[FairfieldLife] RE: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Nice photos of Fair Field, Iowa http://www.beingandseeing.com/ http://www.beingandseeing.com/ Fairfield Come, humble sinner, in whose breast A thousand thoughts revolve. Come with your guilt and fear oppressed, And make this last resolve. I'll go to the Domes , though my sin Hath like a mountain rose; I know its ways, I'll enter in, Whatever may oppose. I can but perish if I don't go, I am resolved to try, For if I stay away I know I must forever die. Fairfield: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLJepRUYYE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLJepRUYYE
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Thanks, Buck, these are wonderful too. I didn't realize how many good photographers we have in FF. I've always thought the midwest has its own kind of beauty. Sure, the coasts have beautiful sunrises on the ocean and the west has the snow clad Rockies. But all that land stretching out in all directions also has something that touches the heart and soul. On Thursday, December 12, 2013 6:04 AM, dhamiltony...@yahoo.com dhamiltony...@yahoo.com wrote: Nice photos of Fair Field, Iowa http://www.beingandseeing.com/ Fairfield Come, humble sinner, in whose breast A thousand thoughts revolve. Come with your guilt and fear oppressed, And make this last resolve. I'll go to the Domes , though my sin Hath like a mountain rose; I know its ways, I'll enter in, Whatever may oppose. I can but perish if I don't go, I am resolved to try, For if I stay away I know I must forever die. Fairfield: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLJepRUYYE
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
I'm nobody! Who are you? I'm nobody! Who are you? Are you nobody, too? Then there's a pair of us -- don't tell! They'd banish -- you know! How dreary to be somebody! How public like a frog To tell one's name the livelong day To an admiring bog! Emily Dickinson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Wolf Baiter sez: Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? Great synopsis of one of Buddhism’s essential point. However, you forgot the other important point. Yer supposed to feel sorry for all the schizoids wanting to protect that nothing who falsely believe they are something. So, feel sorry and start calling your“self” … Mz. Nothing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill wrote: Wolf Baiter sez: Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? Great synopsis of one of Buddhism's essential points. However, you forgot the other important point. Yer supposed to feel sorry for all the schizoids wanting to protect that nothing who falsely believe they are something. So, feel sorry and start calling yourself Mz. Nothing. Excellent point, Empty. And exactly why it's so difficult for me to find anything worth reading or replying to on FFL any more. Because of a few out-of-control ego-selves (who don't exist), the place has degenerated into non-stop arguments between selves (who don't exist) arguing with other selves (who don't exist). I mean, how pathetic does a self (who doesn't exist) have to BE to get their panties (which probably don't exist, because who would wear them?) in a twist over something that another self (who doesn't exist) said about their self (who doesn't exist)? Much less turn all of this into vendettas and grudges in which a self (who doesn't exist) gets SO panty-twisted that they start to STALK other selves (who don't exist), all because one or more of them said something in cyberspace (which probably doesn't exist) about their self (who doesn't exist) that they (again, non-existent) don't like or don't agree with. It's a major clusterfuck of ego-nonsense. One that is becoming easier to deal with every day by just treating these panty-twisted selves (who don't exist) as if they REALLY don't exist. It's not an insult or an affront. In a way, it's a kind of Buddhist favor, all dripping with compassion. :-) I'm treating you (who don't exist) AS IF you don't exist because I'm trying to remind you (who don't exist) that you really don't. If you realized that and just lightened up, you'd be a lot happier (even though 'you' don't really exist). And besides, your panties would fit better. :-) :-) :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote: Wolf Baiter sez: Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? Great synopsis of one of Buddhism’s essential point. However, you forgot the other important point. Yer supposed to feel sorry for all the schizoids wanting to protect that nothing who falsely believe they are something. So, feel sorry and start calling your“self” … Mz. Nothing. Wolf Baiter said no such thing. That was Xeno who said that. You'd never hear/see something like that come out of my mouth or off my computer screen. See response of mine to what he wrote here: Dear Xeno, this is as real as it gets. You need to take the bull by its proverbial horns and go for a RIDE man. Stop pussyfooting around and pretending it is all make-believe, that life is a row, row, row your boat. You are in the middle of something big and something powerful and yet you stand by the wayside and think it all has nothing to do with you, that there isn't real red pulsating blood in them thar veins. But there is and you can pretend all you like that concrete isn't hard and rain isn't wet but you're missing the chance to ride in the last car of the roller coaster when you live in your head like you do. I'd love to spend a day with you, but bring your galoshes and thermos of hot chocolate.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Ann--- ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? Dear Xeno, this is as real as it gets. You need to take the bull by its proverbial horns and go for a RIDE man. Stop pussyfooting around and pretending it is all make-believe, that life is a row, row, row your boat. You are in the middle of something big and something powerful and yet you stand by the wayside and think it all has nothing to do with you, that there isn't real red pulsating blood in them thar veins. But there is and you can pretend all you like that concrete isn't hard and rain isn't wet but you're missing the chance to ride in the last car of the roller coaster when you live in your head like you do. I'd love to spend a day with you, but bring your galoshes and thermos of hot chocolate. You are misinterpreting what I am saying. I never imply that concrete is not hard, that there is no such thing as physical pain. It's snowing here now, it is cold. I made hot chocolate last night. The illusion, if you will, is not these experiences, it is how the mind interprets them. It is kind of a graduated thing, the further you get from concrete experience and into the more abstract realms the mind is capable of thinking, the less likely those thoughts are really useful for anything unless there is a way to correlate those thoughts with experience (this is how scientists are supposed to proceed). Now thoughts get very abstract when talking about consciousness and all this spiritual stuff. They mean nothing without the underlying experience to flesh them out, and in fact they are, in relation to experience, essentially untrue. Most of the psychological suffering people experience has to do with ideas in the head about their life - who they think they are and what life is supposed to be - ideas that are basically false. It is quite a project to undo these ideas; that project is typically called 'the path of enlightenment' wherein one examines one's experience from various perspectives (using such devices as meditation, etc.) until a point is reached where those false ideas fall away. I was in New York City the other day, basically to look at a painting by Vermeer - 'The Girl with the Pearl Earring' - which is temporarily on loan from Europe. A beautiful, not very large, but soft portrait of a young woman, considered one of the great paintings of all time. There were also some paintings by Rembrandt. Walking back at night to Grand Central Terminal, I was on 48th Street and happened to pass by the Fox News Channel headquarters. The red news banner was proclaiming that Nelson Mandela had died. His name was not visible, but from the text it was unmistakable that they were writing about Mandela in the past tense. Now there is someone who experienced an incredible life. Experience has everything to do with everything. You are mistaking what I say to mean I am detached. Everything in this world is intimately connected. Everything about this world is about the world as a whole. The mistake people make is thinking the world is about an individual 'them' being in the world. The idea of a personal 'self' is a fiction. It seems real enough until you get far enough along on a spiritual path, and then you discover it is not about you, it is all about the world as a whole and that interpretation of 'your' experience that makes it seem as if you are a separate thing apart from the world is just a misinterpretation. The whole world is pure existence in all its hard, gritty glory, it is pure experience through and through. There is happiness, sadness, elation, depression, comfort and pain, but it is not happening to anyone, it is just happening. For brevity and convenience, we say 'it is happening to me' but if we believe this, we are lost. But to unbelieve it requires something much more than denial of the belief, or a pretense of detachment, it requires dismantling of the human ego, and that is a rocky trip indeed. The world is all about the world in all its variety and that includes the body and
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill wrote: Wolf Baiter sez: Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? Great synopsis of one of Buddhism's essential points. However, you forgot the other important point. Yer supposed to feel sorry for all the schizoids wanting to protect that nothing who falsely believe they are something. So, feel sorry and start calling yourself Mz. Nothing. Excellent point, Empty. And exactly why it's so difficult for me to find anything worth reading or replying to on FFL any more. Because of a few out-of-control ego-selves (who don't exist), the place has degenerated into non-stop arguments between selves (who don't exist) arguing with other selves (who don't exist). I mean, how pathetic does a self (who doesn't exist) have to BE to get their panties (which probably don't exist, because who would wear them?) in a twist over something that another self (who doesn't exist) said about their self (who doesn't exist)? Much less turn all of this into vendettas and grudges in which a self (who doesn't exist) gets SO panty-twisted that they start to STALK other selves (who don't exist), all because one or more of them said something in cyberspace (which probably doesn't exist) about their self (who doesn't exist) that they (again, non-existent) don't like or don't agree with. It's a major clusterfuck of ego-nonsense. One that is becoming easier to deal with every day by just treating these panty-twisted selves (who don't exist) as if they REALLY don't exist. It's not an insult or an affront. In a way, it's a kind of Buddhist favor, all dripping with compassion. :-) I'm treating you (who don't exist) AS IF you don't exist because I'm trying to remind you (who don't exist) that you really don't. If you realized that and just lightened up, you'd be a lot happier (even though 'you' don't really exist). And besides, your panties would fit better. :-) :-) :-) Silly, silly man Barry. Get the quotes right, get the writers sorted out on who wrote what before you start spewing your usual drek that seems to go on and on and on and on and on...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * *Richard wrote:* The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
You're sounding JELLOS, but I am retired now, so I do have lot's of time on my hands. I can always depend on your to respond, but are you retired too? On 12/9/2013 8:30 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: This is a man who has far too much free time on his hands.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Barry always describes negative situations, with which he is intimately evolved, and often a causal partner, as if he is observing them from a distance. I think its called hypocrisy.:-) :-) :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
But wait a minute, Richard! Way over on that other thread Time Doesn't Exist..., they concluded that time is an illusion! Signed, the other retired non self on FFL (-:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Well Ann, I didn't make up the rules around here and I didn't start this thread either. But, I did post this from my home office and I used my real name, so it looks like I'm guilty on all charges. The only difference is, I don't charge anything for offering my opinions like a professional editor would be doing. LoL! But, I have been picked on a lot by Judy, for no apparent reason that I can tell. If she thinks I told an untruth, why won't she just point it out so we can all read it and decide for ourselves? It's one thing to post slander, but why does Judy have to be a hypocrite as well? Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:37 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let's get serious. So, why would anybody care if anyone else is posting from home; or from their living room; or from their kitchen; or from a cafe in Paris, FR; or from a Dairy Queen in Paris, TX; or even posting from a parking lot on a cell phone Walmart in Deadwood, SD? Now, I can understand why someone might get defensive if anyone found out they were posting to a chat room from their place of employ; or if you're charging clients by the hour and posting from your home office when you should be doing work. That's some serious posting! But, if you're getting paid by the piece, it should be no problem - lot's of people are able to multi-task all day and all night and make an honest living and send posts at all hours. The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious! As serious as it gets Ricky. I, for one, will distribute the mandatory pitchforks, you can organize the burning torches. BTW, were you picked on as a kid and now use FFL as a way to get back at the world for having allowed yourself to have been tortured to death as a child by some aberrant neighbor or older sibling? You certainly seem like a guy with a rather large, shall we say, chip on their shoulder. I first noticed it with MJ.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares if you care what Share cares about. NOBODY. On 12/9/2013 8:44 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. /*I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) */
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Richard, Ann was talking about Sweet Share (-: On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:57 AM, Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares if you care what Share cares about. NOBODY. On 12/9/2013 8:44 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares if you care what Share cares about. NOBODY. I just thought it was funny, that's all. The crazy old coot does this all the time -- claim that she *could* document something to prove how RIGHT she is and how WRONG (or LYING) someone else is -- but never has any intention of actually doing it. So I figured I'd take advantage of her blanket offer to see if she'd actually be able to come up with the detailed refutation she claimed to be able to write. As I suspected, she wasn't. It was just more lame-o He's lying bullshit. More people should call her on this crap. Then as she floundered around trying to get her own petard out of her ass, *perhaps* there might be something about her interesting enough to at least laugh at. :-) On 12/9/2013 8:44 PM, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@ wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. /*I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) */
[FairfieldLife] RE: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares if you care what Share cares about. NOBODY. I just thought it was funny, that's all. The crazy old coot does this all the time -- claim that she *could* document something to prove how RIGHT she is and how WRONG (or LYING) someone else is -- but never has any intention of actually doing it. So I figured I'd take advantage of her blanket offer to see if she'd actually be able to come up with the detailed refutation she claimed to be able to write. As I suspected, she wasn't. It was just more lame-o He's lying bullshit. The really funny thing is, Bawwy, that no one has to prove anything with regard to your bullshit, lying and otherwise mean-spiritedness because you continue to give us concrete examples of this every waking moment. FFL is full of it and as long as you continue to find it fun and exciting and fulfilling to be here it will continue to be full of it. More people should call her on this crap. Then as she floundered around trying to get her own petard out of her ass, *perhaps* there might be something about her interesting enough to at least laugh at. :-) On 12/9/2013 8:44 PM, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@ wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. /*I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) */
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Interesting, but not at all unexpected. After I'd refuted Richard's accusation that I had fibbed, with documentation, I asked explicitly if anyone could still detect any fibs. Barry couldn't, of course, because there weren't any (duh). I had done exactly what I had promised to do. So there's Barry, hoist on his own petard, with egg dripping down his face, as usual. And as usual, he simply tells his own fibs and pretends his hopeful fantasy was the reality. Offer is still open, for anybody, including Barry (but not including Richard or Xeno) to find any fibs either in what I had said originally or in my refutation. But you need to specify what the purported fibs are rather than just declare you found some. While I'm at it, another REEELY STOPID fib Barry tells in the post I'm commenting on is that I claim to be able to document what I say but never do. Anyone who actually reads my posts knows that I do it frequently, most recently with Share (and not the only time I've done it with her either), and countless times with Barry. Neither of them is capable of admitting they've been caught telling falsehoods. Another offer: Anyone (except Richard and Xeno, but including Barry) who wants to go back to any of Richard's previous (or subsequent) posts that I've responded to with the macro I started using awhile back and demand to see the refutations I promised is welcome to do so. This current one wasn't all that detailed because Richard's fibs weren't that detailed. I use the macro because it's not possible to rationally engage with Richard, as many folks here have discovered. He isn't interested in rational engagement, only in trolling, and in extending an initial troll for as long as he can possibly keep it going. The only way to deal with him is simply to refuse to play his game and make him play it with himself. Barry fibbed:. I just thought it was funny, that's all. The crazy old coot does this all the time -- claim that she *could* document something to prove how RIGHT she is and how WRONG (or LYING) someone else is -- but never has any intention of actually doing it. So I figured I'd take advantage of her blanket offer to see if she'd actually be able to come up with the detailed refutation she claimed to be able to write. As I suspected, she wasn't. It was just more lame-o He's lying bullshit. More people should call her on this crap. Then as she floundered around trying to get her own petard out of her ass, *perhaps* there might be something about her interesting enough to at least laugh at. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Ann, I have a hunch that by Wolf Baiter, empty isn't referring to you but to Xeno, who baited you. I.e., you da wolf, Xeno da baiter. empty wrote: Wolf Baiter sez:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Well Ann, I didn't make up the rules around here and I didn't start this thread either. But, I did post this from my home office and I used my real name, so it looks like I'm guilty on all charges. The only difference is, I don't charge anything for offering my opinions like a professional editor would be doing. LoL! But, I have been picked on a lot by Judy, for no apparent reason that I can tell. If she thinks I told an untruth, why won't she just point it out so we can all read it and decide for ourselves? It's one thing to post slander, but why does Judy have to be a hypocrite as well? Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Dear Sharry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbOqu079hyg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbOqu079hyg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Maybe I missed the documentation of how Judy created a macro in Neo, but it's not important - what is interesting is Judy's statement below, which contradicts her previous statement, that the TM mantras are not the names of the personal gods. If Judy refuted her own statement, can someone post it here so we can all read it. Thanks. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 10:43 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Interesting, but not at all unexpected. After I'd refuted Richard's accusation that I had fibbed, with documentation, I asked explicitly if anyone could still detect any fibs. Barry couldn't, of course, because there weren't any (duh). I had done exactly what I had promised to do. So there's Barry, hoist on his own petard, with egg dripping down his face, as usual. And as usual, he simply tells his own fibs and pretends his hopeful fantasy was the reality. Offer is still open, for anybody, including Barry (but not including Richard or Xeno) to find any fibs either in what I had said originally or in my refutation. But you need to specify what the purported fibs are rather than just declare you found some. While I'm at it, another REEELY STOPID fib Barry tells in the post I'm commenting on is that I claim to be able to document what I say but never do. Anyone who actually reads my posts knows that I do it frequently, most recently with Share (and not the only time I've done it with her either), and countless times with Barry. Neither of them is capable of admitting they've been caught telling falsehoods. Another offer: Anyone (except Richard and Xeno, but including Barry) who wants to go back to any of Richard's previous (or subsequent) posts that I've responded to with the macro I started using awhile back and demand to see the refutations I promised is welcome to do so. This current one wasn't all that detailed because Richard's fibs weren't that detailed. I use the macro because it's not possible to rationally engage with Richard, as many folks here have discovered. He isn't interested in rational engagement, only in trolling, and in extending an initial troll for as long as he can possibly keep it going. The only way to deal with him is simply to refuse to play his game and make him play it with himself. Barry fibbed:. */I just thought it was funny, that's all. The crazy old coot does this all the time -- claim that she *could* document something to prove how RIGHT she is and how WRONG (or LYING) someone else is -- but never has any intention of actually doing it. So I figured I'd take advantage of her blanket offer to see if she'd actually be able to come up with the detailed refutation she claimed to be able to write. As I suspected, she wasn't. It was just more lame-o He's lying bullshit. /* */ More people should call her on this crap. Then as she floundered around trying to get her own petard out of her ass, *perhaps* there might be something about her interesting enough to at least laugh at. :-) /*
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
It sure looks like you're posting as authfriend and it looks like your email address is authfriend. But I could be mistaken. Are you still The Author's Friend or not? Seriously - it's not a trick question! On 12/10/2013 10:45 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * * Richard trolled:* Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * *Richard wrote:* The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Now this is funny - somebody that posts as empty, is nobody, and gets a reply from nobody, and an authfriend, who is a professional editor, replies to nobody. Go figure. n 12/10/2013 10:55 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: Ann, I have a hunch that by Wolf Baiter, empty isn't referring to you but to Xeno, who baited you. I.e., you da wolf, Xeno da baiter. empty wrote: Wolf Baiter sez:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. P.S.: Anyone with two synapses to rub together should be able to figure out Richard's fib here, even if they didn't read my refutation. Richard trolled: Maybe I missed the documentation of how Judy created a macro in Neo, but it's not important - what is interesting is Judy's statement below, which contradicts her previous statement, that the TM mantras are not the names of the personal gods. If Judy refuted her own statement, can someone post it here so we can all read it. Thanks. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 10:43 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: Interesting, but not at all unexpected. After I'd refuted Richard's accusation that I had fibbed, with documentation, I asked explicitly if anyone could still detect any fibs. Barry couldn't, of course, because there weren't any (duh). I had done exactly what I had promised to do. So there's Barry, hoist on his own petard, with egg dripping down his face, as usual. And as usual, he simply tells his own fibs and pretends his hopeful fantasy was the reality. Offer is still open, for anybody, including Barry (but not including Richard or Xeno) to find any fibs either in what I had said originally or in my refutation. But you need to specify what the purported fibs are rather than just declare you found some. While I'm at it, another REEELY STOPID fib Barry tells in the post I'm commenting on is that I claim to be able to document what I say but never do. Anyone who actually reads my posts knows that I do it frequently, most recently with Share (and not the only time I've done it with her either), and countless times with Barry. Neither of them is capable of admitting they've been caught telling falsehoods. Another offer: Anyone (except Richard and Xeno, but including Barry) who wants to go back to any of Richard's previous (or subsequent) posts that I've responded to with the macro I started using awhile back and demand to see the refutations I promised is welcome to do so. This current one wasn't all that detailed because Richard's fibs weren't that detailed. I use the macro because it's not possible to rationally engage with Richard, as many folks here have discovered. He isn't interested in rational engagement, only in trolling, and in extending an initial troll for as long as he can possibly keep it going. The only way to deal with him is simply to refuse to play his game and make him play it with himself. Barry fibbed:. I just thought it was funny, that's all. The crazy old coot does this all the time -- claim that she *could* document something to prove how RIGHT she is and how WRONG (or LYING) someone else is -- but never has any intention of actually doing it. So I figured I'd take advantage of her blanket offer to see if she'd actually be able to come up with the detailed refutation she claimed to be able to write. As I suspected, she wasn't. It was just more lame-o He's lying bullshit. More people should call her on this crap. Then as she floundered around trying to get her own petard out of her ass, *perhaps* there might be something about her interesting enough to at least laugh at. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: It sure looks like you're posting as authfriend and it looks like your email address is authfriend. But I could be mistaken. Are you still The Author's Friend or not? Seriously - it's not a trick question! On 12/10/2013 10:45 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
It's true - I've been picked on by Judy for about ten years. I'm not making this up. Nobody would dispute this except Judy. It used to kind of hurt my feelings because I've posted thousands of on-topic message on the internet mostly about spiritual paths since 1999. But, I don't take it personal anymore since it's obvious that Judy is just mean and ornery to almost everyone. Why, I don't know. But, now it's kind of fun to poke fun at her because she takes everything so seriously. Go figure. On 12/10/2013 10:56 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: . *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know.* * * *Richard trolled:* Well Ann, I didn't make up the rules around here and I didn't start this thread either. But, I did post this from my home office and I used my real name, so it looks like I'm guilty on all charges. The only difference is, I don't charge anything for offering my opinions like a professional editor would be doing. LoL! But, I have been picked on a lot by Judy, for no apparent reason that I can tell. If she thinks I told an untruth, why won't she just point it out so we can all read it and decide for ourselves? It's one thing to post slander, but why does Judy have to be a hypocrite as well? Go figure.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
It really doesn't matter what your handle is or what your email address is, because you posted a fib, and it's not very difficult to tell when you're trying to weasel out of it. You either posted the message below or you did not. If you did, it contradicts what you previously posted about the TM mantras NOT being the names of the personal gods. And, that's not even counting how many times you've posted comments about the technique. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 1:38 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know.* *Richard trolled: * It sure looks like you're posting as authfriend and it looks like your email address is authfriend. But I could be mistaken. Are you still The Author's Friend or not? Seriously - it's not a trick question! On 12/10/2013 10:45 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * * Richard trolled:* Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * *Richard wrote:* The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: It really doesn't matter what your handle is or what your email address is, because you posted a fib, and it's not very difficult to tell when you're trying to weasel out of it. You either posted the message below or you did not. If you did, it contradicts what you previously posted about the TM mantras NOT being the names of the personal gods. And, that's not even counting how many times you've posted comments about the technique. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 1:38 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: It sure looks like you're posting as authfriend and it looks like your email address is authfriend. But I could be mistaken. Are you still The Author's Friend or not? Seriously - it's not a trick question! On 12/10/2013 10:45 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
So, I guess it's settled now - Judy posted a fib and now everyone knows it. Serves her right for trying to be so high and mighty and attempting to teach us all about TM and what MMY meant about the names of the personal gods, which fetch to us all the grace. Judy thinks she knows more about TM than MMY himself. Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 1:38 PM On 12/10/2013 2:25 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know.* * * *Richard trolled:* * * It really doesn't matter what your handle is or what your email address is, because you posted a fib, and it's not very difficult to tell when you're trying to weasel out of it. You either posted the message below or you did not. If you did, it contradicts what you previously posted about the TM mantras NOT being the names of the personal gods. And, that's not even counting how many times you've posted comments about the technique. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 1:38 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know.* *Richard trolled: * It sure looks like you're posting as authfriend and it looks like your email address is authfriend. But I could be mistaken. Are you still The Author's Friend or not? Seriously - it's not a trick question! On 12/10/2013 10:45 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * * Richard trolled:* Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: *This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. * *Richard wrote:* The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Ann, I have a hunch that by Wolf Baiter, empty isn't referring to you but to Xeno, who baited you. I.e., you da wolf, Xeno da baiter. He always calls me that so I am not so sure he meant it the way you describe here, but your analysis is a good one. empty wrote: Wolf Baiter sez:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: So, I guess it's settled now - Judy posted a fib and now everyone knows it. Serves her right for trying to be so high and mighty and attempting to teach us all about TM and what MMY meant about the names of the personal gods, which fetch to us all the grace. Judy thinks she knows more about TM than MMY himself. Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 1:38 PM On 12/10/2013 2:25 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: It really doesn't matter what your handle is or what your email address is, because you posted a fib, and it's not very difficult to tell when you're trying to weasel out of it. You either posted the message below or you did not. If you did, it contradicts what you previously posted about the TM mantras NOT being the names of the personal gods. And, that's not even counting how many times you've posted comments about the technique. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/10/2013 1:38 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: It sure looks like you're posting as authfriend and it looks like your email address is authfriend. But I could be mistaken. Are you still The Author's Friend or not? Seriously - it's not a trick question! On 12/10/2013 10:45 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Well, it sure looks like you're posting as the author's friend, but it's hard to tell by the way you spelled your it, authfriend. The problem isn't so much what the respondents here think about your handle and your email address - it's what your clients think about it when they find out you're posting here at all. Go figure. On 12/9/2013 8:09 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Judy, sound like a constipated Inquisition judge all you want... Or at the very least, throw in a dance number from time to time to lighten things up... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbcyiFt5VEs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbcyiFt5VEs On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed: Wow, Buck, what a great rousing hymn to begin the week with, thanks for posting. On Monday, December 9, 2013 6:34 AM, dhamiltony2k5@ dhamiltony2k5@ wrote: Fairfield Come, humble sinner, in whose breast A thousand thoughts revolve. Come with your guilt and fear oppressed, And make this last resolve. I'll go to the Domes , though my sin Hath like a mountain rose; I know its ways, I'll enter in, Whatever may oppose. I can but perish if I don't go, I am resolved to try, For if I stay away I know I must forever die. Fairfield: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLJepRUYYE
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Judy, sound like a constipated Inquisition judge all you want... Or at the very least, throw in a dance number from time to time to lighten things up... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbcyiFt5VEs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbcyiFt5VEs
[FairfieldLife] RE: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Nice altered hymn Buck, but you are turning people away from Jesus, as the original, with words by Edmund Jones, intended. Of course these days, most people do not get what Jesus was about. Here is an interesting article on the M effect and science, and it gives a very different spin on this subject: http://www.geoffgilpin.com/pdfs/Quantum-Failure.pdf http://www.geoffgilpin.com/pdfs/Quantum-Failure.pdf A quote from this paper: 'When the TM movement comes up with solid evidence for the Maharishi Effect, they will have the faculty of every physics department in the world knocking at their door. Until then, they will continue to be ignored, which is just as it should be.' Buck's hymn, the original: Come, humble sinner, in whose breast, A thousand thoughts revolve, Come, with your guilt and fear oppressed, And make this last resolve. I’ll go to Jesus, though my sin Like mountains round me close; I know His courts, I’ll enter in, Whatever may oppose. Prostrate I’ll lie before His throne, And there my guilt confess, I’ll tell Him, I’m a wretch undone, Without His sovereign grace. I’ll to the gracious King approach, Whose scepter pardon gives; Perhaps he command my touch, And then the suppliant lives. Perhaps He will admit my plea, Perhaps will hear my prayer; But, if I perish, I will pray, And perish only there. I can but perish if I go; I am resolved to try; But if I stay away, I know I must forever die. But, if I die with mercy sought, When I the King have tried, This were to die (delightful thought!) As sinner never died. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: Fairfield Come, humble sinner, in whose breast A thousand thoughts revolve. Come with your guilt and fear oppressed, And make this last resolve. I'll go to the Domes , though my sin Hath like a mountain rose; I know its ways, I'll enter in, Whatever may oppose. I can but perish if I don't go, I am resolved to try, For if I stay away I know I must forever die. Fairfield: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLJepRUYYE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXLJepRUYYE
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/9/2013 8:36 AM, authfriend@ This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Maybe Share is waiting for you to admit you told a fib about the TM mantras being the names of the Hindu personal gods. On 12/9/2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@ Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed: Wow, Buck, what a great rousing hymn to begin the week with, thanks for posting.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Me too, turq. Except I probably wouldn't take Judy's detailed refutation seriously enough for her! On Monday, December 9, 2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/9/2013 8:36 AM, authfriend@ This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Maybe Share is waiting for you to admit you told a fib about the TM mantras being the names of the Hindu personal gods. On 12/9/2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@ Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed: Wow, Buck, what a great rousing hymn to begin the week with, thanks for posting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
I don't believe for a second, Barry, that you take Richard seriously. Rather, you take me VERY seriously, and you're continuing to stalk me. So I really shouldn't accede to your request. But it's so laughably simple, I will. (Oh, by the way, you failed Emily's test miserably. You were unable to hold off stalking me for even two weeks--it's been only four days.) Here's Richard's original troll: Yogi Bhajan says that Kundalini energy is technically explained as being sparked during yogic breathing when prana and apana blends at the 3rd chakra (naval center) at which point it initially drops down to the 1st and 2nd chakras before traveling up to the spine to the higher centers of the brain to activate the golden cord - the connection between the pituitary and pineal glands - and penetrate the 7 chakras. However, this technique was denigrated by Judy in a somewhat inane post denying that MMY bijas were the nicknames of the Istadevatas. Go figure. Richard never was able to document his claim that I denigrated the technique he describes. I don't know anything about the technique, had never heard of it, would have had no reason to denigrate it. Nor has he come up with any documentation that I denied that MMY bijas were the nicknames of the Istadevatas. I don't know (as I said in the quote he keeps posting) what nicknames might even mean in this context. But the bijas are not, as I said in the other quote Richard keeps posting, the names of the personal gods; they have perfectly good names of their own (Lakshmi, Saraswati, etc.). Maharishi said in Beacon Light that the bijas are the mantras of personal gods, not the names of personal gods. For reference, here are the two quotes from my posts as Richard has posted them: ...the TM mantras are *not* the names of the Hindu gods. The Hindu gods have perfectly good names of their own. And: Richard is lying. I never said anything about 'the technique,' whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't 'nicknames' of the deities (whatever 'nicknames' means in this context). Any questions? Anybody see any lies or fibs (except from Richard)? Feeling a little silly, Barry? After all that huffing and puffing? BTW, Barry, just for the recordI, failing to keep a promise does not make the promise a lie unless it can be shown that the person who made it never intended to keep it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
You didn't think your opinion carried any weight one way or the other, did you, Share? Share inspidated: Me too, turq. Except I probably wouldn't take Judy's detailed refutation seriously enough for her! On Monday, December 9, 2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
And BTW, you didn't answer my questions. Here, I'll repeat them for your convenience: If you are now, finally, willing to admit that I did qualify the statements in that post, why did you whine to Barry that I had not done so? Even right down to denying I'd said the very words I did, in fact, say? What the hell were you thinking, and why has it taken you so long to acknowledge those falsehoods? Why have you been dancing all around your misdeeds, and even trying to blame me for them? You didn't think your opinion carried any weight one way or the other, did you, Share? Share insipidated: Me too, turq. Except I probably wouldn't take Judy's detailed refutation seriously enough for her! On Monday, December 9, 2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. /*I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) */ On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/9/2013 8:36 AM, authfriend@ This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Maybe Share is waiting for you to admit you told a fib about the TM mantras being the names of the Hindu personal gods. On 12/9/2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@ Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed: Wow, Buck, what a great rousing hymn to begin the week with, thanks for posting.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
Let's get serious. So, why would anybody care if anyone else is posting from home; or from their living room; or from their kitchen; or from a cafe in Paris, FR; or from a Dairy Queen in Paris, TX; or even posting from a parking lot on a cell phone Walmart in Deadwood, SD? Now, I can understand why someone might get defensive if anyone found out they were posting to a chat room from their place of employ; or if you're charging clients by the hour and posting from your home office when you should be doing work. That's some serious posting! But, if you're getting paid by the piece, it should be no problem - lot's of people are able to multi-task all day and all night and make an honest living and send posts at all hours. The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious! On 12/9/2013 4:20 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: I don't believe for a second, Barry, that you take Richard seriously. Rather, you take me VERY seriously, and you're continuing to stalk me. So I really shouldn't accede to your request. But it's so laughably simple, I will. (Oh, by the way, you failed Emily's test miserably. You were unable to hold off stalking me for even two weeks--it's been only four days.) Here's Richard's original troll: Yogi Bhajan says that Kundalini energy is technically explained as being sparked during yogic breathing when prana and apana blends at the 3rd chakra (naval center) at which point it initially drops down to the 1stand 2nd chakras before traveling up to the spine to the higher centers of the brain to activate the golden cord - the connection between the pituitary and pineal glands - and penetrate the 7 chakras. However, this technique was denigrated by Judy in a somewhat inane post denying that MMY bijas were the nicknames of the Istadevatas. Go figure. Richard never was able to document his claim that I denigrated the technique he describes. I don't know anything about the technique, had never heard of it, would have had no reason to denigrate it. Nor has he come up with any documentation that I denied that MMY bijas were the nicknames of the Istadevatas. I don't know (as I said in the quote he keeps posting) what nicknames might even mean in this context. But the bijas are not, as I said in the other quote Richard keeps posting, the names of the personal gods; they have perfectly good names of their own (Lakshmi, Saraswati, etc.). Maharishi said in Beacon Light that the bijas are the mantras of personal gods, not the names of personal gods. For reference, here are the two quotes from my posts as Richard has posted them: ...the TM mantras are *not* the names of the Hindu gods. The Hindu gods have perfectly good names of their own. And: Richard is lying. I never said anything about 'the technique,' whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't 'nicknames' of the deities (whatever 'nicknames' means in this context). Any questions? Anybody see any lies or fibs (except from Richard)? Feeling a little silly, Barry? After all that huffing and puffing? BTW, Barry, just for the recordI, failing to keep a promise does not make the promise a lie unless it can be shown that the person who made it never intended to keep it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. /*I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) */ On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Poor Richard. One minute he's expounding on the quinoa salad, the next he is telling us about his wardrobe which usually includes sweat pants and sneakers, in the next moment we are receiving travelogue photos of buildings in strip malls, then we are barraged with his never-ending let's-keep-harping-on-some-subject-because-I-just-love-to-be-repetitively-annoying act. This is a man who has far too much free time on his hands. But Share really enjoys his posts and we all really appreciate Share's posts for their depth and profundity too. Now what I would really have enjoyed seeing is Share's analysis of your interaction with Bob last night re: the Pinter piece. Richard wrote: The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let's get serious. So, why would anybody care if anyone else is posting from home; or from their living room; or from their kitchen; or from a cafe in Paris, FR; or from a Dairy Queen in Paris, TX; or even posting from a parking lot on a cell phone Walmart in Deadwood, SD? Now, I can understand why someone might get defensive if anyone found out they were posting to a chat room from their place of employ; or if you're charging clients by the hour and posting from your home office when you should be doing work. That's some serious posting! But, if you're getting paid by the piece, it should be no problem - lot's of people are able to multi-task all day and all night and make an honest living and send posts at all hours. The problem is posting to a chat room using your professional name as a handle and including your business email address in order to advertise your services. That's against the FFL rule about posting spam to the group. It's even worse if you're using someone else's business name. That's real serious! As serious as it gets Ricky. I, for one, will distribute the mandatory pitchforks, you can organize the burning torches. BTW, were you picked on as a kid and now use FFL as a way to get back at the world for having allowed yourself to have been tortured to death as a child by some aberrant neighbor or older sibling? You certainly seem like a guy with a rather large, shall we say, chip on their shoulder. I first noticed it with MJ. On 12/9/2013 4:20 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: I don't believe for a second, Barry, that you take Richard seriously. Rather, you take me VERY seriously, and you're continuing to stalk me. So I really shouldn't accede to your request. But it's so laughably simple, I will. (Oh, by the way, you failed Emily's test miserably. You were unable to hold off stalking me for even two weeks--it's been only four days.) Here's Richard's original troll: Yogi Bhajan says that Kundalini energy is technically explained as being sparked during yogic breathing when prana and apana blends at the 3rd chakra (naval center) at which point it initially drops down to the 1st and 2nd chakras before traveling up to the spine to the higher centers of the brain to activate the golden cord - the connection between the pituitary and pineal glands - and penetrate the 7 chakras. However, this technique was denigrated by Judy in a somewhat inane post denying that MMY bijas were the nicknames of the Istadevatas. Go figure. Richard never was able to document his claim that I denigrated the technique he describes. I don't know anything about the technique, had never heard of it, would have had no reason to denigrate it. Nor has he come up with any documentation that I denied that MMY bijas were the nicknames of the Istadevatas. I don't know (as I said in the quote he keeps posting) what nicknames might even mean in this context. But the bijas are not, as I said in the other quote Richard keeps posting, the names of the personal gods; they have perfectly good names of their own (Lakshmi, Saraswati, etc.). Maharishi said in Beacon Light that the bijas are the mantras of personal gods, not the names of personal gods. For reference, here are the two quotes from my posts as Richard has posted them: ...the TM mantras are *not* the names of the Hindu gods. The Hindu gods have perfectly good names of their own. And: Richard is lying. I never said anything about 'the technique,' whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't 'nicknames' of the deities (whatever 'nicknames' means in this context). Any questions? Anybody see any lies or fibs (except from Richard)? Feeling a little silly, Barry? After all that huffing and puffing? BTW, Barry, just for the recordI, failing to keep a promise does not make the promise a lie unless it can be shown that the person who made it never intended to keep it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/9/2013 8:36 AM, authfriend@ This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Maybe Share is waiting for you to admit you told a fib about the TM mantras being the names of the Hindu personal gods. On 12/9/2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@ Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed: Wow, Buck, what a great rousing hymn to begin the week with, thanks for posting.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/9/2013 8:36 AM, authfriend@ This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Maybe Share is waiting for you to admit you told a fib about the TM mantras being the names of the Hindu personal gods. On 12/9/2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@ Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed: Wow, Buck, what a great rousing hymn to begin the week with, thanks for posting.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Meditation Fairfield, Iowa
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote: Let me rephrase that: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and almost NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. Almost NOBODY. Can I just say this: NOBODY cares what you wore today. NOBODY cares what your face looked like today. NOBODY cares where you drove by during your mundane day, NOBODY. Oh, except Sweet Share. Perhaps Richard cares. But then you might be right. What are we? Suppose that in reality we are all NOBODY inside, that our personal life is but the stuff dreams are made of, a fiction created by mistaking our idea of ourselves for something that is real? Dear Xeno, this is as real as it gets. You need to take the bull by its proverbial horns and go for a RIDE man. Stop pussyfooting around and pretending it is all make-believe, that life is a row, row, row your boat. You are in the middle of something big and something powerful and yet you stand by the wayside and think it all has nothing to do with you, that there isn't real red pulsating blood in them thar veins. But there is and you can pretend all you like that concrete isn't hard and rain isn't wet but you're missing the chance to ride in the last car of the roller coaster when you live in your head like you do. I'd love to spend a day with you, but bring your galoshes and thermos of hot chocolate. On 12/9/2013 1:23 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams wrote: Let's make this real simple so everyone understands: NOBODY cares that you're working from home and NOBODY cares if you're posting here in between working for clients and NOBODY cares if you have any clients and NOBODY cares if you post anything or not. NOBODY. I dunno, Richard. I, for one, would love to see her come up with this detailed refuation she's been crowing about for so long. So, speaking in my capacity as someone other than Xeno who takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, I want one. Failure to produce one will prove Judy a liar, because she made that very offer just below. I expect exact quotes, URLs, and citations. Maybe even a bibliography and footnotes. :-) On 12/9/2013 12:51 PM, authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here (except Xeno) takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: Maybe Share is waiting to see if you'll explain NOT saying the bijas are the nicknames of the deities and why you're mixing working and posting to a discussion group at the same time. On 12/9/2013 11:08 AM, authfriend@ So you've made up your mind to die with the sin of bearing false witness (one of the Big Ten) on your soul? In your mind, that's preferable to confessing? (And as you know, sub specie aeternitatis has nothing to do with scolding, so that's yet more false witness.) Share did her phony innocent lightheartedness act: But Richard, you gotta give Judy points, or something, for scolding me in Latin!Google is my new best friend, along with eternity (-: On Monday, December 9, 2013 8:56 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@ This message has all the earmarks of you sitting at your computer in a home office posting replies whenever the ding goes off, alerting you that someone posted to FFL. So, which is it? Did you say the TM mantras are NOT the names of the personal gods; or did you NOT say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities? Go figure. Richard is lying. I never said anything about the technique, whatever it is, or was. Nor did I say the bijas weren't nicknames of the deities (whatever nicknames means in this context). From: authfriend Subject: OMG: madhuauudana definition of dhaaraNaa Forum: Yahoo! FairfiedLife Date: November 25, 2013 2:04 PM On 12/9/2013 8:36 AM, authfriend@ This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard trolled: Maybe Share is waiting for you to admit you told a fib about the TM mantras being the names of the Hindu personal gods. On 12/9/2013 8:03 AM, authfriend@ Do you think this last resolve for you, Share, will include confessing and repenting of the falsehoods you've told on FFL? Or are you just going to pretend they don't count, pretend they're only a matter of seeing things differently, and take a chance you'll get away with them sub specie aeternitatis? Share exclaimed:
