[FairfieldLife] Re: 'The Inward Stroke of TM and Dhyana Shaki'...

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert"  wrote:
>
> From the very first experience of TM after the Initition Puja is done
for Guru Dev...
> Then the 'Inward Stroke of TM' is established from the very 1st
experience...this is the genius of Maharishi and Guru Dev...this simple
way of exeriencing what is called in sanskrit, 'Dhyana Shakti'...
>
> Dhyana Shakti increases many fold around the domes and in any group of
meditators...
>
> So, when we say, 'Let's close the eyes'...immediately one starts to
dive within...
> And when we say, 'Open the eyes'...then one begins to come back out,
or comes back a grosser level of thinking...
>
> So, we close the eyes and go within...
>
> And we slowly open the eyes and come back out...
>
> Here, we are learning the 'Beginning of Self-Referral'...
> That is to train the mind, how to look within, by recognizing that
more subtle layers of thought are quieter and more abstract...
> We recognize that more subtle levels of thinking provides for healing
in the body and great feeliings of expansion of our awareness...
>
> We begin to structure the Dhayana Shakti, which allows us, to more and
more effortlessly and naturally expand our awareness, by going within to
the source of thought...
>
> So, Dhyana Shakti, is one of the 3 main Shaktis
>
> Jai Guru Dev
>

yasyonmeSa-nimeSaabhyaaM jagataH pralayodayau
taM shakti-cakra-vibhava-prabhavaM shankaraM stumaH!

(Attempt at sandhi-vigraha:

yasya + unmeSa-nimeSaabhyaam; jagataH pralaya + udayau
taM shakti-cakra-vibhava-prabhavam; shankaram; stumaH!

[FairfieldLife] 'Another Day by Paul McCartney'...

[Robert]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3nVqLfPBtw

[FairfieldLife] 'The Kriya Value of Shakti'...

[Robert]

This 'Kriya Value' has to do with action or activity...

>From Being we have the Purusha quality; from Dhyana we have the self-referral 
>quality; and from Kriya we have activity arising from Being and becoming a 
>manifest reality...

This Kriya Shakti is what is experienced during the 'Flying Sutra'for 
some...

Others can have all forms of expression of Kriya Shakti, from cooking to 
teaching to any expression of the desire from the level of Being...

So, these 3 kinds of Shakti support one another, as one advances in 
Enlightenment and begins to feel and follow the heart more which allows the 
soul to express itself more in this lifetime...

Jai Guru Dev

[FairfieldLife] 'The Purusha Shakti and Witnessing Awareness'...

[Robert]

So, now we find that it is the 'Purusha Value of Shakti' which allows us to 
maintain the witnessing value of awareness in meditation...

It is this witnessing value that begins to purify the other Shaktis as well

It is this witnessin value of our own abstract awareness that is supported by 
the 'Silent Value of Purusha Shakti'...right at the level before 
manifestation...

Right in the 'Gap'...

Prana, Jyoti(LIght), Prem(Love), Self-Referral, Self-Sustaining, Unborn, 
Infinite Value, Basis of Natural Law...and so on...

This Witnessing value, continues to expand into the boundaries...

We say the 'Being is Becoming'...

We watch as Being unfolds by it's own volition to create with it's 
self-referral quality, and continues to create, on and on...

Being, becoming is the natural growth of Cosmic Consciousness to Unity 
Consciousness...

Jai Guru Deva

[FairfieldLife] 'The Inward Stroke of TM and Dhyana Shaki'...

[Robert]

>From the very first experience of TM after the Initition Puja is done for Guru 
>Dev...
Then the 'Inward Stroke of TM' is established from the very 1st 
experience...this is the genius of Maharishi and Guru Dev...this simple way of 
exeriencing what is called in sanskrit, 'Dhyana Shakti'...

Dhyana Shakti increases many fold around the domes and in any group of 
meditators...

So, when we say, 'Let's close the eyes'...immediately one starts to dive 
within...
And when we say, 'Open the eyes'...then one begins to come back out, or comes 
back a grosser level of thinking...

So, we close the eyes and go within...

And we slowly open the eyes and come back out...

Here, we are learning the 'Beginning of Self-Referral'...
That is to train the mind, how to look within, by recognizing that more subtle 
layers of thought are quieter and more abstract...
We recognize that more subtle levels of thinking provides for healing in the 
body and great feeliings of expansion of our awareness...

We begin to structure the Dhayana Shakti, which allows us, to more and more 
effortlessly and naturally expand our awareness, by going within to the source 
of thought...

So, Dhyana Shakti, is one of the 3 main Shaktis

Jai Guru Dev

[FairfieldLife] Hi Ann

[lordknows888]

Dear Ann.

Ann thank you for very kind words and vote of confidence.This has been a very 
interesting day for me.I was seriously considering dialoguing with Robin but if 
you read my last post you will see how that unfolded.It would have been 
interesting but in the end exhausting, and to what purpose.If Robin would put 
away his old tricks and really be honest rather than always writing about the 
theory of how life supports honesty, than I agree it could have been 
potentially very worthwhile.  I think  a number of people on this forum would 
have found it of interest and it would have been a fullfillmment of my desire 
to have a genuine heart to heart conversation with, him as you know. Is it a 
lost opportunity? You could look at it that way.What to do? It is not how I 
would have wished it to go. As you know from our private conversations I was 
genuinely open and willing to find a new Robin, someone who really had moved on 
and had stopped his old games.I am aware Robin and others here would find that 
hard to believe given my post which was bitter medicine for Robin to read, but 
if Robin had been as reasonable and temperate as he first seemed and open to 
truly heartfelt honest inquiry then all could have been different. I do not 
claim to have the last word on Robin or anything else for that matter. I wish 
Robin could hear the words spoken to his heart "Go and sin no more, all is 
forgiven" as if they were spoken by Christ to him. Just to be clear I have not 
become a born again Christian, but when I think of what might be most healing 
and helpful to Robin it is just what comes to mind.Robin would probably say how 
presumptuous of me to assume he hasn't already experienced this or something 
like it, it's true of course I don't know. All I can say is I don't see the 
change in him that he seems to feel.

All the Best
Lord Knows (my online name makes me laugh a little)   

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Robin Carlsen]

Seraphita:

This was indeed a spectacularly disturbing and violent episode during those ten 
years. I did attempt to find within Suzanne the evidence which seemed to make 
of her someone invulnerable to the reality of everything that I thought I was 
living for as the enlightened man. But this incident has some important 
antecedents.

First of all, my brother is an Orthodox Jew, and has close ties to the state of 
Israel. In the time I spent in Israel in 1985 I had a profound experience of 
the beauty of the Jewish people. They seemed a superior race of people (I have 
already in another post referred to the Jewish settler that I intreviewed, and 
my time in being invited to dinner in a Israeli household where we talked 
freely. I had very serious conversations with many Israelis while I was there. 
I took away an experience of Israel which was ultra-positive, I would say, even 
mystically positive.

And when I returned to North America I had intended to write a book about 
Israel and the Jewish people, especially in regard to the Palestinians. It 
would set out the fact that I believe the Jewish people to be more beautiful 
than any other race of people. They had the genetic credentials, then, to be 
the Chosen People.

But in preparation for writing this book I began to perceive the integrity of 
Jewishness as being something dominant and overpowering, and it seemed that a 
Jewish person subconsciously looked down upon the goyim--the non-Jew. This 
became a metaphysical perception, and dominated my experience. And I especially 
felt my own vulnerability in this context even as I was enlightened and 
presumably beyond the power of being influenced by what I selected out as the 
metaphysical reality of Jewishness.

However, before I became aware of what seemed, from within my enlightenment, to 
be a preternatural form of integrity inside every Jewish person (and my brother 
seemed the exemplary instance of this; I had known him all my life, and 
although we were raised in a goyim household he became convinced while at 
graduate school during the Six Day War that we had Jewish ancestors and he was 
a Jew. So he converted, and as soon as he did--and married an Orthodox Jewish 
woman--he suddenly seemed comprehensible to me. And after that I always saw him 
as a Jew first (which he believed he was) and my brother second. He meanwhile 
looked upon me as the classic and quintessential goyim and he controlled the 
context intellectually, and made it very clear to me the rightness and 
truthfulness of himself as a Jew. He was inside reality; I was now on the 
outside--and he made this the most natural thing there could be. 

When I told an Orthodox Jew the story about all this, this Jewish man insisted 
I come to the synagogue, that my soul was the soul of a Jew, that my mother was 
Jewish, that God had made me a Jew and I must stop thinking I was a Gentile. 
But I never believed in the evidence for my Jewish ancestry (although I did not 
examine this as my brother did), and have remained a goyim to this moment. 
Although after the last 24 hours I am thinking of seeking refuge in the 
enclosed community of the Orthodox here in Toronto. :-) 

(I should just here stipulate that all this began before I had any interest in 
Catholicism; I had always, once I was grown up, rejected Christianity as 
utterly mythological--including the supposed divinity of Christ.

Meanwhile in preparing to write my book I had a personal exchange of letters 
with Benjamin Netanyahu, who was then Israeli Ambassador to the United States.

However, my perception of the metaphysical superiority and power of the Jewish 
people became an obsession, and it dominated my consciousness, even my way of 
seeing reality. Suzanne Segal was the most terrible victim of this perception, 
as I analyzed her in the most ruthless and uncompromising way: attempting to 
get right to the mystical level of her contempt for the goyim. It was perhaps 
the most intense confrontation of the ten years. I can only assume that Suzanne 
now, from where she exists, understands what happened, what drove me into this 
obsession, and even how the integrity of the Jew has always been somewhere--up 
until the the last 75 years or so--a problem for the Gentile since the 
Crucifixion of Christ, although throughout my anti-Semitic period Christ never 
entered into equation.

I do think there is a mystery here which remains not entirely resolved for me, 
but I certainly have no perception of the metaphysical  integrity of a Jew such 
as to make me anti-Semtic. But during one year there, after I returned from 
Israel, I was under the dominion of a prejudice, a prejudice which has gone 
with my enlightenment. Although I have to watch for my tendency to be 
especially alert in the presence of Jew, for I have always found Jewish 
people--with the example of my brother, who is more gifted than I am 
intellectually and musically--to be formidable, much more formidable than the 
avera

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mitt just can't help himself

[authfriend]

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

> "What do you do when everybody's claiming your president 
> said something, and you just know he didn't really say 
> it, but all the video and all the audio and all the 
> transcripts show that he did say it?"

Nobody, of course, is saying he didn't say the words.
But the right-wingers have deliberately taken the words
out of context. They referred not to small businesses
themselves but to the infrastructure without which
they couldn't exist in the first place.




> 
> http://tinyurl.com/7c79njk
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
> 
> > > Your display of braveheartednessitude while assisting
> > > Feste in denigrating dear sweet Sunshine Sal was sooo
> > > impressive. Good on ya attacking an absent FFLer. 
> > 
> > Huh? Who is Sunshine Sal? I have never commented on her in
> > my life. I never read anything she ever wrote.
> 
> And you weren't involved at all in the discussion with
> Feste about Sal. az has you confused with someone else.
> 
> > > But you won't mind me pointing that out because you are, 
> > > self-described, nonreactive.  > > cracked me up when  read it. Yer killin' me girl!>
> > 
> > Really, I said that? Show me where. If you can I will gladly 
> > retract my statement and apologize to you. I need the practice
> > as I told Share anyway.
> 
> You once told Vaj you were *UNreactive* with regard to your
> WTS days:
> 
> -
> [Vaj wrote:]
> > Each person will respond very differently. For example one might
> > expect someone who was found to be demonic would react strongly,
> > someone who never was, less so.
> 
> [Ann wrote:]
> One might expect that, but I was an heavily confronted numerous
> times and I consider myself rather well-adjusted and unreactive,
> about this and many other aspects of the old days including dear
> old Robin himself. It just doesn't compute with me to not take
> total responsibility for my involvement. No one is to blame, for
> any of it, except myself and I don't even "blame" me. It was all
> really good and necessary in the end (and in the now).
> -
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/316091
> 
> That was in a very specific context, i.e., that you didn't
> blame Robin or anybody else for your experiences with his
> group. So that's two strikes on az. Let's see if he goes
> for three.

Geez Judy, how do you do it? Thanks for finding that, I wasn't sure I was up 
for the apology yet anyway. I still need to practice some more in front of the 
mirror.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
> >
> > So, you've changed in the intervening years.  Have you accepted
> > Jesus as your personal Savior?
> 
> Have you not bothered to read any of Robin's posts?
> 
> If he's said once, he's said dozens of times that he
> converted to Catholicism back in 1987 and then
> deconverted. He no longer follows any religion and
> does not believe Jesus is even accessible in the
> world any longer.
>

I just think yifu is jumping on the bandwagon but he isn't sure what wagon it 
is or where it's going. All he knows is it's a wagon and that is good enough!

[FairfieldLife] For merudanda

[awoelflebater]

Here is a statement issued regarding Tiffany Foster and her elimination. I 
thought you might find it interesting.


Statement from Equine Canada Regarding the Disqualification of Victor, Canadian 
Show Jumper from the 2012 Olympic Games
 
August 7, 2012, London, England - Michael Gallagher, President of Equine 
Canada, has issued the following statement regarding the International 
Equestrian Federation's (FEI) hypersensitivity testing protocol.
 
"We fully support the FEI in its hypersensitivity testing protocol. This is an 
important testing procedure for the fairness of our sport and for the welfare 
of the horse which must always be paramount. Victor, our team horse, did have a 
small but sensitive area on the coronary band as a result of a minor lesion. 
This resulted in the disqualification of the horse in accordance with the FEI's 
hypersensitivity protocol. The Canadian Team is disappointed with the outcome, 
and the impact both on our team and the Olympic dreams of our athlete Tiffany 
Foster," states Mr. Gallagher.

"Equine Canada appreciates that the FEI has shared with us the findings of the 
veterinary examinations. We also thank the FEI and its president, HRH Princess 
Haya Al Hussein,  for making it clear that the disqualification in no way 
implies any wrong doing on the part of the Canadian Team, nor athlete Tiffany 
Foster."

Read more on the  FEI's hypersensitivity protocol.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hi Ann

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, oxcart49  wrote:
>
> WOW! that is quite a scathing summation Judy about Lord Knows.
> I felt that Lord Knows post was excellent and hit the nail
> directly on the head and countersunk it.  That post basically
> was 98% accurate, which for some may be difficult to take.

Seems we'll have to disagree on that, oxcart. It wasn't
even *factually* accurate, if you saw my response to it
last night.

I have nothing to say, obviously, about LK's portrayal
of Robin in his WTS days (although I note that Ann, the
only other person on FFL who was there, seems to have
taken a more positive view).

LK's interpretation of Robin as he is today is so far
off the mark I don't even know where to begin. Yes, that
is difficult to take.

I'm a little surprised that you agree with it, given your
comments about the "Fairfield Bullies'" attacks on Robin
in your very first post here.

Did you have any rebuttals to what I said to LK in the
post you quote, or did you just want to wave the
anti-Robin flag?




 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Dear Ann.
> > > 
> > > Ann thank you for very kind words and vote of confidence.This
> > > has been a very interesting day for me.I was seriously
> > > considering dialoguing with Robin but if you read my last post
> > > you will see how that unfolded.It would have been interesting
> > > but in the end exhausting, and to what purpose.If Robin would
> > > put away his old tricks and really be honest rather than always
> > > writing about the theory of how life supports honesty,
> > 
> > "Really be honest" = humbly accept Lord Knows's scathing
> > view of him. "Old tricks" = not accepting that view.
> > 
> > > than I agree it could have been potentially very worthwhile.  I
> > > think  a number of people on this forum would have found it of
> > > interest and it would have been a fullfillmment of my desire to
> > > have a genuine heart to heart conversation with, him as you know.
> > > Is it a lost opportunity? You could look at it that way.What to
> > > do? It is not how I would have wished it to go.
> > 
> > It was how you wished it to go as of your first post, where
> > you declared you had no intention of engaging with Robin.
> > No indication in that post that you wanted a "genuine heart
> > to heart conversation" with him, explicitly to the contrary.
> > 
> > Why do I suspect you may have misrepresented your intentions
> > to Ann when you talked to her privately?
> > 
> > > As you know from our private conversations I was genuinely open
> > > and willing to find a new Robin, someone who really had moved
> > > on and had stopped his old games.I am aware Robin and others
> > > here would find that hard to believe given my post
> > 
> > That's an understatement.
> > 
> > > which was bitter medicine for Robin to read,
> > 
> > Not bitter, toxic. More like poison than medicine.
> > 
> > > but if Robin had been as
> > > reasonable and temperate as he first seemed and open to truly 
> > > heartfelt honest inquiry then all could have been different.
> > 
> > I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. If you had sincerely 
> > changed your mind about wanting a dialogue with him after
> > seeing his first posts, you would have responded to those
> > rather than his fourth. He's right, you chose the coward's
> > way out.
> > 
> > > I do not claim to have the last word on Robin or anything else
> > > for that matter. I wish Robin could hear the words spoken to
> > > his heart "Go and sin no more, all is forgiven" as if they were
> > > spoken by Christ to him.
> > 
> > But with the emphasis on "sin no more," right? As long as
> > he behaves as you think he should behave, he's forgiven,
> > but not otherwise.
> > 
> > What hypocrisy.
> > 
> > > Just to be clear I have not become a born again Christian, but
> > > when I think of what might be most healing and helpful to Robin
> > > it is just what comes to mind.
> > 
> > Just to be clear, I do not believe you have it within you
> > to do anything that might be the least bit healing or
> > helpful to Robin, nor do I think for one second that this
> > is your intention.
> > 
> > > Robin would probably say how presumptuous of me to assume he
> > > hasn't already experienced this or something like it, it's
> > > true of course I don't know. All I can say is I don't see
> > > the change in him that he seems to feel.
> > 
> > You have not been looking for it. You've seen what you
> > wanted to see.
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > All the Best
> > > Lord Knows (my online name makes me laugh a little)
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Greetings from the New York Center for Nonviolent Communication

[nycnvc]

Greetings,

We are excited and grateful for the opportunity to share this upcoming
event with you: NVC Discovery Weekend August 31 - September 2, 2012 in
Chelsea, Manhattan  . It is a weekend of
learning, sharing and discussing what Jack Canfield, Deepak Chopra, John
Gray, Marianne Williamson and many more have called:


`dynamic... life-changing... healing...

invaluable... most useful processes you will ever learn...

effective... elegant... intrinsically radical... timely... necessary...

simple... insightful... liberating... concise... essential...

transformative... as radical and changing as the eight-fold

path... a  must read!... powerful!'

ABOUT NYCNVC
NYCNVC is committed to contributing to the growth and development of
anyone wishing to integrate Nonviolent Communication (NVC) into their
lives. The NVC Discovery Weekend is our most popular in-person workshop,
and is the ideal preparation for our residential intensives
  and 52 week online course
  (which this year includes over
1,000 participants from 6 continents and 54 countries).

WHY YOU?
We are contacting you because we read your mission, it appears to us to
be complementary with our own, and we hope that you will find this event
relevant to the members of your group. If that is not the case, or
should you have any questions or feedback, please contact us directly:
off...@nycnvc.org. I sincerely hope this is of use to you and yours.
(See posting info below)

Warmly,
Kumari and Antonio

THE POSTING

Are you enrolled in the NYCNVC Discovery Weekend? (Aug 31 - Sep 2)
A weekend of learning, sharing and discussing what Jack Canfield, Deepak
Chopra, John Gray, Marianne Williamson and many more have called:


`dynamic... life-changing... healing...

invaluable... most useful processes you will ever learn...

effective... elegant... intrinsically radical... timely... necessary...

simple... insightful... liberating... concise... essential...

transformative... as radical and changing as the eight-fold

path... a  must read!... powerful!'

What This training is for anyone who wants a comprehensive introductory
training in Nonviolent Communication (NVC) with a certified CNVC
trainer. It is also helpful for those who already know NVC and want
deeper integration. The weekend provides the movement and intensity that
many beginners want and the depth practiced NVCers can benefit from. It
is a highly effective way to transform relationships with your friends,
family, and enemies, and bring more compassion, harmony and fun into
your life. The weekend includes experiential exercises, demonstrations,
role plays and more.

When August 31st - September 2nd 2012
Friday 7:00 PM-9:15 PM, Saturday 9:30 AM-4:30 PM, Sunday 9:30 AM-4:30 PM

Where Sivananda Yoga Center (Chelsea, Manhattan)

How Much $260

To register for the Discovery Weekend, visit :
http://www.nycnvc.org/dwe.htm 
  
Questions off...@nycnvc.org or (646) 201-9226

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hi Ann

[oxcart49]

WOW! that is quite a scathing summation Judy about Lord Knows.  I felt that 
Lord Knows post was excellent and hit the nail directly on the head and 
countersunk it.  That post basically was 98% accurate, which for some may be 
difficult to take.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888"  wrote:
> > 
> > Dear Ann.
> > 
> > Ann thank you for very kind words and vote of confidence.This
> > has been a very interesting day for me.I was seriously
> > considering dialoguing with Robin but if you read my last post
> > you will see how that unfolded.It would have been interesting
> > but in the end exhausting, and to what purpose.If Robin would
> > put away his old tricks and really be honest rather than always
> > writing about the theory of how life supports honesty,
> 
> "Really be honest" = humbly accept Lord Knows's scathing
> view of him. "Old tricks" = not accepting that view.
> 
> > than I agree it could have been potentially very worthwhile.  I
> > think  a number of people on this forum would have found it of
> > interest and it would have been a fullfillmment of my desire to
> > have a genuine heart to heart conversation with, him as you know.
> > Is it a lost opportunity? You could look at it that way.What to
> > do? It is not how I would have wished it to go.
> 
> It was how you wished it to go as of your first post, where
> you declared you had no intention of engaging with Robin.
> No indication in that post that you wanted a "genuine heart
> to heart conversation" with him, explicitly to the contrary.
> 
> Why do I suspect you may have misrepresented your intentions
> to Ann when you talked to her privately?
> 
> > As you know from our private conversations I was genuinely open
> > and willing to find a new Robin, someone who really had moved
> > on and had stopped his old games.I am aware Robin and others
> > here would find that hard to believe given my post
> 
> That's an understatement.
> 
> > which was bitter medicine for Robin to read,
> 
> Not bitter, toxic. More like poison than medicine.
> 
> > but if Robin had been as
> > reasonable and temperate as he first seemed and open to truly 
> > heartfelt honest inquiry then all could have been different.
> 
> I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. If you had sincerely 
> changed your mind about wanting a dialogue with him after
> seeing his first posts, you would have responded to those
> rather than his fourth. He's right, you chose the coward's
> way out.
> 
> > I do not claim to have the last word on Robin or anything else
> > for that matter. I wish Robin could hear the words spoken to
> > his heart "Go and sin no more, all is forgiven" as if they were
> > spoken by Christ to him.
> 
> But with the emphasis on "sin no more," right? As long as
> he behaves as you think he should behave, he's forgiven,
> but not otherwise.
> 
> What hypocrisy.
> 
> > Just to be clear I have not become a born again Christian, but
> > when I think of what might be most healing and helpful to Robin
> > it is just what comes to mind.
> 
> Just to be clear, I do not believe you have it within you
> to do anything that might be the least bit healing or
> helpful to Robin, nor do I think for one second that this
> is your intention.
> 
> > Robin would probably say how presumptuous of me to assume he
> > hasn't already experienced this or something like it, it's
> > true of course I don't know. All I can say is I don't see
> > the change in him that he seems to feel.
> 
> You have not been looking for it. You've seen what you
> wanted to see.
> 
> 
> > 
> > All the Best
> > Lord Knows (my online name makes me laugh a little)
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> So, you've changed in the intervening years.  Have you accepted
> Jesus as your personal Savior?

Have you not bothered to read any of Robin's posts?

If he's said once, he's said dozens of times that he
converted to Catholicism back in 1987 and then
deconverted. He no longer follows any religion and
does not believe Jesus is even accessible in the
world any longer.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[authfriend]

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

> > Your display of braveheartednessitude while assisting
> > Feste in denigrating dear sweet Sunshine Sal was sooo
> > impressive. Good on ya attacking an absent FFLer. 
> 
> Huh? Who is Sunshine Sal? I have never commented on her in
> my life. I never read anything she ever wrote.

And you weren't involved at all in the discussion with
Feste about Sal. az has you confused with someone else.

> > But you won't mind me pointing that out because you are, 
> > self-described, nonreactive.  > cracked me up when  read it. Yer killin' me girl!>
> 
> Really, I said that? Show me where. If you can I will gladly 
> retract my statement and apologize to you. I need the practice
> as I told Share anyway.

You once told Vaj you were *UNreactive* with regard to your
WTS days:

-
[Vaj wrote:]
> Each person will respond very differently. For example one might
> expect someone who was found to be demonic would react strongly,
> someone who never was, less so.

[Ann wrote:]
One might expect that, but I was an heavily confronted numerous
times and I consider myself rather well-adjusted and unreactive,
about this and many other aspects of the old days including dear
old Robin himself. It just doesn't compute with me to not take
total responsibility for my involvement. No one is to blame, for
any of it, except myself and I don't even "blame" me. It was all
really good and necessary in the end (and in the now).
-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/316091

That was in a very specific context, i.e., that you didn't
blame Robin or anybody else for your experiences with his
group. So that's two strikes on az. Let's see if he goes
for three.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Seraphita]

Excerpt from Suzanne Segal's Collision with the Infinite  [New Age
Books, pp80-81]. The Victoria community is a minor episode in the book,
which is anyway essential reading for anyone who took up TM and
subsequently had uncomfortable or alarming experiences of unboundedness
or depersonalization. Note that "Robert" = Robin Carlsen:

Robert called me late one night. He said he had felt strange ever since
our talk the previous week, and he wondered what I had done to him. This
was the kind of accusation that Robert often levelled at others.
Whenever he felt "dissociated, spacey, or dissolved" in someone's
presence, he concluded that the person must be evil . . .

. . . At six in the morning, Robert's wife came into my room and woke
me. She said that Robert was outside in the entryway and wanted to speak
with me. What she didn't tell me was that Robert had been telling the
other students in the house that I was evil because I was Jewish.The
previous week, apparently, he had come to the conclusion that all Jews
were evil . . .

I met Robert . . . He started by accusing me of making him feel
"strange" the previous week, then proceeded to enumerate all the things
I had done to him. Finally he told me I needed to leave right away
because all Jews were evil and therefore were no longer welcome in this
house, which was a sacred space to him.

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Aug 04 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Aug 11 00:00:00 2012
284 messages as of (UTC) Wed Aug 08 00:09:41 2012

27 Robert 
23 turquoiseb 
22 Share Long 
20 authfriend 
15 Vaj 
14 sparaig 
14 nablusoss1008 
14 Robin Carlsen 
14 Bhairitu 
13 cardemaister 
13 awoelflebater 
13 Mike Dixon 
 9 merudanda 
 7 John 
 5 danfriedman2002 
 5 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 5 Buck 
 5 "Richard J. Williams" 
 4 Susan 
 3 wgm4u 
 3 lordknows888 
 3 feste37 
 3 azgrey 
 3 Yifu 
 3 Joe 
 2 raunchydog 
 2 laughinggull108 
 2 Rick Archer 
 2 Mark 
 2 Lord Knows 
 2 Duveyoung 
 2 Alex Stanley 
 1 salyavin808 
 1 nelson 
 1 merlin 
 1 martyboi 
 1 iranitea 
 1 eustace10679 
 1 emptybill 
 1 Seraphita 
 1 Dick Mays 
 1 "Dr. Jessie" 

Posters: 42
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hi Ann

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888"  wrote:
> 
> Dear Ann.
> 
> Ann thank you for very kind words and vote of confidence.This
> has been a very interesting day for me.I was seriously
> considering dialoguing with Robin but if you read my last post
> you will see how that unfolded.It would have been interesting
> but in the end exhausting, and to what purpose.If Robin would
> put away his old tricks and really be honest rather than always
> writing about the theory of how life supports honesty,

"Really be honest" = humbly accept Lord Knows's scathing
view of him. "Old tricks" = not accepting that view.

> than I agree it could have been potentially very worthwhile.  I
> think  a number of people on this forum would have found it of
> interest and it would have been a fullfillmment of my desire to
> have a genuine heart to heart conversation with, him as you know.
> Is it a lost opportunity? You could look at it that way.What to
> do? It is not how I would have wished it to go.

It was how you wished it to go as of your first post, where
you declared you had no intention of engaging with Robin.
No indication in that post that you wanted a "genuine heart
to heart conversation" with him, explicitly to the contrary.

Why do I suspect you may have misrepresented your intentions
to Ann when you talked to her privately?

> As you know from our private conversations I was genuinely open
> and willing to find a new Robin, someone who really had moved
> on and had stopped his old games.I am aware Robin and others
> here would find that hard to believe given my post

That's an understatement.

> which was bitter medicine for Robin to read,

Not bitter, toxic. More like poison than medicine.

> but if Robin had been as
> reasonable and temperate as he first seemed and open to truly 
> heartfelt honest inquiry then all could have been different.

I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. If you had sincerely 
changed your mind about wanting a dialogue with him after
seeing his first posts, you would have responded to those
rather than his fourth. He's right, you chose the coward's
way out.

> I do not claim to have the last word on Robin or anything else
> for that matter. I wish Robin could hear the words spoken to
> his heart "Go and sin no more, all is forgiven" as if they were
> spoken by Christ to him.

But with the emphasis on "sin no more," right? As long as
he behaves as you think he should behave, he's forgiven,
but not otherwise.

What hypocrisy.

> Just to be clear I have not become a born again Christian, but
> when I think of what might be most healing and helpful to Robin
> it is just what comes to mind.

Just to be clear, I do not believe you have it within you
to do anything that might be the least bit healing or
helpful to Robin, nor do I think for one second that this
is your intention.

> Robin would probably say how presumptuous of me to assume he
> hasn't already experienced this or something like it, it's
> true of course I don't know. All I can say is I don't see
> the change in him that he seems to feel.

You have not been looking for it. You've seen what you
wanted to see.


> 
> All the Best
> Lord Knows (my online name makes me laugh a little)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
> > >
> > > Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> > > of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> > > economy of only eight posts in a single day.
> > > 
> > > The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> > > with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> > > *our* cracked pot.
> > 
> > It's just like AZ to go for the underbelly when the jackals are trying to 
> > down the antelope. I can always count on you to wait for enough people to 
> > start in on a subject before you come out of the woodwork. The 
> > quintessential coward. Sorry, but true.
> 
> 
> Dear Ann, 
> 
> But I've always considered you much more porcupine than
> jackal.
> 
> Your display of braveheartednessitude while assisting
> Feste in denigrating dear sweet Sunshine Sal was sooo
> impressive. Good on ya attacking an absent FFLer. 

Huh? Who is Sunshine Sal? I have never commented on her in my life. I never 
read anything she ever wrote.
> 
> But you won't mind me pointing that out because you are, 
> self-described, nonreactive.  cracked me up when  read it. Yer killin' me girl!>

Really, I said that? Show me where. If you can I will gladly retract my 
statement and apologize to you. I need the practice as I told Share anyway.
> 
> Yours, with xoxoxo, 
> 
> Azgrey
> 
> (psst: it's the hypocrisy thang, stupid.)
> 
> > > 
> > > Sun Aug 5, 2012
> > > FFL PostCount
> > > 8
> > > 
> > > "Vaj knows that. 
> > > ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> > > ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> > > Vaj wrote
> > > Wonder how Vaj...
> > > ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> > > Actually it's Barry who...
> > > What Barry means...
> > > The real reason Barry
> > > ...if anyone Barry had...
> > > It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> > > ...yet another example of Barry's...
> > > I'm guessing Barry has...
> > > Here Barry was...
> > > ...such as those Barry has when...
> > > ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> > > Barry's lying.
> > > ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> > > ...between Barry and...
> > > Barry tried to ..." 
> > > 
> > > It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> > > from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> > > Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> > > how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> > > those four?
> > > 
> > > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hi Ann

[awoelflebater]

Dear Lord Knows (Good one by the way),

This is the man I know, this one right here in this post. You have always been 
a thoughtful, sensitive and reasonable person and I like you very much. I think 
FFL and you and Robin and Lord knows who else could benefit from dialogue here 
but I also completely understand why your heart may not be in it. I think I 
understand what you are looking for but I am not sure you will be able to find 
it on a forum format like this one. Even the tone of your second post was 
different from the man I know you to be so maybe it would not bring out the 
best of who you are, and believe me, I know you to be very loving, true and 
honest. You are a true seeker and you have remained a good man throughout it 
all.  I also believe you to have moved on, are happy and surrounded by people 
who love you. I don't believe you to be negative, brooding or vengeful. And I 
understand you to love the knowledge there is to be gleaned from investigation 
of the human condition and the human spirit. If you ever feel in the future to 
jump in again I know that all of us would benefit from the depth of who you are.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888"  wrote:
>
> 
> Dear Ann.
> 
> Ann thank you for very kind words and vote of confidence.This has been a very 
> interesting day for me.I was seriously considering dialoguing with Robin but 
> if you read my last post you will see how that unfolded.It would have been 
> interesting but in the end exhausting, and to what purpose.If Robin would put 
> away his old tricks and really be honest rather than always writing about the 
> theory of how life supports honesty, than I agree it could have been 
> potentially very worthwhile.  I think  a number of people on this forum would 
> have found it of interest and it would have been a fullfillmment of my desire 
> to have a genuine heart to heart conversation with, him as you know. Is it a 
> lost opportunity? You could look at it that way.What to do? It is not how I 
> would have wished it to go. As you know from our private conversations I was 
> genuinely open and willing to find a new Robin, someone who really had moved 
> on and had stopped his old games.I am aware Robin and others here would find 
> that hard to believe given my post which was bitter medicine for Robin to 
> read, but if Robin had been as reasonable and temperate as he first seemed 
> and open to truly heartfelt honest inquiry then all could have been 
> different. I do not claim to have the last word on Robin or anything else for 
> that matter. I wish Robin could hear the words spoken to his heart "Go and 
> sin no more, all is forgiven" as if they were spoken by Christ to him. Just 
> to be clear I have not become a born again Christian, but when I think of 
> what might be most healing and helpful to Robin it is just what comes to 
> mind.Robin would probably say how presumptuous of me to assume he hasn't 
> already experienced this or something like it, it's true of course I don't 
> know. All I can say is I don't see the change in him that he seems to feel.
> 
> All the Best
> Lord Knows (my online name makes me laugh a little)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Robin Carlsen]

Dear Lord Knows,

Just to make sure you understand my position here: I take very seriously the 
truth and the feeling contained inside your initial post. I believe it was in 
some basic sense a just response to those ten years--within a certain 
inevitable perspective. But having had your say, then anything which challenges 
your thesis, your judgment, has to be evaluated according to the extent to 
which it either consolidates your thesis, or brings it--in some respects at 
least--into question.

Now regardless of how it may have seemed to you or to others, I was only 
interested in responding to it with complete honesty and candour. That is, I 
wanted to take all of it into me and see what kind of experience I had once I 
had received it its most extreme point of purported truthfulness. Once I had 
done that, then, over the course of time, certain thoughts occurred to me--You 
must remember that I have been thinking about those ten years for twenty-five 
years now, and you must suppose, because of this, that I have considered all 
possible judgments of myself--and I chose to articulate those thoughts in the 
form of three posts. I did not conceive of what I did as some attempt to 
destroy your testimony in its essential integrity. But having suffered deeply 
and wrestled with this matter over a quarter of a century, I am naturally going 
to have some response to a judgment like yours since I will have to compare it 
with my own interrogation of myself, which I can assure you, in some very real 
way is more severe and searching than is represented by what you have said in 
that initial post.

Now I composed several posts in response to your post, and after the third 
post, I saw that, while I was composing that third post, you had already 
posted, giving there an indication that you were contemplating going against 
your initial decision that you would not be drawn into to answering anything I 
had to say. I am sure, by the way, Lord Knows, that even God himself will give 
us a chance (should there still be something in the way of a personal judgment 
of our souls) to explain ourselves, to defend the  actions of our life--that 
is, if we feel ourselves to have a clear conscience. And that is the difference 
here: whatever atrocities I have committed in my life, I have--although you 
will be furiously opposed to accepting the validity of this--done my penance 
over the course of these twenty-five years. And I have a personal witness to 
this, and his testimony is more sophisticated and profound than your own, as 
expressed in your post. Were you to speak to him and listen to his account of 
the past twenty-five years, you would immediately realize how very serious he 
is, how informed he is, and how his grasp of both the truth of those ten years 
and his grasp of the nature and problems (which were serious and almost 
never-ending) of his friend make your own analysis in your post seem, 
paradoxically enough, superficial. And he himself knows all about the 
excoriating and cruel humiliation and terror of confrontation--perhaps more 
than anyone who lived through those ten years.

So. what I have done, then, Lord Knows, is to meet your post not in the 
ambition to demolish its truthfulness, but instead to meet it within my own 
sense of the truthfulness of those ten years--and the very complex and 
multi-leveled understanding I have gained from these past twenty-five years. 
What I know now about why I behaved as I did, and who I am, goes well beyond 
what I believe can be inferred from your post describing the Robin that you 
knew in those ten years and certainly what you know about the kind of human 
being I am now.

I found your response to my fourth and provocative post a complete indulgence. 
You chose to put your entire focus there, neglecting--perhaps accidentally 
(that still is a serious matter)--to consider what I had said in the three 
posts which followed upon your initial post.

I do not in any way consider this conversation, this dispute to be a matter of 
tactics or "moves on the court" as you put. I consider it to be almost a matter 
of life and death, since there are souls out there who were part of those ten 
years who will want us--especially if they still have some moments of 
perplexity and torment--to do justice, complete justice to what happened. I do 
believe you have laid out a case against me. I am not shirking my 
responsibilities in facing your charges; but, as I have tried to say here, I 
have lived with the misery and agony of those ten years--and the horror and 
terror of it all--for twenty-five years. That you would think me to be the very 
same person that I was when you last knew me seems intolerant and close-minded 
indeed. You made some reference in your second post to my being more temperate 
and restrained than you would have anticipated in my first two posts to you. 
But then, when I gently derided you for stepping outside of the affective 
context within which you had

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
>
> Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> economy of only eight posts in a single day.

I wonder why az quotes from only five of them while
implying all eight were about Barry and Vaj, and claims
they were made in a single day when it was actually 
over two days.

He couldn't have intended to mislead anybody, could he?

> The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> *our* cracked pot.
> 
> Sun Aug 5, 2012
> FFL PostCount
> 8
> 
> "Vaj knows that. 
> ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> Vaj wrote
> Wonder how Vaj...
> ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> Actually it's Barry who...
> What Barry means...
> The real reason Barry
> ...if anyone Barry had...
> It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> ...yet another example of Barry's...
> I'm guessing Barry has...
> Here Barry was...
> ...such as those Barry has when...
> ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> Barry's lying.
> ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> ...between Barry and...
> Barry tried to ..." 
> 
> It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB.

Right, two posts about Vaj and then three about Barry.
I'm flattered that az was glued to his computer all day
Saturday and Sunday just for the thrill of catching
that stunning moment when I switched my obsession from
Vaj to Barry.

You know what else is stunning? az never seems to be
able to address anything I say concerning Barry or
Vaj (or anybody else, for that matter).

He did appear to be about to do so once, demanding
to see my evidence for something I'd said about Vaj,
claiming he wanted to discuss the issue in question.
I produced the evidence, and we never heard a word
more from az about it.

 I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> those four?

Let's see, now, how long has Ravi been gone from FFL?
Oh, only seven months. Well, that's OK, then. One can't
always be on top of all the fast-paced developments at
FFL, can one? But there are quite a few more of my
minions you could have included who are still posting
here.

Easier for az, I suppose, to reach back more than 12
years into the past for ammunition.

> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Hi Ann

[laughinggull108]

Lord Knows, it makes me laugh too, particularly when reading Robin's
responses where he uses your name constantly, sometimes I think as a
little "touch-in-cheek" like listening to my grandmother saying "...lord
knows this...and lord knows that...". It's a southern thing, you
know...no, it's a southern thing, lord knows.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888" 
wrote:
>
>
> Dear Ann.
>
> Ann thank you for very kind words and vote of confidence.This has been
a very interesting day for me.I was seriously considering dialoguing
with Robin but if you read my last post you will see how that
unfolded.It would have been interesting but in the end exhausting, and
to what purpose.If Robin would put away his old tricks and really be
honest rather than always writing about the theory of how life supports
honesty, than I agree it could have been potentially very worthwhile. I
think a number of people on this forum would have found it of interest
and it would have been a fullfillmment of my desire to have a genuine
heart to heart conversation with, him as you know. Is it a lost
opportunity? You could look at it that way.What to do? It is not how I
would have wished it to go. As you know from our private conversations I
was genuinely open and willing to find a new Robin, someone who really
had moved on and had stopped his old games.I am aware Robin and others
here would find that hard to believe given my post which was bitter
medicine for Robin to read, but if Robin had been as reasonable and
temperate as he first seemed and open to truly heartfelt honest inquiry
then all could have been different. I do not claim to have the last word
on Robin or anything else for that matter. I wish Robin could hear the
words spoken to his heart "Go and sin no more, all is forgiven" as if
they were spoken by Christ to him. Just to be clear I have not become a
born again Christian, but when I think of what might be most healing and
helpful to Robin it is just what comes to mind.Robin would probably say
how presumptuous of me to assume he hasn't already experienced this or
something like it, it's true of course I don't know. All I can say is I
don't see the change in him that he seems to feel.
>
> All the Best
> Lord Knows (my online name makes me laugh a little)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[azgrey]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Is it rude to say "I told you so" when I actually
> did, back on February 8th?  :-)
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/303806
> 



Not at all TurquoiseB.

Reviewing the Judyatri Mantra on a regular basis has the effect
of shining a disinfecting light on her harpy blathering. 

It seems to carry an inoculating power against the Uncle Remis
tarbaby syndrome.  

Carry on. ;-)






> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
> >
> > Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> > of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> > economy of only eight posts in a single day.
> > 
> > The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> > with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> > *our* cracked pot.
> > 
> > Sun Aug 5, 2012
> > FFL PostCount
> > 8
> > 
> > "Vaj knows that. 
> > ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> > ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> > Vaj wrote
> > Wonder how Vaj...
> > ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> > Actually it's Barry who...
> > What Barry means...
> > The real reason Barry
> > ...if anyone Barry had...
> > It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> > ...yet another example of Barry's...
> > I'm guessing Barry has...
> > Here Barry was...
> > ...such as those Barry has when...
> > ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> > Barry's lying.
> > ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> > ...between Barry and...
> > Barry tried to ..." 
> > 
> > It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> > from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> > Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> > how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> > those four?
> > 
> > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Robin your last post has a double message ((shades of yesteryear)

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 4:35 PM, "lordknows888"  wrote:
> 
> > Dear Robin,
> > 
> > 
> > 1) I am a single author and not a composite of authors
> > 2)I did not state that you were psychotic and that you were going to hell, 
> > I stated I thought you were mentally unbalanced.
> > 3)I live my life holding myself to a standard of honesty (thanks for the 
> > pep talk on the need for honesty anyway)
> > 4)I found your post quite different in it's seeming intent which could be 
> > summarized as a exhortation  to honesty,  and to state that honesty  is 
> > your creed. I detected an unstated subtext. It was a kind of an almost 
> > bullying posturing which you was  communicating in effect " you better 
> > bring your A game buddy boy because I'm going to hit that frigging honesty 
> > ball out of the park".Where do I read this subtext you ask? At least in 
> > part right here  "You have staked out a very strong position; should you 
> > have any doubts about standing behind that position, then it might be more 
> > problematic in "entering into disputations with you". After all, you know 
> > all my tricks and ruses and feints that enable me to cover up the fact that 
> > I don't have any faith that the truth will get me through my argument."
> > and right here,   " No, I think innocence and sincerity are the way to 
> > pursue this matter, LordKnows. And I am hoping you are ready to give it 
> > your all". This is like high class trash talking before playing a game. 
> > This has me feeling shades of yesteryear, I've seen this move before.
> > 5) I have also seen you seem reasonable and temperate initially as you 
> > skillfully absorb an initial hit before marshalling your forces for the 
> > counter offensive . I'm a little rusty Robin it has been over 25 years 
> > since I've seen your moves on the court, but it comes back as things play 
> > out here. What am I referencing when I state this you ask,  this  " 
> > "Reasonable and temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities 
> > somewhat incompatible with your description of my character and my motives 
> > and my mental health." Not that you are not allowed to defend yourself,  
> > but do it out front and don't package it inside a message which is supposed 
> > to be about honesty. Honesty is transparency not hidden double messages. So 
> > you see Robin in your exhortation to honesty you are showing the 
> > opposite,subtle manipulation. 
> > 5)I have to tell you Robin that this kind of bully boy posturing in the 
> > guise of an exhortation to honesty is not an encouraging sign for real 
> > honesty, which is at least your stated intention.
> > 6)Robin in my last post I stated that I was still weighing the pros and 
> > cons of entering into a dialogue with you, this last post has convinced me 
> > it is not worth it.What would be the point when right here in the first 
> > post about our potential dialogue you are up to your old tricks.
> 
> Be careful of the "I'm a wounded animal" type pattern RWC likes to fall back 
> on - to suck people in - typically when it's he who's on the losing end of a 
> particular situation.
> 
> I've also seen him use if `if only you could have felt it as I did' (often 
> implying some extraordinary bliss, grace or trophy state) to draw in the 
> (largely) TM-related folks here. 
> 
> 
> 
> Old tactic, just a "New Fairfield". :-)

RESPONSE:

Dear Vaj,,

I am sure you can explain this, but why is it that your post here contains what 
Lord Knows posted 22 minutes later. Are you colluding with Lord Knows?--surely 
you can provide some explanation for what seems suspiciously like a joint 
enterprise. But if I am wrong and there is an innocent (I rather think there 
must be, this is too much keystone cops) reason for this, you will tell me what 
it is.

What I find staggering and nonplussing is your depiction of me here. You have 
never met me, Vaj, else you would know how fatally off the mark you are in 
almost everything you say about me--once, that is, you become critical. No one 
who has ever met me would say the things you say. They represent an imaginative 
reading of me--and do not in any way whatsoever contain the force and truth of 
some direct encounter with me. Lord Knows, Lord knows, he does know me--after a 
fashion.

But again, Vaj, tell us how you preempted LK888's post to me? I am more curious 
than anything else.

You do not know me, Vaj. You are being driven by something other than the 
search for the truth. And by the way: you must tell your friend, Lord Knows 
that he ducked the real fight, and I consider him to be cowardly for doing so. 
*That* should compel him to respond to those first three posts, don't you think?

Especially the third one on free will. Where I have addressed a very personal 
question to him, which in avoiding answering, he damages his credibility 
fatally.

Of course only in my eyes. I am sure he has garnered sympathy fr

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Yifu]

So, you've changed in the intervening years.  Have you accepted Jesus as your 
personal Savior?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> Dear Lord Knows,
> 
> There is something else which you must bear in mind in wondering how I 
> received your categorical judgment of my sanity, my character, and my 
> actions. It is this, Lord Knows: that I believe that the truth about those 
> ten years, about my behaviour, about my enlightenment, about the pain and 
> terror I created in the souls of other human beings, the matter of free will 
> versus cosmic will--that all this is being discussed here inside what I 
> believe is a context of reality where that reality--what created us, what 
> created the universe, what created your first person subjective sense of 
> yourself, what created even your ability to write that post--and for me to 
> respond to it--will pass judgment (perhaps only silently within itself) on 
> Robin Carlsen, and the extent to which you have represented the truth of 
> those ten years.
> 
> I am keenly sensitive, then, Lord Knows, to those cues from within your 
> post--and how you will act in response to the various rebuttals that have 
> been directed towards you since you posted your letter--which would 
> indicate--beyond what you yourself are identified with as the truth of this 
> matter--reality's verdict here. In other words, Lord Knows--this is so 
> important for you to grasp if you are sincere in wanting everyone to know the 
> truth,--despite being the object of your castigation and damnation, I am 
> still seeking to embrace the truth of those ten years. I have been dedicated 
> to this very purpose for the past twenty-five years.
> 
> What this comes down to, Lord Knows, is that you must not let my own desire 
> to know and to be responsible for the truth of my actions and all that 
> happened during those ten years because of the assumption of my 
> enlightenment, overtake and surpass your own honest and sincere determination 
> to get the truth out. My philosophy asks this of me; that is, to recognize 
> there may be more reality and truth inside the consciousness and point of 
> view of another person than myself.
> 
> This, after all, is what got me launched on this self-rehabilitation project 
> of the past twenty-five years. Someone demonstrating a more accurate 
> perception of me than I had of myself. The beginning of the showdown: that I 
> was gravely deceived about who I was and of course about the human normalcy 
> of my enlightenment.
> 
> Now if you do not depend only on the truth of your experience, and, in the 
> face of challenges to the final validity or definitiveness of that 
> experience, become defensive and evasive and belligerent in the presence of 
> the complexities and contradictions of this whole affair, then I shall have 
> to conclude that, in the end, you are not that sure of your judgment, you are 
> not that sure of your sincerity, and you are not willing to go to where you 
> must go in order to know with a sense of conviction and courage that all that 
> you say in your post--and perhaps future posts--is 'true'.
> 
> Because if you are right in what you have said about me, in the kind of 
> person I really am (unchanged from what I was when you knew me), that I am 
> mentally ill, deluded, and simply plain wrong, then you will trust in the 
> objectivity and truthfulness of your testimony--without the need for any 
> personal venom or hatred or irrationality to come into what you write. This 
> at least--perhaps this is a simplification of reality--is how I understand 
> the means to measure the truth of what you have said, what you are going to 
> say, about me. *Reality and truth will do the work for you, Lord Knows*.
> 
> I will then, declare that I hold myself to that standard of truth whereby I 
> utterly trust reality to make its judgment of me known to me--even through 
> you. But if I sense reality's refusal to go along with your judgment of 
> me--at least to some extent--then I shall pay attention to this, because 
> this, after all--and I know this is a point of much bitterness and 
> condemnation for you--this is how my philosophy 'works': I seek the moral and 
> metaphysical and aesthetic cues within the subjectivity of another person 
> which will enable me--if we are arguing about matters where there is some 
> dispute--to know the extent to which reality is getting behind that 
> subjectivity, and the extent to which, because reality is not getting behind 
> that subjectivity, that subjectivity must make up for this, by becoming more 
> strident, more bellicose, more defensive, more isolated.
> 
> If we take your post as corresponding pretty much to the truth about Robin 
> Carlsen then it must follow that anything which is said, which has been said, 
> which will be said, contra your judgment of me, will be received by you 
> within a context wherein your experience is supported by reality (even if 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[azgrey]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
> >
> > Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> > of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> > economy of only eight posts in a single day.
> > 
> > The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> > with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> > *our* cracked pot.
> 
> It's just like AZ to go for the underbelly when the jackals are trying to 
> down the antelope. I can always count on you to wait for enough people to 
> start in on a subject before you come out of the woodwork. The quintessential 
> coward. Sorry, but true.


Dear Ann, 

But I've always considered you much more porcupine than
jackal.

Your display of braveheartednessitude while assisting
Feste in denigrating dear sweet Sunshine Sal was sooo
impressive. Good on ya attacking an absent FFLer. 

But you won't mind me pointing that out because you are, 
self-described, nonreactive. 

Yours, with xoxoxo, 

Azgrey

(psst: it's the hypocrisy thang, stupid.)

> > 
> > Sun Aug 5, 2012
> > FFL PostCount
> > 8
> > 
> > "Vaj knows that. 
> > ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> > ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> > Vaj wrote
> > Wonder how Vaj...
> > ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> > Actually it's Barry who...
> > What Barry means...
> > The real reason Barry
> > ...if anyone Barry had...
> > It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> > ...yet another example of Barry's...
> > I'm guessing Barry has...
> > Here Barry was...
> > ...such as those Barry has when...
> > ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> > Barry's lying.
> > ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> > ...between Barry and...
> > Barry tried to ..." 
> > 
> > It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> > from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> > Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> > how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> > those four?
> > 
> > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Resending post, including Robin's post with mine this time

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888"  wrote:
>
>  Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra
> Dear Lord Knows,
> 
> Well, I hope you know what you're doing, that you are not being deceived
> in this
> temptation to have a conversation about this matter. I trust you will
> remain as
> serious and non-ambivalent as you were in that first post. You have
> staked out a
> very strong position; should you have any doubts about standing behind
> that
> position, then it might be more problematic in "entering into
> disputations with
> you". After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and feints that enable
> me to
> cover up the fact that I don't have any faith that the truth will get me
> through
> my argument.
> 
> I am assuming you are a single author and not a composite of
> authors--the latter
> would, I think, mean trouble, because what will compel people most is
> one
> persons's utterly sincere testimony about Robin Carlsen--if you are
> pretending
> to be one person and you actually represent a collective
> consciousness--I can
> assure you this will show up in your next post. Because you will
> compromise the
> truth of your testimony by the falseness of your claim to be a single
> person.
> No, I think innocence and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
> Lord
> Knows. And I am hoping you are ready to give it your all.
> 
> From the tone of this second post of yours, I would almost think you
> have been
> partially converted away from your
> Robin-is-psychotic-and-is-going-to-hell
> perspective.
> 
> I will be very interested in the "tone" as you put it, of your next
> post.
> "Reasonable and temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities
> somewhat
> incompatible with your description of my character and my motives and my
> mental
> health.
> 
> The truth of what happened in those ten years--Lord knows, Lord Knows, I
> would
> not want you to be persuaded to mitigate it in any way whatsoever.
> 
> So you must at least make this promise to me: You will not let off on
> the
> accelerator in driving this truth home to all the readers at FFL.
> 
> But sincerity and honesty: this could be the beginning of the Final
> Reconciliation--that is, if we are both capable of exercising these two
> faculties to the maximum.
> 
> And I think we will need to be if we are to get to the bottom of this
> whole
> matter.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Robin
> 
> #316421  From: "lordknows888" 
> Date: Tue Aug 7, 2012 1:35 pm
> Subject: Robin your last post has a double message ((shades of
> yesteryear) 
> lordknows888 
>   [Offline]  Offline
>   [Send Email]  Send Email
>  1iivtbHxWmLP7PCvGVW7MLSMFAs7jlBV6cAYXRtjpvkCw5f9cKc5Ganx-47gyxuE7TloU_ZR\
> maZbAlV3s_jy5CWru6g>  Dear Robin,
> 1) I am a single author and not a composite of authors2)I did not state
> that you were psychotic and that you were going to hell, I stated I
> thought you were mentally unbalanced.3)I live my life holding myself to
> a standard of honesty (thanks for the pep talk on the need for honesty
> anyway)4)I  found your post quite different in it's seeming intent which
> could be  summarized as a exhortation  to honesty,  and to state that
> honesty  is  your creed. I detected an unstated subtext. It was a kind
> of an almost  bullying posturing which you was  communicating in effect
> " you better  bring your A game buddy boy because I'm going to hit that
> frigging  honesty ball out of the park".Where do I read this subtext you
> ask? At  least in part right here  "You have staked out a very strong
> position;  should you have any doubts about standing behind that
> position, then it  might be more problematic in "entering into
> disputations with you".  After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and
> feints that enable me  to cover up the fact that I don't have any faith
> that the truth will get  me through my argument."and right here,   "
> No, I think innocence  and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
> LordKnows. And I am  hoping you are ready to give it your all". This is
> like high class trash  talking before playing a game. This has me
> feeling shades of  yesteryear, I've seen this move before.5) I have also
> seen  you seem reasonable and temperate initially as you skillfully
> absorb an  initial hit before marshalling your forces for the counter
> offensive .  I'm a little rusty Robin it has been over 25 years since
> I've seen your  moves on the court, but it comes back as things play out
> here. What am I  referencing when I state this you ask,  this  "
> "Reasonable and  temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities 
> somewhat incompatible with your description of my character and my 
> motives and my mental health." Not that you are not allowed to defend 
> yourself,  but do it out fro

[FairfieldLife] Re: Resending post, including Robin's post with mine this time

[awoelflebater]

OK, I am changing my mind on the author here. It is sounding less and less like 
the person I know. In fact, it sounds like a different person altogether. I 
wonder what is going on here, are you morphing into a different personae or 
just referencing off others that are very unlike you? All I know is that your 
tone and your character in this latest post is not someone I recognize after 
all. Sorry about that. I guess I was mistaken. And given your tone of the post 
below I agree it would be a good idea to give FFL a miss this time around. We 
have enough negativity here already.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lordknows888"  wrote:
>
>  Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra
> Dear Lord Knows,
> 
> Well, I hope you know what you're doing, that you are not being deceived
> in this
> temptation to have a conversation about this matter. I trust you will
> remain as
> serious and non-ambivalent as you were in that first post. You have
> staked out a
> very strong position; should you have any doubts about standing behind
> that
> position, then it might be more problematic in "entering into
> disputations with
> you". After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and feints that enable
> me to
> cover up the fact that I don't have any faith that the truth will get me
> through
> my argument.
> 
> I am assuming you are a single author and not a composite of
> authors--the latter
> would, I think, mean trouble, because what will compel people most is
> one
> persons's utterly sincere testimony about Robin Carlsen--if you are
> pretending
> to be one person and you actually represent a collective
> consciousness--I can
> assure you this will show up in your next post. Because you will
> compromise the
> truth of your testimony by the falseness of your claim to be a single
> person.
> No, I think innocence and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
> Lord
> Knows. And I am hoping you are ready to give it your all.
> 
> From the tone of this second post of yours, I would almost think you
> have been
> partially converted away from your
> Robin-is-psychotic-and-is-going-to-hell
> perspective.
> 
> I will be very interested in the "tone" as you put it, of your next
> post.
> "Reasonable and temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities
> somewhat
> incompatible with your description of my character and my motives and my
> mental
> health.
> 
> The truth of what happened in those ten years--Lord knows, Lord Knows, I
> would
> not want you to be persuaded to mitigate it in any way whatsoever.
> 
> So you must at least make this promise to me: You will not let off on
> the
> accelerator in driving this truth home to all the readers at FFL.
> 
> But sincerity and honesty: this could be the beginning of the Final
> Reconciliation--that is, if we are both capable of exercising these two
> faculties to the maximum.
> 
> And I think we will need to be if we are to get to the bottom of this
> whole
> matter.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Robin
> 
> #316421  From: "lordknows888" 
> Date: Tue Aug 7, 2012 1:35 pm
> Subject: Robin your last post has a double message ((shades of
> yesteryear) 
> lordknows888 
>   [Offline]  Offline
>   [Send Email]  Send Email
>  1iivtbHxWmLP7PCvGVW7MLSMFAs7jlBV6cAYXRtjpvkCw5f9cKc5Ganx-47gyxuE7TloU_ZR\
> maZbAlV3s_jy5CWru6g>  Dear Robin,
> 1) I am a single author and not a composite of authors2)I did not state
> that you were psychotic and that you were going to hell, I stated I
> thought you were mentally unbalanced.3)I live my life holding myself to
> a standard of honesty (thanks for the pep talk on the need for honesty
> anyway)4)I  found your post quite different in it's seeming intent which
> could be  summarized as a exhortation  to honesty,  and to state that
> honesty  is  your creed. I detected an unstated subtext. It was a kind
> of an almost  bullying posturing which you was  communicating in effect
> " you better  bring your A game buddy boy because I'm going to hit that
> frigging  honesty ball out of the park".Where do I read this subtext you
> ask? At  least in part right here  "You have staked out a very strong
> position;  should you have any doubts about standing behind that
> position, then it  might be more problematic in "entering into
> disputations with you".  After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and
> feints that enable me  to cover up the fact that I don't have any faith
> that the truth will get  me through my argument."and right here,   "
> No, I think innocence  and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
> LordKnows. And I am  hoping you are ready to give it your all". This is
> like high class trash  talking before playing a game. This has me
> feeling shades of  yesteryear, I've seen this move before.5) I have also
> seen  you see

Re: [FairfieldLife] Just Another Day In The Life

[Share Long]

noozguru you made me laugh out loud, will never be able to see acronym FFL 
quite the same.  that's a good thing (-:
ps  maybe will change into my lounging pjs




 From: Bhairitu 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2012 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Just Another Day In The Life
 

  
On 08/07/2012 12:51 PM, azgrey wrote:
> Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> economy of only eight posts in a single day.
>
> The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared
> with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> *our* cracked pot.
>
> Sun Aug 5, 2012
> FFL PostCount
> 8
>
> "Vaj knows that.
> ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> Vaj wrote
> Wonder how Vaj...
> ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> Actually it's Barry who...
> What Barry means...
> The real reason Barry
> ...if anyone Barry had...
> It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> ...yet another example of Barry's...
> I'm guessing Barry has...
> Here Barry was...
> ...such as those Barry has when...
> ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> Barry's lying.
> ...in fact it was Barry who...
> ...between Barry and...
> Barry tried to ..."
>
> It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste,
> Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy,
> how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with
> those four?
>
> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/

Yup, just another day in the life at the Funny Farm Lounge! :-D


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Great Stupa of Tibetan Buddhism, Ketut too (-:

[Robin Carlsen]

Dear Share,

Yes, you are right about the "decidedly Catholic tone to it". Composed by a 
rotund 13th century Dominican monk. When he first wanted to become a religious 
his two brothers, who were soldiers, confined him in a fortress. I will let 
this account speak for itself, as it bears upon the very theme we are now 
discussing:

"There he remained for nearly two years, praying and studying while his family 
tried any means they could think of to lead him to abandon his vocation. His 
brothers even tried  to damage his virtue, but Thomas drove the temptress out 
of his room with a burning branch he snatched from the fire. It was at this 
time that he received the gift of perfect chastity from God, a gift which was 
told to him by two angels in a dream, in answer to his prayers for purity of 
mind and body."

I think your response to this essay apposite, normal, and appropriate. "That 
tone gives this reader the sense of someone demonstrating a waltz with their 
legs and arms tied". That is a response to the ontological context of an old 
universe, a universe which does not exist anymore--that is, the context within 
which this conception of human sexuality and the precepts that naturally follow 
from this such a conception is a different universe from the one we find 
ourselves existing in on August 7, 2012.

You and I were born, then, into a different ontological universe, Share, and so 
your response is a very real one. But you have to imagine: How was it possible 
for someone to believe what this Angelic Doctor says if your experience is 
true? It can only mean one thing--at least to me:--*God changed his universe 
before we were born*.

I think that the present experience of the power of sexuality is beyond any 
supernatural grace originating in the tradition that this Dominican monk so 
faithfully describes here. Christ personally thanked him for writing the book 
from which this passage is taken:  *Summa Theologiae: A Concise Translation* 
edited by Timothy McDermott.

So, then, your "sense of it", Share, seems entirely reasonable. It is just that 
I have a different perspective, for if you are right just in the terms in which 
you understand your experience in reading this passage, it must mean that the 
Angelic Doctor--one of the greatest philosophers who has ever lived--was not as 
sensitive or intelligent as you are.

This could never be. And so it is that I have concluded (for other reasons as 
well) that the universe into which you and I were born differs markedly in its 
ontological context from the universe into which this Dominican friar was born.

"I maintain that Western culture is severely marred by the spirit matter split 
that began long ago". For me, Share, this simply means that the supernatural 
grace which supported and sustained the conception of sexuality as delineated 
in this essay has gone out of the universe, thus leaving a context in which all 
that suppression and discipline and control exercised over the sexuality of 
human beings now, instead of becoming the means to safeguard the salvation of 
the soul, becomes instead something which seems estranged from what is natural 
and normal. The split between matter and the spirit was always joined by 
supernatural grace, since that split began at the Fall. Once Mary and the Holy 
Ghost abandoned the Church, then the forced waltz began. But before 
this--before the Allied Bombing of the very monastery where this  Angelic 
Doctor lived and prayed--there was a big Party going on, and everyone was 
dancing very freely--within, that is, the powerful grace which gave this monk 
the context to have complete control over her sexuality.

I don't disagree with anything you say after this, either, except that while I 
grant you that sex can be in the service of a profoundly loving and 
self-sacrificing act, it cannot lead one to ultimate truth, to our Creator, the 
Being who first put the man-woman reality inside our bodies.

For me you are entirely convincing in your affirmation that: "Nor do I find 
myself distracted from spiritual matters during loving intimacy"--but I wonder 
whether your male partner could reciprocate in this. I am anticipating here 
something you say in your next post on this topic: and I will say, Share, that 
all that I have said about sexuality can only apply to the man, for I cannot 
know what that difference is in a woman's experience of the sexual act. It 
certainly would seem to be something other than the man's experience--at least 
it can be so, certainly. And it seems to me that indeed a woman possesses the 
potential to make of this reality something other than I believe we men can 
make of it.

I have been under siege today from a number of sources. So you are right: I am 
walking that tightrope over the falls--but then again, I ask for this kind of 
precariousness in my sense of what I seek from reality. It wasn't so wonderful 
an evening as it turned out, Lord knows. But this is all good. Good for m

[FairfieldLife] Resending post, including Robin's post with mine this time

[lordknows888]

 Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra
Dear Lord Knows,

Well, I hope you know what you're doing, that you are not being deceived
in this
temptation to have a conversation about this matter. I trust you will
remain as
serious and non-ambivalent as you were in that first post. You have
staked out a
very strong position; should you have any doubts about standing behind
that
position, then it might be more problematic in "entering into
disputations with
you". After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and feints that enable
me to
cover up the fact that I don't have any faith that the truth will get me
through
my argument.

I am assuming you are a single author and not a composite of
authors--the latter
would, I think, mean trouble, because what will compel people most is
one
persons's utterly sincere testimony about Robin Carlsen--if you are
pretending
to be one person and you actually represent a collective
consciousness--I can
assure you this will show up in your next post. Because you will
compromise the
truth of your testimony by the falseness of your claim to be a single
person.
No, I think innocence and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
Lord
Knows. And I am hoping you are ready to give it your all.

>From the tone of this second post of yours, I would almost think you
have been
partially converted away from your
Robin-is-psychotic-and-is-going-to-hell
perspective.

I will be very interested in the "tone" as you put it, of your next
post.
"Reasonable and temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities
somewhat
incompatible with your description of my character and my motives and my
mental
health.

The truth of what happened in those ten years--Lord knows, Lord Knows, I
would
not want you to be persuaded to mitigate it in any way whatsoever.

So you must at least make this promise to me: You will not let off on
the
accelerator in driving this truth home to all the readers at FFL.

But sincerity and honesty: this could be the beginning of the Final
Reconciliation--that is, if we are both capable of exercising these two
faculties to the maximum.

And I think we will need to be if we are to get to the bottom of this
whole
matter.

Sincerely,

Robin

#316421  From: "lordknows888" 
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2012 1:35 pm
Subject: Robin your last post has a double message ((shades of
yesteryear) 
lordknows888 
  [Offline]  Offline
  [Send Email]  Send Email
  Dear Robin,
1) I am a single author and not a composite of authors2)I did not state
that you were psychotic and that you were going to hell, I stated I
thought you were mentally unbalanced.3)I live my life holding myself to
a standard of honesty (thanks for the pep talk on the need for honesty
anyway)4)I  found your post quite different in it's seeming intent which
could be  summarized as a exhortation  to honesty,  and to state that
honesty  is  your creed. I detected an unstated subtext. It was a kind
of an almost  bullying posturing which you was  communicating in effect
" you better  bring your A game buddy boy because I'm going to hit that
frigging  honesty ball out of the park".Where do I read this subtext you
ask? At  least in part right here  "You have staked out a very strong
position;  should you have any doubts about standing behind that
position, then it  might be more problematic in "entering into
disputations with you".  After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and
feints that enable me  to cover up the fact that I don't have any faith
that the truth will get  me through my argument."and right here,   "
No, I think innocence  and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
LordKnows. And I am  hoping you are ready to give it your all". This is
like high class trash  talking before playing a game. This has me
feeling shades of  yesteryear, I've seen this move before.5) I have also
seen  you seem reasonable and temperate initially as you skillfully
absorb an  initial hit before marshalling your forces for the counter
offensive .  I'm a little rusty Robin it has been over 25 years since
I've seen your  moves on the court, but it comes back as things play out
here. What am I  referencing when I state this you ask,  this  "
"Reasonable and  temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities 
somewhat incompatible with your description of my character and my 
motives and my mental health." Not that you are not allowed to defend 
yourself,  but do it out front and don't package it inside a message 
which is supposed to be about honesty. Honesty is transparency not 
hidden double messages. So you see Robin in your exhortation to honesty 
you are showing the opposite,subtle manipulation. 5)I have to  tell you
Robin that this kind of b

Re: [FairfieldLife] Just Another Day In The Life

[Bhairitu]

On 08/07/2012 12:51 PM, azgrey wrote:
> Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> economy of only eight posts in a single day.
>
> The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared
> with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> *our* cracked pot.
>
> Sun Aug 5, 2012
> FFL PostCount
> 8
>
> "Vaj knows that.
> ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> Vaj wrote
> Wonder how Vaj...
> ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> Actually it's Barry who...
> What Barry means...
> The real reason Barry
> ...if anyone Barry had...
> It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> ...yet another example of Barry's...
> I'm guessing Barry has...
> Here Barry was...
> ...such as those Barry has when...
> ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> Barry's lying.
> ...in fact it was Barry who...
> ...between Barry and...
> Barry tried to ..."
>
> It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste,
> Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy,
> how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with
> those four?
>
> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/

Yup, just another day in the life at the Funny Farm Lounge! :-D

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Curiosity Has Landed!

[Bhairitu]

On 08/07/2012 12:33 PM, John wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>> On 08/05/2012 10:34 PM, John wrote:
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-live-stream-coverage-20120309.html
>>>
>>>
>> I watched it on NASA TV but kept thinking it almost looked staged.
>> Hollywood couldn't have done it better.  Now for them to find an
>> "artifact" and hope they still show it to us.  There are some things up
>> there from previous pictures that even NASA doesn't know what to make
>> of.  They don't look natural.
>>
>
> I'm sure there are some people who are thinking that this landing is a hoax 
> or a great conspiracy by NASA.  But we'll have to accept that this event 
> actually happened.
>
> This event also reinforces the likely possibility that robots can do the job 
> of space exploration just as well as humans would on Mars or elsewhere in the 
> solar system.  The use of robots would be safer and cheaper than having 
> humans do the work.
>
> There are many obstacles in having humans do the actual exploration of Mars.  
> That would mean the astronauts would have to pack oxygen, food and water for 
> at least 16 months in the space ship.  Then, there's the likelihood of 
> accidents and emergencies that could happen along the way.

I was thinking the staff was asked to "ham it up" a bit for TV. Nerds 
are usually a bit low key and focused for these things.  I was expecting 
bottles of champagne to be broken out (against guvmint policy).

Re: [FairfieldLife] Robin your last post has a double message ((shades of yesteryear)

[Vaj]

On Aug 7, 2012, at 4:35 PM, "lordknows888"  wrote:

> Dear Robin,
> 
> 
> 1) I am a single author and not a composite of authors
> 2)I did not state that you were psychotic and that you were going to hell, I 
> stated I thought you were mentally unbalanced.
> 3)I live my life holding myself to a standard of honesty (thanks for the pep 
> talk on the need for honesty anyway)
> 4)I found your post quite different in it's seeming intent which could be 
> summarized as a exhortation  to honesty,  and to state that honesty  is your 
> creed. I detected an unstated subtext. It was a kind of an almost bullying 
> posturing which you was  communicating in effect " you better bring your A 
> game buddy boy because I'm going to hit that frigging honesty ball out of the 
> park".Where do I read this subtext you ask? At least in part right here  "You 
> have staked out a very strong position; should you have any doubts about 
> standing behind that position, then it might be more problematic in "entering 
> into disputations with you". After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and 
> feints that enable me to cover up the fact that I don't have any faith that 
> the truth will get me through my argument."and right here,   " No, I 
> think innocence and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter, LordKnows. 
> And I am hoping you are ready to give it your all". This is like high class 
> trash talking before playing a game. This has me feeling shades of 
> yesteryear, I've seen this move before.
> 5) I have also seen you seem reasonable and temperate initially as you 
> skillfully absorb an initial hit before marshalling your forces for the 
> counter offensive . I'm a little rusty Robin it has been over 25 years since 
> I've seen your moves on the court, but it comes back as things play out here. 
> What am I referencing when I state this you ask,  this  " "Reasonable and 
> temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities somewhat incompatible 
> with your description of my character and my motives and my mental health." 
> Not that you are not allowed to defend yourself,  but do it out front and 
> don't package it inside a message which is supposed to be about honesty. 
> Honesty is transparency not hidden double messages. So you see Robin in your 
> exhortation to honesty you are showing the opposite,subtle manipulation. 
> 5)I have to tell you Robin that this kind of bully boy posturing in the guise 
> of an exhortation to honesty is not an encouraging sign for real honesty, 
> which is at least your stated intention.
> 6)Robin in my last post I stated that I was still weighing the pros and cons 
> of entering into a dialogue with you, this last post has convinced me it is 
> not worth it.What would be the point when right here in the first post about 
> our potential dialogue you are up to your old tricks.

Be careful of the “I’m a wounded animal” type pattern RWC likes to fall back on 
- to suck people in - typically when it’s he who’s on the losing end of a 
particular situation.

I’ve also seen him use if ‘if only you could have felt it as I did' (often 
implying some extraordinary bliss, grace or trophy state) to draw in the 
(largely) TM-related folks here. 



Old tactic, just a “New Fairfield”. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Robin your last post has a double message ((shades of yesteryear)

[lordknows888]

Dear Robin,
1) I am a single author and not a composite of authors2)I did not state
that you were psychotic and that you were going to hell, I stated I
thought you were mentally unbalanced.3)I live my life holding myself to
a standard of honesty (thanks for the pep talk on the need for honesty
anyway)4)I found your post quite different in it's seeming intent which
could be summarized as a exhortation  to honesty,  and to state that
honesty  is your creed. I detected an unstated subtext. It was a kind of
an almost bullying posturing which you was  communicating in effect "
you better bring your A game buddy boy because I'm going to hit that
frigging honesty ball out of the park".Where do I read this subtext you
ask? At least in part right here  "You have staked out a very strong
position; should you have any doubts about standing behind that
position, then it might be more problematic in "entering into
disputations with you". After all, you know all my tricks and ruses and
feints that enable me to cover up the fact that I don't have any faith
that the truth will get me through my argument."and right here,   "
No, I think innocence and sincerity are the way to pursue this matter,
LordKnows. And I am hoping you are ready to give it your all". This is
like high class trash talking before playing a game. This has me feeling
shades of yesteryear, I've seen this move before.5) I have also seen you
seem reasonable and temperate initially as you skillfully absorb an
initial hit before marshalling your forces for the counter offensive .
I'm a little rusty Robin it has been over 25 years since I've seen your
moves on the court, but it comes back as things play out here. What am I
referencing when I state this you ask,  this  " "Reasonable and
temperate"? I would have thought those two qualities somewhat
incompatible with your description of my character and my motives and my
mental health." Not that you are not allowed to defend yourself,  but do
it out front and don't package it inside a message which is supposed to
be about honesty. Honesty is transparency not hidden double messages. So
you see Robin in your exhortation to honesty you are showing the
opposite,subtle manipulation. 5)I have to tell you Robin that this kind
of bully boy posturing in the guise of an exhortation to honesty is not
an encouraging sign for real honesty, which is at least your stated
intention.6)Robin in my last post I stated that I was still weighing the
pros and cons of entering into a dialogue with you, this last post has
convinced me it is not worth it.What would be the point when right here
in the first post about our potential dialogue you are up to your old
tricks.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Is it rude to say "I told you so" when I actually
> did, back on February 8th?  :-)

Not more than usual, just predictable, gloating and pathetic.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/303806
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
> >
> > Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> > of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> > economy of only eight posts in a single day.
> > 
> > The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> > with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> > *our* cracked pot.
> > 
> > Sun Aug 5, 2012
> > FFL PostCount
> > 8
> > 
> > "Vaj knows that. 
> > ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> > ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> > Vaj wrote
> > Wonder how Vaj...
> > ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> > Actually it's Barry who...
> > What Barry means...
> > The real reason Barry
> > ...if anyone Barry had...
> > It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> > ...yet another example of Barry's...
> > I'm guessing Barry has...
> > Here Barry was...
> > ...such as those Barry has when...
> > ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> > Barry's lying.
> > ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> > ...between Barry and...
> > Barry tried to ..." 
> > 
> > It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> > from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> > Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> > how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> > those four?
> > 
> > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
>
> Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> economy of only eight posts in a single day.
> 
> The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> *our* cracked pot.

It's just like AZ to go for the underbelly when the jackals are trying to down 
the antelope. I can always count on you to wait for enough people to start in 
on a subject before you come out of the woodwork. The quintessential coward. 
Sorry, but true.
> 
> Sun Aug 5, 2012
> FFL PostCount
> 8
> 
> "Vaj knows that. 
> ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> Vaj wrote
> Wonder how Vaj...
> ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> Actually it's Barry who...
> What Barry means...
> The real reason Barry
> ...if anyone Barry had...
> It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> ...yet another example of Barry's...
> I'm guessing Barry has...
> Here Barry was...
> ...such as those Barry has when...
> ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> Barry's lying.
> ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> ...between Barry and...
> Barry tried to ..." 
> 
> It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> those four?
> 
> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Just Another Day In The Life

[turquoiseb]

Is it rude to say "I told you so" when I actually
did, back on February 8th?  :-)

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/303806

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, azgrey  wrote:
>
> Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
> of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
> economy of only eight posts in a single day.
> 
> The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
> with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
> *our* cracked pot.
> 
> Sun Aug 5, 2012
> FFL PostCount
> 8
> 
> "Vaj knows that. 
> ...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
> ...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
> Vaj wrote
> Wonder how Vaj...
> ...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
> Actually it's Barry who...
> What Barry means...
> The real reason Barry
> ...if anyone Barry had...
> It isn't clear why Barry even ...
> ...yet another example of Barry's...
> I'm guessing Barry has...
> Here Barry was...
> ...such as those Barry has when...
> ...Barry's standard dual motivation...
> Barry's lying.
> ...in fact it was Barry who... 
> ...between Barry and...
> Barry tried to ..." 
> 
> It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
> from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
> Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
> how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
> those four?
> 
> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/
>

[FairfieldLife] Just Another Day In The Life

[azgrey]

Here we see, dear and fair readers of FFL, an example
of doing less and accomplishing more displayed in the
economy of only eight posts in a single day.

The bubbling bliss of an obsessive cult-apologist shared 
with all the world. She might be a cracked pot, but she is
*our* cracked pot.

Sun Aug 5, 2012
FFL PostCount
8

"Vaj knows that. 
...Vaj's malicious dishonesty.
...Vaj's capacity for hatred...
Vaj wrote
Wonder how Vaj...
...Vaj's penchant for malicious dishonesty ...
Actually it's Barry who...
What Barry means...
The real reason Barry
...if anyone Barry had...
It isn't clear why Barry even ...
...yet another example of Barry's...
I'm guessing Barry has...
Here Barry was...
...such as those Barry has when...
...Barry's standard dual motivation...
Barry's lying.
...in fact it was Barry who... 
...between Barry and...
Barry tried to ..." 

It was stunning to watch the obsession turn on a dime
from Vajradhatu to TurquoiseB. I'm sure Ann, Feste, 
Nabby, and Raving Lunatic Yogi are s proud. Boy, 
how would ya like drawing to an inside straight with 
those four?

http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/

[FairfieldLife] Another George Bush Coming Up

[John]

This guy appears to be ambitious in making a name for himself.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/america-ready-another-george-bush-101209365.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curiosity Has Landed!

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 08/05/2012 10:34 PM, John wrote:
> > Cheers!
> >
> > http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-live-stream-coverage-20120309.html
> >
> >
> 
> I watched it on NASA TV but kept thinking it almost looked staged. 
> Hollywood couldn't have done it better.  Now for them to find an 
> "artifact" and hope they still show it to us.  There are some things up 
> there from previous pictures that even NASA doesn't know what to make 
> of.  They don't look natural.
>


I'm sure there are some people who are thinking that this landing is a hoax or 
a great conspiracy by NASA.  But we'll have to accept that this event actually 
happened.

This event also reinforces the likely possibility that robots can do the job of 
space exploration just as well as humans would on Mars or elsewhere in the 
solar system.  The use of robots would be safer and cheaper than having humans 
do the work.

There are many obstacles in having humans do the actual exploration of Mars.  
That would mean the astronauts would have to pack oxygen, food and water for at 
least 16 months in the space ship.  Then, there's the likelihood of accidents 
and emergencies that could happen along the way.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Susan]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for speaking up. As I have made clear in the
> > > > > past, I don't interact with Robin because I believe
> > > > > to do so is to become a codependent in helping an
> > > > > already mentally ill person to become more so. But
> > > > > it's been sad to see him "reel in" naive people 
> > > > > here and do pretty much exactly what you describe. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have watched Fairfield Life and the general dance 
> > > > > of spiritual naivete far too long to believe that
> > > > > those who have been sucked into his web will actually
> > > > > learn from what you said. In fact, they'll probably 
> > > > > attack you for doing it. But thank you very much 
> > > > > for trying. 
> > > > 
> > > > Barry, I agree 100% and could not have said it better. And for
> > > > Lordknows, given what you went through all those years ago, I
> > > > think your post was not only informative and accurate and 
> > > > insightful, but rather generous to Robin.
> > > 
> > > "Generous to Robin"? This is a joke, right?
> > 
> > Not at all a joke. LordKnows paid for a healing ceremony
> > for Robin, and clearly stated Robin's gifts in addition to
> > the problems.
> 
> As I went on to make clear, I'm asking whether you truly
> believe LK has been "generous to Robin" in his portrayals
> of Robin's activities here on FFL (the only activities of
> his you know about firsthand, obviously).

I was not talking only about LK's portrayals of Robin's posts on Ffldlife.  I 
was talking about LK being generous in his assessment of Robin actions in the 
past (30 years ago) and how he sees some of the same patterns remaining, altho 
faded out . And especially generous given how harmful those experiences of 30 
years ago probably were to LK and many others.  Of course, neither you nor I 
was part of Robin's group, so both of us are only basing our opinions on the 
reports of others. Sounds hairraising to me.  If I had been thru that and it 
was as bad as has been suggested, I think I would feel justified in expressing 
the things LK did.
> 
> > > really think how Lord Knows has characterized Robin's
> > > activities on FFL bears any resemblance to the reality,
> > > do you? 
> > 
> > In my opinion it sounds pretty accurate, and like a horrible
> > experience.
> 
> I beg your pardon? Robin's activities on FFL sound like
> a "horrible experience"?

No.  I was talking about being in Robins' cult 30 years ago.
> 
> You must mean Lord Knows's characterization of Robin's
> activities 30 years ago. But that wasn't what I asked you
> about. (On the other hand, how would you know whether
> LK's description of Robin 30 years ago was accurate?)
> 
> Now, would you mind answering my question? Do you think
> LK's descriptions of Robin's participation on FFL are
> accurate?

Dealt with above.
> 
> > You're *agreeing* with Barry that Robin is
> > > "sucking" people "into his web"?
> > 
> > I think Robin is brilliant and working things out about himself
> > and his beliefs
> 
> That, of course, is what he has repeatedly said himself:
> that he is working things out about himself and his beliefs.

Yes, so we agree about that.
> 
> > - and can still be very powerful with words and ideas.  His
> > style of thinking and writing are unusual and make me 
> > uncomfortable - almost mersmerizing.  I have said this before
> > here, and to Robin hmself.
> 
> I think you may be unique in this. I find what Robin writes
> often compelling and fascinating, but it's never made me
> uncomfortable; and I've never seen anybody else suggest that.
> 
> > I think he is powerful, without intending to do anything
> > negative to others.  He just has incredible power 
> 
> I concur. But again, that isn't what I asked you. Do you
> agree with Barry that Robin is trying to "suck people into
> his web"?
No, I do not think Robin is doing that intentionally.  But he has a way of 
writing that switches that I feel keeps at least me off balance. Anyway, I 
guess we fundamentally disagree about this and how much we enjoy reading 
Robin's posts. We can agree he is brilliant, incredibly articulate and has 
great knowledge of many fields.  
> 
> And of course that's what LK has suggested as well. Do you
> find that suggestion "generous to Robin"?

Not generous in that particular instance or phrase, but generous nthe big 
picture and in other ways, as I already explained.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Bhairitu]

On 08/06/2012 06:25 PM, Lord Knows wrote:
> A note to readers of FFL who have found Robin to be very intelligent, 
> erudite, insightful, even at times kind and thoughtful. Yes Robin was all of 
> that and more when we followed him as well, but at bottom Robin is not 
> trustworthy, he is not what he seems.
>

I had heard of Robin years ago when he was up to his mischief and a 
friend from Fairfield told me about him.  He showed up here posting a 
"wall of words" which is usually the sign of an uneducated person 
posting.  I suggested he format his posts better or people wouldn't read 
them.  He continues to post long-winded posts which I also usually don't 
bother with.  To me he just reads like a sociopath and certainly not the 
first one I've encountered from the TMO.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[authfriend]

Xeno, thought you might find this excerpt from one of Robin's
books of interest. It describes his experience of becoming
enlightened on a mountain in Arosa, Switzerland, in 1976:


My friend by this time was asking what was happening, and by the look on my 
face, knew something powerfully expansive was taking place. I could not speak 
and by this time had fallen to my knees, turning in the opposite direction to 
give some respite to my exploding vision; here on the other side was the 
panorama of mountains, and they too assumed the form and reality of Beingness, 
of the most liquid yet ethereal immortality. I was moaning as I experienced all 
these boundaries of perception dissolving, and then, as I turned to look up 
into my friend's face, I saw the perfection of God shining from his face and 
body. I put my head down to touch the ground when suddenly my whole being began 
to flow out of its self, engulfing me in the same ocean of light which had 
swept over the rock face, the mountains, and my now Godlike friend.

And then I as if woke up. The spell was broken. I knew myself to have always 
existed. All my suffering, all my strivings, time, space, personal history was 
but a dream. There had never been anything but the light of consciousness. I 
had never been born nor would I ever die. Something disappeared forever, and I 
later came to know what that was. Something continued to form the apparent 
boundaries of Robin but the ego that had previously had so much to say about my 
sensation and experience of the world was now the individuated expression of 
what was the unmanifest reality of God.

With the completion of my being, I assumed a silence and inner repose, having 
been transformed into the actuality of what existence was. I was the substance, 
the reality that so obviously had its being before and beyond the phenomenal 
forms that before seemed to have an existence of their own. Now I had become 
invisibly one with something whose integrity could only be described as God, 
for I saw how that something was the essential character of everything, indeed 
was naught else but that something. I had lost everything only to gain 
everything, and that everything now supported and motivated the particular 
something I was, giving me a uniqueness that was the purest form of the 
universality which now was the primary reality of my existence and of my being.

By this time I spoke quietly and persuasively to my friend about what had 
happened--that I was "in Unity", the term all meditators and teachers were 
familiar with as equated with liberation, Enlightenment. Apparently my actions 
and my appearance during and immediately after the experience testified to the 
authenticity of what I now simply and innocently declared. The integration of 
my personality was suddenly absolute and every sensation of tension, worry, or 
doubt had dissolved leaving only the self-confidence of Being.

--Excerpt from The Sunnyside Drama: The First Three Years of Enlightenment © 
Robin Woodsworth Carlsen, 1979, ISBN 09-20910-03-3



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> I was in the midst of replying to one of Robin's post to me, though work and 
> events for me tend to put things on a hiatus from time to time. A number of 
> things you have said here resonate with some of what I was going to say, but 
> this post of yours is far more succinct and direct, and, I dare say, eloquent 
> than what I could have produced, and also much clearer in delineating the 
> issues. And you seem to have the advantage of knowing Robin, unlike me.
> 
> Most of the accounts of enlightenment and awaking I have encountered, 
> including my own experiences give the distinct impression that this 
> experience normally takes persons completely by surprise, and takes them 
> aback in a way that leaves them essentially speechless, for it pulls the rug 
> out from under one's beliefs and expectations.
> 
> I had been thinking of the analogy of American football, taking the ball and 
> running with it, as you put it here before I even wrote it down. Robin 
> definitely had an experience, but it does not appear to have shaken his world 
> to its roots; instead he seems to have instantly taken it in hand rather than 
> spending years afterward attempting to make sense of the insensible as other 
> teachers have done. There is a gestation period of consolidation and growth 
> in which one is certainly not ready to teach anything; one in fact may never 
> teach anything at all and just choose to live quietly with it away from the 
> eyes of the world.
> 
> Also the integrative experience is just that, one sees the commonality of 
> spiritual traditions with a tendency to prune off the accumulated 
> distractions of history and subsequent interpretation. That Robin maintains 
> an essentially dualistic stance is an indication he did not experience true 
> unity. I would say he had the experience of an ego having a unity-li

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda  wrote:
>
> Dominus dedit, Dominus abstulit (...)?

affero, abstuli, ablatum, afferre??

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for speaking up. As I have made clear in the
> > > > past, I don't interact with Robin because I believe
> > > > to do so is to become a codependent in helping an
> > > > already mentally ill person to become more so. But
> > > > it's been sad to see him "reel in" naive people 
> > > > here and do pretty much exactly what you describe. 
> > > > 
> > > > I have watched Fairfield Life and the general dance 
> > > > of spiritual naivete far too long to believe that
> > > > those who have been sucked into his web will actually
> > > > learn from what you said. In fact, they'll probably 
> > > > attack you for doing it. But thank you very much 
> > > > for trying. 
> > > 
> > > Barry, I agree 100% and could not have said it better. And for
> > > Lordknows, given what you went through all those years ago, I
> > > think your post was not only informative and accurate and 
> > > insightful, but rather generous to Robin.
> > 
> > "Generous to Robin"? This is a joke, right?
> 
> Not at all a joke. LordKnows paid for a healing ceremony
> for Robin, and clearly stated Robin's gifts in addition to
> the problems.

As I went on to make clear, I'm asking whether you truly
believe LK has been "generous to Robin" in his portrayals
of Robin's activities here on FFL (the only activities of
his you know about firsthand, obviously).

> > really think how Lord Knows has characterized Robin's
> > activities on FFL bears any resemblance to the reality,
> > do you? 
> 
> In my opinion it sounds pretty accurate, and like a horrible
> experience.

I beg your pardon? Robin's activities on FFL sound like
a "horrible experience"?

You must mean Lord Knows's characterization of Robin's
activities 30 years ago. But that wasn't what I asked you
about. (On the other hand, how would you know whether
LK's description of Robin 30 years ago was accurate?)

Now, would you mind answering my question? Do you think
LK's descriptions of Robin's participation on FFL are
accurate?

> You're *agreeing* with Barry that Robin is
> > "sucking" people "into his web"?
> 
> I think Robin is brilliant and working things out about himself
> and his beliefs

That, of course, is what he has repeatedly said himself:
that he is working things out about himself and his beliefs.

> - and can still be very powerful with words and ideas.  His
> style of thinking and writing are unusual and make me 
> uncomfortable - almost mersmerizing.  I have said this before
> here, and to Robin hmself.

I think you may be unique in this. I find what Robin writes
often compelling and fascinating, but it's never made me
uncomfortable; and I've never seen anybody else suggest that.

> I think he is powerful, without intending to do anything
> negative to others.  He just has incredible power 

I concur. But again, that isn't what I asked you. Do you
agree with Barry that Robin is trying to "suck people into
his web"?

And of course that's what LK has suggested as well. Do you
find that suggestion "generous to Robin"?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Robin Carlsen]

Dear Lord Knows,

There is something else which you must bear in mind in wondering how I received 
your categorical judgment of my sanity, my character, and my actions. It is 
this, Lord Knows: that I believe that the truth about those ten years, about my 
behaviour, about my enlightenment, about the pain and terror I created in the 
souls of other human beings, the matter of free will versus cosmic will--that 
all this is being discussed here inside what I believe is a context of reality 
where that reality--what created us, what created the universe, what created 
your first person subjective sense of yourself, what created even your ability 
to write that post--and for me to respond to it--will pass judgment (perhaps 
only silently within itself) on Robin Carlsen, and the extent to which you have 
represented the truth of those ten years.

I am keenly sensitive, then, Lord Knows, to those cues from within your 
post--and how you will act in response to the various rebuttals that have been 
directed towards you since you posted your letter--which would indicate--beyond 
what you yourself are identified with as the truth of this matter--reality's 
verdict here. In other words, Lord Knows--this is so important for you to grasp 
if you are sincere in wanting everyone to know the truth,--despite being the 
object of your castigation and damnation, I am still seeking to embrace the 
truth of those ten years. I have been dedicated to this very purpose for the 
past twenty-five years.

What this comes down to, Lord Knows, is that you must not let my own desire to 
know and to be responsible for the truth of my actions and all that happened 
during those ten years because of the assumption of my enlightenment, overtake 
and surpass your own honest and sincere determination to get the truth out. My 
philosophy asks this of me; that is, to recognize there may be more reality and 
truth inside the consciousness and point of view of another person than myself.

This, after all, is what got me launched on this self-rehabilitation project of 
the past twenty-five years. Someone demonstrating a more accurate perception of 
me than I had of myself. The beginning of the showdown: that I was gravely 
deceived about who I was and of course about the human normalcy of my 
enlightenment.

Now if you do not depend only on the truth of your experience, and, in the face 
of challenges to the final validity or definitiveness of that experience, 
become defensive and evasive and belligerent in the presence of the 
complexities and contradictions of this whole affair, then I shall have to 
conclude that, in the end, you are not that sure of your judgment, you are not 
that sure of your sincerity, and you are not willing to go to where you must go 
in order to know with a sense of conviction and courage that all that you say 
in your post--and perhaps future posts--is 'true'.

Because if you are right in what you have said about me, in the kind of person 
I really am (unchanged from what I was when you knew me), that I am mentally 
ill, deluded, and simply plain wrong, then you will trust in the objectivity 
and truthfulness of your testimony--without the need for any personal venom or 
hatred or irrationality to come into what you write. This at least--perhaps 
this is a simplification of reality--is how I understand the means to measure 
the truth of what you have said, what you are going to say, about me. *Reality 
and truth will do the work for you, Lord Knows*.

I will then, declare that I hold myself to that standard of truth whereby I 
utterly trust reality to make its judgment of me known to me--even through you. 
But if I sense reality's refusal to go along with your judgment of me--at least 
to some extent--then I shall pay attention to this, because this, after 
all--and I know this is a point of much bitterness and condemnation for 
you--this is how my philosophy 'works': I seek the moral and metaphysical and 
aesthetic cues within the subjectivity of another person which will enable 
me--if we are arguing about matters where there is some dispute--to know the 
extent to which reality is getting behind that subjectivity, and the extent to 
which, because reality is not getting behind that subjectivity, that 
subjectivity must make up for this, by becoming more strident, more bellicose, 
more defensive, more isolated.

If we take your post as corresponding pretty much to the truth about Robin 
Carlsen then it must follow that anything which is said, which has been said, 
which will be said, contra your judgment of me, will be received by you within 
a context wherein your experience is supported by reality (even if you are 
unaware of this support, I assure you, reality will be present in your words, 
in your point of view). And I would like to feel this, Lord Knows. I believe I 
am entitled to feel this--as are the readers on this forum.

And should I find myself on the defensive, and preferring to adhere to notions 
of

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[merudanda]

Dominus dedit, Dominus abstulit (...)?
Cave...cave
sit nomen Domini benedictum

and at a  far and forlorn  beach
merumaid fluttered with his wings
  in Job's morning cup
for the flagrance of a long forlorn flower

the hand and arm
who held this empty cup
holds a kite to surf
  with stench of sweat
the boat's in the sky


and  again
merumaid fluttered with his wings
feeling free
  when carried by the winds

Iob 1, 21
Nudus egressus sum
de utero matris meae
et nudus revertar illuc...
sit nomen Domini benedictum

Thanks for taking the time,...
good night
a night in rain storm and lightening
sleep well,
too
..
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" 
wrote:
snip
He had made me enlightened; I still acted as if he were my Master.
snip

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Thanks for speaking up. As I have made clear in the
> past, I don't interact with Robin

Interesting phrase considering how Barry has behaved
toward Robin.

For those who weren't here or don't recall, Barry's
first interactions with Robin were actually rather
friendly on both sides. But then when Robin had been
on FFL for about a week, Barry made a post that began:

"MZ, here's a free clue to explain to you why I got no more
than two sentences into the self-serving drivel below: I
DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR 'ENLIGHTENMENT.' It (meaning the
stories you tell others and yourself about your experiences
and what you think they "mean" or "meant") obviously are
very important to YOU, because you just won't STFU about
them. All these years later and you still won't STFU about
them."

This was a comment on a post Robin had made to Rick (not
to Barry) in response to Rick having questioned what Robin
had said about his enlightenment. As far as Barry was
concerned, it was inappropriate for Robin to describe his
experience in the face of Rick's challenge because Barry
wasn't interested in it.

Robin responded to Barry's attack with one of his irony
posts. From then on, Barry has continued to attack Robin
unrelentingly in posts to others. That's how he can say
he doesn't "interact" with Robin.

> because I believe
> to do so is to become a codependent in helping an
> already mentally ill person to become more so.

Right. But repeated vicious gratuitous, attacks on
such a person would definitely be helpful, I'm sure
we can all agree.

Oh, forgot to mention, while he's attacking Robin, Barry
brags over and over that he doesn't read any of Robin's
posts.

That must be why he gets so much of what he says about
Robin dead wrong.




 But
> it's been sad to see him "reel in" naive people 
> here and do pretty much exactly what you describe. 
> 
> I have watched Fairfield Life and the general dance 
> of spiritual naivete far too long to believe that
> those who have been sucked into his web will actually
> learn from what you said. In fact, they'll probably 
> attack you for doing it. But thank you very much 
> for trying. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Susan]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for speaking up. As I have made clear in the
> > > past, I don't interact with Robin because I believe
> > > to do so is to become a codependent in helping an
> > > already mentally ill person to become more so. But
> > > it's been sad to see him "reel in" naive people 
> > > here and do pretty much exactly what you describe. 
> > > 
> > > I have watched Fairfield Life and the general dance 
> > > of spiritual naivete far too long to believe that
> > > those who have been sucked into his web will actually
> > > learn from what you said. In fact, they'll probably 
> > > attack you for doing it. But thank you very much 
> > > for trying. 
> > 
> > Barry, I agree 100% and could not have said it better. And for
> > Lordknows, given what you went through all those years ago, I
> > think your post was not only informative and accurate and 
> > insightful, but rather generous to Robin.
> 
> "Generous to Robin"? This is a joke, right?

Not at all a joke. LordKnows paid for a healing ceremony for Robin, and clearly 
stated Robin's gifts in addition to the problems.  

> really think how Lord Knows has characterized Robin's
> activities on FFL bears any resemblance to the reality,
> do you? 

In my opinion it sounds pretty accurate, and like a horrible experience.

You're *agreeing* with Barry that Robin is
> "sucking" people "into his web"?

I think Robin is brilliant and working things out about himself and his beliefs 
- and can still be very powerful with words and ideas.  His style of thinking 
and writing are unusual and make me uncomfortable - almost mersmerizing.  I 
have said this before here, and to Robin hmself.  I think he is powerful, 
without intending to do anything negative to others.  He just has incredible 
power 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[laughinggull108]

Seraphita, your message sparked my curiosity regarding Suzanne Segal and
her memoir "Collision with the Infinite" (what a great title!), and some
Googling brought up a couple of links that may be of interest to some of
the readers here at FFL:

http://www.nonduality.com/suzanne.htm
  (Robin, under Part 6, this
passage caught my eye: "Segal, had she lived and integrated her vastness
'body' with the physical/emotional/mental/spiritual body, may have
composed something like that which Adi Da composed below. Segal could
only speak of the vastness; she had not yet made the return journey,
that Adi Da speaks of, back to the body, back to unenlightenment.")

http://www.spiritualteachers.org/suzanne_segal.htm
  (link at bottom to
an interview several months before her death.)

I found it very interesting reading.

LaughingGull



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Seraphita"  wrote:
>
>
> I only learned of the existence of Robin Carlsen when I read Suzanne
> Segal's memoir Collision with the Infinite (she called him "Robert
> Peterson" in the text) which included a brief account of her troubling
> encounter with his "cult".
> Being curious about TM heretics-cum-rebels I was wondering if anyone
has
> any photos of the Victoria community back in the 1980s they could post
> on FFL.
> Lord Knows? Masked Zebra?
>

[FairfieldLife] Things We Know More About Than Romney's Tax Returns

[turquoiseb]

Fascinating bits of trivia in their own right, but I 
love HuffPost's title for the slide show at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/07/mitt-romney-taxes_n_1736813.html#slide=1324149

Things we know more about than a Presidential candidate's
tax returns include King Tut's penis, the secret forumula
for Coca-Cola, Area 51, The God Particle, and dinosaur sex.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Great Stupa of Tibetan Buddhism, Ketut too (-:

[Share Long]

Good morning again, RC
It could be that we are expressing the very wide difference between masculine 
and feminine in these matters.  Indeed the practice Marnia Robinson suggests 
seems as if it would be quite challenging for males.  Thus the Taoist practices 
seem more realistic, compassionate and healthy for both masculine and feminine.

The other difference I sense we are expressing is that between East and West, 
the latter having been much more imbued with the spirit matter split I've 
written about in other posts.  I have turned from the epitome of that resulting 
ignorance, the Catholic Church.  Whereas you seem to be at least intrigued by 
the ideas on sexuality the Church both professes and attempts to enforce.

I readily admit that I could be wrong and deluded about all this.  However, I'm 
willing to take that chance in order to again experience that sex can indeed 
lead one to God.  If only momentarily.
Share

PS  We have switched places Ghazali and I am cheering for you as you walk that 
high wire across Niagara Falls.  Being the Gemini I am I had already integrated 
many divergent points of view of you into my awareness.  So, no surprises. 


It's tricky when someone is so brilliant especially with words.  Others can 
come to distrust the sincerity of the words.  And to state the obvious, here on 
FFL we are limited to words.  None of us know you now as you are in 3D day to 
day life.  I rely on my own felt sense to grok the truth of what your words 
express.  Willing to take a chance on that too (-:  




 From: Robin Carlsen 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, August 6, 2012 12:27 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Great Stupa of Tibetan Buddhism, Ketut too (-:
 

  


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:

Share1: Marnia Robinson writes:  "Take, for example, the ancient Tibetan 
Buddhist myth, The Great Stupa.  It confirms that passion is indeed the reason 
for mankind's fallen state, and says there are three paths to liberation:

~the overcoming of passion through renunciation
~the neutralization of passion by pouring all one's energy into selfless service
~the conquering of passion through controlled indulgence.  That is, using sex 
itself in such a way as to transcend passion's treacherous downward suction.

It says that the third path is the fastest and most powerful path, although 
also the easiest one to fall from...until one masters it.

Robin1: I think this just BS, Share. There is no spiritual path that entails 
sex or abstinence from sex: celibacy. "Controlled indulgence"--any being with 
the intelligence to know how susceptible we all are to the power of this 
reality inside our bodies, knows this is just plain ridiculous. 'Mastering' 
"controlled indulgence"--this is the most absurd and ludicrous idea I think I 
may have heard when it comes to traditional idea of spirituality, Share. 
Beautifully sincere, but hopelessly naive.

Look: here is where I come out on all this. I believe that only the grace of 
the Personal God can make of celibacy something real, creative, strong, holy. 
Without that grace, all you have is will power and some religious idea of how 
good and necessary it is to be abstain from sexual activity. 

The sexual drive in human beings, Share--unless it has simply just attenuated 
because of age, or just doesn't assert itself for some unknown reason--always 
conquers the individual person. One can only do one's best to act with 
integrity in this matter. But turning sex into some kind of path of truth, that 
is just a hoot.

Don't you see, Share, for this to be true would mean that encountering the 
methodology and teaching of Marnia Robinson *would be to encounter something 
more powerful, or potentially more powerful, than sexual desire*. That can't 
happen. The reality and power of sexuality is something *no human being in my 
lifetime* has ever mastered--mastered here means, having more control over and 
intelligence about than what the sensation of sexuality presents to us. *We 
cannot truly command this aspect of ourselves as human beings without the grace 
given to us by the author of sexuality* (before the Fall).

I have never seen a single human being, Share, who I intuitively knew: *This 
person knows more about his or her sexuality, what it is, how it acts within 
him or her, how it can be put it inside a context such as to make it submit 
itself to that person's will--than the power of this reality to determine that 
person's experience*.

Marnia Robinson: The myth, which is very old, predicted there would come a time 
when the unstable energies produced by increased indulgence in passion would 
create chaos at both seen and unseen levels across the globe.  The first two 
paths, celibacy and compassionate service to others, would no longer open the 
door to enlightenment, though they would remain useful spiritual disciplines.  
Why?  Because general unrest would render impossible the

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

I was in the midst of replying to one of Robin's post to me, though work and 
events for me tend to put things on a hiatus from time to time. A number of 
things you have said here resonate with some of what I was going to say, but 
this post of yours is far more succinct and direct, and, I dare say, eloquent 
than what I could have produced, and also much clearer in delineating the 
issues. And you seem to have the advantage of knowing Robin, unlike me.

Most of the accounts of enlightenment and awaking I have encountered, including 
my own experiences give the distinct impression that this experience normally 
takes persons completely by surprise, and takes them aback in a way that leaves 
them essentially speechless, for it pulls the rug out from under one's beliefs 
and expectations.

I had been thinking of the analogy of American football, taking the ball and 
running with it, as you put it here before I even wrote it down. Robin 
definitely had an experience, but it does not appear to have shaken his world 
to its roots; instead he seems to have instantly taken it in hand rather than 
spending years afterward attempting to make sense of the insensible as other 
teachers have done. There is a gestation period of consolidation and growth in 
which one is certainly not ready to teach anything; one in fact may never teach 
anything at all and just choose to live quietly with it away from the eyes of 
the world.

Also the integrative experience is just that, one sees the commonality of 
spiritual traditions with a tendency to prune off the accumulated distractions 
of history and subsequent interpretation. That Robin maintains an essentially 
dualistic stance is an indication he did not experience true unity. I would say 
he had the experience of an ego having a unity-like experience. If he had 
experienced actual unity, he could not have undone it. One cannot really say 'I 
experience unity', there is just unity, and no one to observe it.

This post of yours was an especial treat. You could add a lot of value to this 
forum, should you choose to continue to post here.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Lord Knows  wrote:
> 
> Dear Robin,
> 
> I know you well, I was in the inner circle of your followers. I lived in the 
> group house you named Annapurna in Victoria. I fully experienced what 
> ultimately became a waking nightmare in being a member of your cult. I have a 
> vivid memory of the day when a member of the group who had been extremely 
> close to you attempted suicide after you ruthlessly confronted her and 
> declared her to be an evil being who was only appearing in the guise of a 
> human being. I remember the meeting at Heronwater in which you spoke with ice 
> cold disdain about her when the news came of her attempted suicide, your only 
> concern was to send someone to her apartment to collect any items from her 
> belongings that could connect her to you. This is a fact, a horrible ugly 
> fact which could be verified by all the people in that room, about 15 members 
> of the inner circle.I am not proud of my involvement in this and many other 
> heartless atrocities that took place over the years I was
>  associated with you. In due time my turn came to be on the receiving end of 
> an ultimate pronouncement on my soul as being irretrievably lost and after 
> being brutally confronted by you and the whole group I was ejected from the 
> cult with great scorn. This was the standard operating procedure and happened 
> to many others over the years. 
> 
> Robin I have a simple question for you, what in your background gives you the 
> the standing, the credibility to make pronouncements about the ultimate value 
> of the Eastern Spiritual tradition and declare the death of Christianity?  I 
> would have thought that if you were truly remorseful for the harm you had 
> done to so many people, the last thing you would have wanted to do is to give 
> into the temptation to represent yourself as an authority capable of passing 
> judgment on whole spiritual traditions as well as in some instances making 
> harsh judgments about individuals on FFL. Robin you were never enlightened 
> nothing could be more obvious. The biographies of enlightened teachers down 
> through time are filled with stories of their extraordinary love, compassion 
> and sacrifice in being of profound service to their followers. Yours is a 
> record of extraordinary abuse done to your followers. I care not a whit for 
> your  experience of enlightenment it is all words,
>  words, words. You did not walk the talk, you were never enlightened. In my 
> opinion you were someone who was mentally unbalanced who had a very expansive 
> spiritual experience whose ego appropriated it instantly and you ran with it. 
> You have natural gifts of intellect and charisma which made it possible for 
> you to attract a small group around you who fell for it hook, line, and 
> sinker. The center piece of your unique revelations as a

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for speaking up. As I have made clear in the
> > past, I don't interact with Robin because I believe
> > to do so is to become a codependent in helping an
> > already mentally ill person to become more so. But
> > it's been sad to see him "reel in" naive people 
> > here and do pretty much exactly what you describe. 
> > 
> > I have watched Fairfield Life and the general dance 
> > of spiritual naivete far too long to believe that
> > those who have been sucked into his web will actually
> > learn from what you said. In fact, they'll probably 
> > attack you for doing it. But thank you very much 
> > for trying. 
> 
> Barry, I agree 100% and could not have said it better. And for
> Lordknows, given what you went through all those years ago, I
> think your post was not only informative and accurate and 
> insightful, but rather generous to Robin.

"Generous to Robin"? This is a joke, right? You don't
really think how Lord Knows has characterized Robin's
activities on FFL bears any resemblance to the reality,
do you? You're *agreeing* with Barry that Robin is
"sucking" people "into his web"?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> 
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Seraphita wrote:
> 
> > I only learned of the existence of Robin Carlsen when I read  
> > Suzanne Segal's memoir Collision with the Infinite (she called
> > him "Robert Peterson" in the text) which included a brief
> > account of her troubling encounter with his "cult".
> >
> > Being curious about TM heretics-cum-rebels I was wondering if  
> > anyone has any photos of the Victoria community back in the 
> > 1980s they could post on FFL.
> >
> > Lord Knows? Masked Zebra?
> 
> It's been requested in the past that such photos not be
> shared publicly because of privacy concerns for those
> involved, esp. since many now have children, etc.

As Vaj was told when he posted a photo of Robin and his
group in Fairfield awhile back. These were concerns Robin
himself voiced here. Interesting that Vaj doesn't mention
this. Notice the passive voice: "It's been requested..."

Of course, privacy concerns didn't appear to bother Vaj
when he subsequently threatened to post video of Robin's
seminars on YouTube:

"Well, I try to be sensitive to the fact that this whole
thing has to have been very traumatic for R.

"It's amazing that none of the video has been leaked yet, but
that's really just a matter of converting the old analog video
to digital and we could have them up on YouTube quickly
thereafter. The pathology of supposed higher states of
consciousness - meditative disease -  is a new field really,
and I think video documentation could go a long way to helping jumpstart that 
field, potentially preventing suffering from
faux meditative lineages like Mahesh & Co."

Yes, Vaj is obviously the most sensitive of individuals,
isn't he?

> It would be interesting if you'd share what Segal found
> troubling with RWC and the WTS - perhaps an excerpt or two?

Says Vaj, demonstrating his great sensitivity once again.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Share Long]

Thank you feste for this, its clarity and compassion.  I'd add only that if we 
have made mistakes that contributed, in the Marshall Rosenberg Non Violent 
Communication sense, to the pain of others, we can offer to make amends.  In my 
experience, that sets the healing in motion.  For all concerned.  I think it's 
big in 12 Steps too.




 From: feste37 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2012 7:41 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / 
umasking the zebra
 

  


I have never been a spiritual leader, or a leader of any kind, so I have never 
had followers. My task has been different. In that respect, there may well be 
legions of girlfriends, semi-girlfriends, sort-of girlfriends from way back in 
the 1980s who if they wanted to might well be able to write a screed here on 
FFL about what a jerk I was in those days. And maybe they would be right. But 
we all work on our stuff, and we are not the same people we were. We improve. 
We learn things. And what counts is not so much what we did but what we are 
now. Best to you, Robin. I hope you continue to post here because I enjoy your 
contributions. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> Dear Lord Knows,
> 
> I don't think it is possible to answer to your accusations here and even try 
> to dispute your account of those years you knew me. I am not the person you 
> depict in your indictment of me. Those who know me best (including persons 
> who were there at the beginning, some 35 years ago, and remain in close 
> contact with me even now) know me as I am. They would not agree with your 
> assessment of my character or my motivation. And they would, in your 
> presence, claim to have a more profound understanding of me than is revealed 
> by what you say about me in your post at FFL. If your judgment is the correct 
> one, there will have to be a consensus about this. And if someone who has 
> known me through these last twenty-five years believes your judgment of me is 
> essentially false, you will have to consider that as contradicting what you 
> so sincerely believe is the truth about me. I certainly am not prepared to 
> defend anything I did during those ten years when I was
 enlightened--certainly not the incidents you cite in your case against me. But 
that you have got the person Robin in your sights in a way which is 
meaningfully related to who I am, there is where I believe you are very much 
mistaken. 
> 
> I cannot and will not attempt to justify my actions while I was enlightened, 
> but in terms of where I have come since then I do not recognize myself in 
> your portrayal of me here. And either would anyone who has known me through 
> this past quarter of a century. I can never hope to challenge your 
> interpretation of me based upon the evidence you present here during that 
> time you knew me; but in my conscience and in my soul my conviction of the 
> wrongness of your estimation of me now compels me to protest the unfairness, 
> the inaccuracy, and the unnaturalness of your analysis of me. The person 
> Robin is not who you would have me be. I am not that person.
> 
> In speaking about Eastern or Western traditions I am merely exercising my 
> free speech and what I have to say is based upon my own personal history, my 
> reading, and my sense of what is true. I am not seeking for anyone to follow 
> me, and I doubt that anyone on this forum feels in any way that I am not 
> playing by the rules.
> 
> Of course you are entitled to your extremely severe appraisal of my sanity 
> and my integrity; and if you are essentially right about me, it is indeed a 
> terrible thing for me to believe, as I do certainly believe, that you are 
> prejudiced and blind in the damning conclusion you have reached about the 
> person that I am. Now.
> 
> Only good, however, can come from someone who speaks as you have spoken, and 
> who has laid out the case against me in the way that you have. I suppose it 
> was inevitable that this would happen. And I am glad it has. In the end it 
> will be what the Creator makes of all this that counts, and I hope that he 
> sees things more from my perspective than from your perspective. I will pray 
> for you, as you evidently have already prayed for me.
> 
> Robin
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Lord Knows  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Dear Robin,
> > 
> > I know you well, I was in the inner circle of your followers. I lived in 
> > the group house you named Annapurna in Victoria. I fully experienced what 
> > ultimately became a waking nightmare in being a member of your cult. I have 
> > a vivid memory of the day when a member of the group who had been extremely 
> > close to you attempted suicide after you ruthlessly confronted her and 
> > declared her to be an evil being who was only appearing in the guise of a 
> > human being. I remember the meeting at Heronwater in which you 

[FairfieldLife] Nok has gone nuts??

[cardemaister]

Nokia 888 (ROFLMAO!)

http://seekingalpha.com/article/786081-why-i-bought-nokia-a-picture-s-worth-2-per-share?source=email_rt_article_readmore&ifp=0

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Curiosity Has Landed!

[Share Long]

thank you so much for these.  Links previously posted had sound only.




 From: merudanda 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2012 7:05 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Curiosity Has Landed!
 

  
got the joy of living and re-living

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti_yre6dsa4 

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

 got the fun of sharing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tkil7mlpspI 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 08/05/2012 10:34 PM, John wrote:
> > Cheers!
> >
> > http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-live-stream-coverage-20120309.html
> >
> >
> 
> I watched it on NASA TV but kept thinking it almost looked staged. 
> Hollywood couldn't have done it better.  Now for them to find an 
> "artifact" and hope they still show it to us.  There are some things up 
> there from previous pictures that even NASA doesn't know what to make 
> of.  They don't look natural.
>

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Susan]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Thanks for speaking up. As I have made clear in the
> past, I don't interact with Robin because I believe
> to do so is to become a codependent in helping an
> already mentally ill person to become more so. But
> it's been sad to see him "reel in" naive people 
> here and do pretty much exactly what you describe. 
> 
> I have watched Fairfield Life and the general dance 
> of spiritual naivete far too long to believe that
> those who have been sucked into his web will actually
> learn from what you said. In fact, they'll probably 
> attack you for doing it. But thank you very much 
> for trying. 
> 

Barry, I agree 100% and could not have said it better. And for Lordknows, given 
what you went through all those years ago, I think your post was not only 
informative and accurate and insightful, but rather generous to Robin.   He had 
and has apparently incredible charisma, intellect and ability to attract 
people.  I , too wish him well in dealing with such a combination of 
characteristics. Glad you made it out and away and on to your life.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Lord Knows  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Robin,
> > 
> > I know you well, I was in the inner circle of your followers. I lived in 
> > the group house you named Annapurna in Victoria. I fully experienced what 
> > ultimately became a waking nightmare in being a member of your cult. I have 
> > a vivid memory of the day when a member of the group who had been extremely 
> > close to you attempted suicide after you ruthlessly confronted her and 
> > declared her to be an evil being who was only appearing in the guise of a 
> > human being. I remember the meeting at Heronwater in which you spoke with 
> > ice cold disdain about her when the news came of her attempted suicide, 
> > your only concern was to send someone to her apartment to collect any items 
> > from her belongings that could connect her to you. This is a fact, a 
> > horrible ugly fact which could be verified by all the people in that room, 
> > about 15 members of the inner circle.I am not proud of my involvement in 
> > this and many other heartless atrocities that took place over the years I 
> > was
> >  associated with you. In due time my turn came to be on the receiving end 
> > of an ultimate pronouncement on my soul as being irretrievably lost and 
> > after being brutally confronted by you and the whole group I was ejected 
> > from the cult with great scorn. This was the standard operating procedure 
> > and happened to many others over the years. 
> > 
> > Robin I have a simple question for you, what in your background gives you 
> > the the standing, the credibility to make pronouncements about the ultimate 
> > value of the Eastern Spiritual tradition and declare the death of 
> > Christianity?  I would have thought that if you were truly remorseful for 
> > the harm you had done to so many people, the last thing you would have 
> > wanted to do is to give into the temptation to represent yourself as an 
> > authority capable of passing judgment on whole spiritual traditions as well 
> > as in some instances making harsh judgments about individuals on FFL. Robin 
> > you were never enlightened nothing could be more obvious. The biographies 
> > of enlightened teachers down through time are filled with stories of their 
> > extraordinary love, compassion and sacrifice in being of profound service 
> > to their followers. Yours is a record of extraordinary abuse done to your 
> > followers. I care not a whit for your  experience of enlightenment it is 
> > all words,
> >  words, words. You did not walk the talk, you were never enlightened. In my 
> > opinion you were someone who was mentally unbalanced who had a very 
> > expansive spiritual experience whose ego appropriated it instantly and you 
> > ran with it. You have natural gifts of intellect and charisma which made it 
> > possible for you to attract a small group around you who fell for it hook, 
> > line, and sinker. The center piece of your unique revelations as an 
> > "enlightened man" was the imperative to confront your followers in order to 
> > expose the demonic and then expel it. Where in the biographies of 
> > enlightened sages do you find this method being used to enlighten the 
> > disciples? The idea that you were  faithful and true to Maharishi and his 
> > teaching is pure fiction that lives on in your mind and your mind 
> > alone.   
> > 
> >  To put into perspective and accurate chronology your "revelation" about 
> > the Eastern spiritual tradition, it came in 1987 when you told the group 
> > that the the mantras we received through TM were the names of demons or 
> > fallen angels. It did not come years later after you had purged yourself of 
> > your supposed "enlightenment".It was while you were still in a self 
> > admitted deeply disturbed state that you received this "truth", and not as 
> > you have represent

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mitt just can't help himself

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > This has been making the rounds for quite some time (since
> > > February, in fact). It's a Photoshop job. Here's the original
> > > AP photo:
> > > 
> > > http://i.huffpost.com/gen/490196/thumbs/s-MITT-ROMNEY-RMONEY-large640.jpg
> > 
> > Not the first time the Turq posts photoshopjobs here as if 
> > they are originals ...
> 
> Nabby seems to be forgetting that only yesterday he 
> weighed in as the photography expert he claims to
> be and said that this photo was *not* Photoshopped.  :-)
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/316328


That's right, but I didn't study it in photoshop. If I did I would probably 
have discovered it was doctored, just like the many other pictures you have 
posted here over the years :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> I have never been a spiritual leader, or a leader of any kind, so I have 
> never had followers. My task has been different. In that respect, there may 
> well be legions of girlfriends, semi-girlfriends, sort-of girlfriends from 
> way back in the 1980s who if they wanted to might well be able to write a 
> screed here on FFL about what a jerk I was in those days. And maybe they 
> would be right. But we all work on our stuff, and we are not the same people 
> we were. We improve. We learn things. And what counts is not so much what we 
> did but what we are now. Best to you, Robin. I hope you continue to post here 
> because I enjoy your contributions. 


Well said. Only the Buddhists here obsess with the past. I suppose their 
techniques brings them nowhere so the past is more comforting.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Vaj]

On Aug 7, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Seraphita wrote:

I only learned of the existence of Robin Carlsen when I read  
Suzanne Segal's memoir Collision with the Infinite  (she called him  
"Robert Peterson" in the text) which included a brief account of  
her troubling encounter with his "cult".



Being curious about TM heretics-cum-rebels I was wondering if  
anyone has any photos of the Victoria community back in the 1980s  
they could post on FFL.


Lord Knows? Masked Zebra?



It's been requested in the past that such photos not be shared  
publicly because of privacy concerns for those involved, esp. since  
many now have children, etc.


It would be interesting if you'd share what Segal found troubling  
with RWC and the WTS - perhaps an excerpt or two?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Seraphita"  wrote:
>
> 
> I only learned of the existence of Robin Carlsen when I read Suzanne
> Segal's memoir Collision with the Infinite  (she called him "Robert
> Peterson" in the text) which included a brief account of her troubling
> encounter with his "cult".
> Being curious about TM heretics-cum-rebels I was wondering if anyone has
> any photos of the Victoria community back in the 1980s they could post
> on FFL.
> Lord Knows? Masked Zebra?

I have hundreds of them but would never presume to post a single one of them on 
this public forum due to privacy concerns. That just isn't going to happen.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Seraphita]

I only learned of the existence of Robin Carlsen when I read Suzanne
Segal's memoir Collision with the Infinite  (she called him "Robert
Peterson" in the text) which included a brief account of her troubling
encounter with his "cult".
Being curious about TM heretics-cum-rebels I was wondering if anyone has
any photos of the Victoria community back in the 1980s they could post
on FFL.
Lord Knows? Masked Zebra?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[feste37]

I have never been a spiritual leader, or a leader of any kind, so I have never 
had followers. My task has been different. In that respect, there may well be 
legions of girlfriends, semi-girlfriends, sort-of girlfriends from way back in 
the 1980s who if they wanted to might well be able to write a screed here on 
FFL about what a jerk I was in those days. And maybe they would be right. But 
we all work on our stuff, and we are not the same people we were. We improve. 
We learn things. And what counts is not so much what we did but what we are 
now. Best to you, Robin. I hope you continue to post here because I enjoy your 
contributions. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> Dear Lord Knows,
> 
> I don't think it is possible to answer to your accusations here and even try 
> to dispute your account of those years you knew me. I am not the person you 
> depict in your indictment of me. Those who know me best (including persons 
> who were there at the beginning, some 35 years ago, and remain in close 
> contact with me even now) know me as I am. They would not agree with your 
> assessment of my character or my motivation. And they would, in your 
> presence, claim to have a more profound understanding of me than is revealed 
> by what you say about me in your post at FFL. If your judgment is the correct 
> one, there will have to be a consensus about this. And if someone who has 
> known me through these last twenty-five years believes your judgment of me is 
> essentially false, you will have to consider that as contradicting what you 
> so sincerely believe is the truth about me. I certainly am not prepared to 
> defend anything I did during those ten years when I was 
> enlightened--certainly not the incidents you cite in your case against me. 
> But that you have got the person Robin in your sights in a way which is 
> meaningfully related to who I am, there is where I believe you are very much 
> mistaken. 
> 
> I cannot and will not attempt to justify my actions while I was enlightened, 
> but in terms of where I have come since then I do not recognize myself in 
> your portrayal of me here. And either would anyone who has known me through 
> this past quarter of a century. I can never hope to challenge your 
> interpretation of me based upon the evidence you present here during that 
> time you knew me; but in my conscience and in my soul my conviction of the 
> wrongness of your estimation of me now compels me to protest the unfairness, 
> the inaccuracy, and the unnaturalness of your analysis of me. The person 
> Robin is not who you would have me be. I am not that person.
> 
> In speaking about Eastern or Western traditions I am merely exercising my 
> free speech and what I have to say is based upon my own personal history, my 
> reading, and my sense of what is true. I am not seeking for anyone to follow 
> me, and I doubt that anyone on this forum feels in any way that I am not 
> playing by the rules.
> 
> Of course you are entitled to your extremely severe appraisal of my sanity 
> and my integrity; and if you are essentially right about me, it is indeed a 
> terrible thing for me to believe, as I do certainly believe, that you are 
> prejudiced and blind in the damning conclusion you have reached about the 
> person that I am. Now.
> 
> Only good, however, can come from someone who speaks as you have spoken, and 
> who has laid out the case against me in the way that you have. I suppose it 
> was inevitable that this would happen. And I am glad it has. In the end it 
> will be what the Creator makes of all this that counts, and I hope that he 
> sees things more from my perspective than from your perspective. I will pray 
> for you, as you evidently have already prayed for me.
> 
> Robin
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Lord Knows  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Dear Robin,
> > 
> > I know you well, I was in the inner circle of your followers. I lived in 
> > the group house you named Annapurna in Victoria. I fully experienced what 
> > ultimately became a waking nightmare in being a member of your cult. I have 
> > a vivid memory of the day when a member of the group who had been extremely 
> > close to you attempted suicide after you ruthlessly confronted her and 
> > declared her to be an evil being who was only appearing in the guise of a 
> > human being. I remember the meeting at Heronwater in which you spoke with 
> > ice cold disdain about her when the news came of her attempted suicide, 
> > your only concern was to send someone to her apartment to collect any items 
> > from her belongings that could connect her to you. This is a fact, a 
> > horrible ugly fact which could be verified by all the people in that room, 
> > about 15 members of the inner circle.I am not proud of my involvement in 
> > this and many other heartless atrocities that took place over the years I 
> > was
> >  associated with you. In due time my turn came to be on the re

[FairfieldLife] Re: Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[cardemaister]

Wonder if there could be even the remotest of possibilities
that the "entities" Robin and Lordknows occupy(?) exactly the
same space-time coordinates... ;D


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> This would make an excellent starting point for a RWC and WTS FAQ, in my 
> opinion. It's the bitch-slap of enlightened insight.
> 
> Thanks for taking the time, effort and emotional digging it took to write 
> this. And ditto on wishing RWC the best - think of it as a `shirts off bear 
> hug' R. :-).
> 
> On Aug 6, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Lord Knows  wrote:
> 
> > Dear Robin,
> > 
> > I know you well, I was in the inner circle of your followers. I lived in 
> > the group house you named Annapurna in Victoria. I fully 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Curiosity Has Landed!

[merudanda]

got the joy of living and re-living

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti_yre6dsa4


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


  got the fun of sharing [:D]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tkil7mlpspI

  [http://www.bloomberg.com/image/ivQNiFG73kd8.jpg]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> On 08/05/2012 10:34 PM, John wrote:
> > Cheers!
> >
> > http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-live-stream-coverage-20120309.html
> >
> >
>
> I watched it on NASA TV but kept thinking it almost looked staged.
> Hollywood couldn't have done it better.  Now for them to find an
> "artifact" and hope they still show it to us.  There are some things
up
> there from previous pictures that even NASA doesn't know what to make
> of.  They don't look natural.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Some facts and background on Robin Carlsen / umasking the zebra

[Vaj]

This would make an excellent starting point for a RWC and WTS FAQ, in my 
opinion. It’s the bitch-slap of enlightened insight.

Thanks for taking the time, effort and emotional digging it took to write this. 
And ditto on wishing RWC the best - think of it as a ‘shirts off bear hug' R. 
:-).

On Aug 6, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Lord Knows  wrote:

> Dear Robin,
> 
> I know you well, I was in the inner circle of your followers. I lived in the 
> group house you named Annapurna in Victoria. I fully experienced what 
> ultimately became a waking nightmare in being a member of your cult. I have a 
> vivid memory of the day when a member of the group who had been extremely 
> close to you attempted suicide after you ruthlessly confronted her and 
> declared her to be an evil being who was only appearing in the guise of a 
> human being. I remember the meeting at Heronwater in which you spoke with ice 
> cold disdain about her when the news came of her attempted suicide, your only 
> concern was to send someone to her apartment to collect any items from her 
> belongings that could connect her to you. This is a fact, a horrible ugly 
> fact which could be verified by all the people in that room, about 15 members 
> of the inner circle.I am not proud of my involvement in this and many other 
> heartless atrocities that took place over the years I was associated with 
> you. In due time my turn came to be on the receiving end of an ultimate 
> pronouncement on my soul as being irretrievably lost and after being brutally 
> confronted by you and the whole group I was ejected from the cult with great 
> scorn. This was the standard operating procedure and happened to many others 
> over the years. 
> 
> Robin I have a simple question for you, what in your background gives you the 
> the standing, the credibility to make pronouncements about the ultimate value 
> of the Eastern Spiritual tradition and declare the death of Christianity?  I 
> would have thought that if you were truly remorseful for the harm you had 
> done to so many people, the last thing you would have wanted to do is to give 
> into the temptation to represent yourself as an authority capable of passing 
> judgment on whole spiritual traditions as well as in some instances making 
> harsh judgments about individuals on FFL. Robin you were never enlightened 
> nothing could be more obvious. The biographies of enlightened teachers down 
> through time are filled with stories of their extraordinary love, compassion 
> and sacrifice in being of profound service to their followers. Yours is a 
> record of extraordinary abuse done to your followers. I care not a whit for 
> your  experience of enlightenment it is all words, words, words. You did not 
> walk the talk, you were never enlightened. In my opinion you were someone who 
> was mentally unbalanced who had a very expansive spiritual experience whose 
> ego appropriated it instantly and you ran with it. You have natural gifts of 
> intellect and charisma which made it possible for you to attract a small 
> group around you who fell for it hook, line, and sinker. The center piece of 
> your unique revelations as an "enlightened man" was the imperative to 
> confront your followers in order to expose the demonic and then expel it. 
> Where in the biographies of enlightened sages do you find this method being 
> used to enlighten the disciples? The idea that you were  faithful and true to 
> Maharishi and his teaching is pure fiction that lives on in your mind and 
> your mind alone.   
> 
>  To put into perspective and accurate chronology your "revelation" about the 
> Eastern spiritual tradition, it came in 1987 when you told the group that the 
> the mantras we received through TM were the names of demons or fallen angels. 
> It did not come years later after you had purged yourself of your supposed 
> "enlightenment".It was while you were still in a self admitted deeply 
> disturbed state that you received this "truth", and not as you have 
> represented here as coming years later. In fact at the time this revelation 
> came to you, you also  believed that your wife was the incarnation of the 
> devil and that Jewish people were evil. This was the nature of your very 
> disturbed mind when you had the revelation that the whole Eastern spiritual 
> tradition was satanic.   
> The one new conclusion that you have offered here on FFL is that the 
> Christian tradition and most significantly the Catholic tradition no longer 
> has any spiritual substance whatsoever and has not since the bombing by the 
> Allies of the monastery of Monte Cassino (1945) during World War II. A very 
> strange and eccentric theory, which is at odds with the example of Mother 
> Teresa's life (1910-1997) and also that of saint Padre Pio (1887-1968), to 
> give just two prominent examples. 
> Robin your record of accuracy on your grand theories and insights is abysmal. 
> A pharmacy student in college is allowed only 3 occasions of

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mitt just can't help himself

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > This has been making the rounds for quite some time (since
> > February, in fact). It's a Photoshop job. Here's the original
> > AP photo:
> > 
> > http://i.huffpost.com/gen/490196/thumbs/s-MITT-ROMNEY-RMONEY-large640.jpg
> 
> Not the first time the Turq posts photoshopjobs here as if 
> they are originals ...

Nabby seems to be forgetting that only yesterday he 
weighed in as the photography expert he claims to
be and said that this photo was *not* Photoshopped.  :-)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/316328

I can only assume that his faulty memory is caused
by the same unreasoning hatred and need to "get"
critics of TM and Maharishi as the resident cult 
apologist. We should have compassion; its a disease.

Photoshopped or not, it's funny, and an accurate
portrayal of the man and what he stands for. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mitt just can't help himself

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> This has been making the rounds for quite some time (since
> February, in fact). It's a Photoshop job. Here's the original
> AP photo:
> 
> http://i.huffpost.com/gen/490196/thumbs/s-MITT-ROMNEY-RMONEY-large640.jpg

Not the first time the Turq posts photoshopjobs here as if they are originals 
...

[FairfieldLife] Information on Narcissistic Personality Disorder

[turquoiseb]

Definitions

Narcissism, as in excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one's
physical appearance.  noun (See egotism) definition:

• Psychology; extreme selfishness, with a  grandiose view of one's
own talents and a craving for admiration, as  characterizing a
personality type.

• Psychoanalysis;  self-centeredness arising from failure to
distinguish the self from  external objects, either in very young babies
or as a feature of mental  disorder.

Someone with Narcissistic Personality disorder (NPD) has at least 5 of
these symptoms:

*  has a grandiose  sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates
achievements and talents,  expects to be recognized as superior without
commensurate achievements)
*  is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
*  believes that he or she is "special" and  unique and can only be
understood by, or should associate with, other  special or high-status
people (or institutions)
*  requires excessive admiration
*  has a sense of entitlement, i.e.,  unreasonable expectations of
especially favorable treatment or automatic  compliance with his or her
expectations
*  is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others
to achieve his or her own ends
*  lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the
feelings and needs of others
*  is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of
him or her
*  shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

Associated Features: Depressed Mood, Dramatic or Erratic or Antisocial
Personality

Differential Diagnosis. Not everyone who acts like a narcissist is one.

Some disorders have similar or even the same symptoms such as:



 
Histrionic  Personality Disorder;
 Antisocial Personality
Disorder; 
Borderline  Personality Disorder;

Obsessive-Compulsive Personality  Disorder;
S chizotypal
Personality Disorder;
 Paranoid Personality  Disorder;

Manic Episodes;
 Hypomanic Episodes;
 Personality Change Due
to a  General Medical Condition;
 Symptoms that may develop in
association  with chronic substance use.

Psychology Today: A Field Guide To Narcissism Link


Here are some more signs of Narcissistic Personality Disorder to look
out for:

* Jealousy and possessiveness
* Excessive need to feel special, adored, loved, appreciated, or
admired
* Rage attacks when you do not sufficiently meet his/her needs
* Controlling behaviors (trying to control how you spend your time,
who you talk to, how you dress, etc.)
* Inflated self-esteem, or grandiosity (bragging, "fishing" for
compliments)
* Dramatic, insecure behaviors
* Expecting you to take responsibility for making him/her feel better
about him/herself
* Blaming you for behaviors or feelings (i.e., "YOU made me do this,"
or "YOU made me feel this way.")
* Not taking responsibility for angry behavior and justifying angry
outbursts
* An attitude that demonstrates "the world  revolves around me" and
"you need to cater to my ideas, opinions,  thoughts, and feelings."
* An unwillingness to reflect on his/her own behaviors



Half the harm that is done in this world
Is due to people who want to feel important
They don't mean to do harm ­
But the harm does not interest them.
Or they do not see it, or they justify it
Because they are absorbed in the endless struggle
To think well of themselves.

T. S. Eliot

[FairfieldLife] Word!

[turquoiseb]

[https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268620_101519855\
62685203_1718165249_n.jpg]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/268620_1015198556\
2685203_1718165249_n.jpg