YANG" > "YOU LOOK LUDICROUS" > "YOU ARE A FAILURE" > > Pointing out that humans with mastery of yin & yang are > not fat is not an attack. fatness is a condition similar > to ignorance. It's "curable". But it must be recognized > in order to be cured. Stating yoir fatness or your ignorance > is only an attack if you live in a world of self-delusion. > > While you live in self-delusion you cannot, of your own volition, > be of service. This is not a "point of view". > > > It is arrogant > > Babycheeks we lack arrogance completely. > The only one arrogant here is you. > And you are arrogant enough to fancy that you are capable > of perceiving anything outside of your ego, despite > plentiful evidence to the contrary. > > You're indeed catatonic. > > > male children like you, > > Male is not an insult babycheeks. > And none of us here are children. > The "children juz playing" here are you. > We are sure you have a "problem" > with confident male children, however. > > They'd laugh at you and point : the emperor has no clothes. > > > who are sure they know REALITY, > > We are not "sure we know REALITY". > We Do know it. > > > who are > > destroyers of reality. > > No babycheeks. Reality cannot be destroyed. > Your simpletonistic ignorant drivel knows no end. > Nothing is "destroyed" except the chance for conscious development. > And you do that. > > When will you stop with your ignorant cheap attempts at character > assassination because we have pointed out EXACTLY how ignorant > and idiotic you are? > > > > > If you want to show yourself > > We are not interested in "showing ourselves". > What you want is "proof". You want humans to act as bitches ona "leash" > to your brain. > Sorry. Nobody owes you any proofs. > Shove your cheap attemptsa t "guilt" "shame' passive-aggressiveness" > control. > > > as something other than an arrogant > > We have not showed ourselves as an arrigant follower, babycheeks. > We are NOT an arrogant follower. > > > FOLLOWER, > > Talk about infantilism. Leaders just sit around waiting to be > knee-jerked by cheap attempts of passive-aggressive leash pulling by the > above. That's laughable. > > Leaders babycheeks do not PROVE themselves to your idiotic brains. > Nor do they care about OPINIONS of others. > > > demonstrate a NEW evolution of practice/theory. > > Therea re no NEW evolutions babycheeks. > Nor are we here to "demonstrate; anything to you. > You're truly egotistically catatonic aren't ya? > Who are you Joseph? Exactly who are you? > The only one who needs to "demonstrate' anything baycheeks > IS YOU. YOU need to demonstrate yourself worthy. TO The universe. > > And you aren't. > > You simply are NOT. > > You will receive nothing. > > And you are not WORTHY of having anything "shown" to you. > > Don't even think about trying to turn this aroundm you idiotic > passive-aggressuve egotist. :) > > > You are not a creator, just a > > destroyer and follower. > > babycheeks. We are a creator. > We are not a DESTROYER nor are we are FOLLOWER. > Nor are there any PROBLEMS with FOLLOWERS. > Humansa re created as FOLLOWERS in the majority. > And that is just fine. Follower is not an "unworthy" position. > > Avoid using slapstick labeling in order to elicit proofs. > This is simply an attempta t a mindfuck game. > > We dont think you heard it so far, so let us tell you > again. > > YOU ARE REJECTED. > YOU WILL RECEIVE NOTHING. > YOU WILL BE SHOWN NOTHING. > NOTHING WILL BE SHOWN TO YOU. > And this will not LESSEN IN ONE BIT WHAT WE ARE. > > On the contrary, you're evidencing yourself more and more > UNFIT. Passive aggressive. Idiotic. > > Do you really think that leaders exest so that they can > "prove themselves" to you? Or anyone? > > The only responsibility ANY human being, a leader or a follower, has > is to its INTENT. And INTENT doesnt care about your brain. > It doesn't give a damn about "proofs". Its demands are far greater, > yet its a private contract. Between human and intent. > > NOBODY owes you anything. > > Not only do you need the "bleating" community to FEED ENERGETICALLY ON, > but you attempt standard bleating community tactics. It's called > PEER PRESSURE IN THE US, isn't IT? > > When one starts PROVING one removes its center of action from INTENT > into the BRAIN and becomes susceptible to mind-control games, > as well as functioning properly. > > This ain't a yin yang theory. > It's a FACT. > > And gee wiz, you want humans to start proving themselves to YOUR > BRAIN (because the world revolves around your dick) and step > away from their INTENT (path, strength). > > Is this part of the teaching them to be weak programy babycheeks? > > You just cannot STAND an independent person whose existence > and value doesnt revolve around you CAN YOU? > > VALUE is self-evident. > Your lack of ability to perceive it is your own simpleton problem. > > > And it is obvious that you are a bigot > > No dearest. Nothing of the sort is obvious. > We are not a BIGOT. You are simply trying > a simpleton character assassination trick > (again and again). > > the only BIGOT here is you babycheeks. > You are the one who fancies that "THIS KIND OF HUMANS ARE MAKING > PROBLEMS". > This kind of humans have been : christians, independent individuals, > male yang leaders, male children, etc. > These are your OWN WORDS. > THIS_ is bigotry. > There are no "groups of humans" who "cause the problems". > You are simply projecting your own PROBLEMS OUTWARDLY > and bashing others for them. > > Rather to the contrary, we have pointed out, and repeatedly, > that there is no "type of humans who cause problems". > And that problems are caused by individual ignorance. > That humans are STRONG and can OVERCOME those problems. > We have in fact stated on numerous occasions > that anyone who wants to do the WORK can do it. > One does not have to be a "leader". > > > - note - the ONLY slang term you used in > > your eloquent description of MALE LEADERS > > We didn't use it in a description of MALE LEADERS. > We used it in a description of YOU. > > > > was the derogatory term for humans of > > African descent. > > Yes, and we used the word to illustrate their behaviors. > That is not "reflective" of our us. > There are in fact humans existing who advocate LITERALLY > that "niggers are the problem". > Our stating that doesn't make us a bigot. > > > You are an incredibly UGLY person. > > No dearest, the only UGLY person here is you. > You are narcissistic, selfish, arrogant, > an energetic leech, ignorant, idiotic, > murderous and masochistic. > > You LIE that your performances are "shamanic." > You attempt to "reject" and "dismiss" teachings > which you do not understand. > You attempt to feed on others energy. > You attempt to force_ your "relationship". > You dismiss FACTS about human emotional well-being > with some cheap "labels" of us being "ridiculous" > just so that you can wash your hands clean from > the contiuous murder that you are_ commiting. > > CONSCIOUSNESS is not some 'ancient teaching'. > > It would be hard to look at an artist in the duration > of the entire 20c of any significance who hasn't > addressed the issue. > > There is nothing "new". NEW is a delusion of the > brain and the sensorial "apparatus". Reality > exists outside of time. > > We have presented you with a large number of representative > > writers > artists > performance artists > musicians > both western and eastern. > > Tell us again how all shamans should be killed. > That was marvellous. > > Or maybe even the Buddha should be killed? > > What do you say, why don't you stockpile all "ancient outdated > and FAILED worldviews (the egotistical moron never realizing > that it is him who is FAILING and not those systems)" and the > churches, and the mosks, and the books, and paintings, > and the lot of it and burn it. > > Then you can invite marc garret and you can attempt to emotionally > kneejerk everybody, appeal to their infantile sexuality by attempts > to control it (after all, one wouldn't WANT independent humans > WOULD ONE?) and start teaching us allabout "luv" and "brotherhood. > > Then you can kill 845783478597489574 jews, and just > wash your hands off. You could say that they wanted it. > Or that they deserved it. Or that it didn't happen at all? > > At the bottom of it all Joseph, the hideous idiot here is you. > You have denied ALL responsibility for any of your idiocies. > You have attempted to blindly BASH anything put in front of you. > > And your problem with YANG energy is that humans are not controllable > when in yang state. They are simply NOT. Whether followers or not. > > As for the ancient "outmoded worldview" homosexual gay magic > is two-yang. It's absolutely not controllable at all. > Hence Monsieur Hitler killed them off. We suppose it still worked > in 1940s.
