Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
On Nov 28, 2007, at 1:44 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: The 'tudes we see in Jim and Rory are *Maharishi's* 'tudes; the delusions we see in them are *his* delusions. Jim and Rory are just acting out bratty and self-important behavior that they've seen modeled for them for decades. Bingo again. Notice how whenever it gets too hot, one or the other resorts to claiming they're rocking the boat or upsetting people? Evidently the fact that they are acting simply like self-important twits, and that whatever they're claiming is secondary, just doesn't register. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The 'tudes we see in Jim and Rory are *Maharishi's* 'tudes; the delusions we see in them are *his* delusions. Jim and Rory are just acting out bratty and self-important behavior that they've seen modeled for them for decades. Hmmm, so what Turq is saying here is that his own 'humble self- deprecating demeanor' is superior to Jim and Rory's 'tudes. Contradiction in terms there don't ya think? Contradictions discovered: 1. Humble, self-deprecating = Superior 2. Humble, self-deprecating = Turq 3. Turq = Superior None of these 3 statements hold water under close scrutiny. OffWorld
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
On Nov 28, 2007, at 2:44 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's fascinating to me and, I would suspect, to Vaj and Bharitu and others who have seen and been exposed to *other* models for what enlightenment and what it is. These other models do NOT involve a sense of superiority; they do NOT involve delusions of all-powerfulness, or even the conviction that they can fix other people by shining their grace on them. If anything, it rendered the enlightenee more normal. It's often only if you're around such an enlightened person over time that the spontaneous qualities of the enlightened state display themselves. I'm sorry to say I feel none of that FF satsang crowd, although they are overall a very nice group of people. It's also not unusual to hear reports of bliss experiences and energetic phenomenon around Mahesh, but again, IME, these are not the style of phenomenon of an enlightened being, but instead of someone in process. There are a number of experiences I associate with a saint, but energetic phenomenon are not one of them, quiescence and the ability to communicate knowledge nondually, without any conventional means, are certainly a common ones IME.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class. You mean, one of Us is not threatening your Buddhi-tyranny at the moment, and the other two of Us are? You're just like Vaj, aren't you? You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? The only good Dead-guy is a dead Dead-guy! *lol* A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-) Unfortunately not upset enough to capsize the boat into the ocean though... They are struggeling hard to keep their head above the water, IMO. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) It is the assumption of superiority that is drawing the fire, not that you are rocking anyone's boat. Bingo. It's not as if anything either of these guys says is provocative (or even that interesting). It's the assumption of how much more evolved and powerful and able to influence others that underlies everything they say. And the corollary, the assumption of how much lower than they are everyone else is. And what else could you expect? That is what they have been trained by Maharishi to think of as the state of enlightenment. That is certainly how *he* has acted, all the years we've known him. These guys are just moodmaking a set of behavior patterns that they've been taught. It's fascinating to me and, I would suspect, to Vaj and Bharitu and others who have seen and been exposed to *other* models for what enlightenment and what it is. These other models do NOT involve a sense of superiority; they do NOT involve delusions of all-powerfulness, or even the conviction that they can fix other people by shining their grace on them. The 'tudes we see in Jim and Rory are *Maharishi's* 'tudes; the delusions we see in them are *his* delusions. Jim and Rory are just acting out bratty and self-important behavior that they've seen modeled for them for decades. I decided a long time ago that unless someone can demonstrate true levitation or some other awesome power, then I don't take their advice on enlightenment. Other than that, scientific research published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. The reason so many people like me left Fairfield was because of the arrogant and supremacist attitude that a lot of TM teachers had, which now , years later the anti-Tm'rs seem to have transferred into their own little fascistic version of fundametnalism. The TMO is now left with the more humble and pragmatic human people, and all the arrogant supremacists are the fundamentalist anti-TM'rs on boards like this. Sad, but truth hurts bud. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: Nablusos: A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-) jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Unfortunately not upset enough to capsize the boat into the ocean though... Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) No kidding! The dynamics are fascinating though. Also how the fleas are absolutely buck naked, yet strut around all wrapped up in themselves! What a hoot! That's why it is so enjoyable, for a larger audiance than you might think, to witness how you are nicely telling particularily Vaj and Turq that they have no clothes on. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of the three folks who regularly say that they are enlightened (or at the very least experiencing enlightened states of mind, even if they don't call themselves enlightened) on FFL, during the last month: * Jim has made +120 posts, the majority of them defending his view of himself against critics and those who regard his experiences as mainly mood- making. * Rory has made +100 posts, the majority of them defending his view of himself against critics and those who regard his experiences as mainly mood- making. * Tom T has made one post, just having fun with some photos that someone posted: I thought that the guys you picked to show me were much to handsome. I am much fatter and have all gray hair. Great shots of the gang on Weds nite. Enjoyed this very much. So here's a question -- if you were a betting man (or woman), based solely on their behavior, which of these three do you think is more likely to have actually experienced enlightened states of mind? :-) I am sure not betting on You, Buddhi Boy!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Of the three folks who regularly say that they are enlightened (or at the very least experiencing enlightened states of mind, even if they don't call themselves enlightened) on FFL, during the last month: * Jim has made +120 posts, the majority of them defending his view of himself against critics and those who regard his experiences as mainly mood- making. * Rory has made +100 posts, the majority of them defending his view of himself against critics and those who regard his experiences as mainly mood- making. * Tom T has made one post, just having fun with some photos that someone posted: I thought that the guys you picked to show me were much to handsome. I am much fatter and have all gray hair. Great shots of the gang on Weds nite. Enjoyed this very much. So here's a question -- if you were a betting man (or woman), based solely on their behavior, which of these three do you think is more likely to have actually experienced enlightened states of mind? :-) I am sure not betting on You, Buddhi Boy! In all seriousness, this attempt to turn the actions of the enlightened into a popularity contest for the unenlightened is probably the most absurd thing I've ever seen-- almost demonic dude. So what you are saying is that living within your personal boundaries if you deign to judge my actions or another enlightened person's actions as worthy of your acceptance, or not, then you deem that person as enlightened, or not? Don't you get how completely f*cked up that sounds? I would hope that as a person I am liked by at least some on this forum, but to put my actions in the perverted spotlight that you are proposing is just crazy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In all seriousness, this attempt to turn the actions of the enlightened into a popularity contest for the unenlightened... Why do you assume that others on this board are unenlightened? Doesn't that imply a limitation in YOU? They might be fully realized and just not as insecure as you are and with a compulsive need to tout your superior experiences. In other words, they might be laying low like Tom. And even if they're not, seems to me that a *real* enlightened person would see the enlight- enment in them, and not think of them as unenlightened. is probably the most absurd thing I've ever seen-- almost demonic dude. It's not a popularity contest, Jim. If it were, you'd have no *chance* of winning. :-) Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
You don't think calling someone Buddhi Boy sounds condescending? jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Of the three folks who regularly say that they are enlightened (or at the very least experiencing enlightened states of mind, even if they don't call themselves enlightened) on FFL, during the last month: * Jim has made +120 posts, the majority of them defending his view of himself against critics and those who regard his experiences as mainly mood- making. * Rory has made +100 posts, the majority of them defending his view of himself against critics and those who regard his experiences as mainly mood- making. * Tom T has made one post, just having fun with some photos that someone posted: I thought that the guys you picked to show me were much to handsome. I am much fatter and have all gray hair. Great shots of the gang on Weds nite. Enjoyed this very much. So here's a question -- if you were a betting man (or woman), based solely on their behavior, which of these three do you think is more likely to have actually experienced enlightened states of mind? :-) I am sure not betting on You, Buddhi Boy! In all seriousness, this attempt to turn the actions of the enlightened into a popularity contest for the unenlightened is probably the most absurd thing I've ever seen-- almost demonic dude. So what you are saying is that living within your personal boundaries if you deign to judge my actions or another enlightened person's actions as worthy of your acceptance, or not, then you deem that person as enlightened, or not? Don't you get how completely f*cked up that sounds? I would hope that as a person I am liked by at least some on this forum, but to put my actions in the perverted spotlight that you are proposing is just crazy. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class. You mean, one of Us is not threatening your Buddhi-tyranny at the moment, and the other two of Us are? You're just like Vaj, aren't you? You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? The only good Dead-guy is a dead Dead-guy! *lol*
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
I understand your point about Disney Land. It's the usual statement about it all being illusory. Nevertheless, Rory, given the choice, what sort of life while still in the body would you choose? Are there differences among the various stations in Disney Land? Does being tortured to death in a prison sound as lovely as dying fully conscious in good humor and surrounded by loved ones? That is what I meant, and I suspect you knew it. And if you are so enlightened as to have no preference in the matter, then why are you not more compassionate towards those who do? a Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class. You mean, one of Us is not threatening your Buddhi-tyranny at the moment, and the other two of Us are? You're just like Vaj, aren't you? You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? The only good Dead-guy is a dead Dead-guy! *lol* Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class. You mean, one of Us is not threatening your Buddhi-tyranny at the moment, and the other two of Us are? You're just like Vaj, aren't you? You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? The only good Dead-guy is a dead Dead-guy! *lol* A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class. You mean, one of Us is not threatening your Buddhi-tyranny at the moment, and the other two of Us are? You're just like Vaj, aren't you? You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? The only good Dead-guy is a dead Dead-guy! *lol* Exactly-- that pronouncement by Vaj about keeping quiet is a historical warning to not confuse the ignorant with the speech of the enlightened. I for one refuse to believe that everyone on FFL is as ignorant as Turq and Vaj would have us believe. It certainly feels as if there is some receptivity out there in the fertile Silence. Its a great feeling being able to share what are everyday experiences of mine to those who enjoy hearing them. I am also all ears when those who are supremely free speak. Its just more fun than being stuck and frustrated and desperate.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Its a comparison of *behaviors* in several people who have stepped up to the plate here on FFL and made statements about their supposed state of consciousness. My point was simply that one of them has done so with class, and two have done so without an ounce of class. You mean, one of Us is not threatening your Buddhi-tyranny at the moment, and the other two of Us are? You're just like Vaj, aren't you? You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? The only good Dead-guy is a dead Dead-guy! *lol* A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-) Unfortunately not upset enough to capsize the boat into the ocean though...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A: I understand your point about Disney Land. It's the usual statement about it all being illusory. Nevertheless, Rory, given the choice, what sort of life while still in the body would you choose? Are there differences among the various stations in Disney Land? Does being tortured to death in a prison sound as lovely as dying fully conscious in good humor and surrounded by loved ones? That is what I meant, and I suspect you knew it. R: Of course, Angela; all things being equal, I like a movie with a nice pat (fat) happy Hollywood ending, like all dumb Americans (I am not implying by these quotes that this term or idea is yours; I am merely laughing at us a little) :-) But it's still only a movie, and to be bound to a nice movie is infinitely worse -- INFINITELY worse -- than being free in a nasty one. We can truly *enjoy* the nasty one if we are free, for freedom is bliss. We cannot truly *enjoy* the happy one if we are bound, for we are bound in fear. A:And if you are so enlightened as to have no preference in the matter, then why are you not more compassionate towards those who do? a R: Truly, I don't know how to say this any more clearly, I am not at all enlightened, as the word is apparently commonly understood. That's only an I-max movie too, as far as I can see. I am just a simple ordinary guy, or better yet, virtually nothing at all. I'm dead; that's all. :-) And I know it probably doesn't seem like it, but it is in -- and out of -- love and laughter and compassion that I am being as truthful as I can in speaking out (where I have at least a remote chance of being heard) and pointing out the tyrannical conspiracy that lies around the heart of things -- just as you do. Love You, R.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Exactly-- that pronouncement by Vaj about keeping quiet is a historical warning to not confuse the ignorant with the speech of the enlightened. I for one refuse to believe that everyone on FFL is as ignorant as Turq and Vaj would have us believe. It certainly feels as if there is some receptivity out there in the fertile Silence. Its a great feeling being able to share what are everyday experiences of mine to those who enjoy hearing them. I am also all ears when those who are supremely free speak. Its just more fun than being stuck and frustrated and desperate. For the record, Jim, since you're being all self-defensive again, while claiming that you no longer have a self to defend. :-) You're inventing a straw man, at least as regards me. I don't think I've EVER suggested that you stop telling your stories. I think it's NEAT that you tell your stories; I just point out that IMO that's all they are. Talk about your experiences all you want. Claim anything you want. What I'm suggesting isn't nearly as productive as you seem to think it is is all this self defensive stuff, going on post after post after post after post compulsively replying to anyone who doesn't buy your act. THAT, in my opinion, *undercuts* any of the stories you tell. When you react in a manner that *most* of the people here perceive as angry and hurt and insecure, while claiming that there is no one in there TO be angry and hurt and insecure...well, dude...it just inspires *disbelief* in your stories. When you seem incapable of responding to some- one who doesn't buy your stories, or who doesn't give you the amount of awe and reverence you seem to be trolling with by putting them down and calling them names...well, *again* that undercuts anything you might have to say in your stories. The stories themselves are sometimes entertaining. That's ALL that they are, IMO...just some pleasant fictions by someone who is moodmaking a few minor experiences and trying to make them a Big Deal, but they ARE occasionally entertaining. It's what you do when someone doesn't respond to the entertainment the way you clearly WANT them to that's causing the cognitive dissonance. You act like a spoiled ten-year-old who's been caught trying to act older. You *lash out* at people who don't buy your stories and give you the proper amount of awe. And THEN you act all sur- prised when others who *watch* this stuff go down every day don't buy your act. It's not the stories, Jim. It's how you act when people don't give you a standing round of applause for them that's the issue. Until the stories are good enough TO deserve applause, you really can't expect it. But you do. And you get pissed off and defensive when it doesn't appear. That's not enlightenment, dude. That's being a ten-year-old.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Until the stories are good enough TO deserve applause, you really can't expect it. But you do. And you get pissed off and defensive when it doesn't appear. That's not enlightenment, dude. That's being a ten-year-old. Again, you filter my actions through this bizarre lens and equate how you perceive me on some only known to Turq enlightenment meter, or something. Huh? Its just crazy talk to me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nablusos: A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-) jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Unfortunately not upset enough to capsize the boat into the ocean though... Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) No kidding! The dynamics are fascinating though. Also how the fleas are absolutely buck naked, yet strut around all wrapped up in themselves! What a hoot!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
Nablusos: A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-) jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately not upset enough to capsize the boat into the ocean though... Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) I sense some headway being made. In this analogy I guess people like me are the flea and you guys are the elephant's ass right? It is the assumption of superiority that is drawing the fire, not that you are rocking anyone's boat. I am interested up to a point in reading about your experiences. But I have my own take on what is going on with your experiences. My take is of little value to you but it has value to me. But what I also get from your posts is you describing your relationship to me in unnecessarily hierarchical terms. I don't doubt that you believe this, and truthfully I think my perspective on life is better at least for me. But that doesn't mean that I have to sprinkle my communications with little bombs about how I view your experiences to put you down. I'm glad you feel all enlightened up. Good for you. But my enlightenment is just as valuable to me although we think of this term in radically different ways. It isn't the fact that you guys think you have attained a higher state that causes communication trouble for you here, I dig that part, it is interesting. It is a need to use that experience as a form of oneupsmanship. I think it may come from your belief that you have the truth rather than a POV to share. I'll accept your POV as entertaining, but you can't sell it as more than that to other people unless they want to buy in, which apparently some do. It just wont work. This is a pretty elementary communication principle being violated here. I also think that people are taking time to respond in detail to how your communication comes across because you do have a genuine contribution. I for one am happy to hear about TMers who feel they have reached higher states with TM. Because I have a different take on what these states mean I am completely comfortable with my decision to opt out of this path and still give your experiences a careful listen. But human to human our internal experience of our selves or Selves if you prefer is of zero value outside the communications we use to describe them. The responsibility for how we are coming across is our own. I often need feedback to correct how I am coming across here. Now it may be that you really don't give a shit as Angela proposed. I am inviting you to care. Mr. Gobachov tear down that wall! ZA VAS ! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nablusos: A couple of fellows are shaking their anti-TM boat where it used to be so comfy. No wonder they are upset. :-) jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Unfortunately not upset enough to capsize the boat into the ocean though... Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: But it's still only a movie, and to be bound to a nice movie is infinitely worse -- INFINITELY worse -- than being free in a nasty one. We can truly *enjoy* the nasty one if we are free, for freedom is bliss. We cannot truly *enjoy* the happy one if we are bound, for we are bound in fear. I dunno... I'm pondering the pre- and post- Dark Night of the Soul states, and the gap between them just isn't striking me as infinite. Probably because in both states, I'm still largely preoccupied with disliking parts of the movie. Same shit, different day, except now there's some internal spaciousness helping to maintain a degree of freeing dissociation from the story. Yeah, until we have the freeing dissociation, we can't really turn around and see the story as love-light-bliss. Death isn't an instant fix to everything, but it's only after Death that the real spiritual work really *begins* -- the alchemizing of all that old shit into gold. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it's still only a movie, and to be bound to a nice movie is infinitely worse -- INFINITELY worse -- than being free in a nasty one. We can truly *enjoy* the nasty one if we are free, for freedom is bliss. We cannot truly *enjoy* the happy one if we are bound, for we are bound in fear. I dunno... I'm pondering the pre- and post- Dark Night of the Soul states, and the gap between them just isn't striking me as infinite. Probably because in both states, I'm still largely preoccupied with disliking parts of the movie. Same shit, different day, except now there's some internal spaciousness helping to maintain a degree of freeing dissociation from the story.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) I sense some headway being made. In this analogy I guess people like me are the flea and you guys are the elephant's ass right? R: Ha! No, Curtis, I know I am both, but it wasn't until I saw the elephant's ass that I realized that the I that I had thought I was, was only a flea. YMMV, of course; I really can't speak for you. C: It is the assumption of superiority that is drawing the fire, not that you are rocking anyone's boat. R: Actually, I am not assuming any superiority *over you*, Curtis; I never have. I know that you and I are utterly the same. I am asserting superiority *over Tyrannical Buddhi*. If you are reading my lines as put-downs of You, I suspect it is because you are momentarily identifying with Tyrannical Buddhi. (Or of course it could simply be because I am an arrogant asshole :-) ) C: I am interested up to a point in reading about your experiences. But I have my own take on what is going on with your experiences. My take is of little value to you but it has value to me. But what I also get from your posts is you describing your relationship to me in unnecessarily hierarchical terms. I don't doubt that you believe this, and truthfully I think my perspective on life is better at least for me. But that doesn't mean that I have to sprinkle my communications with little bombs about how I view your experiences to put you down. I'm glad you feel all enlightened up. Good for you. But my enlightenment is just as valuable to me although we think of this term in radically different ways. R: Where did I say it wasn't, Curtis, and where for that matter did I say you weren't enlightened ? C: It isn't the fact that you guys think you have attained a higher state that causes communication trouble for you here, I dig that part, it is interesting. It is a need to use that experience as a form of oneupsmanship. R: The only one-upmanship I am asserting is over *Tyrannical Buddhi*, not over You. C: I think it may come from your belief that you have the truth rather than a POV to share. I'll accept your POV as entertaining, but you can't sell it as more than that to other people unless they want to buy in, which apparently some do. It just wont work. This is a pretty elementary communication principle being violated here. R: That is quite correct. I am not here just to shoot the shit and compare different realities. I realize this may look fundamentalist to you, but BTDT, and it's a waste of time. There is no real conversing with Tyrannical Buddhi, it only wants to lure Us into its mood-making stuporous haze with its logic and reasonableness. C: I also think that people are taking time to respond in detail to how your communication comes across because you do have a genuine contribution. I for one am happy to hear about TMers who feel they have reached higher states with TM. R: Not a TMer, and any higher states I reached were a complete fool's paradise. They were only useful in showing me what I *didn't* want -- which on reflection, was absolutely good enough, at that. Negative information is still information :-) C: Because I have a different take on what these states mean I am completely comfortable with my decision to opt out of this path and still give your experiences a careful listen. But human to human our internal experience of our selves or Selves if you prefer is of zero value outside the communications we use to describe them. The responsibility for how we are coming across is our own. I often need feedback to correct how I am coming across here. Now it may be that you really don't give a shit as Angela proposed. I am inviting you to care. Mr. Gobachov tear down that wall! ZA VAS ! R: No wall whatsoever here, Curtis, except between me and Tyrannical Buddhi, and I can't help that. It wants to be the boss, and it's simply not smart enough for that :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
Cool, thanks for responding Rory. I feel heard and I hope you do too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) I sense some headway being made. In this analogy I guess people like me are the flea and you guys are the elephant's ass right? R: Ha! No, Curtis, I know I am both, but it wasn't until I saw the elephant's ass that I realized that the I that I had thought I was, was only a flea. YMMV, of course; I really can't speak for you. C: It is the assumption of superiority that is drawing the fire, not that you are rocking anyone's boat. R: Actually, I am not assuming any superiority *over you*, Curtis; I never have. I know that you and I are utterly the same. I am asserting superiority *over Tyrannical Buddhi*. If you are reading my lines as put-downs of You, I suspect it is because you are momentarily identifying with Tyrannical Buddhi. (Or of course it could simply be because I am an arrogant asshole :-) ) C: I am interested up to a point in reading about your experiences. But I have my own take on what is going on with your experiences. My take is of little value to you but it has value to me. But what I also get from your posts is you describing your relationship to me in unnecessarily hierarchical terms. I don't doubt that you believe this, and truthfully I think my perspective on life is better at least for me. But that doesn't mean that I have to sprinkle my communications with little bombs about how I view your experiences to put you down. I'm glad you feel all enlightened up. Good for you. But my enlightenment is just as valuable to me although we think of this term in radically different ways. R: Where did I say it wasn't, Curtis, and where for that matter did I say you weren't enlightened ? C: It isn't the fact that you guys think you have attained a higher state that causes communication trouble for you here, I dig that part, it is interesting. It is a need to use that experience as a form of oneupsmanship. R: The only one-upmanship I am asserting is over *Tyrannical Buddhi*, not over You. C: I think it may come from your belief that you have the truth rather than a POV to share. I'll accept your POV as entertaining, but you can't sell it as more than that to other people unless they want to buy in, which apparently some do. It just wont work. This is a pretty elementary communication principle being violated here. R: That is quite correct. I am not here just to shoot the shit and compare different realities. I realize this may look fundamentalist to you, but BTDT, and it's a waste of time. There is no real conversing with Tyrannical Buddhi, it only wants to lure Us into its mood-making stuporous haze with its logic and reasonableness. C: I also think that people are taking time to respond in detail to how your communication comes across because you do have a genuine contribution. I for one am happy to hear about TMers who feel they have reached higher states with TM. R: Not a TMer, and any higher states I reached were a complete fool's paradise. They were only useful in showing me what I *didn't* want -- which on reflection, was absolutely good enough, at that. Negative information is still information :-) C: Because I have a different take on what these states mean I am completely comfortable with my decision to opt out of this path and still give your experiences a careful listen. But human to human our internal experience of our selves or Selves if you prefer is of zero value outside the communications we use to describe them. The responsibility for how we are coming across is our own. I often need feedback to correct how I am coming across here. Now it may be that you really don't give a shit as Angela proposed. I am inviting you to care. Mr. Gobachov tear down that wall! ZA VAS ! R: No wall whatsoever here, Curtis, except between me and Tyrannical Buddhi, and I can't help that. It wants to be the boss, and it's simply not smart enough for that :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cool, thanks for responding Rory. I feel heard and I hope you do too. I love you, man. I wasn't kidding or making a put-down when I said I feel moved by your great heart. It's awesome.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Cool, thanks for responding Rory. I feel heard and I hope you do too. I love you, man. I wasn't kidding or making a put-down when I said I feel moved by your great heart. It's awesome. I always prefer to find a place to connect rather then dwell on the disconnect brother. I appreciate your being willing to take the time to get there.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
Right on BlueGreenMan. That's why I mostly just read you, rick, curtis, the traynors a few other folks. Life is too short. I would be very surprised if any fully enlighted being would read this list. And probably everyone has 4 or 5 people they really enjoy connecting with. all different. And I would imagine a large majority of folks just skim this 15 minutes every few days. and it IS a great list for all sorts of different reasons. A great mirror.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
On Nov 27, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Rory Goff wrote: You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? Do I? Don't stop your klesha-dance on my behalf.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
On Nov 27, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Rory Goff wrote: You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do I? Don't stop your klesha-dance on my behalf. Nice ambiguity. Do you mean dance *of* the kleshas or dance *on* the kleshas, or is there a difference? Are you implying that those are the only two choices, quiet or kleshas? If there is a third choice, how would you know it?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
On Nov 27, 2007, at 7:05 PM, Rory Goff wrote: On Nov 27, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Rory Goff wrote: You want us all to keep quiet, to not rock the boat? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do I? Don't stop your klesha-dance on my behalf. Nice ambiguity. Do you mean dance *of* the kleshas or dance *on* the kleshas, or is there a difference? Are you implying that those are the only two choices, quiet or kleshas? If there is a third choice, how would you know it? If you're really cogitating that much, I'd recommend ice-packs to the skull and call me in the morning. Eat meat and potatoes in heavy gravy now or on arising.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you're really cogitating that much, I'd recommend ice-packs to the skull and call me in the morning. Eat meat and potatoes in heavy gravy now or on arising. Me? No. I just liked your term klesha-dance and was open to hearing more of your backstory.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: If you're really cogitating that much, I'd recommend ice-packs to the skull and call me in the morning. Eat meat and potatoes in heavy gravy now or on arising. Me? No. I just liked your term klesha-dance and was open to hearing more of your backstory. JOOC, have you ever used ice-packs to the skull and eaten meat and potatoes in heavy gravy to keep yourself from thinking too much? What would have happened if you had let the thinking run its course, I wonder?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: If you're really cogitating that much, I'd recommend ice-packs to the skull and call me in the morning. Eat meat and potatoes in heavy gravy now or on arising. Me? No. I just liked your term klesha-dance and was open to hearing more of your backstory. JOOC, have you ever used ice-packs to the skull and eaten meat and potatoes in heavy gravy to keep yourself from thinking too much? What would have happened if you had let the thinking run its course, I wonder? ... I suspect we might find that kleshas and quiet are concepts built of nothing -- but that believing in them serves nicely to keep the meaninglessness of Death away, and thus to keep one imprisoned by the Tyrannical Buddhi, but of course I could be Dead wrong.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: If you're really cogitating that much, I'd recommend ice- packs to the skull and call me in the morning. Eat meat and potatoes in heavy gravy now or on arising. Me? No. I just liked your term klesha-dance and was open to hearing more of your backstory. JOOC, have you ever used ice-packs to the skull and eaten meat and potatoes in heavy gravy to keep yourself from thinking too much? What would have happened if you had let the thinking run its course, I wonder? ... I suspect we might find that kleshas and quiet are concepts built of nothing -- but that believing in them serves nicely to keep the meaninglessness of Death away, and thus to keep one imprisoned by the Tyrannical Buddhi, but of course I could be Dead wrong. I had no clue what a klesha was until Vaj mentioned it-- go figure...and it turns out that the first one, from which all the others spring, is ignorance of our own nature, so Vaj mentioning the *dance* of the kleshas, necessarily is speaking of someone in ignorance. Once that first klesha is recognized and dealt with, the whole structure of the kleshas vanishes. So it sure looks like yet another distraction, another fable, another construction of identity theft to keep our true nature from emerging victorious.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Interesting stats
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ha! Just what I was thinking. I love how the flea sits on the elephant's rump, thinking it can control the elephant :-) It is the assumption of superiority that is drawing the fire, not that you are rocking anyone's boat. Bingo. It's not as if anything either of these guys says is provocative (or even that interesting). It's the assumption of how much more evolved and powerful and able to influence others that underlies everything they say. And the corollary, the assumption of how much lower than they are everyone else is. And what else could you expect? That is what they have been trained by Maharishi to think of as the state of enlightenment. That is certainly how *he* has acted, all the years we've known him. These guys are just moodmaking a set of behavior patterns that they've been taught. It's fascinating to me and, I would suspect, to Vaj and Bharitu and others who have seen and been exposed to *other* models for what enlightenment and what it is. These other models do NOT involve a sense of superiority; they do NOT involve delusions of all-powerfulness, or even the conviction that they can fix other people by shining their grace on them. The 'tudes we see in Jim and Rory are *Maharishi's* 'tudes; the delusions we see in them are *his* delusions. Jim and Rory are just acting out bratty and self-important behavior that they've seen modeled for them for decades.
