[FairfieldLife] Re: Feles domesticae!

[pranamoocher]

BeeYouTeeFul!!
thx!


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "card"  wrote:
>
>
>
http://www.buzzfeed.com/summeranne/50-amazing-photos-from-cat-heaven-isl\
and-in-japan
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Da Vinci's Cosmic Code

[salyavin808]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Take a look at the Last Supper painting shown in the link below:
> > > 
> > > http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A2KJkK0BRrZQyEMAIr.JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dda%2Bvinci%2Bs%2Blast%2Bsupper%26fr%3Dfptb-w3i-s%26fr2%3Dpiv-web%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D4&w=909&h=481&imgurl=3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-3Onz2hex5go%2FTa92n9ERi7I%2FDNk%2FKEc8i5wr8dU%2Fs1600%2FThe%2BLast%2BSupper%2B-%2BDa%2BVinci%2B1495-98.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffavourite-paintings.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fleonardo-da-vinci-last-supper.html&size=90+KB&name=Paintings%3A+Leonardo+%3Cb%3Eda+Vinci+%3C%2Fb%3E-+The+%3Cb%3ELast+Supper%3C%2Fb%3E&p=da+vinci+s+last+supper&oid=2995358d7d2b0d7d59d588b21229&fr2=piv-web&fr=fptb-w3i-s&tt=Paintings%253A%2BLeonardo%2B%253Cb%253Eda%2BVinci%2B%253C%252Fb%253E-%2BThe%2B%253Cb%253ELast%2BSupper%253C%252Fb%253E&b=0&ni=42&no=4&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12irt8vt0&sigb=13gabvn00&sigi=13fb2p08t&.crumb=G8uAyIXytCH
> > 
> > Is this the biggest link ever?
> > 
> >  
> > > You'll find that Jesus is seated in the middle of the apostles 
> > > representing the cross or the autumnal equinox.
> > 
> > Why does the cross represent the autumnal equinox?
> 
> Salyavin,
> 
> Because the cross represents border between the light and dark which the 
> autumnal equinox represents.  After the equinox, the days get shorter and 
> nights get longer.  Also, at this point the Sun is considered at its fall or 
> the weakest in astrological terms. 

So why does the cross resemble the border between light
and dark? Or is it the obvious one. 


> > > The apostles are grouped in four, representing the four seasons.
> > > 
> > > The first apostle who is standing represents Aries since he is at the 
> > > head of the table
> > 
> > Isn't the start of a circle somewhat arbitrary?
> 
> The table is not a circle.  Also, Aries is considered the first sign in the 
> zodiac in western and eastern astrology.


I mean that the zodiac is a circle, so why is anywhere considered
the begininning.
> >  
> > > The second apostle with the long hair represents Taurus, a sign owned by 
> > > Venus, a female.
> > 
> > Wouldn't he better represent it if he had horns? And why does
> > long hair signify female, they were all hippies in those days?
> 
> You have to interpret the painting in context with the situation.

Or interpret it in terms of the conspiracy theory

> > > The third apostle with his arms raised represents Gemini, the 
> > > significator of the human arms.
> > 
> > Never heard that one before.
> 
> Please, read an introductory astrology book for more information regarding 
> the various meanings of the sign.
> 
> >  
> > > The fourth apostle with a knife represents Cancer.
> > 
> > Why? cancer is a crab.
> 
> The crab's pincers can cut your fingers like a knife.

Tenuous. 

> > > The fifth apostle with his arms majestically placed on the table is Leo, 
> > > ruled by the Sun, the king of the heavens.
> > 
> > Wouldn't Jesus be king here?
> 
> Please, interpret the meaning in context with the rest of the painting.
> 
> >  
> > > The sixth apostle who looks like a female represents Virgo, a female sign.
> > 
> > Not representing something else to fit in with the theory this
> > time then?
> 
> In the novel, "Da Vinci Code", this apostle was interpreted to mean Mary 
> Magdalene who was regarded by some historians to have been one of the 
> disciples of Jesus.
> 
> >  
> > > You can analyze the rest of the apostles and will find their 
> > > correspondence to the remaining zodiacal signs.
> > 
> > Probably the least convincing conspiracy theory I have ever
> > seen. Congratulations!
> 
> Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.


It sure is old chum, I think that eyes behold patterns very
well too, even some that aren't there. Which is a pretty good
definition of astrology I think!

[FairfieldLife] Why Nate Silver Got Drunk

[raunchydog]

Attacked from both the left and the right (but mostly the right), Nate Silver 
didn't just call the results of the election, he nailed it. 
http://youtu.be/qAKia84_XBs

[FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Duveyoung]

Okay, maybe I over-reacted.  I've been so made-fun-of because of this gizmo -- 
a gizmo that pretty much saved me and my health from couch potato doom, and 
works as well for others who apply themselves to the sport.  I am in public 
every day on these things, and all I get is approbation from the onlookers with 
lots of inquiries.  But I know it looks silly to the uninitiated, and I know 
haters gunna hate, and I well know I have stepped on most of the FFL toes 
extant so of course, the smarmy banter is to be expected as a normal outlet of 
locker-room jocularity.  

But still, me personally, I'm not so emotionally able to take the cuts.  I can 
dish it out, but when my Trikke is taking a hit because folks don't have the 
nerve to go toe to toe with me about the negative dynamics of my presentation, 
I get ashamed that the sport is only being represented here by the likes of me.

So, for the most part, I'm all set up to be angry, and when you used the word 
"Trikkenosis" -- to me, hey, referring to parasites and trikking just doesn't 
naturally incline to pair-up it seems, so I took it as mere a crude pun meant 
to heap a pile of shame on me for having such a goofy assed nut buggy.

The apple sauce ref I still don't get.  

Edg


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> It's a joke, Edg.  Apparently you didn't get it.  It's a play on the 
> words Trikke and trichinosis.
> 
> On 11/28/2012 12:32 PM, Duveyoung wrote:
> > I don't understand your question's basis.
> >
> > I think you're being a troll, but I have sincere question:  Do you really 
> > have such a negativity towards the machines, or are you actually just 
> > trying to snark at me personally despite the fact that you're besmirching  
> > Trikkes and Skkis which are great gizmos that promotes fitness and fun 
> > around the world?
> >
> > Attack me all you want, I sure have faults, but these inventions are 
> > helping the world more obviously than I EVER saw results in the people to 
> > whom I taught TM.
> >
> > And, the general negativity expressed here at FFL towards them seems to be 
> > a very striking measurement of just exactly HOW LITTLE TM has helped anyone 
> > have an open mind towards new things -- despite the messenger.
> >
> > BAH!
> >
> > Edg
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >> Will apple sauce help prevent Trikkenosis?
> >>
> >> On 11/28/2012 08:46 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> >>> Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI
> >>>
> >>> Edg
> >>>
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> 
>  http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html
> 
> >>>
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
> wrote:
> 
> snip
> 
>   But for heaven's sake (and maybe for our sake too) you need to get a
> bit of a grip. The train is headed for Chicago but somehow you have
> ended up riding a donkey backwards towards Topeka.
> 
> 
> Hey Ann,
> 
> This may seem a little strange. Naturally I've read your posts for many
> months now, and I've never felt a need to apply the Robin template to
> anyone, (checking to see how one's posts jibe with reality) except with
> you.  And I have to say that  I always feel you are a little off.
> 

Steve *feels* Ann is a little off. He wants to apply Robin's reality template 
to her but astonishingly, he hasn't a clue how to apply Robin's reality 
template to *himself*. Steve's bright idea to apply Robin's Reality Template to 
Ann ranks in the top ten for "Most Ridiculous Shit Steve Has Ever Said."   

Steve can't put his finger on why Ann's posts mostly miss the target. But 
that's not surprising. He has yet to put his finger on why *he* has become a 
target for ridicule. He could give concrete examples of Ann missing the mark 
but he won't because there are no such examples and as usual he's too fucking 
lazy to search the archives. He says whatever irresponsible shit he *feels* as 
if it's true without offering a shred of proof and then remains, stubbornly, 
stupidly clueless as to why anyone would ask him to be accountable for the shit 
he flings around FFLife. 

http://youtu.be/wXvrvyKhpV0

> It's hard for me to put my finger on it, but I think somehow you always
> (or mostly) miss the mark.
> 
> Sort of like the arrow flies but it glances off the hay, or if it hits
> the target, (in one of the outer rings) it just sort of drops down.  You
> know, it just pierces the covering, and nothing else.
> 
> I guess I could give a couple concrete examples.
> 

 
> You, almost more than any one here, was deeply offended by awakened_yedi
> a couple weeks back.
> 
> He couldn't be booted off fast enough for you.
> 
> And yet, at the same time, we were getting very similiar posts by Ravi,
> and yet you were praising Ravi for his insightfulness and loyalty.
> 
> I admit, that puzzled me.
> 
> I'll just leave it that.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Ravi Chivukula]

Ravi this, Ravi that..oh stop pining for me please.

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 7:06 PM, seventhray1  wrote:

> **
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> snip
>
>  But for heaven's sake (and maybe for our sake too) you need to get a bit
> of a grip. The train is headed for Chicago but somehow you have ended up
> riding a donkey backwards towards Topeka.
>
> Hey Ann,
>
> This may seem a little strange. Naturally I've read your posts for many
> months now, and I've never felt a need to apply the Robin template to
> anyone, (checking to see how one's posts jibe with reality) except with
> you.  And I have to say that  I always feel you are a little off.
>
> It's hard for me to put my finger on it, but I think somehow you always
> (or mostly) miss the mark.
>
> Sort of like the arrow flies but it glances off the hay, or if it hits the
> target, (in one of the outer rings) it just sort of drops down.  You know,
> it just pierces the covering, and nothing else.
>
> I guess I could give a couple concrete examples.
>
> You, almost more than any one here, was deeply offended by awakened_yedi a
> couple weeks back.
>
> He couldn't be booted off fast enough for you.
>
> And yet, at the same time, we were getting very similiar posts by Ravi,
> and yet you were praising Ravi for his insightfulness and loyalty.
>
> I admit, that puzzled me.
>
> I'll just leave it that.
>
>
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:

snip

  But for heaven's sake (and maybe for our sake too) you need to get a
bit of a grip. The train is headed for Chicago but somehow you have
ended up riding a donkey backwards towards Topeka.


Hey Ann,

This may seem a little strange. Naturally I've read your posts for many
months now, and I've never felt a need to apply the Robin template to
anyone, (checking to see how one's posts jibe with reality) except with
you.  And I have to say that  I always feel you are a little off.

It's hard for me to put my finger on it, but I think somehow you always
(or mostly) miss the mark.

Sort of like the arrow flies but it glances off the hay, or if it hits
the target, (in one of the outer rings) it just sort of drops down.  You
know, it just pierces the covering, and nothing else.

I guess I could give a couple concrete examples.

You, almost more than any one here, was deeply offended by awakened_yedi
a couple weeks back.

He couldn't be booted off fast enough for you.

And yet, at the same time, we were getting very similiar posts by Ravi,
and yet you were praising Ravi for his insightfulness and loyalty.

I admit, that puzzled me.

I'll just leave it that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in
> > > the archives where I said LA LA LA.� But perhaps by real
> > > world you mean some context other than FFL?
> > 
> > No, he means FFL. And you've just said it again in both
> > sentences above, and in everything else you've said in
> > the post I'm responding to. You haven't been saying much
> > else lately.
> > 
> > "LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING
> > TO YOU" is how you've chosen to deal with "heat" on FFL.
> > Or one of the ways, all equally dishonest.
> 
> Why should she deal with a witch like you? You are full of
> malice and venom. Why don't you look in the mirror and see
> who you are?

She doesn't deal honestly with anybody here, feste. It's 
genuinely scary that you can't, or won't, see that. It's
right in front of your nose in this post of hers to Alex
that I was responding to.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Share Long]

Edg, you and Ron do make it look like a lot of fun.  Thanks for posting here.  
Well Steve, feste et al, I was intending to stay with Wunnerful Wednesday but 
found I couldn't let Alex's post go answered.  Hope you all at least end 
Wednesday with some delight by watching Ron and Edg and anonymous hotdogger 
zoom down the hill.  And then view Card's cat heaven photos.  Thank you guys 
(-:    



 From: Duveyoung 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:46 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday
 

  
Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in
> > the archives where I said LA LA LA.� But perhaps by real
> > world you mean some context other than FFL?
> 
> No, he means FFL. And you've just said it again in both
> sentences above, and in everything else you've said in
> the post I'm responding to. You haven't been saying much
> else lately.
> 
> "LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING
> TO YOU" is how you've chosen to deal with "heat" on FFL.
> Or one of the ways, all equally dishonest.

Why should she deal with a witch like you? You are full of malice and venom. 
Why don't you look in the mirror and see who you are?

> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar 
> > to me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people 
> > like Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar 
> > situations.  I choose to ignore those who express disregard for me and the 
> > validity of my experiences especially those who express these in a very 
> > attacking and or crude and or condescending way.  I also choose to ignore 
> > those who first ignore and or misrepresent what I've written.  I don't see 
> > that any good will come of such discussions.  And I certainly choose to 
> > ignore certain posters who, though delightful on their own, often become 
> > distorted versions of themselves when they take on the pack mentality.   
> > 
> > 
> > I have and will continue to listen to those who express agreement or 
> > disagreement with me in a reasonable and unbiased and compassionate 
> > manner.  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:16 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, 
> > and it does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the 
> > real world, if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, 
> > you're likely to get called on it. And, if the response to being called on 
> > it is "LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", 
> > people might pile on.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in 
> > > my experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in 
> > > the name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and 
> > > cowardly behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people 
> > > who disagreed with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  
> > > Warts yet present.  I never saw any of these behaviors in Waking 
> > > Down.  And it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same 
> > > meetings.  In my experience, Waking Down created a safe environment in 
> > > which people could be rigorously honest with themselves and with 
> > > others.  It was balanced masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness 
> > > in either direction.    
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: Alex Stanley 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > > 
> > > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > > "rigorous". 
> > > 
> > > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found 
> > > Share's excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very 
> > > strange. Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit 
> > > frosting, but as another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to 
> > > your mugshot. It's not about techiquifying yourself into some future 
> > > perfected enlightened being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are 
> > > right now. From my own experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be 
> > > any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> 
> Emily, I love you.  I really do.  But I gotta do this.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
> wrote:
> You can have no impact on Judy whatsoever. Â Did you not see the
> brilliance of her last post - see how beautiful the play is? Â You
> have already been branded as someone who leveled "vile accusations" at
> her and you have been dismissed. Â Done deal. Â Either you support
> Judy in her reality or you're out. Period. Â If she does deign to
> question or answer you, don't expect anything real to come across. Judy
> is a master of manipulation. Â Look what she has done here since the
> time she's been here? Â I would guess that now that she's 70, we
> would only expect her to become more and more entrenched in the business
> of adapting reality to her unconscious needs. Judy is the ultimate
> controller. Â
> >
> > Yes, Steve, those of us who are more direct communicators are at a
> disadvantage with someone like Judy, but I counter with the idea that
> ultimately it wouldn't matter. Â Those with a world view such as
> Judy's have no concept of compassion based in the real world. Judy is
> "right" about her assessment of FFL and woe be it to anyone who
> disagrees with her, and I do and I will continue to do so. Â The
> best, most compassionate thing she could do for me, would be to never
> read another post of mine ever. Â  Â
> >
> > Judy is the consummate misconstruer - when all else fails - she is
> fully blameless, unfairly attacked by others, subject of accusations
> from those in a cult, those engaged in a high school dynamic, etc. Â
> Whatever. Â
> 
> Now, makes a little more sense. (-:

Dear Steve, I have read all of your recent posts (there isn't much I don't read 
here, but I have to say the Maitreya thing has thrown me for a bit of a loop, 
but I digress) and you are a stubborn sort of fellow at times. I mean, there is 
a part of me that really, really likes a part of you. I still don't think you 
have a mean bone in that body of yours and you can certainly take criticism 
with a shrug and a smile but sometimes you are just plain silly. I'll bet in 
real life you are well liked and I am sure you deserve the many friends that 
you most likely have. But for heaven's sake (and maybe for our sake too) you 
need to get a bit of a grip. The train is headed for Chicago but somehow you 
have ended up riding a donkey backwards towards Topeka.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> 
> Emily, I love you.  I really do.  But I gotta do this.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
> wrote:
> You can have no impact on Judy whatsoever. Â Did you not see the
> brilliance of her last post - see how beautiful the play is? Â You
> have already been branded as someone who leveled "vile accusations" at
> her and you have been dismissed. Â Done deal. Â Either you support
> Judy in her reality or you're out. Period. Â If she does deign to
> question or answer you, don't expect anything real to come across. Judy
> is a master of manipulation. Â Look what she has done here since the
> time she's been here? Â I would guess that now that she's 70, we
> would only expect her to become more and more entrenched in the business
> of adapting reality to her unconscious needs. Judy is the ultimate
> controller. Â
> >
> > Yes, Steve, those of us who are more direct communicators are at a
> disadvantage with someone like Judy, but I counter with the idea that
> ultimately it wouldn't matter. Â Those with a world view such as
> Judy's have no concept of compassion based in the real world. Judy is
> "right" about her assessment of FFL and woe be it to anyone who
> disagrees with her, and I do and I will continue to do so. Â The
> best, most compassionate thing she could do for me, would be to never
> read another post of mine ever. Â  Â
> >
> > Judy is the consummate misconstruer - when all else fails - she is
> fully blameless, unfairly attacked by others, subject of accusations
> from those in a cult, those engaged in a high school dynamic, etc. Â
> Whatever. Â
> 
> Now, makes a little more sense. (-:

Dear Steve, I have read all of your recent posts (there isn't much I don't read 
here, but I have to say the Maitreya thing has thrown me for a bit of a loop, 
but I digress) and you are a stubborn sort of fellow at times. I mean, there is 
a part of me that really, really likes a part of you. I still don't think you 
have a mean bone in that body of yours and you can certainly take criticism 
with a shrug and a smile but sometimes you are just plain silly. I'll bet in 
real life you are well liked and I am sure you deserve the many friends that 
you most likely have. But for heaven's sake (and maybe for our sake too) you 
need to get a bit of a grip. The train is headed for Chicago but somehow you 
have ended up riding a donkey backwards towards Topeka.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Feles domesticae!

[Share Long]

Ah, Card, these are wonderful and wunnerful in so many different ways.  Perfect 
for viewing towards the end of Wednesday.  Thank you.





 From: card 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 5:19 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Feles domesticae!
 

  

http://www.buzzfeed.com/summeranne/50-amazing-photos-from-cat-heaven-island-in-japan


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[awoelflebater]

Oh, thanks for that Empty, it is making soo much more sense to me now.(And 
I misspelled Fellini, sorry about that. I was all flustered by the revelations 
today on FFL regarding the new grand master Maitreya.) And all this time I was 
oblivious that this great Being was on Earth AS WE SPEAK. I gotta get out of 
Victoria more.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> Wolf Baiter -
> 
> 
> This is indeed like a Fillini movie - sort of like the Fellini short
> Toby Dammit.
> 
>   [168]
> 
> 
> Apparently, you don't know about the pseudo-buddhist, pseudo-hindu
> speculations of the Theosophist Alice Bailey. That means you don't know
> how far people will go to invent their "telepathic revelations" from the
> "holy masters" ...  you know - the old hidden masters with their
> "ju-ju".
> 
> The beginning paragraph from wiki-
> 
> Share International's publications claim that the coming of Maitreya
>   (meaning
> "friendly" in Sanskrit  )
> fulfills not only Buddhist  
> prophecies about the appearance of a future great teacher named
> Maitreya, but also the prophecies of a number of other world religions -
> including Christianity   (the
> second coming of Christ  ),
> Hinduism   (the Kalki
>   avatar of Vishnu
>  ), Islam
>   (the Imam Mahdi
>  ) and Judaism
>   (the Jewish Messiah
>  ). Creme claims that Maitreya
> manifested himself through (or overshadowed) Jesus
>   2,000 years ago,[6]
>  998._page_8-6>  that Maitreya resided in the Himalayas, and that in 1977
> he descended from his ancient retreat in the Himalayas
>   and took an aeroplane to
> London  .  His belief is that
> Maitreya took up residence in the Indian-Pakistani  community of London
> in the Brick Lane area and has been living and  working there, seemingly
> as an ordinary man, his true status known to  relatively few.
> Furthermore, that Maitreya has been emerging gradually  into full public
> view so as not to infringe humanity's free will.[5]
>  _347-5> [6]
>  998._page_8-6> [7]
>  [8]
>  [9]
>  
> Journalists had been invited to find Maitreya in the Brick Lane area but
> were unable to do so.[10]
>  
> According to Creme, Maitreya influenced the ending of the cold war
>  , the German
> reunification  , and
> the ending of apartheid in South Africa
>  
> .[11] 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
> >
> > OK, it this some kind of bizarre Fillini-esque movie I am suddenly a
> part of or are you being for real with all of this? Tell me you are
> making this up and you don't really think this is either: A)relevant,
> B)true or C)important. It just keeps getting weirder and weirder here
> today. I gotta go feed the chickens now...
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[raunchydog]

http://youtu.be/4SXLffvBpTY

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> 
> Not so fast young lady.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> 
> > > [Judy] is "right" about her assessment of FFL and woe be it
> > > to anyone who disagrees with her, and I do and I will
> > > continue to do so.
> > 
> >
> > > Now, makes little sense.
> 
> 
> > Ooopsie. Emily and I are in just about 100 percent agreement
> > in our respective assessments of FFL.
> >
> > Gee, Steve, you screwed up *again*.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > nablusoss1008:
> > > > > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus 
> > > > > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > > > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Like the majority of "Christians" you are mixing up names. The Christ 
> > > > > did not "incarnate" through a process of self-creation (Mahavirupa), 
> > > > > until after Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of 
> > > > > Enlightenment in 1975, a body with which He arrived in the West July 
> > > > > 19 1977. Until then noone had seen Him in the flesh, though He did 
> > > > > overshadow and inspire Jesus of Nazareth in Palestine constantly for 
> > > > > about three years.
> > > > 
> > > > Nabs,
> > > > 
> > > > Are you speaking of MMY here or Maitreya?
> > > 
> > > Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975 in 
> > > accordance with the Dive Plan which is being excecuted by the Masters of 
> > > Wisdom of which Guru Dev is a senior member and Maitreya the most senior. 
> > > As you know Maitreya now has a mayavirupa body and is living in the West, 
> > > Maharishi and Guru Dev are currently not in incarnation.
> > > 
> > > During the Inauguration and in the following years, Maharishi voiced for 
> > > the first time, yet hinted at in Theosophical literature particularily 
> > > that of Alice Bailey and Madam Blavatsky, the huge change that was to 
> > > come and that will last for 1 years.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > "Q. The Christ is formless, but he is also centered within his 
> > > > > mayavirupa body in London, and his light-body lies asleep in the 
> > > > > Himalayas. Where is his center, his focal point of existence? Does he 
> > > > > meditate from his light-body? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > BC: The Christ is not formless but, of course, the energy he 
> > > > > embodies, the Love energy, the energy which we call the Christ 
> > > > > Principle, is formless. His consciousness is centered in the 
> > > > > mayavirupa (self- created body). He meditates and lives and works as 
> > > > > a normal man, in the mayavirupa, which is a completely real body."
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Are you saying Jesus is still alive in the Himalyas?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The confusion about this is quite understandable since the process of 
> > > "overshadowing" is not publicly well known. It's a process completely 
> > > different from any kind of spiritism as it in no way whatsoever infringes 
> > > the free will of the vehicle (man or woman). Historically the best known 
> > > example is when Jesus of Palestine for 3 years was overshadowed by the 
> > > Christ (the Christ today use the name Maitreya). The relationship between 
> > > Jesus and the Christ was so perfect that the Christians to this day 
> > > believe they are one and the same, hence they reffer to Jesus Christ.
> > > 
> > > In the quote above Benjamin Creme states that the Christ " is not 
> > > formless but, of course, the energy he embodies, the Love energy, the 
> > > energy which we call the Christ Principle, is formless. His consciousness 
> > > is centered in the mayavirupa (self- created body). He meditates and 
> > > lives and works as a normal man, in the mayavirupa, which is a completely 
> > > real body."
> > > 
> > > The answer to your question is that Jesus is today a Master cooperating 
> > > very closely with Maitreya in bringing in the full sunshine of the Age of 
> > > Enlightenment. Maitreya, in His self-created (mayavirupa) body is active 
> > > in the West, as well as appearing to people of all faiths all over the 
> > > world on a daily basis.
> > > 
> > > The ressurection was not real in the sense that it was permanent. 
> > > Maitreya did this to the dead body of Jesus from Palestine for a very 
> > > short time to uplift and strengthen the faith of the Disciples (and 
> > > others)for 40 days. After dying on the cross  (which also marked His 4'th 
> > > initiation) Jesus of Palestine has had several incarnations, amongst them 
> > > one in Syria. He is now living and acting out of Italy, incognito and not 
> > > known to the public. He is today a member of the Masters of Wisdom.
> > 
> > OK, it this some kind of bizarre Fillini-esque movie I am suddenly a part 
> > of or are you being for real with all of this? Tell me you are making this 
> > up and you don't really think this is either: A)relevant, B)true or 
> > C)important. It just keeps getting weirder and weirder here today. I gotta 
> > go feed the chickens now...
> 
> 
> If I'm not mistaken (I could be) I answered a question of yours along the 
> same lines not long ago to which you remind silent. Instead of keep asking 
> questions I would recommend doing some study of yo

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

Not so fast young lady.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:

> > [Judy] is "right" about her assessment of FFL and woe be it
> > to anyone who disagrees with her, and I do and I will
> > continue to do so.
> 
>
> > Now, makes little sense.


> Ooopsie. Emily and I are in just about 100 percent agreement
> in our respective assessments of FFL.
>
> Gee, Steve, you screwed up *again*.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula
 wrote:
> Right you dumb MF'er - we get it - it's either a opinion, rant and/or
> insult never your idiocy. Barry on your left, Share on your right

I'm doin the hokey pokey and I'm turning myself around, that's what it's
all about!

  - you are
> on the top of the world Steve baby.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:02 PM, seventhray1  wrote:

> **
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula 
> wrote:
>
> > He will not, he's in a idiotic, inane, inebriated state - it would be
> > Curtis, Barry in the past arguing it's all opinion to hide their deceit.
> > Now it's the idiot Steve going for the same argument - that's it's all
> > opinion. - he can't see his idiocy because he's totally reveling in *it*.
> >
> Poor Ravi, can't make up his own insult.  On the other hand, he's
> basically been on same stale insult for about four years now.
>
> You go girl!
>
>  _
>

Right you dumb MF'er - we get it - it's either a opinion, rant and/or
insult never your idiocy. Barry on your left, Share on your right - you are
on the top of the world Steve baby.

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
> 
> Emily, I love you.  I really do.  But I gotta do this.

You shouldn't have. Because:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
> wrote:

> [Judy] is "right" about her assessment of FFL and woe be it
> to anyone who disagrees with her, and I do and I will
> continue to do so.


> Now, makes a little more sense. (-:

Ooopsie. Emily and I are in just about 100 percent agreement
in our respective assessments of FFL.

Gee, Steve, you screwed up *again*.

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula
 wrote:

> He will not, he's in a idiotic, inane, inebriated state - it would be
> Curtis, Barry in the past arguing it's all opinion to hide their
deceit.
> Now it's the idiot Steve going for the same argument - that's it's all
> opinion. - he can't see his idiocy because he's totally reveling in
*it*.
>
Poor Ravi, can't make up his own insult.  On the other hand, he's
basically been on same stale insult for about four years now.

You go girl!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:46 PM, authfriend  wrote:

> **
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > wrote:
> > snip
> > > Yes, you do. Plus which, you're stupidly wrong, as usual,
> > > because you haven't been paying attention to the context.
> >
> > Judy, I wish trying to follow your logic or "context" was a more
> > fruitful activity. But more often than not, it turns out to be
> > a total waste of time.
>
> Then STFU so you don't keep making a fool of yourself.
>
>
>
He will not, he's in a idiotic, inane, inebriated state - it would be
Curtis, Barry in the past arguing it's all opinion to hide their deceit.
Now it's the idiot Steve going for  the same argument - that's it's all
opinion. - he can't see his idiocy because he's totally reveling in *it*.

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

Emily, I love you.  I really do.  But I gotta do this.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
wrote:
You can have no impact on Judy whatsoever. Â Did you not see the
brilliance of her last post - see how beautiful the play is? Â You
have already been branded as someone who leveled "vile accusations" at
her and you have been dismissed. Â Done deal. Â Either you support
Judy in her reality or you're out. Period. Â If she does deign to
question or answer you, don't expect anything real to come across. Judy
is a master of manipulation. Â Look what she has done here since the
time she's been here? Â I would guess that now that she's 70, we
would only expect her to become more and more entrenched in the business
of adapting reality to her unconscious needs. Judy is the ultimate
controller. Â
>
> Yes, Steve, those of us who are more direct communicators are at a
disadvantage with someone like Judy, but I counter with the idea that
ultimately it wouldn't matter. Â Those with a world view such as
Judy's have no concept of compassion based in the real world. Judy is
"right" about her assessment of FFL and woe be it to anyone who
disagrees with her, and I do and I will continue to do so. Â The
best, most compassionate thing she could do for me, would be to never
read another post of mine ever. Â  Â
>
> Judy is the consummate misconstruer - when all else fails - she is
fully blameless, unfairly attacked by others, subject of accusations
from those in a cult, those engaged in a high school dynamic, etc. Â
Whatever. Â

Now, makes a little more sense. (-:

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> snip
> > Yes, you do. Plus which, you're stupidly wrong, as usual,
> > because you haven't been paying attention to the context.
>
> Judy, I wish trying to follow your logic or "context" was a more
> fruitful activity.  But more often than not, it turns out to be
> a total waste of time.

Then STFU so you don't keep making a fool of yourself.



> > > is that the reason you may be so clueless about this
> > > notion of "piling on",
> >
> > Read the whole post again, carefully, including what I
> > quoted from Share's post. Read all the words. Look up
> > any words you don't understand in Mr. Dictionary. If
> > you still can't see your stupid mistakes, find someone
> > who can read English to help you out.
> Judy, I admire your tenacity in thinking that the more you say you're
> right about something the more it must be true.  Fortunately we have a
> fifty post limit, because most of us remember how that used to play out.
> > This isn't about opinion, BTW. Imagine that.This is about your
> > chronic inability to retain context. Another term for
> > it is lousy reading comprehension. But it's a function
> > of gross laziness.
> Okay teacher.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in
> the archives where I said LA LA LA.  But perhaps by real
> world you mean some context other than FFL?

No, he means FFL. And you've just said it again in both
sentences above, and in everything else you've said in
the post I'm responding to. You haven't been saying much
else lately.

"LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING
TO YOU" is how you've chosen to deal with "heat" on FFL.
Or one of the ways, all equally dishonest.



> 
> 
> I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar to 
> me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people like 
> Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar situations.  I 
> choose to ignore those who express disregard for me and the validity of my 
> experiences especially those who express these in a very attacking and or 
> crude and or condescending way.  I also choose to ignore those who first 
> ignore and or misrepresent what I've written.  I don't see that any good 
> will come of such discussions.  And I certainly choose to ignore certain 
> posters who, though delightful on their own, often become distorted versions 
> of themselves when they take on the pack mentality.   
> 
> 
> I have and will continue to listen to those who express agreement or 
> disagreement with me in a reasonable and unbiased and compassionate manner.  
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Alex Stanley 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:16 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex
>  
> 
>   
> Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, and 
> it does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the real 
> world, if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're 
> likely to get called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is "LA 
> LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile 
> on.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
> > experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the 
> > name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and 
> > cowardly behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people 
> > who disagreed with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  Warts 
> > yet present.  I never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.  And 
> > it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same meetings.  In my 
> > experience, Waking Down created a safe environment in which people could be 
> > rigorously honest with themselves and with others.  It was balanced 
> > masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.    
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > 
> > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > "rigorous". 
> > 
> > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> > excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> > Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> > another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's 
> > not about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened 
> > being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> > experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than 
> > WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] To Sharester: Post 50

[Emily Reyn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GBR6PRDgBg

Put on your dancing shoes sweetheart.  FFL is for free.  Believe that.  
Compassionately, Emilina

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" 
wrote:
>
> The Ten Thray Desideratum
>
> You can only get the sense you are saying something real--when arguing
with someone--by attempting to understanding the meaning of the tension
that is being created by your determination to oppose what that other
person is saying.
  Not sure of the "meaning of the tension".
> In order to have some sense of the appropriateness of your position
you must get a feeling for the relative depth of intelligence that the
argument of your opponent contains--in relation to the depth of
intelligence of your own argument.
Well in Judy's case, I think she generally misses any kind of big
picture, and tends to focus on small, often insignificant details to
attempt to make her case.
> You must look upon your argument as a creation; if it is not beautiful
in and of itself--beyond the mere content--it is unlikely to have
received the endorsement of reality.
Certainly I don't think about it to that degree.  But I must admit, that
I generally like what I post.  But as you say, if I understand it
correctly, I post from an emotional level.
> When someone is saying something true, reality likes to be there
(somewhere inside the argument). And if you are wrong, reality makes
sure it doesn't make any appearance inside your argument.
Well, certainly I'd like to think that my arguments resonate with
reality.
> When stepping back and examining your argument, the ideal standard is
to say: I am not personally identified with what I have said--I have
tried to let it be the property of what is disinterested and
true--independent of my own vanity: my argument, as I see it, could have
been said by someone else. It reflects more of reality than it reflects
who I am.
That resonates with me.  I don't think I am particularly attached to any
argument I might make.  Perhaps that is why I don't feel the need to
defend to the nth degree what I write.   But maybe you were directing
this to Judy.  That would make a little more sense.
> When inserting oneself into a conversation where one is inclined to
come out on one side rather than the other (the conversation between
persons who disagree with one another), one should first of all try to
argue against that first inclination, so that when finally you express
your own point of view that very point of view has already undergone the
kind of scrutiny that is its inevitable destiny when read by your
adversaries.
Yes, I am guilty of not spending time reflecting on things before I
write them, but rather I just let whatever feels like coming out, come
out.
> When constructing an argument against another person's point of view,
you should find that that argument is assuming the form of a structure,
in which each sentence builds towards its completion. It should have a
kind of architectonic integrity by the time you are at the end of saying
all that you want to say.
Oh,  I feel I achieve that with my short posting.  Nothing wrong with
brevity in my opinion.
> At the very least you must imagine yourself understanding why your
opponent is arguing the way he or she is. If you cannot conceive of how
that other person (if they have committed themselves honestly to a real
debate) can argue as they are arguing, it is demonstrably true you do
not understand the issue, because if you are right, that rightness is
inclusive of understanding exactly why your opponent is arguing the way
he or she is arguing.
Well, I can usually follow what most people here are saying, or arguing.
But for some people, I have found it a waste of time.  I mean, I would
hope that the goal of an argument is to arrive at a better
understanding, and not to try to claim  a victory like we often see
here.
> When going against what someone has said, you want to land up in a
place where you sense the ground is not going to give beneath your feet.
Your argument must strive for this kind of physics of stability and
rest--at its endpoint.
Ok
> If you feel strongly that someone is wrong, besides feeling how wrong
they are, you must attempt to imagine what could make them believe
something that is wrong and think (and experience) that they are right.
For even if they are wrong, they are having the experience (if they are
reasonably honest and brave) they are right--just as you are.
That sounds like a good idea and a good plan.  And I think many, if not
most adopt that attitude to some extent.  I can't say this would
describe any kind of interaction with Judy.


But speaking of reality, what is important for you?  Thinking deeply
about things?

I mean you often deride me as one who reacts out of emotion, who doesn't
think deeply before he writes.

On the other hand, I do consider myself  relatively happy. I don't
particularly find discussions like this inspiring.

But I think it's neat that you analyze such things, and there may be a
few here who take the time to read it all.

I've just sort of lost interest in such things.  I am more interested in
reading t

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > P.S. (post 48)  Steve, even if Share defers to her perception that 
> > "psychological rape"  occurred during her off-line exchange with Robin, 
> >  individually, Robin recently proposed, agreed, and offered to make those 
> > exchanges public here.  Because they were private, he asked Share for her 
> > permission.  Share ultimately, deferred to a meeting with her pastoral 
> > counselor that she was going to have to supposedly get feedback.  She came 
> > back here and posted something about "bringing more positivity to FFL" 
> >  What?  She never said:  "I discussed it and decided against it."  She 
> > didn't address it at all.  Her response was completely insulting and 
> > completely dismissive of everyone here who was following the conversation 
> > and participating in it.  Exceee Me!  
> > 
> > So, Share gets to retain her condemnation of Robin, and Robin, who was 
> > willing to make the entire exchange public, is cut off at the knees.  You 
> > see why Judy said that, in her opinion, if the allegations are malicious, 
> > for example, the privacy issue doesn't apply.  It I were being accused of 
> > such a thing, I would go ahead and post the exchanges, if I thought it 
> > would be of service to me.  I learned my lesson in the much less important 
> > post that Sal posted to me privately that I held private and asked Judy and 
> > Curtis to do the same with, as I actually didn't hold it quite private, did 
> > I?  In the future, for me, if it's an FFL conversation or should be one, 
> > than it goes to FFL - period.  Particularly if it's a controversial  one. 
> >  I want the extended feedback for those that want to chime in.  I value 
> > it, I believe in it, I always consider it.  Always.  Share's behavior 
> > here has been to act out and create the kind of drama that shows that what's
> >  inside the orange isn't necessarily orange juice.  Too bad she is 
> > unwilling to take responsibility or accountability for anything she says. 
> >  I am glad she has created a life for her that works in a community that 
> > supports her.  I'm sure that on the outside she is a very loving and open 
> > and generous person.  All I'm saying is that she has a shadow side, and 
> > she is demonstrating many aspects of that here.  She can pretend she's all 
> > love and light all she likes, but the proof is in the words she puts down 
> > here, as far as I'm concerned, and it is undeniable bullshit.  None of us 
> > are all love and light all the time; I don't know why she is so scared to 
> > acknowledge her negative qualities.  
> > 
> 
> You just don't get it, do you Emily?

Emily gets it, laughinggull. So do Ann, raunchy, Robin,
Alex, and I, and probably others who haven't spoken up.

Share on FFL is bullshit: toxic, thoroughly dishonest
and spiteful bullshit. You and Steve and feste have
been conned, but good.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Da Vinci's Cosmic Code

[John]

Richard,

In the novel, "Da Vinci Code", the apostle on the right side of Jesus was 
considered to be Mary Magdalene, the disciple and wife of Jesus.  The novel 
continued to narrate that Magdalene became pregnant, moved to France, and 
raised the child who started the bloodline that still exists today.

JR


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> John jr_esq: 
> > The second apostle with the long hair represents Taurus, 
> > a sign owned by Venus, a female.
> > 
> Stoyanov thinks that the one single local Langudocian 
> notion in Catharism was the theology of the belief that 
> Mary Magdalene was the concubine of Jesus - knowledge that 
> was reserved for the inner circle of Cathars: "The teaching 
> of Mary Magdalene as the 'wife or 'concubine' of Christ 
> appears moreover, an original Cathar tradition which does 
> not have any counterpart in Bogomil doctrines" (222-223).
> 
> Work cited:
> 
> 'The Hidden Tradition in Europe'
> by Yuri Stoyanov
> Penguin Books, 1995
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>


>
> The beginning paragraph from wiki-
>
> Share International's publications claim that the coming of Maitreya
>  (meaning
> "friendly" in Sanskrit  )
> fulfills not only Buddhist 
> prophecies about the appearance of a future great teacher named
> Maitreya, but also the prophecies of a number of other world religions
-
> including Christianity 
(the
> second coming of Christ  ),
> Hinduism  (the Kalki
>  avatar of Vishnu
>  ), Islam
>  (the Imam Mahdi
>  ) and Judaism
>  (the Jewish Messiah
>  ). Creme claims that Maitreya
> manifested himself through (or overshadowed) Jesus
>  2,000 years ago,[6]
>
 998._page_8-6> that Maitreya resided in the Himalayas, and that in
1977
> he descended from his ancient retreat in the Himalayas
>  and took an aeroplane to
> London  . His belief is that
> Maitreya took up residence in the Indian-Pakistani community of London
> in the Brick Lane area and has been living and working there,
seemingly
> as an ordinary man, his true status known to relatively few.
> Furthermore, that Maitreya has been emerging gradually into full
public
> view so as not to infringe humanity's free will.[5]
>
 _347-5> [6]
>
 998._page_8-6> [7]
>  [8]
>  [9]
> 
> Journalists had been invited to find Maitreya in the Brick Lane area
but
> were unable to do so.[10]
> 
> According to Creme, Maitreya influenced the ending of the cold war
>  , the
German
> reunification  ,
and
> the ending of apartheid in South Africa
> 
> .[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share_International#cite_note-11



Well put, thanks for posting this :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Feles domesticae!

[authfriend]

Fantastic photos, card, great find! Thank you.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "card"  wrote:
>
> 
> http://www.buzzfeed.com/summeranne/50-amazing-photos-from-cat-heaven-island-in-japan
>

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Nov 24 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Dec 01 00:00:00 2012
463 messages as of (UTC) Thu Nov 29 00:14:32 2012

44 Emily Reyn 
34 seventhray1 
34 awoelflebater 
32 Share Long 
31 authfriend 
28 Bhairitu 
27 Buck 
24 John 
24 "Richard J. Williams" 
22 turquoiseb 
22 salyavin808 
18 nablusoss1008 
17 raunchydog 
17 Robin Carlsen 
16 laughinggull108 
11 Mike Dixon 
 8 Susan 
 7 Ravi Chivukula 
 6 emptybill 
 6 Alex Stanley 
 5 "emilymae.reyn" 
 4 Rick Archer 
 4 Duveyoung 
 3 merlin 
 3 card 
 3 Michael Jackson 
 2 PaliGap 
 2 David 
 1 stevelf 
 1 sri...@ymail.com, UNEXPECTED_DATA_AFTER_ADDRESS@".SYNTAX-ERROR.
 1 mjackson74 
 1 mdixon.6...@yahoo.com
 1 Yifu 
 1 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 1 Richard 
 1 Dick Mays 
 1 Bill Coop 

Posters: 37
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Da Vinci's Cosmic Code

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> >
> > Take a look at the Last Supper painting shown in the link below:
> > 
> > http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A2KJkK0BRrZQyEMAIr.JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dda%2Bvinci%2Bs%2Blast%2Bsupper%26fr%3Dfptb-w3i-s%26fr2%3Dpiv-web%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D4&w=909&h=481&imgurl=3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-3Onz2hex5go%2FTa92n9ERi7I%2FDNk%2FKEc8i5wr8dU%2Fs1600%2FThe%2BLast%2BSupper%2B-%2BDa%2BVinci%2B1495-98.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffavourite-paintings.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fleonardo-da-vinci-last-supper.html&size=90+KB&name=Paintings%3A+Leonardo+%3Cb%3Eda+Vinci+%3C%2Fb%3E-+The+%3Cb%3ELast+Supper%3C%2Fb%3E&p=da+vinci+s+last+supper&oid=2995358d7d2b0d7d59d588b21229&fr2=piv-web&fr=fptb-w3i-s&tt=Paintings%253A%2BLeonardo%2B%253Cb%253Eda%2BVinci%2B%253C%252Fb%253E-%2BThe%2B%253Cb%253ELast%2BSupper%253C%252Fb%253E&b=0&ni=42&no=4&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12irt8vt0&sigb=13gabvn00&sigi=13fb2p08t&.crumb=G8uAyIXytCH
> 
> Is this the biggest link ever?
> 
>  
> > You'll find that Jesus is seated in the middle of the apostles representing 
> > the cross or the autumnal equinox.
> 
> Why does the cross represent the autumnal equinox?

Salyavin,

Because the cross represents border between the light and dark which the 
autumnal equinox represents.  After the equinox, the days get shorter and 
nights get longer.  Also, at this point the Sun is considered at its fall or 
the weakest in astrological terms. 

>  
> > The apostles are grouped in four, representing the four seasons.
> > 
> > The first apostle who is standing represents Aries since he is at the head 
> > of the table
> 
> Isn't the start of a circle somewhat arbitrary?

The table is not a circle.  Also, Aries is considered the first sign in the 
zodiac in western and eastern astrology.


>  
> > The second apostle with the long hair represents Taurus, a sign owned by 
> > Venus, a female.
> 
> Wouldn't he better represent it if he had horns? And why does
> long hair signify female, they were all hippies in those days?

You have to interpret the painting in context with the situation.


>  
> > The third apostle with his arms raised represents Gemini, the significator 
> > of the human arms.
> 
> Never heard that one before.

Please, read an introductory astrology book for more information regarding the 
various meanings of the sign.

>  
> > The fourth apostle with a knife represents Cancer.
> 
> Why? cancer is a crab.

The crab's pincers can cut your fingers like a knife.

> 
>  
> > The fifth apostle with his arms majestically placed on the table is Leo, 
> > ruled by the Sun, the king of the heavens.
> 
> Wouldn't Jesus be king here?

Please, interpret the meaning in context with the rest of the painting.

>  
> > The sixth apostle who looks like a female represents Virgo, a female sign.
> 
> Not representing something else to fit in with the theory this
> time then?

In the novel, "Da Vinci Code", this apostle was interpreted to mean Mary 
Magdalene who was regarded by some historians to have been one of the disciples 
of Jesus.

>  
> > You can analyze the rest of the apostles and will find their correspondence 
> > to the remaining zodiacal signs.
> 
> Probably the least convincing conspiracy theory I have ever
> seen. Congratulations!

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[emptybill]

Wolf Baiter -


This is indeed like a Fillini movie - sort of like the Fellini short
Toby Dammit.

  [168]


Apparently, you don't know about the pseudo-buddhist, pseudo-hindu
speculations of the Theosophist Alice Bailey. That means you don't know
how far people will go to invent their "telepathic revelations" from the
"holy masters" ...  you know - the old hidden masters with their
"ju-ju".

The beginning paragraph from wiki-

Share International's publications claim that the coming of Maitreya
  (meaning
"friendly" in Sanskrit  )
fulfills not only Buddhist  
prophecies about the appearance of a future great teacher named
Maitreya, but also the prophecies of a number of other world religions -
including Christianity   (the
second coming of Christ  ),
Hinduism   (the Kalki
  avatar of Vishnu
 ), Islam
  (the Imam Mahdi
 ) and Judaism
  (the Jewish Messiah
 ). Creme claims that Maitreya
manifested himself through (or overshadowed) Jesus
  2,000 years ago,[6]
  that Maitreya resided in the Himalayas, and that in 1977
he descended from his ancient retreat in the Himalayas
  and took an aeroplane to
London  .  His belief is that
Maitreya took up residence in the Indian-Pakistani  community of London
in the Brick Lane area and has been living and  working there, seemingly
as an ordinary man, his true status known to  relatively few.
Furthermore, that Maitreya has been emerging gradually  into full public
view so as not to infringe humanity's free will.[5]
 [6]
 [7]
 [8]
 [9]
 
Journalists had been invited to find Maitreya in the Brick Lane area but
were unable to do so.[10]
 
According to Creme, Maitreya influenced the ending of the cold war
 , the German
reunification  , and
the ending of apartheid in South Africa
 
.[11] 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote:
>
> OK, it this some kind of bizarre Fillini-esque movie I am suddenly a
part of or are you being for real with all of this? Tell me you are
making this up and you don't really think this is either: A)relevant,
B)true or C)important. It just keeps getting weirder and weirder here
today. I gotta go feed the chickens now...
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in the archives 
> > where I said LA LA LA.  But perhaps by real world you mean some context 
> > other than FFL? 
> > 
> > 
> > I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar 
> > to me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people 
> > like Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar 
> > situations.
> 
> Er, hello, you have your own in-resident former WTS participant
> right here at FFL, namely - me. Why not pick my brain a little
> more?
> 

What good would that do? You got over it, moved on, and are not clinging 
desperately to victimhood, so what the hell could you, with all your stupid 
growth, maturity, and healing, possibly add to the discussion?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Emily Reyn]

Ann, you are out.  (post 49) You can have no impact on Share whatsoever.  Did 
you not see the brilliance of her last post - see how beautiful the play is?  
You have already been branded as someone who leveled "vile accusations" at her 
and you have been dismissed.  Done deal.  Either you support her in her reality 
or you're out. Period.  If she does deign to question or answer you, don't 
expect anything real to come across.  She is a master of manipulation.  Look 
what she has done here since the time she's been here?  I would guess that now 
that she's 65, we would only expect her to become more and more entrenched in 
the business of adapting reality to her unconscious needs.  She is the ultimate 
controller.  

Yes, Steve, those of us who are more direct communicators are at a disadvantage 
with someone like Share, but I counter with the idea that ultimately it 
wouldn't matter.  Those with a world view such as Share's have no concept of 
compassion based in the real world.  She is "right" about her assessment of FFL 
and woe be it to anyone who disagrees with her, and I do and I will continue to 
do so.  The best, most compassionate thing she could do for me, would be to 
never read another post of mine ever.    

Share is the consummate victim - when all else fails - she is fully blameless, 
unfairly attacked by others, subject of accusations from those in a cult, those 
engaged in a high school dynamic, etc.  Whatever.  


 From: awoelflebater 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 3:10 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex
 

  


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in the archives where 
> I said LA LA LA.  But perhaps by real world you mean some context other than 
> FFL? 
> 
> 
> I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar to 
> me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people like 
> Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar situations.

Er, hello, you have your own in-resident former WTS participant right here at 
FFL, namely - me. Why not pick my brain a little more?

  I choose to ignore those who express disregard for me and the validity of my 
experiences especially those who express these in a very attacking and or crude 
and or condescending way.  I also choose to ignore those who first ignore and 
or misrepresent what I've written.  I don't see that any good will come of 
such discussions.  And I certainly choose to ignore certain posters who, 
though delightful on their own, often become distorted versions of themselves 
when they take on the pack mentality.   
> 
> 
> I have and will continue to listen to those who express agreement or 
> disagreement with me in a reasonable and unbiased and compassionate manner.  
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Alex Stanley 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:16 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex
> 
> 
>   
> Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, and 
> it does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the real 
> world, if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're 
> likely to get called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is "LA 
> LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile 
> on.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
> > experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the 
> > name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and 
> > cowardly behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people 
> > who disagreed with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  Warts 
> > yet present.  I never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.  And 
> > it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same meetings.  In my 
> > experience, Waking Down created a safe environment in which people could be 
> > rigorously honest with themselves and with others.  It was balanced 
> > masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.    
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > 
> > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > actually break a small sweat if it included th

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in
> > the archives where I said LA LA LA.  But perhaps by real
> > world you mean some context other than FFL? 
> > 
> > I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters
> > so unfamiliar to me in large part because what I have said
> > has been validated by people like Lord Knows and Bill and
> > Brahmi who have been through similar situations.
> 
> Er, hello, you have your own in-resident former WTS participant
> right here at FFL, namely - me. Why not pick my brain a little
> more?

Because some Reality might come out. Can't have that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[laughinggull108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> P.S. (post 48)  Steve, even if Share defers to her perception that 
> "psychological rape"  occurred during her off-line exchange with Robin, 
>  individually, Robin recently proposed, agreed, and offered to make those 
> exchanges public here.  Because they were private, he asked Share for her 
> permission.  Share ultimately, deferred to a meeting with her pastoral 
> counselor that she was going to have to supposedly get feedback.  She came 
> back here and posted something about "bringing more positivity to FFL" 
>  What?  She never said:  "I discussed it and decided against it."  She 
> didn't address it at all.  Her response was completely insulting and 
> completely dismissive of everyone here who was following the conversation and 
> participating in it.  Exceee Me!  
> 
> So, Share gets to retain her condemnation of Robin, and Robin, who was 
> willing to make the entire exchange public, is cut off at the knees.  You 
> see why Judy said that, in her opinion, if the allegations are malicious, for 
> example, the privacy issue doesn't apply.  It I were being accused of such a 
> thing, I would go ahead and post the exchanges, if I thought it would be of 
> service to me.  I learned my lesson in the much less important post that Sal 
> posted to me privately that I held private and asked Judy and Curtis to do 
> the same with, as I actually didn't hold it quite private, did I?  In the 
> future, for me, if it's an FFL conversation or should be one, than it goes to 
> FFL - period.  Particularly if it's a controversial  one.  I want the 
> extended feedback for those that want to chime in.  I value it, I believe in 
> it, I always consider it.  Always.  Share's behavior here has been to act 
> out and create the kind of drama that shows that what's
>  inside the orange isn't necessarily orange juice.  Too bad she is unwilling 
> to take responsibility or accountability for anything she says.  I am glad 
> she has created a life for her that works in a community that supports her. 
>  I'm sure that on the outside she is a very loving and open and generous 
> person.  All I'm saying is that she has a shadow side, and she is 
> demonstrating many aspects of that here.  She can pretend she's all love and 
> light all she likes, but the proof is in the words she puts down here, as far 
> as I'm concerned, and it is undeniable bullshit.  None of us are all love 
> and light all the time; I don't know why she is so scared to acknowledge her 
> negative qualities.  
> 

You just don't get it, do you Emily? Send Emilina over and have Steve explain 
it to her.

> 
> 
> 
>  From: seventhray1 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 11:20 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve
>  
> 
>   
> Hey Emily,
> 
> I am sorry that you are running low on posts.  I hope you don't post out.
> 
> I also want to qualify my comment with something Raunchy has brought up, 
> about not commenting if you don't have any skin in the game.  And I don't 
> feel like I have a lot of skin in this game.
> 
> But, I do want to say, that if one steps back a little and allows for what is 
> sometimes called, "poetic license", then maybe Share's comments take on a 
> different perspective.
> 
> Let's take for example this term "psychological rape".  ( I hope I have the 
> term right, but you know what I am referring to)
> 
> I knew what Share meant.  I guess if you want, you can take great offense at 
> the term, and pick it apart.  On the other hand,  do we not as a matter of 
> course here, often use such loaded terms?
> 
> But even aside from that, I felt the term could be a reasonable description 
> of the way Robin often interacts with people.
> 
> But that's the way he often is, and from his point of view, he feels he sees 
> a blind spot that person may not be aware of.  So, why the big deal about 
> it.  
> 
> Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom Robin 
> has a greater affinity?
> 
> Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what 
> defines "cult behavior".
> 
> At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you disagree 
> with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving on.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> 
> > So:  You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that 
> > healing of the wts cult has taken place since November 11th?  Huh? 
> >  These two premises are oppositional; one does not support the other. 
> >  Do you or  don't you believe that there is a wts cult in operation 
> > here on FFL?  Yes or No.  
> > 
> > The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by 
> > you.the bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you believe a 
> > factio

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[laughinggull108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> Hey Emily,
> I am sorry that you are running low on posts.  I hope you don't post
> out.
> I also want to qualify my comment with something Raunchy has brought up,
> about not commenting if you don't have any skin in the game.  And I
> don't feel like I have a lot of skin in this game.
> But, I do want to say, that if one steps back a little and allows for
> what is sometimes called, "poetic license", then maybe Share's comments
> take on a different perspective.
> Let's take for example this term "psychological rape".  ( I hope I have
> the term right, but you know what I am referring to)
> I knew what Share meant.  I guess if you want, you can take great
> offense at the term, and pick it apart.  On the other hand,  do we not
> as a matter of course here, often use such loaded terms?
> But even aside from that, I felt the term could be a reasonable
> description of the way Robin often interacts with people.
> But that's the way he often is, and from his point of view, he feels he
> sees a blind spot that person may not be aware of.  So, why the big deal
> about it.
> Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom
> Robin has a greater affinity?
> Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what
> defines "cult behavior".
> At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you
> disagree with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving
> on.

Very sensible Steve. A person could fall in love with you based on this post 
alone. Not that I've fallen in love with you, you understand. Well, even if I 
had fallen in love with you, there's nothing wrong with that, is there? Good on 
ya'.

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
> wrote:
> 
> > So: Â You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that
> healing of the wts cult has taken place since November 11th? Â Huh?
> Â These two premises are oppositional; one does not support the
> other.  Do you or  don't you believe that there is a wts cult in
> operation here on FFL? Â Yes or No. Â
> >
> > The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by
> you.the bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you believe a
> faction of FFL (those you identify) are involved in a cult, that you
> have termed wts. Â I disagree, for the record, and will not play this
> game with you in the future. Â
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:

> > > > > > > 
> > > > > nablusoss1008:
> > > > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus 
> > > > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > > > 
> > > > Like the majority of "Christians" you are mixing up names. The Christ 
> > > > did not "incarnate" through a process of self-creation (Mahavirupa), 
> > > > until after Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment 
> > > > in 1975, a body with which He arrived in the West July 19 1977. Until 
> > > > then noone had seen Him in the flesh, though He did overshadow and 
> > > > inspire Jesus of Nazareth in Palestine constantly for about three years.
> > > 
> > > Nabs,
> > > 
> > > Are you speaking of MMY here or Maitreya?
> > 
> > Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975 in 
> > accordance with the Dive Plan which is being excecuted by the Masters of 
> > Wisdom of which Guru Dev is a senior member and Maitreya the most senior. 
> > As you know Maitreya now has a mayavirupa body and is living in the West, 
> > Maharishi and Guru Dev are currently not in incarnation.
> > 
> > During the Inauguration and in the following years, Maharishi voiced for 
> > the first time, yet hinted at in Theosophical literature particularily that 
> > of Alice Bailey and Madam Blavatsky, the huge change that was to come and 
> > that will last for 1 years.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > "Q. The Christ is formless, but he is also centered within his 
> > > > mayavirupa body in London, and his light-body lies asleep in the 
> > > > Himalayas. Where is his center, his focal point of existence? Does he 
> > > > meditate from his light-body? 
> > > > 
> > > > BC: The Christ is not formless but, of course, the energy he embodies, 
> > > > the Love energy, the energy which we call the Christ Principle, is 
> > > > formless. His consciousness is centered in the mayavirupa (self- 
> > > > created body). He meditates and lives and works as a normal man, in the 
> > > > mayavirupa, which is a completely real body."
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Are you saying Jesus is still alive in the Himalyas?
> > 
> > 
> > The confusion about this is quite understandable since the process of 
> > "overshadowing" is not publicly well known. It's a process completely 
> > different from any kind of spiritism as it in no way whatsoever infringes 
> > the free will of the vehicle (man or woman). Historically the best known 
> > example is when Jesus of Palestine for 3 years was overshadowed by the 
> > Christ (the Christ today use the name Maitreya). The relationship between 
> > Jesus and the Christ was so perfect that the Christians to this day believe 
> > they are one and the same, hence they reffer to Jesus Christ.
> > 
> > In the quote above Benjamin Creme states that the Christ " is not formless 
> > but, of course, the energy he embodies, the Love energy, the energy which 
> > we call the Christ Principle, is formless. His consciousness is centered in 
> > the mayavirupa (self- created body). He meditates and lives and works as a 
> > normal man, in the mayavirupa, which is a completely real body."
> > 
> > The answer to your question is that Jesus is today a Master cooperating 
> > very closely with Maitreya in bringing in the full sunshine of the Age of 
> > Enlightenment. Maitreya, in His self-created (mayavirupa) body is active in 
> > the West, as well as appearing to people of all faiths all over the world 
> > on a daily basis.
> > 
> > The ressurection was not real in the sense that it was permanent. Maitreya 
> > did this to the dead body of Jesus from Palestine for a very short time to 
> > uplift and strengthen the faith of the Disciples (and others)for 40 days. 
> > After dying on the cross  (which also marked His 4'th initiation) Jesus of 
> > Palestine has had several incarnations, amongst them one in Syria. He is 
> > now living and acting out of Italy, incognito and not known to the public. 
> > He is today a member of the Masters of Wisdom.
> 
> OK, it this some kind of bizarre Fillini-esque movie I am suddenly a part of 
> or are you being for real with all of this? Tell me you are making this up 
> and you don't really think this is either: A)relevant, B)true or C)important. 
> It just keeps getting weirder and weirder here today. I gotta go feed the 
> chickens now...


If I'm not mistaken (I could be) I answered a question of yours along the same 
lines not long ago to which you remind silent. Instead of keep asking questions 
I would recommend doing some study of your own. Use your own common sense, the 
opinions of others including me have little value. A good place to start is 
here:

http://www.share-international.org/background/faq/faq_main.htm

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[laughinggull108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely
> > > did not in my experience ever include what I call in FFL
> > > piling on. Piling on in the name of rigorous honesty is what
> > > I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly behavior in wts.
> >
> > Unbelievable.
> >
> > There was never any "piling on in the name of rigorous
> > honesty" on FFL. All anybody has ever asked of Share
> > is *basic* honesty. Even just *approximate* honesty
> > would be a welcome change.
> >
> > > That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed
> > > with them. And cheering each other on about it.
> >
> > Does anybody have a clue what this means?
> 
> (Hand raised in back of class)
>   "Yes, Steven, do you have an answer?"
> "Yes, teacher.  I read somewhere, teacher, that the only time we may not
> feel the effect of a force is when we are most under its influence"
> "You mean like gravity, Steven?"
> "Yes teacher.  So, what I am saying teacher, and I don't mean to be
> disrespectful, is that the reason you may be so clueless about this
> notion of "piling on", is that, this describes your behavior much of the
> timeteacher"
> "Steven, I want you to come up to the board right now, and write 100
> times, "Teacher is Always Right, Teacher is Always Right"
> "Yes teacher"
> 

ROTFLMAO...you *do* have a style about you Steve that everyone can't help but 
like (well, almost everyone). Good contribution on Wunnerful Wednesday.

> > > Warts yet present. I never saw any of these behaviors in
> > > Waking Down.
> >
> > Look to your own warts, your own unhealthy, unhealed, and
> > cowardly behavior here. Start by eliminating, or at least
> > cutting down on, the bullshit you spout, like the above.
> >
> > If it appears that you are making *some* kind of effort
> > to be honest and straightforward, you won't get so much
> > flak. But don't expect *not* to get flak when you come
> > up with utter crap like "wts" as an excuse for not
> > copping to your own behavior. Nobody buys that, and we
> > all recognize that it's pure hostility on your part--
> > hostility because you've been called on the rest of your
> > dishonesty and your refusal to deal with reality.
> >
> > > And it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same
> > > meetings. In my experience, Waking Down created a safe
> > > environment in which people could be rigorously honest with
> > > themselves and with others. It was balanced masculine and
> > > feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.
> >
> > Obviously Waking Down did Share no good whatsoever. She's
> > made herself utterly oblivious to who she is and seems to
> > be incapable of any kind of honesty with herself or with
> > others.
> >
> > What a contrast with Alex.
> >
> > > 
> > >  From: Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > >
> > > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > > "rigorous".
> > >
> > > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found
> Share's excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very
> strange. Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit
> frosting, but as another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to
> your mugshot. It's not about techiquifying yourself into some future
> perfected enlightened being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are
> right now. From my own experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be
> any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Feles domesticae!

[card]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/summeranne/50-amazing-photos-from-cat-heaven-island-in-japan

[FairfieldLife] Re: Love and God

[laughinggull108]

Thank you nablusoss. A wonderful contribution any day of the week!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgzX2dtdeGE
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in the archives where 
> I said LA LA LA.  But perhaps by real world you mean some context other than 
> FFL? 
> 
> 
> I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar to 
> me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people like 
> Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar situations.

Er, hello, you have your own in-resident former WTS participant right here at 
FFL, namely - me. Why not pick my brain a little more?

  I choose to ignore those who express disregard for me and the validity of my 
experiences especially those who express these in a very attacking and or crude 
and or condescending way.  I also choose to ignore those who first ignore and 
or misrepresent what I've written.  I don't see that any good will come of 
such discussions.  And I certainly choose to ignore certain posters who, 
though delightful on their own, often become distorted versions of themselves 
when they take on the pack mentality.   
> 
> 
> I have and will continue to listen to those who express agreement or 
> disagreement with me in a reasonable and unbiased and compassionate manner.  
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Alex Stanley 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:16 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex
>  
> 
>   
> Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, and 
> it does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the real 
> world, if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're 
> likely to get called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is "LA 
> LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile 
> on.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
> > experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the 
> > name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and 
> > cowardly behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people 
> > who disagreed with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  Warts 
> > yet present.  I never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.  And 
> > it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same meetings.  In my 
> > experience, Waking Down created a safe environment in which people could be 
> > rigorously honest with themselves and with others.  It was balanced 
> > masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.    
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > 
> > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > "rigorous". 
> > 
> > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> > excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> > Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> > another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's 
> > not about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened 
> > being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> > experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than 
> > WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time for gift-giving, 
> > > > > > partying and carnivals.
> > > > > > 
> > > > nablusoss1008:
> > > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus 
> > > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > > >
> > > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > > 
> > > Like the majority of "Christians" you are mixing up names. The Christ did 
> > > not "incarnate" through a process of self-creation (Mahavirupa), until 
> > > after Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975, 
> > > a body with which He arrived in the West July 19 1977. Until then noone 
> > > had seen Him in the flesh, though He did overshadow and inspire Jesus of 
> > > Nazareth in Palestine constantly for about three years.
> > 
> > Nabs,
> > 
> > Are you speaking of MMY here or Maitreya?
> 
> Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975 in 
> accordance with the Dive Plan which is being excecuted by the Masters of 
> Wisdom of which Guru Dev is a senior member and Maitreya the most senior. As 
> you know Maitreya now has a mahavirupa body and is living in the West, 
> Maharishi and Guru Dev are currently not in incarnation.
> 
> During the Inauguration and in the following years, Maharishi voiced for the 
> first time, yet hinted at in Theosophical literature particularily that of 
> Alice Bailey and Madam Blavatsky, the huge change that was to come and that 
> will last for 1 years.
> 
> 
> 
> > > "Q. The Christ is formless, but he is also centered within his mayavirupa 
> > > body in London, and his light-body lies asleep in the Himalayas. Where is 
> > > his center, his focal point of existence? Does he meditate from his 
> > > light-body? 
> > > 
> > > BC: The Christ is not formless but, of course, the energy he embodies, 
> > > the Love energy, the energy which we call the Christ Principle, is 
> > > formless. His consciousness is centered in the mayavirupa (self- created 
> > > body). He meditates and lives and works as a normal man, in the 
> > > mayavirupa, which is a completely real body."
> > >
> > 
> > Are you saying Jesus is still alive in the Himalyas?
> 
> 
> The confusion about this is quite understandable since the process of 
> "overshadowing" is not publicly well known. It's a process completely 
> different from any kind of spiritism as it in no way whatsoever infringes the 
> free will of the vehicle (man or woman). Historically the best known example 
> is when Jesus of Palestine for 3 years was overshadowed by the Christ (today 
> He use the name Maitreya). The intimate relationship between Jesus and the 
> Christ was so perfect that the Christians to this day believe they are one 
> and the same, hence they reffer to the name Jesus Christ.
> 
> In the quote above Benjamin Creme states that the Christ " is not formless 
> but, of course, the energy he embodies, the Love energy, the energy which we 
> call the Christ Principle, is formless. His consciousness is centered in the 
> mayavirupa (self- created body). He meditates and lives and works as a normal 
> man, in the mayavirupa, which is a completely real body."
> 
> The answer to your question is that Jesus is now today a Master cooperating 
> very closely with Maitreya in bringing in the full sunshine of the Age of 
> Enlightenment. Maitreya, in His self-created (mahavirupa) body is active in 
> the West, as well as appearing to people of all faiths all over the world on 
> a daily basis.
> 
> The ressurection was not real in the sense that it was permanent. Maitreya 
> did this to the dead body of Jesus from Palestine for a very short time to 
> uplift and strengthen the faith of the Disciples (and others). After dying on 
> the cross  (which also marked His 4'th initiation) Jesus of Palestine has had 
> several incarnations, amongst them one in Syria. He is now living and acting 
> out of Italy, incognito and not known to the public but to a small circle of 
> friends and disciples who are sworn to secrecy about His real nature. He is 
> today a member of the Masters of Wisdom.

OK, it this some kind of bizarre Fillini-esque movie I am suddenly a part of or 
are you being for real with all of this? Tell me you are making this up and you 
don't really think this is either: A)relevant, B)true or C)important. It just 
keeps getting weirder and weirder here today. I gotta go feed the chickens 
now...

> Your sincerity is much respected John. I hope the answers have been helpful. 
> For more information about the work of the Masters of Wisdom, this is a

[FairfieldLife] Jerry Seinfeld; I've been using it 37 years !

[nablusoss1008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gM_sXiUPvo&feature=plcp

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Share Long]

Alex, for a starter, perhaps you could get Judy to find in the archives where I 
said LA LA LA.  But perhaps by real world you mean some context other than FFL? 


I stand by everything I have said about these subtle matters so unfamiliar to 
me in large part because what I have said has been validated by people like 
Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi who have been through similar situations.  I 
choose to ignore those who express disregard for me and the validity of my 
experiences especially those who express these in a very attacking and or crude 
and or condescending way.  I also choose to ignore those who first ignore and 
or misrepresent what I've written.  I don't see that any good will come of such 
discussions.  And I certainly choose to ignore certain posters who, though 
delightful on their own, often become distorted versions of themselves when 
they take on the pack mentality.   


I have and will continue to listen to those who express agreement or 
disagreement with me in a reasonable and unbiased and compassionate manner.  



 From: Alex Stanley 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:16 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex
 

  
Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, and it 
does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the real world, 
if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're likely to 
get called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is "LA LA LA I AM 
NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile on.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
> experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the name 
> of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly 
> behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed 
> with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  Warts yet present.  I 
> never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.  And it's possible you and 
> I didn't attend all of the same meetings.  In my experience, Waking Down 
> created a safe environment in which people could be rigorously honest with 
> themselves and with others.  It was balanced masculine and feminine with 
> lack of hyperness in either direction.    
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Alex Stanley 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > 
> > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > "rigorous". 
> 
> Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not 
> about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; 
> it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's 
> brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Robin Carlsen]

The Ten Thray Desideratum

You can only get the sense you are saying something real--when arguing with 
someone--by attempting to understanding the meaning of the tension that is 
being created by your determination to oppose what that other person is saying.

In order to have some sense of the appropriateness of your position you must 
get a feeling for the relative depth of intelligence that the argument of your 
opponent contains--in relation to the depth of intelligence of your own 
argument.

You must look upon your argument as a creation; if it is not beautiful in and 
of itself--beyond the mere content--it is unlikely to have received the 
endorsement of reality.

When someone is saying something true, reality likes to be there (somewhere 
inside the argument). And if you are wrong, reality makes sure it doesn't make 
any appearance inside your argument.

When stepping back and examining your argument, the ideal standard is to say: I 
am not personally identified with what I have said--I have tried to let it be 
the property of what is disinterested and true--independent of my own vanity: 
my argument, as I see it, could have been said by someone else. It reflects 
more of reality than it reflects who I am.

When inserting oneself into a conversation where one is inclined to come out on 
one side rather than the other (the conversation between persons who disagree 
with one another), one should first of all try to argue against that first 
inclination, so that when finally you express your own point of view that very 
point of view has already undergone the kind of scrutiny that is its inevitable 
destiny when read by your adversaries.

When constructing an argument against another person's point of view, you 
should find that that argument is assuming the form of a structure, in which 
each sentence builds towards its completion. It should have a kind of 
architectonic integrity by the time you are at the end of saying all that you 
want to say.

At the very least you must imagine yourself understanding why your opponent is 
arguing the way he or she is. If you cannot conceive of how that other person 
(if they have committed themselves honestly to a real debate) can argue as they 
are arguing, it is demonstrably true you do not understand the issue, because 
if you are right, that rightness is inclusive of understanding exactly why your 
opponent is arguing the way he or she is arguing.

When going against what someone has said, you want to land up in a place where 
you sense the ground is not going to give beneath your feet. Your argument must 
strive for this kind of physics of stability and rest--at its endpoint. 

If you feel strongly that someone is wrong, besides feeling how wrong they are, 
you must attempt to imagine what could make them believe something that is 
wrong and think (and experience) that they are right. For even if they are 
wrong, they are having the experience (if they are reasonably honest and brave) 
they are right--just as you are.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> snip
> > Yes, you do. Plus which, you're stupidly wrong, as usual,
> > because you haven't been paying attention to the context.
> Judy, I wish trying to follow your logic or "context" was a more
> fruitful activity.  But more often than not, it turns out to be a total
> waste of time.
> > > is that the reason you may be so clueless about this
> > > notion of "piling on",
> >
> > Read the whole post again, carefully, including what I
> > quoted from Share's post. Read all the words. Look up
> > any words you don't understand in Mr. Dictionary. If
> > you still can't see your stupid mistakes, find someone
> > who can read English to help you out.
> Judy, I admire your tenacity in thinking that the more you say you're
> right about something the more it must be true.  Fortunately we have a
> fifty post limit, because most of us remember how that used to play out.
> > This isn't about opinion, BTW. Imagine that.This is about your
> > chronic inability to retain context. Another term for
> > it is lousy reading comprehension. But it's a function
> > of gross laziness.
> Okay teacher.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Bhairitu]

It's a joke, Edg.  Apparently you didn't get it.  It's a play on the 
words Trikke and trichinosis.

On 11/28/2012 12:32 PM, Duveyoung wrote:
> I don't understand your question's basis.
>
> I think you're being a troll, but I have sincere question:  Do you really 
> have such a negativity towards the machines, or are you actually just trying 
> to snark at me personally despite the fact that you're besmirching  Trikkes 
> and Skkis which are great gizmos that promotes fitness and fun around the 
> world?
>
> Attack me all you want, I sure have faults, but these inventions are helping 
> the world more obviously than I EVER saw results in the people to whom I 
> taught TM.
>
> And, the general negativity expressed here at FFL towards them seems to be a 
> very striking measurement of just exactly HOW LITTLE TM has helped anyone 
> have an open mind towards new things -- despite the messenger.
>
> BAH!
>
> Edg
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> Will apple sauce help prevent Trikkenosis?
>>
>> On 11/28/2012 08:46 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
>>> Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI
>>>
>>> Edg
>>>
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:

 http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html

>>>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
wrote:
>
> P.S. (post 48) Â Steve, even if Share defers to her perception that
"psychological rape" Â occurred during her off-line exchange with
Robin, Â individually, Robin recently proposed, agreed, and offered
to make those exchanges public here. Â Because they were private, he
asked Share for her permission. Â Share ultimately, deferred to a
meeting with her pastoral counselor that she was going to have to
supposedly get feedback. Â She came back here and posted something
about "bringing more positivity to FFL" Â What? Â She never
said: Â "I discussed it and decided against it." Â She didn't
address it at all. Â Her response was completely insulting and
completely dismissive of everyone here who was following the
conversation and participating in it. Â Exceee Me! Â
I guess it was a judgement call on her part.  But certainly when this is
an opportunity to clear something up, especially when it pertains to a
person's character, it is desirable to do so.
> So, Share gets to retain her condemnation of Robin, and Robin, who was
willing to make the entire exchange public, is cut off at the knees.
 You see why Judy said that, in her opinion, if the allegations are
malicious, for example, the privacy issue doesn't apply. Â It I were
being accused of such a thing, I would go ahead and post the exchanges,
if I thought it would be of service to me. Â I learned my lesson in
the much less important post that Sal posted to me privately that I held
private and asked Judy and Curtis to do the same with, as I actually
didn't hold it quite private, did I? Â In the future, for me, if it's
an FFL conversation or should be one, than it goes to FFL - period. Â
Particularly if it's a controversial  one.  I want the extended
feedback for those that want to chime in. Â I value it, I believe in
it, I always consider it. Â Always. Â Share's behavior here has
been to act out and create the kind of drama that shows that what's
>  inside the orange isn't necessarily orange juice. Â Too bad she is
unwilling to take responsibility or accountability for anything she
says. Â I am glad she has created a life for her that works in a
community that supports her. Â I'm sure that on the outside she is a
very loving and open and generous person. Â All I'm saying is that
she has a shadow side, and she is demonstrating many aspects of that
here. Â She can pretend she's all love and light all she likes, but
the proof is in the words she puts down here, as far as I'm concerned,
and it is undeniable bullshit. Â None of us are all love and light
all the time; I don't know why she is so scared to acknowledge her
negative qualities. Â
I would have to disagree with some of your statement here.  I don't
think she is in denial in any way, shape or form of her shadow self. 
But certainly I can understand if that is your opinion.
It just may be that some of us think, feel, and express ourselves
differently.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Michael Jackson]

I have never heard of these things - they look pretty cool!





 From: Duveyoung 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 3:32 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday
 

  
I don't understand your question's basis.

I think you're being a troll, but I have sincere question:  Do you really have 
such a negativity towards the machines, or are you actually just trying to 
snark at me personally despite the fact that you're besmirching  Trikkes and 
Skkis which are great gizmos that promotes fitness and fun around the world?

Attack me all you want, I sure have faults, but these inventions are helping 
the world more obviously than I EVER saw results in the people to whom I taught 
TM.

And, the general negativity expressed here at FFL towards them seems to be a 
very striking measurement of just exactly HOW LITTLE TM has helped anyone have 
an open mind towards new things -- despite the messenger.

BAH!

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> Will apple sauce help prevent Trikkenosis?
> 
> On 11/28/2012 08:46 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> > Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI
> >
> > Edg
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html
> >>
> >
> >
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time for gift-giving, 
> > > > > partying and carnivals.
> > > > > 
> > > nablusoss1008:
> > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus 
> > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > >
> > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > 
> > Like the majority of "Christians" you are mixing up names. The Christ did 
> > not "incarnate" through a process of self-creation (Mahavirupa), until 
> > after Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975, a 
> > body with which He arrived in the West July 19 1977. Until then noone had 
> > seen Him in the flesh, though He did overshadow and inspire Jesus of 
> > Nazareth in Palestine constantly for about three years.
> 
> Nabs,
> 
> Are you speaking of MMY here or Maitreya?

Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975 in 
accordance with the Dive Plan which is being excecuted by the Masters of Wisdom 
of which Guru Dev is a senior member and Maitreya the most senior. As you know 
Maitreya now has a mahavirupa body and is living in the West, Maharishi and 
Guru Dev are currently not in incarnation.

During the Inauguration and in the following years, Maharishi voiced for the 
first time, yet hinted at in Theosophical literature particularily that of 
Alice Bailey and Madam Blavatsky, the huge change that was to come and that 
will last for 1 years.



> > "Q. The Christ is formless, but he is also centered within his mayavirupa 
> > body in London, and his light-body lies asleep in the Himalayas. Where is 
> > his center, his focal point of existence? Does he meditate from his 
> > light-body? 
> > 
> > BC: The Christ is not formless but, of course, the energy he embodies, the 
> > Love energy, the energy which we call the Christ Principle, is formless. 
> > His consciousness is centered in the mayavirupa (self- created body). He 
> > meditates and lives and works as a normal man, in the mayavirupa, which is 
> > a completely real body."
> >
> 
> Are you saying Jesus is still alive in the Himalyas?


The confusion about this is quite understandable since the process of 
"overshadowing" is not publicly well known. It's a process completely different 
from any kind of spiritism as it in no way whatsoever infringes the free will 
of the vehicle (man or woman). Historically the best known example is when 
Jesus of Palestine for 3 years was overshadowed by the Christ (today He use the 
name Maitreya). The intimate relationship between Jesus and the Christ was so 
perfect that the Christians to this day believe they are one and the same, 
hence they reffer to the name Jesus Christ.

In the quote above Benjamin Creme states that the Christ " is not formless but, 
of course, the energy he embodies, the Love energy, the energy which we call 
the Christ Principle, is formless. His consciousness is centered in the 
mayavirupa (self- created body). He meditates and lives and works as a normal 
man, in the mayavirupa, which is a completely real body."

The answer to your question is that Jesus is now today a Master cooperating 
very closely with Maitreya in bringing in the full sunshine of the Age of 
Enlightenment. Maitreya, in His self-created (mahavirupa) body is active in the 
West, as well as appearing to people of all faiths all over the world on a 
daily basis.

The ressurection was not real in the sense that it was permanent. Maitreya did 
this to the dead body of Jesus from Palestine for a very short time to uplift 
and strengthen the faith of the Disciples (and others). After dying on the 
cross  (which also marked His 4'th initiation) Jesus of Palestine has had 
several incarnations, amongst them one in Syria. He is now living and acting 
out of Italy, incognito and not known to the public but to a small circle of 
friends and disciples who are sworn to secrecy about His real nature. He is 
today a member of the Masters of Wisdom.

Your sincerity is much respected John. I hope the answers have been helpful. 
For more information about the work of the Masters of Wisdom, this is a good 
place to begin:

http://www.share-international.org/background/faq/faq_main.htm

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:
snip
> Yes, you do. Plus which, you're stupidly wrong, as usual,
> because you haven't been paying attention to the context.
Judy, I wish trying to follow your logic or "context" was a more
fruitful activity.  But more often than not, it turns out to be a total
waste of time.
> > is that the reason you may be so clueless about this
> > notion of "piling on",
>
> Read the whole post again, carefully, including what I
> quoted from Share's post. Read all the words. Look up
> any words you don't understand in Mr. Dictionary. If
> you still can't see your stupid mistakes, find someone
> who can read English to help you out.
Judy, I admire your tenacity in thinking that the more you say you're
right about something the more it must be true.  Fortunately we have a
fifty post limit, because most of us remember how that used to play out.
> This isn't about opinion, BTW. Imagine that.This is about your
> chronic inability to retain context. Another term for
> it is lousy reading comprehension. But it's a function
> of gross laziness.
Okay teacher.

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[Robin Carlsen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM2gCYN7y3M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fM2qhG8mA4&feature=watch-vrec

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> Hey Emily,
> I am sorry that you are running low on posts.  I hope you don't post
> out.
> I also want to qualify my comment with something Raunchy has brought up,
> about not commenting if you don't have any skin in the game.  And I
> don't feel like I have a lot of skin in this game.
> But, I do want to say, that if one steps back a little and allows for
> what is sometimes called, "poetic license", then maybe Share's comments
> take on a different perspective.
> Let's take for example this term "psychological rape".  ( I hope I have
> the term right, but you know what I am referring to)
> I knew what Share meant.  I guess if you want, you can take great
> offense at the term, and pick it apart.  On the other hand,  do we not
> as a matter of course here, often use such loaded terms?
> But even aside from that, I felt the term could be a reasonable
> description of the way Robin often interacts with people.
> But that's the way he often is, and from his point of view, he feels he
> sees a blind spot that person may not be aware of.  So, why the big deal
> about it.
> Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom
> Robin has a greater affinity?
> Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what
> defines "cult behavior".
> At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you
> disagree with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving
> on.
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
> wrote:
> 
> > So: Â You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that
> healing of the wts cult has taken place since November 11th? Â Huh?
> Â These two premises are oppositional; one does not support the
> other.  Do you or  don't you believe that there is a wts cult in
> operation here on FFL? Â Yes or No. Â
> >
> > The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by
> you.the bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you believe a
> faction of FFL (those you identify) are involved in a cult, that you
> have termed wts. Â I disagree, for the record, and will not play this
> game with you in the future. Â
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Jennifer Lynch's "Chained"

[Susan]

A novel about the experience of an abducted girl  kept in a soundproof room for 
years (and she has a baby there) from her point of view is Room by Emma 
Donoghue.   Intense and well written.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> For a counter "Wunnerful Wednesday" post I present my micro review of 
> Jennifer Lynch's "Chained."  As you all know Jennifer is the daughter of 
> TM icon David Lynch though I don't know if she shares his interest in 
> that.  "Chained" is story about a boy abducted with his mother (played 
> by Julia Ormand) by a crazed taxi driver (played by Vincent D'Onofrio) 
> who kills the mother and keeps the boy as a captive for years.  This is 
> not your average B-movie but an excellent film which probably does need 
> the "director's cut" that Lynch mentions in the commentary she would 
> like to do.  Apparently the financial backers dictated a little too much 
> what the release was going to be.  A worse experience for Lynch was 
> "Hiss", a Bollywood film she shot as a love story but the backers took 
> the post production from her and edited to be a horror film.
> 
> Though billed as a horror film "Chained" really isn't.  It's more about 
> a horrific tale of a child growing up with a serial killer. Such tales 
> are not that far removed from society as just a few miles from me in 
> Antioch a wacko couple abducted a young girl and kept her captive way 
> into adulthood.  The neighbors never suspected a thing. Lynch's intent 
> was to tell a tale about child abuse but as I said earlier the backers 
> had other ideas.  Still this film is well worth a watch for D'Onofrio's 
> excellent performance even though I'll rate the movie Absolutely Not for 
> Buck.
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1989475/
>

[FairfieldLife] Glenn Beck's sells 'Obama in pee pee' piece of 'art'

[mdixon . 6569]

Art that drives Libs...

http://wp.me/pEdAp-xjU#.ULZ15YF9IKM.email

---
This message was sent by mdixon.6...@yahoo.com via http://addthis.com.  Please 
note that AddThis does not verify email addresses.

Make sharing easier with the AddThis Toolbar:  
http://www.addthis.com/go/toolbar-em

To stop receiving any emails from AddThis, please visit: 
http://www.addthis.com/privacy/email-opt-out?e=p2T0Dtsd1AbXA9Yj2wnXL8sO2gDdCMAAxx_BQdEA3w

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[Emily Reyn]

P.S. (post 48)  Steve, even if Share defers to her perception that 
"psychological rape"  occurred during her off-line exchange with Robin,  
individually, Robin recently proposed, agreed, and offered to make those 
exchanges public here.  Because they were private, he asked Share for her 
permission.  Share ultimately, deferred to a meeting with her pastoral 
counselor that she was going to have to supposedly get feedback.  She came back 
here and posted something about "bringing more positivity to FFL"  What?  
She never said:  "I discussed it and decided against it."  She didn't address 
it at all.  Her response was completely insulting and completely dismissive of 
everyone here who was following the conversation and participating in it.  
Exceee Me!  

So, Share gets to retain her condemnation of Robin, and Robin, who was willing 
to make the entire exchange public, is cut off at the knees.  You see why Judy 
said that, in her opinion, if the allegations are malicious, for example, the 
privacy issue doesn't apply.  It I were being accused of such a thing, I would 
go ahead and post the exchanges, if I thought it would be of service to me.  I 
learned my lesson in the much less important post that Sal posted to me 
privately that I held private and asked Judy and Curtis to do the same with, as 
I actually didn't hold it quite private, did I?  In the future, for me, if it's 
an FFL conversation or should be one, than it goes to FFL - period.  
Particularly if it's a controversial  one.  I want the extended feedback for 
those that want to chime in.  I value it, I believe in it, I always consider 
it.  Always.  Share's behavior here has been to act out and create the kind of 
drama that shows that what's
 inside the orange isn't necessarily orange juice.  Too bad she is unwilling to 
take responsibility or accountability for anything she says.  I am glad she has 
created a life for her that works in a community that supports her.  I'm sure 
that on the outside she is a very loving and open and generous person.  All I'm 
saying is that she has a shadow side, and she is demonstrating many aspects of 
that here.  She can pretend she's all love and light all she likes, but the 
proof is in the words she puts down here, as far as I'm concerned, and it is 
undeniable bullshit.  None of us are all love and light all the time; I don't 
know why she is so scared to acknowledge her negative qualities.  





 From: seventhray1 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 11:20 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve
 

  
Hey Emily,

I am sorry that you are running low on posts.  I hope you don't post out.

I also want to qualify my comment with something Raunchy has brought up, about 
not commenting if you don't have any skin in the game.  And I don't feel like I 
have a lot of skin in this game.

But, I do want to say, that if one steps back a little and allows for what is 
sometimes called, "poetic license", then maybe Share's comments take on a 
different perspective.

Let's take for example this term "psychological rape".  ( I hope I have the 
term right, but you know what I am referring to)

I knew what Share meant.  I guess if you want, you can take great offense at 
the term, and pick it apart.  On the other hand,  do we not as a matter of 
course here, often use such loaded terms?

But even aside from that, I felt the term could be a reasonable description of 
the way Robin often interacts with people.

But that's the way he often is, and from his point of view, he feels he sees a 
blind spot that person may not be aware of.  So, why the big deal about it.  

Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom Robin has 
a greater affinity?

Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what 
defines "cult behavior".

At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you disagree 
with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving on.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:

> So:  You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that healing 
> of the wts cult has taken place since November 11th?  Huh?  These two 
> premises are oppositional; one does not support the other.  Do you or 
>  don't you believe that there is a wts cult in operation here on FFL?  Yes 
> or No.  
> 
> The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by 
> you.the bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you believe a 
> faction of FFL (those you identify) are involved in a cult, that you have 
> termed wts.  I disagree, for the record, and will not play this game with 
> you in the future.  


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Duveyoung]

I don't understand your question's basis.

I think you're being a troll, but I have sincere question:  Do you really have 
such a negativity towards the machines, or are you actually just trying to 
snark at me personally despite the fact that you're besmirching  Trikkes and 
Skkis which are great gizmos that promotes fitness and fun around the world?

Attack me all you want, I sure have faults, but these inventions are helping 
the world more obviously than I EVER saw results in the people to whom I taught 
TM.

And, the general negativity expressed here at FFL towards them seems to be a 
very striking measurement of just exactly HOW LITTLE TM has helped anyone have 
an open mind towards new things -- despite the messenger.

BAH!

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> Will apple sauce help prevent Trikkenosis?
> 
> On 11/28/2012 08:46 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> > Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI
> >
> > Edg
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html
> >>
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Da Vinci's Cosmic Code

[Richard J. Williams]

John jr_esq: 
> The second apostle with the long hair represents Taurus, 
> a sign owned by Venus, a female.
> 
Stoyanov thinks that the one single local Langudocian 
notion in Catharism was the theology of the belief that 
Mary Magdalene was the concubine of Jesus - knowledge that 
was reserved for the inner circle of Cathars: "The teaching 
of Mary Magdalene as the 'wife or 'concubine' of Christ 
appears moreover, an original Cathar tradition which does 
not have any counterpart in Bogomil doctrines" (222-223).

Work cited:

'The Hidden Tradition in Europe'
by Yuri Stoyanov
Penguin Books, 1995

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[Emily Reyn]

 Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom 
Robin has a greater affinity?

Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what 
defines "cult behavior".

At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you disagree 
with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving on.

Dear Steve, (post 47).  Note:  I am keeping track online so that I remember and 
don't use the excuse to myself that I "wasn't paying attention."  I may correct 
the grammar in my last post as post 48, but likely won't.

Nothing is wrong with what you say above, and I did disagree in my last post.  
I agree.  I agree that "poetic license" is a good thing, and I use it all the 
time, myself.  I trigger off the term "psychological rape."  It is a serious 
term - not one that most people use in the context of poetic license.  The term 
has serious implications and indicates that a threat is involved and that 
"rape" of sorts has occurred.  I have never in the last two years seen such a 
term cross the forum.  I have seen some great debates, disagreements, insults, 
etc.  I have also seen Rick boot a couple of people who were exhibiting 
behavior that was downright threatening - to Barry, for example (although Dan 
did post recently so maybe he isn't truly booted).  I think it unfair to lob 
this kind of term at Robin.  

I agree that Robin has challenged Curtis, for example.  Their posts to each 
other are downright legendary here on FFL - I read none of the original ones as 
I wasn't tracking well at that time and Robin was posting in a mass of words 
that I couldn't decipher, bottom line.  I started to read him to myself out 
loud and began to appreciate his poetic style a bit.  But, I will say that he 
repeated his points numerous times in a given post.  Curtis called him on that 
in more recent exchanges between them that I did read.  I don't ever remember 
Curtis using that term - do you think he felt that he was being psychologically 
raped?  Please.  Rape is done in private, first of all,  not in public.  There 
were a lot of people here to witness.  

If you feel that you were psychologically raped than I would question why you 
thought so.  Again, this is a serious allegation.  I think it is a false one 
that doesn't apply to FFL on any level.  

Share is welcome to think what she likes and spread her message and thoughts 
and feelings on FFL in any way that she likes, using any communication style 
that she is comfortable with.  I am aware and appreciative of some of what she 
says and  I won't ever deny her that.  I am  not trying to control anyone here. 
 She also has to be prepared for the fact that I take issue with the way that 
she characterized me as a member of Robin's inner circle (cult-style).  This is 
my right and I have stated as such.  I am moving on.  



 From: seventhray1 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 11:20 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve
 

  
Hey Emily,

I am sorry that you are running low on posts.  I hope you don't post out.

I also want to qualify my comment with something Raunchy has brought up, about 
not commenting if you don't have any skin in the game.  And I don't feel like I 
have a lot of skin in this game.

But, I do want to say, that if one steps back a little and allows for what is 
sometimes called, "poetic license", then maybe Share's comments take on a 
different perspective.

Let's take for example this term "psychological rape".  ( I hope I have the 
term right, but you know what I am referring to)

I knew what Share meant.  I guess if you want, you can take great offense at 
the term, and pick it apart.  On the other hand,  do we not as a matter of 
course here, often use such loaded terms?

But even aside from that, I felt the term could be a reasonable description of 
the way Robin often interacts with people.

But that's the way he often is, and from his point of view, he feels he sees a 
blind spot that person may not be aware of.  So, why the big deal about it.  

Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom Robin has 
a greater affinity?

Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what 
defines "cult behavior".

At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you disagree 
with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving on.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:

> So:  You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that healing 
> of the wts cult has taken place since November 11th?  Huh?  These two 
> premises are oppositional; one does not support the other.  Do you or 
>  don't you believe that there is a wts cult in operation here on FFL?  Yes 
> or No.  
> 
> The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by 
> you.the bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you 

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely
> > > did not in my experience ever include what I call in FFL
> > > piling on. Piling on in the name of rigorous honesty is what
> > > I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly behavior in wts.
> >
> > Unbelievable.
> >
> > There was never any "piling on in the name of rigorous
> > honesty" on FFL. All anybody has ever asked of Share
> > is *basic* honesty. Even just *approximate* honesty
> > would be a welcome change.
> >
> > > That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed
> > > with them. And cheering each other on about it.
> >
> > Does anybody have a clue what this means?
> 
> (Hand raised in back of class)
>   "Yes, Steven, do you have an answer?"
> "Yes, teacher.  I read somewhere, teacher, that the only time we may not
> feel the effect of a force is when we are most under its influence"
> "You mean like gravity, Steven?"
> "Yes teacher.  So, what I am saying teacher, and I don't mean to be
> disrespectful,

Yes, you do. Plus which, you're stupidly wrong, as usual,
because you haven't been paying attention to the context.

> is that the reason you may be so clueless about this
> notion of "piling on",

Read the whole post again, carefully, including what I
quoted from Share's post. Read all the words. Look up
any words you don't understand in Mr. Dictionary. If
you still can't see your stupid mistakes, find someone
who can read English to help you out.

This isn't about opinion, BTW. This is about your
chronic inability to retain context. Another term for
it is lousy reading comprehension. But it's a function
of gross laziness.






 is that, this describes your behavior much of the
> timeteacher"
> "Steven, I want you to come up to the board right now, and write 100
> times, "Teacher is Always Right, Teacher is Always Right"
> "Yes teacher"
> 
> > > Warts yet present. I never saw any of these behaviors in
> > > Waking Down.
> >
> > Look to your own warts, your own unhealthy, unhealed, and
> > cowardly behavior here. Start by eliminating, or at least
> > cutting down on, the bullshit you spout, like the above.
> >
> > If it appears that you are making *some* kind of effort
> > to be honest and straightforward, you won't get so much
> > flak. But don't expect *not* to get flak when you come
> > up with utter crap like "wts" as an excuse for not
> > copping to your own behavior. Nobody buys that, and we
> > all recognize that it's pure hostility on your part--
> > hostility because you've been called on the rest of your
> > dishonesty and your refusal to deal with reality.
> >
> > > And it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same
> > > meetings. In my experience, Waking Down created a safe
> > > environment in which people could be rigorously honest with
> > > themselves and with others. It was balanced masculine and
> > > feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.
> >
> > Obviously Waking Down did Share no good whatsoever. She's
> > made herself utterly oblivious to who she is and seems to
> > be incapable of any kind of honesty with herself or with
> > others.
> >
> > What a contrast with Alex.
> >
> > > 
> > >  From: Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > >
> > > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > > "rigorous".
> > >
> > > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found
> Share's excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very
> strange. Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit
> frosting, but as another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to
> your mugshot. It's not about techiquifying yourself into some future
> perfected enlightened being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are
> right now. From my own experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be
> any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
 wrote:
>
> Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are
thing, and it does have its place within the context of Waking Down.
But, in the real world, if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity
or honesty, you're likely to get called on it. And, if the response to
being called on it is "LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT
LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile on.
Or maybe those people don't understand what you are saying, or perhaps
don't like what you are saying.
And who determines if a response lacks integrity or honesty?
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote:
> >
> > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not
in my experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling
on in the name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy,
unhealed and cowardly behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only
one of the people who disagreed with them.  And cheering each other
on about it.  Warts yet present.  I never saw any of these
behaviors in Waking Down.  And it's possible you and I didn't attend
all of the same meetings.  In my experience, Waking Down created a
safe environment in which people could be rigorously honest with
themselves and with others.  It was balanced masculine and feminine
with lack of hyperness in either direction. Â Â
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> >
> >
> > Â
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > >
> > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > "rigorous".
> >
> > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found
Share's excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very
strange. Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit
frosting, but as another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to
your mugshot. It's not about techiquifying yourself into some future
perfected enlightened being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are
right now. From my own experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be
any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as 
> you are thing, and it does have its place within the context 
> of Waking Down. But, in the real world, if you show up in a 
> manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're likely to get 
> called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is
>  "LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO 
> YOU", people might pile on.

And? 

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
> > experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the 
> > name of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and 
> > cowardly behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people who 
> > disagreed with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  Warts yet 
> > present.  I never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.  And it's 
> > possible you and I didn't attend all of the same meetings.  In my 
> > experience, Waking Down created a safe environment in which people could be 
> > rigorously honest with themselves and with others.  It was balanced 
> > masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.    
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > > 
> > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > "rigorous". 
> > 
> > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> > excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> > Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> > another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's 
> > not about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened 
> > being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> > experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than 
> > WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[seventhray1]

Hey Emily,
I am sorry that you are running low on posts.  I hope you don't post
out.
I also want to qualify my comment with something Raunchy has brought up,
about not commenting if you don't have any skin in the game.  And I
don't feel like I have a lot of skin in this game.
But, I do want to say, that if one steps back a little and allows for
what is sometimes called, "poetic license", then maybe Share's comments
take on a different perspective.
Let's take for example this term "psychological rape".  ( I hope I have
the term right, but you know what I am referring to)
I knew what Share meant.  I guess if you want, you can take great
offense at the term, and pick it apart.  On the other hand,  do we not
as a matter of course here, often use such loaded terms?
But even aside from that, I felt the term could be a reasonable
description of the way Robin often interacts with people.
But that's the way he often is, and from his point of view, he feels he
sees a blind spot that person may not be aware of.  So, why the big deal
about it.
Or, does Share see a cult mindset among some of the people with whom
Robin has a greater affinity?
Well, maybe she does.  Maybe she ascribes to a looser definition of what
defines "cult behavior".
At any rate, I am not sure what is wrong with telling her that you
disagree with her conclusions and moving on.   Or after a time, moving
on.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
wrote:

> So: Â You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that
healing of the wts cult has taken place since November 11th? Â Huh?
 These two premises are oppositional; one does not support the
other.  Do you or  don't you believe that there is a wts cult in
operation here on FFL? Â Yes or No. Â
>
> The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by
you.the bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you believe a
faction of FFL (those you identify) are involved in a cult, that you
have termed wts. Â I disagree, for the record, and will not play this
game with you in the future. Â

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Alex Stanley]

Waking Down does have that whole greenlighting/show up as you are thing, and it 
does have its place within the context of Waking Down. But, in the real world, 
if you show up in a manner that lacks integrity or honesty, you're likely to 
get called on it. And, if the response to being called on it is "LA LA LA I AM 
NOT LISTENING TO YOU I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU", people might pile on.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
> experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the name 
> of rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly 
> behavior in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed 
> with them.  And cheering each other on about it.  Warts yet present.  I 
> never saw any of these behaviors in Waking Down.  And it's possible you and 
> I didn't attend all of the same meetings.  In my experience, Waking Down 
> created a safe environment in which people could be rigorously honest with 
> themselves and with others.  It was balanced masculine and feminine with 
> lack of hyperness in either direction.    
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: Alex Stanley 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
>  
> 
>   
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > 
> > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > "rigorous". 
> 
> Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not 
> about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; 
> it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's 
> brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote:
> >
> > Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely
> > did not in my experience ever include what I call in FFL
> > piling on. Piling on in the name of rigorous honesty is what
> > I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly behavior in wts.
>
> Unbelievable.
>
> There was never any "piling on in the name of rigorous
> honesty" on FFL. All anybody has ever asked of Share
> is *basic* honesty. Even just *approximate* honesty
> would be a welcome change.
>
> > That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed
> > with them. And cheering each other on about it.
>
> Does anybody have a clue what this means?

(Hand raised in back of class)
  "Yes, Steven, do you have an answer?"
"Yes, teacher.  I read somewhere, teacher, that the only time we may not
feel the effect of a force is when we are most under its influence"
"You mean like gravity, Steven?"
"Yes teacher.  So, what I am saying teacher, and I don't mean to be
disrespectful, is that the reason you may be so clueless about this
notion of "piling on", is that, this describes your behavior much of the
timeteacher"
"Steven, I want you to come up to the board right now, and write 100
times, "Teacher is Always Right, Teacher is Always Right"
"Yes teacher"

> > Warts yet present. I never saw any of these behaviors in
> > Waking Down.
>
> Look to your own warts, your own unhealthy, unhealed, and
> cowardly behavior here. Start by eliminating, or at least
> cutting down on, the bullshit you spout, like the above.
>
> If it appears that you are making *some* kind of effort
> to be honest and straightforward, you won't get so much
> flak. But don't expect *not* to get flak when you come
> up with utter crap like "wts" as an excuse for not
> copping to your own behavior. Nobody buys that, and we
> all recognize that it's pure hostility on your part--
> hostility because you've been called on the rest of your
> dishonesty and your refusal to deal with reality.
>
> > And it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same
> > meetings. In my experience, Waking Down created a safe
> > environment in which people could be rigorously honest with
> > themselves and with others. It was balanced masculine and
> > feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.
>
> Obviously Waking Down did Share no good whatsoever. She's
> made herself utterly oblivious to who she is and seems to
> be incapable of any kind of honesty with herself or with
> others.
>
> What a contrast with Alex.
>
> > 
> >  From: Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:
> > >
> > > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > >
> > > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > > "rigorous".
> >
> > Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found
Share's excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very
strange. Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit
frosting, but as another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to
your mugshot. It's not about techiquifying yourself into some future
perfected enlightened being; it's about waking up to exactly who you are
right now. From my own experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be
any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If you are thinking of the past in the present moment, 
> > > > are you living in the now?  
> > > 
> > > YES, I think so and that is what I said the other day in 
> > > my post about this. You can never not be living in the 
> > > 'now' except under some extreme situations. I do not think 
> > > we can really 'escape' the present, the now and all of the 
> > > demands and conditions that go along with what is presently 
> > > (chronologically speaking) going on. It is impossible. Some 
> > > people try really hard to escape the now but you have to be 
> > > pretty tricky to do it. Maybe enlightened guys are capable 
> > > of this but they are the ones everyone thinks are the 
> > > masters of living in the now. How ironic.
> > 
> > Everyone lives in the 'now'. But the mind, thinking of the 
> > past, or anticipating some future event, or avoiding some 
> > experience is what is *called* 'not living in the now' in 
> > the enlightenment game. Living in the now in this game means 
> > the mind is basically silent, empty, there is just the raw 
> > experience and the interpretive engine of the mind has stopped. 
> 
> A nice interpretation. Though in this particular 'enlightenment
> gane' there appears to be some hostility to the 'interpretive
> engine of the mind'. I wonder why. All This Is That. 
> 
> > You are just living the experience and not evaluating it 
> > intellectually and emotionally as it goes on. Still, though 
> > you have to step on the car brakes to avoid running a 
> > pedestrian over, but that is pretty much an instinctive 
> > habit if you know how to drive.
> 
> All drivers who 'know how to drive' think they know how to
> drive. But some who 'know how to drive' know how to drive
> better than others.
> 
> Conscious of this, some choose to evaluate intellectually
> and emotionally how they're driving. Just to check if they're
> one of the ones who know, or one of the others. Perhaps the
> world is a safer place as a result?

Good distinction. One wonders who among the "subjectivity
rules" brigade would ever make the effort to see whether
they were actually driving more safely, or less safely. 

In actual scientific studies, those who consider themselves
good drivers are actually...wait for it...bad drivers. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve

[Emily Reyn]

 As for your other post about what's the rush, Emily was using up all her 
posts to pry an answer out of me.  Yep, I caved!

Thank you Sharester, this is post number 46.  I was upping the stakes, of 
course - going for a little guilt.  I wouldn't have posted out for you this 
week; am trying to exercise a little self-discipline these days as it is almost 
time for me to start looking for work.  I didn't use *all* my posts this week 
on you :)  I wasn't trying to "pry" an answer out of you - I was simply begging 
you to give me a clear answer.  Yes, begging you to take compassion on me, not 
dismiss me, and do me the humble service of answering a question clearly - 
never did get that though - lets be clear on that.  I had to use my remarkable 
powers of intuition and analysis to decipher your cryptic responses.   

And, in the process of our attempted conversation, you switched the context 
from the question of "do you believe that there is a wts being acted out here" 
(I paraphrase) to "do you think that complete healing of wts since November 
11th?"   

I stuck with it because I really was curious as to whether you truly believed 
that FFL is operating as wts in your mind.  You did author the post, of course, 
but perhaps you wrote that in a state of fear and anger at the time, and had 
let it go.  Maybe you wrote it intending to be funny and never did believe it.  
I was just trying to understand your position; not even judge it, just 
understand it because it has the potential to affect the attitude you 
take/posts you make towards everyone on your list of wts participants. 

Honestly, your responses seem to indicate that you don't leave open the 
possibility of changing the reality you have created and determined is "right." 
 Instead, you adapt and selectively choose the facts to support what you have 
determined is "right."  It's a sad situation, given how many people you 
implicated in the wts scenario for example.   

Re: "Piling on" - another example of wts behavior you identify.  Huh?  This is 
an internet forum and the dynamic of the rules here that allow for all to weigh 
in on all the posts is a good one in that it allows for the reader/participant 
to get multiple feedback and multiple perspectives on a conversation, issue, or 
presented idea.  Was Steve "piling on" when he chivalrously jumped in to 
exercise his right to state is opinion, in your support?  If you don't want to 
receive feedback from multiple sources that may not agree with you and your 
perspective, then maintaining off-line, individual email conversations with 
people that you know agree with you ahead of time *IS* the best way to go.  

Please don't frame the one thing here that I love into a "behavior" of the wts 
cult.  I find that inaccurate and offensive.  The opportunity for multiple 
responses is a characteristic of a forum and you do not need to co-opt it into 
"cult-like behavior" that supports your premise of wts.  Why are you putting 
yourself at risk here if you think that cult dynamics are in play?  Seems like 
kind of a waste of time.  If I felt that such dynamics existed here, I would 
leave, I assure you.  

You played a game; I played it with you.  You don't like to be called on your 
behavior, no matter how compassionately, because it might require rigorous 
honesty.  So you keep everyone guessing and communicate in a passive and 
sometimes passive-aggressive style that allows you to never take responsibility 
for your words.  End of story.  

So:  You do believe that wts survives here and you do believe that healing of 
the wts cult has taken place since November 11th?  Huh?  These two premises are 
oppositional; one does not support the other.  Do you or  don't you believe 
that there is a wts cult in operation here on FFL?  Yes or No.  

The "healing" question was a change in context and a distraction by you.the 
bottom line here is, Sharester, that I believe you believe a faction of FFL 
(those you identify) are involved in a cult, that you have termed wts.  I 
disagree, for the record, and will not play this game with you in the future.  



 From: Share Long 
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Steve
 

  
Thanks, Steve, but I do still participate on Bat just about every day.  Today I 
also sang Happy Birthday, not on Bat but  to my Mom, before I went off to the 
Dome.  She said I sounded on key the whole time and that I should join a 
choir.  But she's 82 so allowances must be made for her hearing, etc.  Then I 
made my first Christmas gift purchase at Overland Sheepskin.  And the whole 
time wearing what I'll be wearing for the next few months:  my long down coat 
with hood, looking like a cornflower blue marshmallow (-:


As for your other post about what's the rush, Emily was using up all her posts 
to pry an answer out of me.  Yep, I caved!  Anyway, hope 

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > If you are thinking of the past in the present moment, are you living in 
> > > the now?  
> > 
> > YES, I think so and that is what I said the other day in my post about 
> > this. You can never not be living in the 'now' except under some extreme 
> > situations. I do not think we can really 'escape' the present, the now and 
> > all of the demands and conditions that go along with what is presently 
> > (chronologically speaking) going on. It is impossible. Some people try 
> > really hard to escape the now but you have to be pretty tricky to do it. 
> > Maybe enlightened guys are capable of this but they are the ones everyone 
> > thinks are the masters of living in the now. How ironic.
> 
> Everyone lives in the 'now'. But the mind, thinking of the past, or 
> anticipating some future event, or avoiding some experience is what is 
> *called* 'not living in the now' in the enlightenment game. Living in the now 
> in this game means the mind is basically silent, empty, there is just the raw 
> experience and the interpretive engine of the mind has stopped. 

A nice interpretation. Though in this particular 'enlightenment
gane' there appears to be some hostility to the 'interpretive
engine of the mind'. I wonder why. All This Is That. 

>You are just living the experience and not evaluating it intellectually and 
>emotionally as it goes on. Still, though you have to step on the car brakes to 
>avoid running a pedestrian over, but that is pretty much an instinctive habit 
>if you know how to drive.
>

All drivers who 'know how to drive' think they know how to
drive. But some who 'know how to drive' know how to drive
better than others.

Conscious of this, some choose to evaluate intellectually
and emotionally how they're driving. Just to check if they're
one of the ones who know, or one of the others. Perhaps the
world is a safer place as a result?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Bhairitu]

Will apple sauce help prevent Trikkenosis?

On 11/28/2012 08:46 AM, Duveyoung wrote:
> Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI
>
> Edg
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html
>>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Da Vinci's Cosmic Code

[salyavin808]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>
> Take a look at the Last Supper painting shown in the link below:
> 
> http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A2KJkK0BRrZQyEMAIr.JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dda%2Bvinci%2Bs%2Blast%2Bsupper%26fr%3Dfptb-w3i-s%26fr2%3Dpiv-web%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D4&w=909&h=481&imgurl=3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-3Onz2hex5go%2FTa92n9ERi7I%2FDNk%2FKEc8i5wr8dU%2Fs1600%2FThe%2BLast%2BSupper%2B-%2BDa%2BVinci%2B1495-98.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffavourite-paintings.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fleonardo-da-vinci-last-supper.html&size=90+KB&name=Paintings%3A+Leonardo+%3Cb%3Eda+Vinci+%3C%2Fb%3E-+The+%3Cb%3ELast+Supper%3C%2Fb%3E&p=da+vinci+s+last+supper&oid=2995358d7d2b0d7d59d588b21229&fr2=piv-web&fr=fptb-w3i-s&tt=Paintings%253A%2BLeonardo%2B%253Cb%253Eda%2BVinci%2B%253C%252Fb%253E-%2BThe%2B%253Cb%253ELast%2BSupper%253C%252Fb%253E&b=0&ni=42&no=4&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12irt8vt0&sigb=13gabvn00&sigi=13fb2p08t&.crumb=G8uAyIXytCH

Is this the biggest link ever?

 
> You'll find that Jesus is seated in the middle of the apostles representing 
> the cross or the autumnal equinox.

Why does the cross represent the autumnal equinox?
 
> The apostles are grouped in four, representing the four seasons.
> 
> The first apostle who is standing represents Aries since he is at the head of 
> the table

Isn't the start of a circle somewhat arbitrary?
 
> The second apostle with the long hair represents Taurus, a sign owned by 
> Venus, a female.

Wouldn't he better represent it if he had horns? And why does
long hair signify female, they were all hippies in those days?
 
> The third apostle with his arms raised represents Gemini, the significator of 
> the human arms.

Never heard that one before.
 
> The fourth apostle with a knife represents Cancer.

Why? cancer is a crab.

 
> The fifth apostle with his arms majestically placed on the table is Leo, 
> ruled by the Sun, the king of the heavens.

Wouldn't Jesus be king here?
 
> The sixth apostle who looks like a female represents Virgo, a female sign.

Not representing something else to fit in with the theory this
time then?
 
> You can analyze the rest of the apostles and will find their correspondence 
> to the remaining zodiacal signs.

Probably the least convincing conspiracy theory I have ever
seen. Congratulations!
 
> JR
>

[FairfieldLife] Art that drives conservatives crazy

[raunchydog]

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1808001_free.jpg?1354031799073

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807990_free.jpg?1354031693006

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807991_free.jpg?1354031780225

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1808000_free.jpg?1354032095467

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807997_free.jpg?1354032051549

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807992_free.jpg?1354031906969

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807995_free.jpg?1354032018972

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807993_free.jpg?1354031925269

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807994_free.jpg?1354031947049

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/grover-norquist-wizard-of-oz_n_2198484.html?utm_hp_ref=arts#slide=1807996

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807998_free.jpg?1354032065283

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1807999_free.jpg?1354032079006

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/265979/slide_265979_1808002_free.jpg?1354032111337

[FairfieldLife] Da Vinci's Cosmic Code

[John]

Take a look at the Last Supper painting shown in the link below:

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=A2KJkK0BRrZQyEMAIr.JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBlMTQ4cGxyBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1n?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dda%2Bvinci%2Bs%2Blast%2Bsupper%26fr%3Dfptb-w3i-s%26fr2%3Dpiv-web%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D4&w=909&h=481&imgurl=3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-3Onz2hex5go%2FTa92n9ERi7I%2FDNk%2FKEc8i5wr8dU%2Fs1600%2FThe%2BLast%2BSupper%2B-%2BDa%2BVinci%2B1495-98.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffavourite-paintings.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fleonardo-da-vinci-last-supper.html&size=90+KB&name=Paintings%3A+Leonardo+%3Cb%3Eda+Vinci+%3C%2Fb%3E-+The+%3Cb%3ELast+Supper%3C%2Fb%3E&p=da+vinci+s+last+supper&oid=2995358d7d2b0d7d59d588b21229&fr2=piv-web&fr=fptb-w3i-s&tt=Paintings%253A%2BLeonardo%2B%253Cb%253Eda%2BVinci%2B%253C%252Fb%253E-%2BThe%2B%253Cb%253ELast%2BSupper%253C%252Fb%253E&b=0&ni=42&no=4&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12irt8vt0&sigb=13gabvn00&sigi=13fb2p08t&.crumb=G8uAyIXytCH

You'll find that Jesus is seated in the middle of the apostles representing the 
cross or the autumnal equinox.

The apostles are grouped in four, representing the four seasons.

The first apostle who is standing represents Aries since he is at the head of 
the table

The second apostle with the long hair represents Taurus, a sign owned by Venus, 
a female.

The third apostle with his arms raised represents Gemini, the significator of 
the human arms.

The fourth apostle with a knife represents Cancer.

The fifth apostle with his arms majestically placed on the table is Leo, ruled 
by the Sun, the king of the heavens.

The sixth apostle who looks like a female represents Virgo, a female sign.

You can analyze the rest of the apostles and will find their correspondence to 
the remaining zodiacal signs.

JR

[FairfieldLife] Jennifer Lynch's "Chained"

[Bhairitu]

For a counter "Wunnerful Wednesday" post I present my micro review of 
Jennifer Lynch's "Chained."  As you all know Jennifer is the daughter of 
TM icon David Lynch though I don't know if she shares his interest in 
that.  "Chained" is story about a boy abducted with his mother (played 
by Julia Ormand) by a crazed taxi driver (played by Vincent D'Onofrio) 
who kills the mother and keeps the boy as a captive for years.  This is 
not your average B-movie but an excellent film which probably does need 
the "director's cut" that Lynch mentions in the commentary she would 
like to do.  Apparently the financial backers dictated a little too much 
what the release was going to be.  A worse experience for Lynch was 
"Hiss", a Bollywood film she shot as a love story but the backers took 
the post production from her and edited to be a horror film.

Though billed as a horror film "Chained" really isn't.  It's more about 
a horrific tale of a child growing up with a serial killer. Such tales 
are not that far removed from society as just a few miles from me in 
Antioch a wacko couple abducted a young girl and kept her captive way 
into adulthood.  The neighbors never suspected a thing. Lynch's intent 
was to tell a tale about child abuse but as I said earlier the backers 
had other ideas.  Still this film is well worth a watch for D'Onofrio's 
excellent performance even though I'll rate the movie Absolutely Not for 
Buck.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1989475/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time for gift-giving, 
> > > > partying and carnivals.
> > > > 
> > nablusoss1008:
> > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus 
> > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > >
> > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> 
> Like the majority of "Christians" you are mixing up names. The Christ did not 
> "incarnate" through a process of self-creation (Mahavirupa), until after 
> Maharishi inaugurated the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment in 1975, a body 
> with which He arrived in the West July 19 1977. Until then noone had seen Him 
> in the flesh, though He did overshadow and inspire Jesus of Nazareth in 
> Palestine constantly for about three years.

Nabs,

Are you speaking of MMY here or Maitreya?


> 
> "Q. The Christ is formless, but he is also centered within his mayavirupa 
> body in London, and his light-body lies asleep in the Himalayas. Where is his 
> center, his focal point of existence? Does he meditate from his light-body? 
> 
> BC: The Christ is not formless but, of course, the energy he embodies, the 
> Love energy, the energy which we call the Christ Principle, is formless. His 
> consciousness is centered in the mayavirupa (self- created body). He 
> meditates and lives and works as a normal man, in the mayavirupa, which is a 
> completely real body."
>

Are you saying Jesus is still alive in the Himalyas?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[Richard J. Williams]

Share Long:
> Richard how ever do you know so much cool stuff?
>
Or, I'm sure I read it somewhere; I'm not prone to 
just make stuff up. I guess I've got a lock-down, 
digital, iconic, built-in memory-bank, thanks to 
that time when Don Juan slipped me that 'special 
taco' down in Mexico! LoL!

My library once contained over 2,000 plus tomes on 
Asian spirituality and shamanism. At one time, my 
library got spread out across three states and four 
cities, now all sold or donated. Go figure. 

Now I just read Wikipedia. LoL!

Hey! I just wrote a book based on my 6,000 messages
sent to news forums on the internet. LoL!

Excerpt for Willytex-boy's book:
http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/Etheogens.pdf

> > > > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time
> > > > > > for gift-giving, partying and carnivals.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Don't know where you get this "part of" claim.
> > > > > It is Saturnalia, only given another name.
> > > > >
> > > > Christmas is probably not based on the Roman
> > > > Saturnalia, but rather on the Winter Solstice
> > > > which occurs on December 25 - Natalis Invicti.
> > > > 
> > > > In fact, Christmas is based on the prehistoric
> > > > ancient shamanism of Siberia. Closely associated
> > > > with the legend of the Northern Shaman is the
> > > > classical form of ecstatic practice.
> > > > 
> > > Interesting theory.  But how come we're not eating 
> > > hallucegenic mushrooms on Christmas these days?
> > >
> > Speak for yourself, it saves me a fortune in twinkly 
> > lights and glitter.
> > 
> The most popular version of the Indian myth 'Churning 
> the Milk Ocean' is found in the Eighth Canto of the 
> Bhagavata Purana. In Buddhist mythology, Amrita is the 
> 'drink of the gods', which grants them immortality. 
> 
> According to Terrence McKenna in his book 'The Food Of 
> Gods', the psilocybin mushroom is a likely Vedic Soma 
> candidate. Psilocybin, 'Stropharia Cubensis', contains 
> an active psychoactive component which has a strong 
> hallucinogenic property.
> 
> The Ninth Mandala of the Rig Veda is known as the Soma 
> Mandala. 
> 
> Soma (Sanskrit), or Haoma (Avestan) was a ritual drink 
> of importance among the early Indo-Iranians, and the 
> later Vedic and Iranian cultures. It is frequently 
> mentioned in the Rig Veda, which contains many hymns 
> praising its energizing or intoxicating qualities.
> 
> Read more: 
> 
> Subject: Soma: The primary ingredient in TM
> Author: Willytex
> Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
> Date: February 23, 2005
> http://tinyurl.com/639zxy6
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Universe Grows Like a Giant Brain?

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm always intrigued at how you have an interest in cosmology but
> > > don't apply the principles to astrology, horoscopes put the Earth
> > > at the centre of the solar system and divide up the rest into houses
> > > that aren't real and have the planets moving about in them as if their
> > > going backwards (which they only appear to do due to differences in
> > > orbital speed) means we'll get a different effect than normal when
> > > they are in that particular part of the sky, even though that was totally 
> > > arbitrary anyway. I doesn't begin to make sense, or maybe 
> > > it's because my Mars is in Leo that I get annoyed about it
> > 
> > Caveat: What I'm about to say is not an argument for the 
> > validity of astrology; it just addresses one of the most
> > common misunderstandings by skeptics of what astrology *is*.
> > 
> > If you think of astrology as an attempt to represent the
> > universe, or even just the solar system, it's going to seem
> > particularly ludicrous.
> > 
> > But that's the wrong standard. What it represents is much
> > simpler: what the inverted bowl of the sky looks like to
> > the naked eye of someone standing on the surface of the
> > earth. The zodiac constellations and "houses" are just
> > ways to divide up that bowl into segments so one person
> > can convey to another exactly which portion of the sky
> > they're talking about.
> 
> I know, that's what I said.

Um, well, no, not quite.

> > This is an oversimplification, but it's close enough in
> > this context. To complain that astrology puts the earth
> > in the center of the solar system is absurd. 
> 
> But that is exactly what it does do, still.

Yes, dear. But that isn't a bug, you see, it's a feature.

> The earth
> > *is* at the center of what astrology concerns itself with:
> > again, what the sky *looks like from earth*.
> 
> What's absurd is to  pretend that an outdated way of looking at
> the world is still somehow relevant, because any effect they 
> claimed was due to the way they saw the world operating is 
> redundant knowing what we do now.

That may be, but I wasn't addressing its relevance or
validity (see my "Caveat" above). I'm just pointing out
that the specific objections you made in the post I was
responding to were irrelevant. Your Mars in Leo is getting
annoyed about the wrong things.


> 
> Lightning isn't caused by clouds bumping together, babies
> aren't delivered by storks. There comes a time when you have
> to move on.
>

[FairfieldLife] wts evangelist

[turquoiseb]

[https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/224176_470939059\
614673_1649326769_n.jpg]

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely
> did not in my experience ever include what I call in FFL
> piling on. Piling on in the name of rigorous honesty is what
> I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly behavior in wts.

Unbelievable.

There was never any "piling on in the name of rigorous
honesty" on FFL. All anybody has ever asked of Share
is *basic* honesty. Even just *approximate* honesty
would be a welcome change.

> That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed
> with them. And cheering each other on about it.

Does anybody have a clue what this means?

> Warts yet present. I never saw any of these behaviors in
> Waking Down.

Look to your own warts, your own unhealthy, unhealed, and
cowardly behavior here. Start by eliminating, or at least
cutting down on, the bullshit you spout, like the above.

If it appears that you are making *some* kind of effort
to be honest and straightforward, you won't get so much
flak. But don't expect *not* to get flak when you come
up with utter crap like "wts" as an excuse for not 
copping to your own behavior. Nobody buys that, and we
all recognize that it's pure hostility on your part--
hostility because you've been called on the rest of your
dishonesty and your refusal to deal with reality.

> And it's possible you and I didn't attend all of the same 
> meetings. In my experience, Waking Down created a safe
> environment in which people could be rigorously honest with 
> themselves and with others. It was balanced masculine and
> feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction.

Obviously Waking Down did Share no good whatsoever. She's
made herself utterly oblivious to who she is and seems to
be incapable of any kind of honesty with herself or with
others.

What a contrast with Alex.

> 
>  From: Alex Stanley 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
>  
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > 
> > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > "rigorous". 
> 
> Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not 
> about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; 
> it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's 
> brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.

[FairfieldLife] Re: hangboarding on Wunnerful Wednesday

[Duveyoung]

Believe me, the hangboard just can't compare to the Trikke Skki.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYd07-ezBI

Edg

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> http://www.hangboard.ca/video1.html
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[salyavin808]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>

> Too old now for tripping; I just inhale burnt hydro 
> marijuana as an out-patient and meditate using the 
> body's own natural serotonin, the primary ingredient 
> in TM, to relax and enjoy. LoL!
> 
> FYI: Years ago I posted to Usenet several comments 
> describing my experience searching for the mysterious 
> and legendary substance, the so-called 'magic' 
> mushroom, mentioned by Carlos Castaneda in his great
> book about don Juan, 'A Yaqui Way of Knowledge'.
> 
> "In late 1971 I went down to Mexico with Carlos 
> Castaneda and Oscar Ichazo, whom I had met at Esalen, 
> but we didn't find any magic mushrooms growing in the 
> wild. 
> 
> However, at a party someone, probably don Juan, gave 
> me a taco to eat that was laced with 'fly agaric'." 
> 
> When I found out I almost gagged on the spot. D'oh! 
> I've always been a Tequila man. 
> 
> In twenty minutes the psychoactive ingredients were 
> already taking their effect on me: to alter my very 
> state of consciousness. Go figure.
> 
> Then, I transcended and I saw and experienced the 
> entire cosmos as a divine bi-unity with 'strings', 
> just like the 'Net of Lord Indra'. 
> 
> "At that point I realized that we are all 
> inter-connected and I became enlightened on the spot. 
> 
> Then, standing right in front of me, appeared L the 
> 'Creator God of Volcanoes' and His wife, the beautiful 
> 'Wisdom Sophia', their son Baal, and their daughter 
> Ashley. I realized that existence, is, in reality, a 
> great big family affair!"
> 
> Read more: 
> 
> A preliminary, annotated hagiography of past gleaning 
> positioning endeavors, with some appended statements: 
> 
> 'The Confessions of a Taco Eater' 
> http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/confessions.htm
>

Ha ha, good for you Willy tex, I was a dedicated psychonaut 
in my younger days. Some of the worlds finest psylocybin 
mushrooms grow in the muddy fields of the home counties. 
It's no surprise to me people start to get really religious 
and awakened after ingesting a handful of the little blighters. 

Amazing experiences, even travelled back in time once through 
all my previous incarnations until I was a small nocturnal shrew
on a tree with dinosaurs walking past! Then I saw some aliens 
land. Most peculiar looking they were. I tried to believe it 
was real recovered memories but I'm just too rational, what 
with my love of sci-fi and paleontology it's just a tad 
suspicious. But I honestly know what it's like to be a shrew, 
"urgent" is the best way of summing it up. Scared too, especially
with those Iguanadon's walking about.


But as experiences go they are as real as sitting here now, more
so in a supercharged, ripped open kind of way. Imagine what some 
new age teachers would be telling people if they'd had my trips! 
If I wasn't so sceptical I could have formed an alien-dinosaur-
worshipping cult. Far out. And John would be quoting my scriptures.
Lol!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[Share Long]

Richard how ever do you know so much cool stuff?  Do you read ALL the time?  
Anyway, thanks for bunging it along to us.  Flow on Soma (-:




 From: Richard J. Williams 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 8:46 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival
 

  


> > > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time
> > > > > for gift-giving, partying and carnivals.
> > > > >
> > > > Don't know where you get this "part of" claim.
> > > > It is Saturnalia, only given another name.
> > > >
> > > Christmas is probably not based on the Roman
> > > Saturnalia, but rather on the Winter Solstice
> > > which occurs on December 25 - Natalis Invicti.
> > > 
> > > In fact, Christmas is based on the prehistoric
> > > ancient shamanism of Siberia. Closely associated
> > > with the legend of the Northern Shaman is the
> > > classical form of ecstatic practice.
> > > 
> > Interesting theory.  But how come we're not eating 
> > hallucegenic mushrooms on Christmas these days?
> >
salyavin808:
> Speak for yourself, it saves me a fortune in twinkly 
> lights and glitter.
> 
The most popular version of the Indian myth 'Churning 
the Milk Ocean' is found in the Eighth Canto of the 
Bhagavata Purana. In Buddhist mythology, Amrita is the 
'drink of the gods', which grants them immortality. 

According to Terrence McKenna in his book 'The Food Of 
Gods', the psilocybin mushroom is a likely Vedic Soma 
candidate. Psilocybin, 'Stropharia Cubensis', contains 
an active psychoactive component which has a strong 
hallucinogenic property.

The Ninth Mandala of the Rig Veda is known as the Soma 
Mandala. 

Soma (Sanskrit), or Haoma (Avestan) was a ritual drink 
of importance among the early Indo-Iranians, and the 
later Vedic and Iranian cultures. It is frequently 
mentioned in the Rig Veda, which contains many hymns 
praising its energizing or intoxicating qualities.

Read more: 

Subject: Soma: The primary ingredient in TM
Author: Willytex
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Date: February 23, 2005
http://tinyurl.com/639zxy6


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2 but really to Alex

[Share Long]

Alex the important difference is that Waking Down absolutely did not in my 
experience ever include what I call in FFL piling on.  Piling on in the name of 
rigorous honesty is what I consider unhealthy, unhealed and cowardly behavior 
in wts.  That and piling onto only one of the people who disagreed with them.  
And cheering each other on about it.  Warts yet present.  I never saw any of 
these behaviors in Waking Down.  And it's possible you and I didn't attend all 
of the same meetings.  In my experience, Waking Down created a safe environment 
in which people could be rigorously honest with themselves and with others.  It 
was balanced masculine and feminine with lack of hyperness in either direction. 
   




 From: Alex Stanley 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:58 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2
 

  


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
>
> > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> 
> Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> "rigorous". 

Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. Saniel 
Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as another WD 
teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not about 
techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; it's about 
waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own experience, I don't see 
how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled 
free-fall into what is.


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[awoelflebater]

OK you've really got me tripping out right now. I think I'll go inhale some 
good old horse manure and ammonia created by their urine. Maybe I'll come back 
and write something meaningful here afterwards something called 'Somachromes' 
or perhaps 'Rigging the Veda'.
And I thought it was the Victorians who invented Santa Claus, at least as he 
appears in his present day form.
Maybe I'll skip Christmas this year.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> awoelflebater:
> > Those mushrooms look like Santa Claus, all 
> > dressed up in that red and white and the 
> > shape is similar. 
> >
> The 'Santa Clause' we see today evolved from 
> Shamanic traditions developed in ancient Gaul 
> and Siberia.
> 
> > It is all crystal clear now.
> >
> Everyone knows that the 'Weihnactsmann' was an 
> amalgam of Thor and Donner. Saint Nick as Thor 
> flies through the skies in his chariot, 
> vis-a-vis the Big Dipper, circling the North 
> Star in a 24-hour period, and throws his mighty 
> hammer down to the ground in order to create
> lightning.
> 
> The so-called 'fly agaric' was the substance 
> used in order to compose most, if not all, of 
> the New Testament. 
> 
> Apparently, parts of the Appendix, such as the 
> 'Gospel According to John' was composed by its 
> author while under the influence of fermented 
> grape juice and old bread. 
> 
> The 'Book of Revelations' was dictated by a
> person while under the influence of a psychedelic;
> it even says so: "John swallowed..." (a square 
> blotter paper laced with LSD).
> 
> As you probably know, old bread contains an ergot 
> which was synthesized by Hoffman in 1959 as
> 'Lysergic acid diethylamide'.
>  
> > > > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus
> > > > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > > > >
> > > John jr_esq:
> > > > There are some Christian preachers who believe
> > > > that Jesus was not born on December 25...
> > > >
> > > Maybe so, but it doesn't matter the date when
> > > anyone says that 'Jesus of Nazareth' was born
> > > since Jesus was not an historical person but
> > > rather a cover story for the magic mushroom
> > > cult, according to Allegro.
> > > 
> > > It's all about the shaman, Saint Nick, and the
> > > Indo-European cult of Mithras.
> > > 
> > > The 'Santa Clause' we see today evolved from
> > > Shamanic traditions developed in ancient Gaul
> > > and Siberia.
> > > 
> > > The Indo-European mushroom cult is probably
> > > 'Vedic' in origin deriving from the Siberian
> > > shamanism which had arrived in the Urals by
> > > 5,000 BCE.
> > > 
> > > The Amanita Muscaria spoken of in the Rig
> > > Veda as 'Soma' thus has its origin in the northern
> > > area around Finland and Siberia, where the
> > > fungus still grows and can be seen each year.
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > This has been pretty much established by not
> > > only G. Gordon Wasson but also by other eminent
> > > botanists such as S. Hajicek-Dobberstein, the
> > > author of the paper "Soma Siddhas and
> > > Alchemical Enlightenment: Psychedelic
> > > Mushrooms in Buddhist Tradition" published in
> > > the Journal of Ethno pharmacology and cited
> > > by Wasson on page 88.
> > > 
> > > Works cited:
> > > 
> > > 'Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality'
> > > By G. Gordon Wasson
> > > Harcourt Brace Javanovich, 1969
> > > 
> > > 'The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross'
> > > by John M. Allegro
> > > Doubleday, 1970
> > > 
> > > 'The Post-Vedic History of the Soma Plant'
> > > by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, Ph.D.
> > > page 95
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> > 
> > Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> > actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> > "rigorous". 
> 
> Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
> excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. 
> Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as 
> another WD teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not 
> about techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; 
> it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own 
> experience, I don't see how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's 
> brutal, uncontrolled free-fall into what is.
>

I have yet to see you frost anything with bullshit, Alex and thank goodness for 
that or FFLife would be one big mash pit of squabbles over post count. Anyway, 
maybe people get out of WD what they are willing to put into it, garbage 
in...garbage out. Sounds like you went all in, no chips left on the WD table. 
I'm certain a good looking mugshot signed, "Love Alex" didn't come without a 
strategic bet placed on *rigorous honesty*. Good on ya.

[FairfieldLife] Around Town

[Richard J. Williams]

This is starting to look like quite a season
for live music around here! 

Jim Cullum Jazz Band
October 26, Boardwalk Bistro, San Antonio

ZZ Top
October 26, Moody Theater, San Antonio

Jimmy Vaughan
October 26, Backyard, San Antonio

Rocky Erikson
October 26, Backyard, San Antonio

Bob Dylan & Mark Knopfler
November 1, Verizon Theater, Grand Prarie

Taj Mahal
November 10, Gruene Hall, San Antonio

Styx
November 11, Moody Theater, Austin

Counting Crows
November 12, Bayou Music Center, Houston

Paul McCartney
November 14, Minute Maid Park, Houston

Al Stewart
November 15, Sam's, San Antonio

Aerosmith
November 16, Austin Convention Center

Cheap Trick
November 16, Austin Convention Center

Eddie Vedder
November 16, Lila Cockrell Theater, San Antonio

Randy Travis
November 18, Majestic Theater, San Antonio

Average White Band
November 22, One World Theater, Austin

Rush
November 30, At&T Center, San Antonio

Aaron Neville
December 6, Carver Center, San Antonio

Kenny Rogers
December 10, Majestic Center, San Antonio

Bryan Adams
December 14, Majestic Theater, San Antonio

Brian Seltzer Orchestra
December 15, Arena Theater, Houston

Robert Earl Keen
December 19, Majestic Theater, San Antonio

Tran-Siberia Orchestra
December 22, AT&T Center, San Antonio

Mannhiem Steam Roller
December 30, Majestic Theater, San Antonio

George Strait
June 1, Alamodome, San Antonio

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[Richard J. Williams]

awoelflebater:
> Those mushrooms look like Santa Claus, all 
> dressed up in that red and white and the 
> shape is similar. 
>
The 'Santa Clause' we see today evolved from 
Shamanic traditions developed in ancient Gaul 
and Siberia.

> It is all crystal clear now.
>
Everyone knows that the 'Weihnactsmann' was an 
amalgam of Thor and Donner. Saint Nick as Thor 
flies through the skies in his chariot, 
vis-a-vis the Big Dipper, circling the North 
Star in a 24-hour period, and throws his mighty 
hammer down to the ground in order to create
lightning.

The so-called 'fly agaric' was the substance 
used in order to compose most, if not all, of 
the New Testament. 

Apparently, parts of the Appendix, such as the 
'Gospel According to John' was composed by its 
author while under the influence of fermented 
grape juice and old bread. 

The 'Book of Revelations' was dictated by a
person while under the influence of a psychedelic;
it even says so: "John swallowed..." (a square 
blotter paper laced with LSD).

As you probably know, old bread contains an ergot 
which was synthesized by Hoffman in 1959 as
'Lysergic acid diethylamide'.
 
> > > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus
> > > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > > >
> > > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > > >
> > John jr_esq:
> > > There are some Christian preachers who believe
> > > that Jesus was not born on December 25...
> > >
> > Maybe so, but it doesn't matter the date when
> > anyone says that 'Jesus of Nazareth' was born
> > since Jesus was not an historical person but
> > rather a cover story for the magic mushroom
> > cult, according to Allegro.
> > 
> > It's all about the shaman, Saint Nick, and the
> > Indo-European cult of Mithras.
> > 
> > The 'Santa Clause' we see today evolved from
> > Shamanic traditions developed in ancient Gaul
> > and Siberia.
> > 
> > The Indo-European mushroom cult is probably
> > 'Vedic' in origin deriving from the Siberian
> > shamanism which had arrived in the Urals by
> > 5,000 BCE.
> > 
> > The Amanita Muscaria spoken of in the Rig
> > Veda as 'Soma' thus has its origin in the northern
> > area around Finland and Siberia, where the
> > fungus still grows and can be seen each year.
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > This has been pretty much established by not
> > only G. Gordon Wasson but also by other eminent
> > botanists such as S. Hajicek-Dobberstein, the
> > author of the paper "Soma Siddhas and
> > Alchemical Enlightenment: Psychedelic
> > Mushrooms in Buddhist Tradition" published in
> > the Journal of Ethno pharmacology and cited
> > by Wasson on page 88.
> > 
> > Works cited:
> > 
> > 'Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality'
> > By G. Gordon Wasson
> > Harcourt Brace Javanovich, 1969
> > 
> > 'The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross'
> > by John M. Allegro
> > Doubleday, 1970
> > 
> > 'The Post-Vedic History of the Soma Plant'
> > by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, Ph.D.
> > page 95
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time
> > > > > for gift-giving, partying and carnivals.
> > > > >
> > > > Don't know where you get this "part of" claim.
> > > > It is Saturnalia, only given another name.
> > > >
> > > Christmas is probably not based on the Roman
> > > Saturnalia, but rather on the Winter Solstice
> > > which occurs on December 25 - Natalis Invicti.
> > > 
> > > In fact, Christmas is based on the prehistoric
> > > ancient shamanism of Siberia. Closely associated
> > > with the legend of the Northern Shaman is the
> > > classical form of ecstatic practice.
> > > 
> > Interesting theory.  But how come we're not eating 
> > hallucegenic mushrooms on Christmas these days?
> >
salyavin808:
> Speak for yourself, it saves me a fortune in twinkly 
> lights and glitter.
>  
The most popular version of the Indian myth 'Churning 
the Milk Ocean' is found in the Eighth Canto of the 
Bhagavata Purana. In Buddhist mythology, Amrita is the 
'drink of the gods', which grants them immortality. 

According to Terrence McKenna in his book 'The Food Of 
Gods', the psilocybin mushroom is a likely Vedic Soma 
candidate. Psilocybin, 'Stropharia Cubensis', contains 
an active psychoactive component which has a strong 
hallucinogenic property.

The Ninth Mandala of the Rig Veda is known as the Soma 
Mandala. 

Soma (Sanskrit), or Haoma (Avestan) was a ritual drink 
of importance among the early Indo-Iranians, and the 
later Vedic and Iranian cultures. It is frequently 
mentioned in the Rig Veda, which contains many hymns 
praising its energizing or intoxicating qualities.

Read more: 

Subject: Soma: The primary ingredient in TM
Author: Willytex
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental
Date: February 23, 2005
http://tinyurl.com/639zxy6

[FairfieldLife] One species on the planet didn't need MMY's immortality course...

[turquoiseb]

...it's already immortal. 

Absolutely fascinating article. And species. Called 
Turritopsis dohrniiis, but also "the immortal jellyfish,"
it ages in reverse and never dies. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/magazine/can-a-jellyfish-unlock-the-secret-of-immortality.html?_r=0

Very well written, too.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[awoelflebater]

Well no wonder everyone's confused. Those mushrooms look like Santa Claus, all 
dressed up in that red and white and the shape is similar. And of course 
imbibing them might cause you to see a person you just imagine would be named 
"Jesus" but as an infant. It is all crystal clear now.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> > > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus
> > > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > > >
> > > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> > >
> John jr_esq:
> > There are some Christian preachers who believe
> > that Jesus was not born on December 25...
> >
> Maybe so, but it doesn't matter the date when
> anyone says that 'Jesus of Nazareth' was born
> since Jesus was not an historical person but
> rather a cover story for the magic mushroom
> cult, according to Allegro.
> 
> It's all about the shaman, Saint Nick, and the
> Indo-European cult of Mithras.
> 
> The 'Santa Clause' we see today evolved from
> Shamanic traditions developed in ancient Gaul
> and Siberia.
> 
> The Indo-European mushroom cult is probably
> 'Vedic' in origin deriving from the Siberian
> shamanism which had arrived in the Urals by
> 5,000 BCE.
> 
> The Amanita Muscaria spoken of in the Rig
> Veda as 'Soma' thus has its origin in the northern
> area around Finland and Siberia, where the
> fungus still grows and can be seen each year.
> 
>   
> 
> This has been pretty much established by not
> only G. Gordon Wasson but also by other eminent
> botanists such as S. Hajicek-Dobberstein, the
> author of the paper "Soma Siddhas and
> Alchemical Enlightenment: Psychedelic
> Mushrooms in Buddhist Tradition" published in
> the Journal of Ethno pharmacology and cited
> by Wasson on page 88.
> 
> Works cited:
> 
> 'Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality'
> By G. Gordon Wasson
> Harcourt Brace Javanovich, 1969
> 
> 'The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross'
> by John M. Allegro
> Doubleday, 1970
> 
> 'The Post-Vedic History of the Soma Plant'
> by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, Ph.D.
> page 95
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > > The Romans called it Saturnalia, a time
> > > > for gift-giving, partying and carnivals.
> > > >
> > > Don't know where you get this "part of" claim.
> > > It is Saturnalia, only given another name.
> > >
> > Christmas is probably not based on the Roman
> > Saturnalia, but rather on the Winter Solstice
> > which occurs on December 25 - Natalis Invicti.
> > 
> > In fact, Christmas is based on the prehistoric
> > ancient shamanism of Siberia. Closely associated
> > with the legend of the Northern Shaman is the
> > classical form of ecstatic practice.
> >
John jr_esq:
> Interesting theory.  But how come we're not eating 
> hallucegenic mushrooms on Christmas these days?
> 
Too old now for tripping; I just inhale burnt hydro 
marijuana as an out-patient and meditate using the 
body's own natural serotonin, the primary ingredient 
in TM, to relax and enjoy. LoL!

FYI: Years ago I posted to Usenet several comments 
describing my experience searching for the mysterious 
and legendary substance, the so-called 'magic' 
mushroom, mentioned by Carlos Castaneda in his great
book about don Juan, 'A Yaqui Way of Knowledge'.

"In late 1971 I went down to Mexico with Carlos 
Castaneda and Oscar Ichazo, whom I had met at Esalen, 
but we didn't find any magic mushrooms growing in the 
wild. 

However, at a party someone, probably don Juan, gave 
me a taco to eat that was laced with 'fly agaric'." 

When I found out I almost gagged on the spot. D'oh! 
I've always been a Tequila man. 

In twenty minutes the psychoactive ingredients were 
already taking their effect on me: to alter my very 
state of consciousness. Go figure.

Then, I transcended and I saw and experienced the 
entire cosmos as a divine bi-unity with 'strings', 
just like the 'Net of Lord Indra'. 

"At that point I realized that we are all 
inter-connected and I became enlightened on the spot. 

Then, standing right in front of me, appeared L the 
'Creator God of Volcanoes' and His wife, the beautiful 
'Wisdom Sophia', their son Baal, and their daughter 
Ashley. I realized that existence, is, in reality, a 
great big family affair!"

Read more: 

A preliminary, annotated hagiography of past gleaning 
positioning endeavors, with some appended statements: 

'The Confessions of a Taco Eater' 
http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/confessions.htm

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:28 AM, awoelflebater 
> wrote:
> 
> > **
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh Emilina that is so sweet of you to pass along Emily's message. You can
> > > just call me Ravi and I think I may be in love with you? I think it's
> > your
> > > name - Emi-li-na - that's made me fall in love.
> >
> > OK, that does it. My name is now officially Anna.
> >
> 
> Oh I'm in a real quandary now. I forgot to be real specific - I have been a
> sucker for any name that matches the pattern "A[a-z]+na" - for
> non-programmers that's A followed by one or more characters of a to z and
> ending with "na" - so Anna is a perfect fit but then based on Emily's other
> email Emilina is just her creation and not a real person? And then her name
> doesn't match the pattern - Oh boy.

Not to worry Ravi. Emilina and Anna are both beautiful, smart, loving and wise 
women, you can't lose.
> 
> 
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Chivukula:
> > > >
> > > > My sincerest thanks for returning from the out-of-bounds, the outer
> > > > limits, the outer circle to help inform poor Emily on the key message
> > that
> > > > had escaped her laser-like focus this past 24 hours. Her concerted
> > > > compassionate efforts to communicate with Share exacted a great toll on
> > > > her, and she found herself nursing a migraine headache, slowly sipping
> > some
> > > > chamomile tea, on her 18th century, blue velvet, rococo chaise lounge
> > this
> > > > afternoon, praying for salvation in the form of an enlightened man.
> > She is
> > > > deeply grateful to you, as always.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Emilina
> > > >
> > > > (Emily's anonymous stalwart defender, in hiding)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *From:* Ravi Chivukula 
> > > > *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > *Sent:* Monday, November 26, 2012 6:58 PM
> > > >
> > > > *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] to Emily
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dear Share Long,
> > > >
> > > > *Re: In fact I don't think anyone on FFL is out to get me.*
> >
> > > >
> > > > On behalf on all stakeholders of "wts" (notice all lower case and not
> > to
> > > > be confused with WTS - all upper case) - I express our profound
> > gratitude
> > > > at absolving our members and organization of any wrongdoing and moral
> > > > culpability. There is great joy and happiness at our HQ and all our
> > branch
> > > > offices.
> > > >
> > > > It has been a harrowing last 3 weeks for our members since that ill
> > fated
> > > > day of Nov 11, 2012. We operate in extreme secrecy and it was extremely
> > > > unfortunate that you got wind of our activities which led to the
> > exposure
> > > > of several of our members who clearly would have wanted to remain
> > anonymous.
> > > >
> > > > The only regret we have, if any, is your inclusion of the obviously
> > > > emotionally, intellecually, psychologically retarded "feste37" among
> > the
> > > > possible members of our cabal. We have denied it then and we continue
> > to do
> > > > so. If you continue to harbor any ideas to the contrary may I kindly
> > refer
> > > > to a recent post on FFL where feste leaned on a known retard Barry aka
> > > > turquoiseb for emotional support.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you dear Share Long and we wish you all the luck in your complete
> > > > healing !!! Our respects and regards to your pastoral counsellor.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Ravi Chivukula
> > > > Nov 26, 2012
> > > > Undisclosed Title @"wts"
> > > > Undisclosed location, USA.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > > Emily I definitely don't think that you are out to get me. In fact I
> > > > don't think anyone on FFL is out to get me. And as I said before, I do
> > > > think you are compassionate. And I think you were brave to disagree
> > with
> > > > others re rigorous honesty. Thank you. I don't remember what I said
> > > > about you. It seems like a long time ago to me. Certainly I could have
> > > > been mistaken.
> > > >
> > > > Share, raunchy is correct below. I am not out "to get you" on any
> > level.
> > > > I am out to understand what you are saying, as conversations are more
> > fun
> > > > that way. I continue to bring up the question of the wts post because
> > I do
> > > > *not* like or agree with how you characterized me in that post (I
> > speak for
> > > > myself only) and you have yet to get back to me. If you were kidding,
> > than
> > > > I get it completely. I'm not sure that you were though as you never
> > > > confirmed your position. I am not judging you, or dismissing what you
> > say
> > > > in that post, I am simply trying to understand if you were serious
> > about
> > > > your belief in the different roles you placed th

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, 
> I found Share's excuse/explanation about rigorousness being 
> hypermasculine very strange. 

So did I. It sounded like something women accuse
something of being when they want to put down men. :-)

> Saniel Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit 
> frosting, but as another WD teacher described it, in WD you 
> wake up to your mugshot. It's not about techiquifying 
> yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; 
> it's about waking up to exactly who you are right now. 
> From my own experience, I don't see how self-honesty could 
> be any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled free-
> fall into what is.

Nicely said. Love the mugshot quote. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Plz, don't let this fool you!

[card]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/top-rated/wireless/2407747011/ref=zg_tr_tab_t_tr

[FairfieldLife] Love and God

[nablusoss1008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgzX2dtdeGE

[FairfieldLife] IX/XI: FF-operation??

[card]

Let's suppose that "nain-ilevn" was a Phalse Phlag -operation.

During this morning's TM-session, having just seen Jesse Ventura's
Conspiracy show, that made me think what the fvck did those pilots
benefit from sacrificing their lives?

The only thing came to mind was the elimination of Saddam... :o

[FairfieldLife] Re: Christmas Is Part of a Pagan Festival

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > It's certainly not a celebration of the birth of Jesus
> > > of Palestine who was born March 15.
> > >
> > Christmas is a holiday celebrated worldwide to acknowledge
> > the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, birth date unknown.
> >
John jr_esq:
> There are some Christian preachers who believe
> that Jesus was not born on December 25...
>
Maybe so, but it doesn't matter the date when
anyone says that 'Jesus of Nazareth' was born
since Jesus was not an historical person but
rather a cover story for the magic mushroom
cult, according to Allegro.

It's all about the shaman, Saint Nick, and the
Indo-European cult of Mithras.

The 'Santa Clause' we see today evolved from
Shamanic traditions developed in ancient Gaul
and Siberia.

The Indo-European mushroom cult is probably
'Vedic' in origin deriving from the Siberian
shamanism which had arrived in the Urals by
5,000 BCE.

The Amanita Muscaria spoken of in the Rig
Veda as 'Soma' thus has its origin in the northern
area around Finland and Siberia, where the
fungus still grows and can be seen each year.

  

This has been pretty much established by not
only G. Gordon Wasson but also by other eminent
botanists such as S. Hajicek-Dobberstein, the
author of the paper "Soma Siddhas and
Alchemical Enlightenment: Psychedelic
Mushrooms in Buddhist Tradition" published in
the Journal of Ethno pharmacology and cited
by Wasson on page 88.

Works cited:

'Soma: Divine Mushroom of Immortality'
By G. Gordon Wasson
Harcourt Brace Javanovich, 1969

'The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross'
by John M. Allegro
Doubleday, 1970

'The Post-Vedic History of the Soma Plant'
by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, Ph.D.
page 95

[FairfieldLife] Re: to Emily part 2

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
>
> > Maybe even *rigorous* examination.
> 
> Lord help us Judy (but not that Lord), someone might have to
> actually break a small sweat if it included the act of being
> "rigorous". 

Speaking as another person with experience in Waking Down, I found Share's 
excuse/explanation about rigorousness being hypermasculine very strange. Saniel 
Bonder likes to slather WD with saccharine bullshit frosting, but as another WD 
teacher described it, in WD you wake up to your mugshot. It's not about 
techiquifying yourself into some future perfected enlightened being; it's about 
waking up to exactly who you are right now. From my own experience, I don't see 
how self-honesty could be any more rigorous than WD's brutal, uncontrolled 
free-fall into what is.

[FairfieldLife] Fwd: In case you have friends that might be interested...

[Dick Mays]

From: Kathy McNamara 
Subject: In case you have friends that might be interested...


Inviting you to join us this Friday, November 30th at 7:30 pm for the final 
intro to the "Living Your Life Purpose” Mastermind group forming at the Qi 
Studio, 60½ South Main (Alley Entrance, behind Infinite Om, Top Floor). 

The Mastermind focus for the month of December will be 'Resonating with your 
Soul's Fingerprint' and will include exercises and repatternings to help you 
get clear on the path that will lead to your greatest fulfillment as well as 
tools to help you navigate your heart’s path with greater ease.

The December topic is ideal for those who:

1. Know they have something more to give, but aren’t clear on what that is, or
2. Are looking at ‘what’s next’ in life, or 
3. Know their purpose AND know they would benefit from group support and 
energetic clearing in living it, or
4. Want group support in walking the path of heart.

You can read more about the Mastermind, check out testimonials &/or register 
for the intro at: http://www.LiberateYourLifeToday.com/

If you’re unable to make the intro, but are interested in exploring whether the 
mastermind is a good fit for you, please contact me directly either by replying 
here, or by calling 641-472-9133.
Namaste,
Kathy

[FairfieldLife] Fw: A Rare Chance to Save Acres of Redwood Trees

[Share Long]

Yep, I'm a tree lover, probably a Druid in a previous life.


- Forwarded Message -
From: Care2 Causes 
To: sharelon...@yahoo.com 
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 4:59 AM
Subject: A Rare Chance to Save Acres of Redwood Trees
 

Causes 
 
  the editor's note


Check out the causes you care about most -- with stories from Care2's network 
of bloggers and non-profit partners.

from editor: Cynthia Samuels 
  Ladies: If You Want to Get Married, Get Back in the Kitchen
Men are in big trouble. We're slothful, clueless, adrift on the wind, unable to 
deal with a world that has changed.read more   
  Absolutely All Plastic Bags Banned in Delhi
Plastic bags were banned in the Indian capital of Delhi in 2009 and, as of this 
past month, the government has imposed a far more extensive ban, with new...
read more  
  Cute Animal Video of the Day: Sea Lion Pup Flops Down, Too Tired to Reach 
Family
In an attempt to reach its family just several meters away, a sea lion pup 
flops down repeatedly in defeat.
read more  
  10 Reasons Cory Booker Is a Superhero
Cory Booker, the mayor of the city of Newark, and a Twitter follower are to  
try to live on food stamps for a week -- here are ten reasons that Booker is...
read more  
take action, now! 
Get Marco Rubio Off The Science Committee!
signatures: 23271
created by: 
sign now 
  Dear Tea Party Candidates, Please Shut Up
Republicans admit their best chance to win in 2014 is to keep their candidates 
quiet.
read more  
  Saving Bears from the Cruelty of Bile Farming
More than 10,000 bears are kept on bile farms in China, and around 2,400 in 
Vietnam. This post talks of the life-saving work being carried out by Animals...
read more  
  Thanksgiving Dog Rescue Video You Can’t Watch Just Once
After a long holiday weekend in America where families celebrated all they have 
to be thankful for, the Bonyun family has an extra reason to count their...
read more  
  A Rare Chance to Save Acres of Redwood Trees
The San Francisco-based Save the Redwoods League, hopes to purchase what 
experts say is the third-largest old-growth redwoods grove in the area from a...
read more  
  Louisiana Use Public Funds To Teach Creationism
First came Louisiana's voucher program, sending tens of millions of taxpayer 
dollars to private schools; now textbooks are promoting creationism over...
read more  
  Internet Privacy? Not If the Government Has Its Way
The Senate will consider a new bill that threatens Internet privacy rights on 
Thursday, November 29, reports Yahoo and CNET. If the bill passes,...
read more  
  A World Without Coffee
A new study predicts that climate change could cause the world-famous Arabica 
coffee bean to be extinct by 2080.
read more  
  Can The UN Pass Basic Human Rights for Trans People?
A United Nations committee on Tuesday voted to advance a sexual orientation and 
gender identity-inclusive resolution against extrajudicial killings. This...
read more



 To stop receiving this newsletter, visit: 
http://www.care2.com/newsletters/unsub/126474/0/49510140/e02bd8ab 

or send a blank email message to:
ng-u-126474-49510140-8639856-13214429-03296...@australia.care2.com 

Care2.com, Inc.
275 Shoreline Drive, Suite 300
Redwood City, CA 94065
http://www.care2.com