Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: Ann, I suggest you go back to how this topic began. Judy threw out the phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with reference to Robin. I said I thought those phrases were inaccurate given that Robin himself called his enlightenment a delusion. That is how this discussion began. I am not fighting with you Share. I was attempting to clarify something. It has become evident that this is a hot button topic for you - Robin I mean. Sorry, I didn't realize how deep this went. BTW I don't have TV hookup so I don't watch the Olympics, was in Vancouver during the 2010 games! Lucky you, but it sounds as if you didn't attend any of the events. You should have come and visited Vancouver Island. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 2:58 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, if Robin thinks that his experience of union with God was a delusion, then there is no validity to his saying that enlightenment defined as union with God is wrong because he did not have it! How could he know if it is right or wrong? Share, it would be best, if you really are interested in any of this, to go back and re-read what Robin himself actually wrote, God knows he said a lot in his time at FFL so you won't lack for reading material. Instead of using Judy as the translator look it up for yourself. That way you can decide on your own how you feel about what he said and you can take your time with it if you really want to. On another note, do you watch the Olympics and if so do you prefer the summer or winter version? What is your favorite winter sport event to watch? Favorite summer event? Strangely, I don't watch much TV let alone sports events but I do really enjoy the Olympics and also Wimbledon. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: We've had this discussion before, Share. Yes, it's inaccurate. Search your memory. And my beliefs, such as they may be, have nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion, so just drop that angle of attack, please. Judy, what your beliefs have to do with this discussion is that you're the person with whom I'm having the discussion! And I've gotten the impression that you're a devout Christian. Is that inaccurate? What does it mean that Robin said his union with God was a delusion? He said his experience of union with God was a delusion. Is this where the evil forces come in? I don't know what come in means in this context. My point is that Eastern traditions define enlightenment as union with God. But if Robin wasn't really united with God, then how can he validly comment on enlightenment?! Share, you're not making any sense at all. I can't respond to questions that are incoherent. I suggest you drop out of this discussion altogether. It's way over your head. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Yes, that's what it means. Me, I haven't a clue. (What do my beliefs have to do with this?) Yes, Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion. Judy, does ontological union mean: due to their respective natures, there can be no union between God and human? And do you also believe that there can be no ontological union between God and human? Another question: was Robin saying that he experienced union with God? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly, immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human beings and God. Judy, do you think Robin thinks ALL forms of realization, awakening, enlightenment, etc. in ALL traditions are a delusion? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 11:28 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Absolutely correct. He was insistent that enlightenment is a real state of consciousness, and that he was in this state for 10-plus years. What he says he came to realize is that the state itself is delusional--the experience of being one with God, the identification with Self rather than self, and so on, everything Maharishi describes, is a trick, a seduction engineered by dark forces that do not have the welfare of human beings at heart. It's all very real--including the special powers, the mastery of nature--but it leads away from God. And that, of course, is why he spent 25 years attempting--apparently successfully--to break the unholy spell and pull himself out of that state back into ordinary consciousness. He made these points over and over in his posts. How anyone could read those posts and come away with the notion that he was
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
No, that is most definitely not what I told Seraphita. I told her my family heritage was Presbyterian but that I did not have a religious upbringing. I also told her I was not a believer. So I'm wondering where you got the impression that I was a devout Christian. I remember another time when you thought I was a conservative Catholic because you had misread something someone else had said. I read Howatch's novels because my sister recommended them as good reads, not because of any religious affinity. And in any case, one more time, my beliefs have NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO, as Ann has explained to you so clearly, with this discussion about Robin. I know you were hoping to somehow use my religious beliefs in your continuing attempts to denigrate Robin, but you won't be doing that, sorry to disappoint. Ann, actually I think this is where you and Judy go off track! Judy once told Seraph that she was raised Presbyterian. Judy has mentioned reading the ecclesiastical novels of Susan Howatch. In light of the current topic of God human union, I wanted to know what Judy thought as well as what she thought Robin thought. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 2:33 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, what your beliefs have to do with this discussion is that you're the person with whom I'm having the discussion! Here is where Barry and you go off track. Just because Judy is trying to explain how ROBIN felt and what he believes it doesn't have anything necessarily to do with what Judy personally feels about all of this. All she is doing is defining and trying to clarify Robin's position and beliefs because she actually understands them well. But don't confuse her beliefs with his or assume because she happens to understand what he was saying all those months that he posted here that she agrees with any, some or all of it. She is merely translating. And I've gotten the impression that you're a devout Christian. Is that inaccurate? What does it mean that Robin said his union with God was a delusion? Is this where the evil forces come in? My point is that Eastern traditions define enlightenment as union with God. But if Robin wasn't really united with God, then how can he validly comment on enlightenment?! On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Yes, that's what it means. Me, I haven't a clue. (What do my beliefs have to do with this?) Yes, Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion. Judy, does ontological union mean: due to their respective natures, there can be no union between God and human? And do you also believe that there can be no ontological union between God and human? Another question: was Robin saying that he experienced union with God? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly, immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human beings and God. Judy, do you think Robin thinks ALL forms of realization, awakening, enlightenment, etc. in ALL traditions are a delusion? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 11:28 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Absolutely correct. He was insistent that enlightenment is a real state of consciousness, and that he was in this state for 10-plus years. What he says he came to realize is that the state itself is delusional--the experience of being one with God, the identification with Self rather than self, and so on, everything Maharishi describes, is a trick, a seduction engineered by dark forces that do not have the welfare of human beings at heart. It's all very real--including the special powers, the mastery of nature--but it leads away from God. And that, of course, is why he spent 25 years attempting--apparently successfully--to break the unholy spell and pull himself out of that state back into ordinary consciousness. He made these points over and over in his posts. How anyone could read those posts and come away with the notion that he was saying he was deluded to think he was enlightened is just beyond me. People understand what they want to understand, I guess. Whether one finds Robin's analysis convincing or not, it's what he believed on the basis of extraordinarily painful experience, and should not be misrepresented or denigrated. Judy, Robin himself called his alleged enlightenment a delusion. So I think it's inaccurate to use the phrase enlightened days. Here is the important point Share: Robin believes true enlightenment to be a delusion, an illusion. It is not that he is saying he wasn't enlightened in the sense that MMY or
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Judy, I don't want to throw cold water on any of your fantasies. (hey, that came out just the way I wanted), so create any scenario you want. My recollection was close enough I think. But, I realize I am treading on your sacred ground here, so I'm going to try to tip toe away, so you can work this out on your own. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Nowhere near, Stevie baby. Here's what you claimed: And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. And: My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. No confessional, nothing about his meeting his friend at Starbuck's, nothing about confiding thoughts and feelings. I knew he'd never said anything like that, and if this is your only evidence (Barry found it for you, I'm guessing), I was right. He did say, many times, that his best friend helped him with his de-enlightenment project, so what he said in this post was nothing we didn't already know. Nope, not even any forest, let alone any trees. No eggs in the basket, either. I was trying to think of what he might have said that you could have misinterpreted as you did. But as it turns out, you were far more off even than that. Tell ya what, since you don't know how to make your links clickable, I'll do it for you. That way anyone who wants to can easily check the post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my comment, and Robin's post stand on their own without any additional commentary from me. And although I am not a big fan of the Olympics, I am enjoying watching them with my wife and daughter and cracking jokes as we go along. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
I'm not going to discuss my friendship with Robin, sorry, other than to say it was mutual. Boy, between you and Share, the stench in here is getting overpowering. No doubt Barry will fly in here overnight and deposit a bunch more piles of doodoo. Such spiritual people. and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: Ann, actually I think this is where you and Judy go off track! Judy once told Seraph that she was raised Presbyterian. Judy has mentioned reading the ecclesiastical novels of Susan Howatch. In light of the current topic of God human union, I wanted to know what Judy thought as well as what she thought Robin thought. I made no comment about Judy's penchant for religion or otherwise. What I am saying is that you and Barry are mistaking Judy's clarification of Robin's stances on enlightenment as somehow related to how Judy feels. This is not the case. Judy was merely acting as a sort of objective encyclopaedic discourser on his views. If you wanted to know what Judy, as an individual, feels about all of that then that is another kettle of fish altogether. I have a sneaky suspicion you are not going to be able to talk about this without getting a bit perturbed so maybe I should stop here. And by the way, Judy and I are separate people who are not connected at the hip as much as some here would like to make it seem so. I can guarantee that she and I could have some pretty knock down drag out disagreements if it came to that which thankfully it has not. Frankly, the woman terrifies me... Now, about those Olympics... On Saturday, February 8, 2014 2:33 PM, awoelflebater@... awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote: Judy, what your beliefs have to do with this discussion is that you're the person with whom I'm having the discussion! Here is where Barry and you go off track. Just because Judy is trying to explain how ROBIN felt and what he believes it doesn't have anything necessarily to do with what Judy personally feels about all of this. All she is doing is defining and trying to clarify Robin's position and beliefs because she actually understands them well. But don't confuse her beliefs with his or assume because she happens to understand what he was saying all those months that he posted here that she agrees with any, some or all of it. She is merely translating. And I've gotten the impression that you're a devout Christian. Is that inaccurate? What does it mean that Robin said his union with God was a delusion? Is this where the evil forces come in? My point is that Eastern traditions define enlightenment as union with God. But if Robin wasn't really united with God, then how can he validly comment on enlightenment?! On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Yes, that's what it means. Me, I haven't a clue. (What do my beliefs have to do with this?) Yes, Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion. Judy, does ontological union mean: due to their respective natures, there can be no union between God and human? And do you also believe that there can be no ontological union between God and human? Another question: was Robin saying that he experienced union with God? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly, immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human beings and God. Judy, do you think Robin thinks ALL forms of realization, awakening, enlightenment, etc. in ALL traditions are a delusion? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 11:28 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Absolutely correct. He was insistent that enlightenment is a real state of consciousness, and that he was in this state for 10-plus years. What he says he came to realize is that the state itself is delusional--the experience of being one with God, the identification with Self rather than self, and so on, everything Maharishi describes, is a trick, a seduction engineered by dark forces that do not have the welfare of human beings at heart. It's all very real--including the special powers, the mastery of nature--but it leads away from God. And that, of course, is why he spent 25 years attempting--apparently successfully--to break the unholy spell and pull himself out of that state back into ordinary consciousness. He made these points over and over in his posts. How anyone could read those posts and come away with the notion that he was saying he was deluded to think he was enlightened is just beyond me. People understand what they want to understand, I guess. Whether one finds Robin's analysis convincing or not, it's what he believed on the basis of extraordinarily painful experience, and should not be misrepresented or denigrated. Judy, Robin himself called his alleged enlightenment a delusion. So I think it's inaccurate to use the phrase enlightened days. Here is the
[FairfieldLife] The Rhythmical Test:
I don't think it has anything to do with spiritual illumination. I scored 64% and I don't know nothing about rhythm. Though I can applaud with two hands clapping. -Buck http://tonometric.com/rhythmdeaf/ http://tonometric.com/rhythmdeaf/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Stevie, honest, it doesn't hurt me when you make a big fuss about something and get it badly wrong. I'm sure there are lots of people who know things about Robin that I don't. But you aren't one of them. sounds like this one hurt Judy. kinda has your ire up for some reason. and yikes, I guess I pushed the mother of all buttons, claiming I knew something about Robin you didn't. My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Ann knows how it began. Remember her response to your original comment? Take her advice and go research the topic on your own rather than continuing to flounder around here without knowing what you're talking about, any more than you had any idea what my religious beliefs are. Ann, I suggest you go back to how this topic began. Judy threw out the phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with reference to Robin. I said I thought those phrases were inaccurate given that Robin himself called his enlightenment a delusion. That is how this discussion began. BTW I don't have TV hookup so I don't watch the Olympics, was in Vancouver during the 2010 games! Judy, if Robin thinks that his experience of union with God was a delusion, then there is no validity to his saying that enlightenment defined as union with God is wrong because he did not have it! How could he know if it is right or wrong? Share, it would be best, if you really are interested in any of this, to go back and re-read what Robin himself actually wrote, God knows he said a lot in his time at FFL so you won't lack for reading material. Instead of using Judy as the translator look it up for yourself. That way you can decide on your own how you feel about what he said and you can take your time with it if you really want to. On another note, do you watch the Olympics and if so do you prefer the summer or winter version? What is your favorite winter sport event to watch? Favorite summer event? Strangely, I don't watch much TV let alone sports events but I do really enjoy the Olympics and also Wimbledon. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: We've had this discussion before, Share. Yes, it's inaccurate. Search your memory. And my beliefs, such as they may be, have nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion, so just drop that angle of attack, please. Judy, what your beliefs have to do with this discussion is that you're the person with whom I'm having the discussion! And I've gotten the impression that you're a devout Christian. Is that inaccurate? What does it mean that Robin said his union with God was a delusion? He said his experience of union with God was a delusion. Is this where the evil forces come in? I don't know what come in means in this context. My point is that Eastern traditions define enlightenment as union with God. But if Robin wasn't really united with God, then how can he validly comment on enlightenment?! Share, you're not making any sense at all. I can't respond to questions that are incoherent. I suggest you drop out of this discussion altogether. It's way over your head. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Yes, that's what it means. Me, I haven't a clue. (What do my beliefs have to do with this?) Yes, Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion. Judy, does ontological union mean: due to their respective natures, there can be no union between God and human? And do you also believe that there can be no ontological union between God and human? Another question: was Robin saying that he experienced union with God? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly, immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human beings and God. Judy, do you think Robin thinks ALL forms of realization, awakening, enlightenment, etc. in ALL traditions are a delusion? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 11:28 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Absolutely correct. He was insistent that enlightenment is a real state of consciousness, and that he was in this state for 10-plus years. What he says he came to realize is that the state itself is delusional--the experience of being one with God, the identification with Self rather than self, and so on, everything Maharishi describes, is a trick, a seduction engineered by dark forces that do not have the welfare of human beings at heart. It's all very real--including the special powers, the mastery of nature--but it leads away from God. And that, of course, is why he spent 25 years attempting--apparently successfully--to break the unholy spell and pull himself out of that state back into ordinary consciousness. He made these points over and over in his posts. How anyone could read those posts and come away with the notion that he was saying he was deluded to think he was enlightened is just beyond me. People understand what they want to understand, I guess. Whether one finds Robin's analysis convincing or not, it's what he believed on the basis of extraordinarily painful experience,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Thank you emptybill for clarifying the Christian and Orthodox views on union between God and human. It was disconcerting to think that there was such a seperative divide between Eastern and Western religions on this most essential of religious concepts. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 5:20 PM, emptyb...@yahoo.com emptyb...@yahoo.com wrote: “Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly, immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human beings and God.” Robin’s views about uniting with God were his own views only. In fact, most of what he asserted about “union with God” was private speculation – basically cypto-Protestant “make it up” theologizing. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. There were many varied references to divinization in the writings of the Church Fathers, including the following: * Irenaeus (c. 130-200) * [T]he Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself. * 'For we cast blame upon [God], because we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods; although God has adopted this course out of His pure benevolence, that no one may impute to Him invidiousness or grudgingness he declares, I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the Most High. * For it was necessary, at first, that nature should be exhibited; then, after that, that what was mortal should be conquered and swallowed up by immortality, and the corruptible by incorruptibility, and that man should be made after the image and likeness of God. * Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215) * [T]he Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God. * For if one knows himself, he will know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God * [H]is is beauty, the true beauty, for it is God; and that man becomes God, since God so wills. Heraclitus, then, rightly said, “Men are gods, and gods are men.” For the Word Himself is the manifest mystery: God in man, and man God * [H]e who listens to the Lord, and follows the prophecy given by Him, will be formed perfectly in the likeness of the teacher—made a god going about in flesh. * And to be incorruptible is to participate in divinity... * Justin Martyr (c. 100-165) * [Men] were made like God, free from suffering and death, provided that they kept His commandments, and were deemed deserving of the name of His sons, and yet they, becoming like Adam and Eve, work out death for themselves; let the interpretation of the Psalm be held just as you wish, yet thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming “gods,” and of having power to become sons of the Highest. * Theophilus of Antioch (c. 120-190) * For if He had made him immortal from the beginning, He would have made him God. Again, if He had made him mortal, God would seem to be the cause of his death. Neither, then, immortal nor yet mortal did He make him, but, as we have said above, capable of both; so that if he should incline to the things of immortality, keeping the commandment of God, he should receive as reward from Him immortality, and should become God... * Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170-235) * And you shall be a companion of the Deity, and a co-heir with Christ, no longer enslaved by lusts or passions, and never again wasted by disease. For you have become God: for whatever sufferings you underwent while being a man, these He gave to you, because you were of mortal mould, but whatever it is consistent with God to impart, these God has promised to bestow upon you, because you have been deified, and begotten unto immortality. * If, therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be God. And if he is made God by water and the Holy Spirit after the regeneration of the laver he is found to be also joint-heir with Christ after the resurrection from the dead. * Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373) * Therefore He was not man, and then became God, but He was God, and then became man, and that to deify us * for as the Lord, putting on the body, became man, so we men are deified by the Word as being taken to Him through His flesh. * For He was made man that we might be made God.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my comment, and Robin's post stand on their own without any additional commentary from me. I don't blame you since the quoted post doesn't exactly back up your point. But, that's okay with me. It is what it is. And although I am not a big fan of the Olympics, I am enjoying watching them with my wife and daughter and cracking jokes as we go along. You have a good life there Steve. I am happy to hear of your family and the good times you have together. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Nope, as I said, Stevie-poo (and Ann has said as well), nowhere near. You got it wrong, that's obvious. Acknowledge it (or not), and move on. Judy, I don't want to throw cold water on any of your fantasies. (hey, that came out just the way I wanted), so create any scenario you want. My recollection was close enough I think. But, I realize I am treading on your sacred ground here, so I'm going to try to tip toe away, so you can work this out on your own. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Nowhere near, Stevie baby. Here's what you claimed: And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. And: My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. No confessional, nothing about his meeting his friend at Starbuck's, nothing about confiding thoughts and feelings. I knew he'd never said anything like that, and if this is your only evidence (Barry found it for you, I'm guessing), I was right. He did say, many times, that his best friend helped him with his de-enlightenment project, so what he said in this post was nothing we didn't already know. Nope, not even any forest, let alone any trees. No eggs in the basket, either. I was trying to think of what he might have said that you could have misinterpreted as you did. But as it turns out, you were far more off even than that. Tell ya what, since you don't know how to make your links clickable, I'll do it for you. That way anyone who wants to can easily check the post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Translation: He can't figure out how to dig himself out of this hole he's dug for himself. Standard Stevie. Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my comment, and Robin's post stand on their own without any additional commentary from me. And although I am not a big fan of the Olympics, I am enjoying watching them with my wife and daughter and cracking jokes as we go along. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
[FairfieldLife] RE: Another Interesting Take on Addiction
Re I would hate for anyone to call me right wing: A European right-wing conservative would have views far closer to a typical American Democrat than to a Republican. Eg, the right for a woman to be able to opt for an abortion is almost universally accepted over here. But I would never label myself either right or left. Maybe I'd opt for something paradoxical like a right-wing anarchist or a left-wing libertarian but these right/left distinctions seem ever more pointless. We need a radically new politics as no one now trusts mainstream politicians. This disengagement from the established parties is usually presented as a crisis by the MSM but I regard it as a healthy sign that people are no longer willing to be taken for granted . And to be fair to the Natural Law Party at least they were thinking outside the box.
[FairfieldLife] The early six-month (AEGTC) courses
Hey Thanks 7thRay. This is always something I appreciate about FFL and keeps me coming back, that folks pop up, folks “who were there” and can give an insight of recollection. -Buck 7thRay27 wrote: Hey Mike, Since I know you like this kind of thing, I'll relate a few stories from the time I was on the first six month course along with Andy Rhymer, Rick Archer and others. In fact, Andy was in my small group, along with some 108's. It was our responsbility to correspond on Maharishi's behalf with some the other teacher's and 108's who were stationed around the world. I remember getting letters from, I believe, Michael Brule, was teaching in Iran and was getting harassed by the Shaw's secret service. I believe it was called the Savak, (yes, just checked it, and that is correct). In fact, I think he was even imprisoned for a time. He was feeling pretty discouraged. At any rate, I remember Andy describing his experience of doing Puja, and describing wave after wave of bliss. I also remember him describing to Maharishi some past life experiences, and saying each previous incarnation was displayed as a sort of statue park, during an experience he had. Probably the best moment was when Andy was talking directly to Maharishi, who was there in the room, as he often was, and telling Maharishi that the most important part of enlightenment was devotion to the Master. Maharishi said it was the most natural, and Andy kept insisting that it was the most important. There was a sweet back and forth that when on for a while like that. As to Andy being, or becoming an alleged pedophile, don't have an answer for that. Edg is on record here saying that he'd remove the alleged part. If that is a disqualification for being enlightened, I really can't say. I'm not familiar with all the ins and outs of it. But it does seem that many who may have done some heavy lifting to get that point, (of enlightenment) will sometimes take a funny detour. As for Robin, yes I found him extraordinary in many ways. Whether he had classic NPS, I couldn't say, but it sure seemed that way to me much of the time. But then again, it doesn't register with me much if a person is said to be enlightened or not. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote: M said Robin Carlsen and Andy Rhymer were enlightened. On Fri, 2/7/14, steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, February 7, 2014, 10:26 PM Speaking for myself, I never felt I was guaranteed enlightenment. Yea, I know all about cc in 5 - 7 years, but I never put much stock in that,nor did I know others who did. Perhaps that was the extent of the misrepresentation, it you're looking for a smoking gun, at least as far as the gaining enlightenment part. Otherwise, I think people got involved either for a vision of possibilities, or because because they were looking for something, and this seemed to offer some potential. But as for declaring such and such a person as enlightened, that would appear to be pretty out of place in any tradition I'm familiar with. Spiritual growth is a pretty personal matter, not something you're likely to crow about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Now, wait. This sort of sounds like a set up. I say this because you have always been a proponent of the these (supposed) states of consciousness are all subjective and can't be proven. So, why would such a declaration be important to you? It wouldn't be the least bit important to me. But you'd think it might be important to Maharishi (who sold this supposed state of consciousness for close to 50 years) to be able to point to even one of his students who embodied it. After all, if he didn't, people might begin to think that the sales pitch was a pile of crap.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Another Interesting Take on Addiction
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, s3raphita@... wrote: Re I would hate for anyone to call me right wing: A European right-wing conservative would have views far closer to a typical American Democrat than to a Republican. Eg, the right for a woman to be able to opt for an abortion is almost universally accepted over here. But I would never label myself either right or left. Maybe I'd opt for something paradoxical like a right-wing anarchist or a left-wing libertarian but these right/left distinctions seem ever more pointless. We need a radically new politics as no one now trusts mainstream politicians. This disengagement from the established parties is usually presented as a crisis by the MSM but I regard it as a healthy sign that people are no longer willing to be taken for granted . And to be fair to the Natural Law Party at least they were thinking outside the box.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Judy, best to just let your perceptions and fantasies go unimpeded. (as though there's a choice in the matter). But you must realize, that for you, things are always going wrong in the minds of people who disagree with you. I mean that is your calling card, and that's not going to change. But I'm glad there was some spark between the two of you, even if it was at a distance. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Stevie, honest, it doesn't hurt me when you make a big fuss about something and get it badly wrong. I'm sure there are lots of people who know things about Robin that I don't. But you aren't one of them. sounds like this one hurt Judy. kinda has your ire up for some reason. and yikes, I guess I pushed the mother of all buttons, claiming I knew something about Robin you didn't. My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
[FairfieldLife] RE: Another Interesting Take on Addiction
By the way Ann, re your recent photo upload: that's a splendid hound you have. I'm jealous. I am more of a cat lover myself but all domestic animals are endlessly fascinating. Much more enjoyable and rewarding than a colour TV! Those who do TM are supposed to keep pets out of the room when they are meditating as the creatures bleed away your psychic energy - if MMY is to be believed.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Stevie-poops, you aren't doing yourself any good with this crap. You aren't clever enough to patronize anybody; you just make yourself look increasingly foolish, especially when the mistake was yours in the first place. Judy, best to just let your perceptions and fantasies go unimpeded. (as though there's a choice in the matter). But you must realize, that for you, things are always going wrong in the minds of people who disagree with you. I mean that is your calling card, and that's not going to change. But I'm glad there was some spark between the two of you, even if it was at a distance. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Stevie, honest, it doesn't hurt me when you make a big fuss about something and get it badly wrong. I'm sure there are lots of people who know things about Robin that I don't. But you aren't one of them. sounds like this one hurt Judy. kinda has your ire up for some reason. and yikes, I guess I pushed the mother of all buttons, claiming I knew something about Robin you didn't. My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Judy, you will just have to live with another unfulfilled desire. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Nope, as I said, Stevie-poo (and Ann has said as well), nowhere near. You got it wrong, that's obvious. Acknowledge it (or not), and move on. Judy, I don't want to throw cold water on any of your fantasies. (hey, that came out just the way I wanted), so create any scenario you want. My recollection was close enough I think. But, I realize I am treading on your sacred ground here, so I'm going to try to tip toe away, so you can work this out on your own. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Nowhere near, Stevie baby. Here's what you claimed: And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. And: My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. No confessional, nothing about his meeting his friend at Starbuck's, nothing about confiding thoughts and feelings. I knew he'd never said anything like that, and if this is your only evidence (Barry found it for you, I'm guessing), I was right. He did say, many times, that his best friend helped him with his de-enlightenment project, so what he said in this post was nothing we didn't already know. Nope, not even any forest, let alone any trees. No eggs in the basket, either. I was trying to think of what he might have said that you could have misinterpreted as you did. But as it turns out, you were far more off even than that. Tell ya what, since you don't know how to make your links clickable, I'll do it for you. That way anyone who wants to can easily check the post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
He's been well trained by Barry. What do you expect? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss the mark, at least by much. But what is wrong with my feeling that Judy had some attachment to Robin? I mean she said as much, (and I am not going to look up that post). Now whether she said so in jest or seriousness, I don't know, but there was a comment along those lines. And given the frequency with which those kindred souls would alternate between irony and seriousness, I'm not going to speculate much beyond that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
How many times have you said such over the past 17 years? I'd say over a thousand. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Translation: He can't figure out how to dig himself out of this hole he's dug for himself. Standard Stevie. Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my comment, and Robin's post stand on their own without any additional commentary from me. And although I am not a big fan of the Olympics, I am enjoying watching them with my wife and daughter and cracking jokes as we go along. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Think you can get a little more morally smelly, Stevie-boy? Are you in some kind of competition with Share? Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss the mark, at least by much. But what is wrong with my feeling that Judy had some attachment to Robin? I mean she said as much, (and I am not going to look up that post). Now whether she said so in jest or seriousness, I don't know, but there was a comment along those lines. And given the frequency with which those kindred souls would alternate between irony and seriousness, I'm not going to speculate much beyond that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
you're boring Judy. no one can beat you in this game of yours. and no sensible person would want to. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Stevie-poops, you aren't doing yourself any good with this crap. You aren't clever enough to patronize anybody; you just make yourself look increasingly foolish, especially when the mistake was yours in the first place. Judy, best to just let your perceptions and fantasies go unimpeded. (as though there's a choice in the matter). But you must realize, that for you, things are always going wrong in the minds of people who disagree with you. I mean that is your calling card, and that's not going to change. But I'm glad there was some spark between the two of you, even if it was at a distance. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Stevie, honest, it doesn't hurt me when you make a big fuss about something and get it badly wrong. I'm sure there are lots of people who know things about Robin that I don't. But you aren't one of them. sounds like this one hurt Judy. kinda has your ire up for some reason. and yikes, I guess I pushed the mother of all buttons, claiming I knew something about Robin you didn't. My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
[FairfieldLife] RE: Crazy Raam crap
Well, Fairfield seems to generally have a lot of currency experts like these. They kind of occupied the Ron Paul campaign. At a point it seemed Ron Paul did not really know what hit him. Nothing like friends. Always has been a lot of lectures and seminars on money/currencies in Fairfield.Hard money people too. This Raam financial report seems to have been written by a committee of some of them given free rein. Speculating the Iranian Dinar is particularly hot in Fairfield now.I recently bought a one Raam note for ten dollars to send to a museum collection for historical reasons. I did not pop for the 50 Raam note. The exchange rate was was a whole lot more on the higher denomination notes. The engravings are haughty triumphant in graphics and color. They are fabulous that way. I'd love to have a 500 Raam note to carry in my wallet, along with my Dome badge. -Buck mjackson74 writes: You just gotta read it to believe that anyone could be foolish enough to believe that anyone would ever buy this kind of thinking. I only got through 11 pages. http://www.hiddencures.com/Videos/Raam%20Lecture%202-12-09.pdf http://www.hiddencures.com/Videos/Raam%20Lecture%202-12-09.pdf
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Wow, has it been that many holes you've dug for yourself and then couldn't get out of? How many times have you said such over the past 17 years? I'd say over a thousand. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Translation: He can't figure out how to dig himself out of this hole he's dug for himself. Standard Stevie. Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my comment, and Robin's post stand on their own without any additional commentary from me. And although I am not a big fan of the Olympics, I am enjoying watching them with my wife and daughter and cracking jokes as we go along. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
God bless you Judy. God bless you. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Think you can get a little more morally smelly, Stevie-boy? Are you in some kind of competition with Share? Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss the mark, at least by much. But what is wrong with my feeling that Judy had some attachment to Robin? I mean she said as much, (and I am not going to look up that post). Now whether she said so in jest or seriousness, I don't know, but there was a comment along those lines. And given the frequency with which those kindred souls would alternate between irony and seriousness, I'm not going to speculate much beyond that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
[FairfieldLife] RE: Marshy's Marketing
Dear MJ, you seem jealous of the Maharishi in publishing this time-line of yours and the color commentary in it. The guy (Maharishi) evidently was incredibly successful in his life. At the least in leading and creating large changes in culture in a lot of ways the Maharishi was also quite evidently the extraordinary revolutionary and spiritual teacher in his time. And you, some guy from South Carolina want to pull him down. Seems more like you are hard riding him trying your level best to run and break him down and everyone else associated with him. Are you really anti-TM or is it you are just jealous of Maharishi? -Buck
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Anne, This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one of the participants is mentioned Starbucks. Now if you wish to fault me over this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall point that Robin had a friend that appeared to call him out on his stuff. My apologies that I indicated the setting was at Starbucks, or that I called it a confessional. But I feel my recollection was close enough to what I originally indicated. Now if others wish to make a federal case out of it,be my guest. But you may have to try me in absentia. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Interesting to read this again, I don't ever go back and search and re-read stuff here. But I don't see anything about any confessionals at Starbucks. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Judy, draw whatever conclusions you wish to draw. It is fine with me. If you feel I missed the point completely, I am okay with that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Nowhere near, Stevie baby. Here's what you claimed: And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. And: My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. No confessional, nothing about his meeting his friend at Starbuck's, nothing about confiding thoughts and feelings. I knew he'd never said anything like that, and if this is your only evidence (Barry found it for you, I'm guessing), I was right. He did say, many times, that his best friend helped him with his de-enlightenment project, so what he said in this post was nothing we didn't already know. Nope, not even any forest, let alone any trees. No eggs in the basket, either. I was trying to think of what he might have said that you could have misinterpreted as you did. But as it turns out, you were far more off even than that. Tell ya what, since you don't know how to make your links clickable, I'll do it for you. That way anyone who wants to can easily check the post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Now you are making me laugh. Yes Judy, yes. That many holes at least. And you have called me on each of them. Thank God! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Wow, has it been that many holes you've dug for yourself and then couldn't get out of? How many times have you said such over the past 17 years? I'd say over a thousand. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Translation: He can't figure out how to dig himself out of this hole he's dug for himself. Standard Stevie. Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my comment, and Robin's post stand on their own without any additional commentary from me. And although I am not a big fan of the Olympics, I am enjoying watching them with my wife and daughter and cracking jokes as we go along. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Um, I think it's close enough Judy. But to someone who as a matter of course cannot see the forest for the trees, it probably has no semblance. Kinda, sorta seems like you had your eggs in the e-mails with me basket sorry about that. Oh dear, well I don't see any similarity either. Obviously I am missing the thing you think talks about meeting someone at Starbucks regularly to talk to and confess. Can you clarify Steve, or maybe it is so obvious to you that you don't see the need but I have definitely missed it here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: Oh, hilarious. Of course, this doesn't say at all what you claimed, does it, now? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
[FairfieldLife] RE: Another Interesting Take on Addiction
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, s3raphita@... wrote: By the way Ann, re your recent photo upload: that's a splendid hound you have. I'm jealous. I am more of a cat lover myself but all domestic animals are endlessly fascinating. Much more enjoyable and rewarding than a colour TV! Those who do TM are supposed to keep pets out of the room when they are meditating as the creatures bleed away your psychic energy - if MMY is to be believed. I am of the belief that we are more likely to be the ones sucking the psychic energy off of animals. They deign to come into our lives, to take on our baggage, to give us unconditional love and to remain steadfast and loyal through thick and thin. I think, in that case, that I could afford to offer a little something to them in return in the form of psychic energy if, indeed, I actually had any of that in me to give.
[FairfieldLife] RE: Crazy Raam crap
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, dhamiltony2k5@... wrote: Well, Fairfield seems to generally have a lot of currency experts like these. They kind of occupied the Ron Paul campaign. At a point it seemed Ron Paul did not really know what hit him. Nothing like friends. Always has been a lot of lectures and seminars on money/currencies in Fairfield.Hard money people too. This Raam financial report seems to have been written by a committee of some of them given free rein. Speculating the Iranian Dinar is particularly hot in Fairfield now.I recently bought a one Raam note for ten dollars to send to a museum collection for historical reasons. I did not pop for the 50 Raam note. The exchange rate was was a whole lot more on the higher denomination notes. The engravings are haughty triumphant in graphics and color. They are fabulous that way. I'd love to have a 500 Raam note to carry in my wallet, along with my Dome badge. -Buck There's truly a sucker born every minute and FF is full of them as well as those who are just dying to take advantage of that fact. mjackson74 writes: You just gotta read it to believe that anyone could be foolish enough to believe that anyone would ever buy this kind of thinking. I only got through 11 pages. http://www.hiddencures.com/Videos/Raam%20Lecture%202-12-09.pdf http://www.hiddencures.com/Videos/Raam%20Lecture%202-12-09.pdf
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Anne, This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one of the participants is mentioned Starbucks. Now if you wish to fault me over this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall point that Robin had a friend that appeared to call him out on his stuff. My apologies that I indicated the setting was at Starbucks, or that I called it a confessional. But I feel my recollection was close enough to what I originally indicated. Like I said, I don't really care one way or another. I know more about Robin past and present than anyone here and I know of whom he speaks when you mistakenly thought he meant some guy at Starbucks. It's fine, but why is it so hard for some of you here at FFL to admit you made a mistake? I, frankly, don't give a crap because I know who and what he was referring to that you got so badly wrong. But what is the deal with not being able to admit you made a mistake about this? This is a rhetorical question, BTW, I don't really need to know the answer to this but you might. Now if others wish to make a federal case out of it,be my guest. But you may have to try me in absentia. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Interesting to read this again, I don't ever go back and search and re-read stuff here. But I don't see anything about any confessionals at Starbucks. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss the mark, at least by much. Steve, as I said, I don't really care one way or another but you did, in fact, get it wrong, missed the mark. Pray tell, in what sense did Robin go to any sort of confession with anyone on a regular (or irregular) basis at Starbucks? Come on. You really did go way off what was said in that post you referenced. But what is wrong with my feeling that Judy had some attachment to Robin? Nothing, per se. It was the way in which you said it that was starting to become boorish and rude. I mean she said as much, (and I am not going to look up that post). Now whether she said so in jest or seriousness, I don't know, but there was a comment along those lines. And given the frequency with which those kindred souls would alternate between irony and seriousness, I'm not going to speculate much beyond that. Good idea, no speculating, because if you miss this one like you screwed up the confession post then it is bound to be a doozy. I am not sure that accuracy is your forte, Steve. You are a nice guy (most of the time) and were awfully adorable in that picture you posted with the Three Stooges but let's not push our luck and have to include you as the fourth (Stooge, that is). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
[FairfieldLife] Iranian Warships Sailing to the US?
One wonders about the current leadership of Iran. He appears to be intent on intimidating the US military forces. But they don't have the firepower to shoot it out with the US. Or, it could be just a bluff. http://news.yahoo.com/iran-says-warships-sailing-towards-u-agency-214302042--finance.html http://news.yahoo.com/iran-says-warships-sailing-towards-u-agency-214302042--finance.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Anne, you are saying, Trust me, because I know what is going on. I'm not going to tell you anything about it, but I'm in the know Well, I don't operate that way, and I don't know many who do. So as they say, and I don't mean this in an impolite way, but put up, or shut up. There is really no other way to say it. As for being willing to admit a mistake. I need to be shown where I was mistaken, other than, You are mistaken ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Anne, This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one of the participants is mentioned Starbucks. Now if you wish to fault me over this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall point that Robin had a friend that appeared to call him out on his stuff. My apologies that I indicated the setting was at Starbucks, or that I called it a confessional. But I feel my recollection was close enough to what I originally indicated. Like I said, I don't really care one way or another. I know more about Robin past and present than anyone here and I know of whom he speaks when you mistakenly thought he meant some guy at Starbucks. It's fine, but why is it so hard for some of you here at FFL to admit you made a mistake? I, frankly, don't give a crap because I know who and what he was referring to that you got so badly wrong. But what is the deal with not being able to admit you made a mistake about this? This is a rhetorical question, BTW, I don't really need to know the answer to this but you might. Now if others wish to make a federal case out of it,be my guest. But you may have to try me in absentia. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Interesting to read this again, I don't ever go back and search and re-read stuff here. But I don't see anything about any confessionals at Starbucks. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Ah, now this is Anne we've come to know. No worries. Anne, read Robin's post. Read the various comments I have made about it. Now, what I am gathering is that you think I am mistaken! Yes, I managed to pick that up.! Now, I've told you why I came to the conclusions I've come to. And you are saying, You're wrong Steve, and I'm right, because I am an authority in this area. That is what I believe is called an Appeal to Authority. And it is a fallacy. You have said nothing to support your position other than, I Am An Authority on this Subject Anne, you may not realize this, but your supposed authorityness is pretty compromised. I mean it is kind of funny that in all the months Robin posted here, he never addressed you directly, once! Yikes!! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss the mark, at least by much. Steve, as I said, I don't really care one way or another but you did, in fact, get it wrong, missed the mark. Pray tell, in what sense did Robin go to any sort of confession with anyone on a regular (or irregular) basis at Starbucks? Come on. You really did go way off what was said in that post you referenced. But what is wrong with my feeling that Judy had some attachment to Robin? Nothing, per se. It was the way in which you said it that was starting to become boorish and rude. I mean she said as much, (and I am not going to look up that post). Now whether she said so in jest or seriousness, I don't know, but there was a comment along those lines. And given the frequency with which those kindred souls would alternate between irony and seriousness, I'm not going to speculate much beyond that. Good idea, no speculating, because if you miss this one like you screwed up the confession post then it is bound to be a doozy. I am not sure that accuracy is your forte, Steve. You are a nice guy (most of the time) and were awfully adorable in that picture you posted with the Three Stooges but let's not push our luck and have to include you as the fourth (Stooge, that is). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: and yikes II, this is pretty revealing. I didn't realize how deep the attachment went. Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though? Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve? Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and far-fetched in your unfounded theories? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: My memory is excellent, and I followed Robin's posts more closely than anyone here. The two of us were good friends and had extensive email correspondence. You repeatedly get things wrong that have happened in the past. I never saw him say anything like what you imagine. You made the claim, you find the post. Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility. Sorta my take on the whole thing. On the other hand, we do have the missing years when he was substitute teaching. Could get some checks in the humility column for that. And then we have his daily confessional with his friend at Starbucks. Do I have that right?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
She is in the know. On this point, as it happens, so am I. Of course neither of us is going to tell you anything about Robin's private life that he didn't divulge here; what are you, nuts? Ironically, though, as I told you before, he'd already written a number of times about his friend who called him out on his stuff. But, hmmm, you didn't remember that, did you? So much for your great memory, eh? And that sure as heck isn't how you described the post. If that was what you'd said, I wouldn't have objected, because we already knew that. It was the daily confessional with a friend he met almost every day at Starbuck's that was off the wall. That's where you were mistaken, and it's not a discrepancy you can just paper over, much as you'd like to, especially when you insisted on it after I told you he'd never said that. And you most certainly do operate that way. You did it in this very discussion, and you've done it dozens of times before, when you get asked for proof or examples of some claim you've made and refuse to provide it. If Barry hadn't dug this post up for you, that's how you'd have operated in this case as well. But even so, when Ann asked you to explain how you could claim your description matched the post, you refused to say. You know who else did it? Your hero, Curtis. And your favorite helpless damsel, Share, has done it. Vaj used to do it, big-time. Sometimes it's warranted, sometimes it isn't. All three people above used it as an illegitimate weapon against folks they were having conflicts with. Curtis's example was especially reprehensible. Anne, you are saying, Trust me, because I know what is going on. I'm not going to tell you anything about it, but I'm in the know Well, I don't operate that way, and I don't know many who do. So as they say, and I don't mean this in an impolite way, but put up, or shut up. There is really no other way to say it. As for being willing to admit a mistake. I need to be shown where I was mistaken, other than, You are mistaken ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Anne, This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one of the participants is mentioned Starbucks. Now if you wish to fault me over this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall point that Robin had a friend that appeared to call him out on his stuff. My apologies that I indicated the setting was at Starbucks, or that I called it a confessional. But I feel my recollection was close enough to what I originally indicated. Like I said, I don't really care one way or another. I know more about Robin past and present than anyone here and I know of whom he speaks when you mistakenly thought he meant some guy at Starbucks. It's fine, but why is it so hard for some of you here at FFL to admit you made a mistake? I, frankly, don't give a crap because I know who and what he was referring to that you got so badly wrong. But what is the deal with not being able to admit you made a mistake about this? This is a rhetorical question, BTW, I don't really need to know the answer to this but you might. Now if others wish to make a federal case out of it,be my guest. But you may have to try me in absentia. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/328672 Interesting to read this again, I don't ever go back and search and re-read stuff here. But I don't see anything about any confessionals at Starbucks. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote: Judy, I don't know what the point of arguing about it is. If he said it, it will be there in the record. Without being too boastful, my memory is pretty good. My impression is that he had nothing to do with e-mails, and seemed to predate his participation here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: You've got something screwy here, Stevie. He may have been talking about email, in which case he probably meant with me. But there was no daily confessional. My recollection is that he did, indeed say that he has a friend he meets with most everyday, at Starbucks, (I believe), in whom he confides thoughts, feelings. I would say this was a couple months before he stopped posting. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote: emptybill doesn't know what he's talking about with regard to Robin, his reams of quotes notwithstanding. Daily confessional with his friend at Starbuck's?? Robin never said anything remotely like that. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies have clearly explicated the nature of union with God – at least as far as that is possible for humans. However, he never
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
No, go look up the fallacy of appeal to authority. You don't know what you're talking about, no surprise. You are wrong not because Ann is an authority, but because, duh, you got it wrong, and the evidence is on the record in the posts in this exchange plus Robin's post from December 2012. No meeting a friend almost every day at Starbuck's. No daily confessional. Wrong. That's not in his post. You said it was. You got it wrong. And you have something else very badly wrong in this post. Robin did address Ann directly a number of times. Among other things, they had a long, fascinating multi-post exchange about a number of different topics related to enlightenment and Robin's group. Ask Barry to find it for you. So much for your wonderful memory, again. What a lamer you are. Ah, now this is Anne we've come to know. No worries. Anne, read Robin's post. Read the various comments I have made about it. Now, what I am gathering is that you think I am mistaken! Yes, I managed to pick that up.! Now, I've told you why I came to the conclusions I've come to. And you are saying, You're wrong Steve, and I'm right, because I am an authority in this area. That is what I believe is called an Appeal to Authority. And it is a fallacy. You have said nothing to support your position other than, I Am An Authority on this Subject Anne, you may not realize this, but your supposed authorityness is pretty compromised. I mean it is kind of funny that in all the months Robin posted here, he never addressed you directly, once! Yikes!!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Raam
Missed this earlier... He didn't say his enlightenment was a delusion. He said enlightenment per se, although very real and genuine, is a delusion. You've been told this now five or six times between Ann and me, so now when you say it, it's a lie, because you know otherwise. You are attacking Robin by lying about what he said. Shame on you. You're as morally smelly as Stevie. It's true, Judy, my intention is not to analyze what Robin wrote. My intention is to say that I think your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Robin are inaccurate given that he said his enlightenment was a delusion. I don't think it is attacking of someone to refer to what they themselves said. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 2:35 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Again, Share, your question is incoherent. Robin never said enlightenment defined as union with God is wrong, for example. You made that up. I'm telling you, this whole topic is over your head. Your intention is not to understand what Robin wrote but rather to find yet another way to beat up on him in his absence, and I'm just not going to play that mug's game. Do you understand? Judy, if Robin thinks that his experience of union with God was a delusion, then there is no validity to his saying that enlightenment defined as union with God is wrong because he did not have it! How could he know if it is right or wrong? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: We've had this discussion before, Share. Yes, it's inaccurate. Search your memory. And my beliefs, such as they may be, have nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion, so just drop that angle of attack, please. Judy, what your beliefs have to do with this discussion is that you're the person with whom I'm having the discussion! And I've gotten the impression that you're a devout Christian. Is that inaccurate? What does it mean that Robin said his union with God was a delusion? He said his experience of union with God was a delusion. Is this where the evil forces come in? I don't know what come in means in this context. My point is that Eastern traditions define enlightenment as union with God. But if Robin wasn't really united with God, then how can he validly comment on enlightenment?! Share, you're not making any sense at all. I can't respond to questions that are incoherent. I suggest you drop out of this discussion altogether. It's way over your head. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Yes, that's what it means. Me, I haven't a clue. (What do my beliefs have to do with this?) Yes, Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion. Judy, does ontological union mean: due to their respective natures, there can be no union between God and human? And do you also believe that there can be no ontological union between God and human? Another question: was Robin saying that he experienced union with God? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly, immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human beings and God. Judy, do you think Robin thinks ALL forms of realization, awakening, enlightenment, etc. in ALL traditions are a delusion? On Saturday, February 8, 2014 11:28 AM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: Absolutely correct. He was insistent that enlightenment is a real state of consciousness, and that he was in this state for 10-plus years. What he says he came to realize is that the state itself is delusional--the experience of being one with God, the identification with Self rather than self, and so on, everything Maharishi describes, is a trick, a seduction engineered by dark forces that do not have the welfare of human beings at heart. It's all very real--including the special powers, the mastery of nature--but it leads away from God. And that, of course, is why he spent 25 years attempting--apparently successfully--to break the unholy spell and pull himself out of that state back into ordinary consciousness. He made these points over and over in his posts. How anyone could read those posts and come away with the notion that he was saying he was deluded to think he was enlightened is just beyond me. People understand what they want to understand, I guess. Whether one finds Robin's analysis convincing or not, it's what he believed on the basis of extraordinarily painful experience, and should not be misrepresented or denigrated. Judy, Robin himself called his alleged enlightenment a delusion. So I think it's inaccurate to use the phrase
