[FairfieldLife] Re: The seduction of the beautiful

[emilymae.reyn]

Oh, it's all about the passion and the voices and the melodies for me in the 
end, although I got a kick out that blog I posted.  I once heard Faust in 
English - what a waste of effort to make it more approachable to the masses - 
couldn't understand it in English either.  

And from Anais Nin for a feminine touch:  

"Only the united beat of sex and heart together can create ecstasy."
~Anais Nin



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> 
> Thanks Emily,
> 
> That's the one I meant to post. Thanks to Judy for alerting me.
> It's a beautiful aria and revealing. Men act so emotionally crude
> at times but this is their other side.
> 
> As a Russian Archbishop told me:
> 
> When their dicks get hard their hearts get soft.
> When their dicks get soft their hearts get hard.
> 
> Such is the definition of the brutish man.
> This is why men need women - mothers,
> sisters, lovers to refine them.
> 
> However, see what it got Masetto in the aria -
> just a candidacy for being a wuss.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
> wrote:
> >
> > Can't go wrong with Dmitri's voice...a dream come true. Â Pair that
> with Ann's husband's qualities and I might consider marriage one day.
> Kidding! Â I looked up the story of Don Giovanni - oh my. Â Here
> is a cute blurb on a canadian opera singer's thoughts while trying to
> learn the Batti batti aria:
> >
> >
> http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/mozart-don-giovanni-k-527-\
> zerlinas-batti-batti-aria/
> >
> >
> > I grew up with opera and classical, but I didn't care for most of it
> as no one else I knew was forced to listen to it. Â My grandparents
> had season tickets forever to the symphony, to the opera, to the ballet.
> Â I had little TV before 12 and none after for many years. Â I was
> a huge book reader. Â No real exposure to pop culture until Pop got
> us a radio of our own as he was walking out the door when we hit our
> teen years. Â I craved pop culture; I wanted to relate. Â With all
> that crosses FFL, I feel that I've caught up on pop culture and now
> this...coming full circle I am and I am so delighted I can appreciate
> opera and classical now. Â Ha hatime for a glass of ginger ale.
> Â I'm getting all mushy and don't want to make myself ill with all
> this gratitude talk. Â  Â
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > From: emptybill emptybill@
> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:47 PM
> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful
> > >
> > >
> > >Â
> > >Ladies â€" You just wish you
> > could be seduced like this:
> > >Don Giovanni â€" La ci darem la
> > mano
> > >Sung byDmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:26 PM, awoelflebater wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 16, 2012, at 4:49 PM, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > > > !
> > > >
> > > > It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
> > > > to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
> > > > ignoring the sexism. Since the compliment wasn't directed
> > > > at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
> > > > see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
> > > > said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
> > > > come out smelling like a rose.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sorry about it at all. I like it. I chose it deliberately,
> with a little bit of a smile.
> > >
> >
> > An evil smile I reckon. You got jealous on Ann's husband and cast a
> spell on her. Stay away from Ann and her husband you evil bastard !!!
>
> God Ravi, you are one funny, playful guy and I love you for that. You are
> the ultimate knight but I think the colour is black instead of white, so
> much sexier. You got it going on - you just keep being you and it will all
> be fine.


Yaay black for Kali's pimp. I'm glad you enjoyed it as much as I did dear
Ann - I was wondering if you could see that it was all a pun on feste's own
idiotic behavior the last few weeks. I always like to be entertain myself
by making fun of idiots, usually it is Steve but today it was feste.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> > > > > > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> > > > > > peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> > > > > > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
> > > > > can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
> > > > > you've used to express it.
> > > > 
> > > > Unlike you, Ann had no objection to it. In fact, she picked
> > > > it up and ran with it. Lighten up, authfriend!
> > > 
> > > It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
> > > to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
> > > ignoring the sexism. 

You read it right. I agree with what you say here, completely.

>>>Since the compliment wasn't directed
> > > at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
> > > see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
> > > said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
> > > come out smelling like a rose.
> > 
> > I'm not sorry about it at all. I like it. I chose it
> > deliberately, with a little bit of a smile. What you are
> > doing here is what you do so often -- getting offended on
> > behalf of someone who is not the least bit offended.
> 
> Let me say it another way: That Ann did not express offense
> does NOT mean that the metaphor wasn't sexist, or that sexism
> isn't offensive. I wasn't offended on Ann's behalf; she gets
> to decide whether she was offended by your sexism. 

Correct, and I thought I might be for just a moment or two but the unexpected 
nature of Feste's post after many weeks of not interacting with him was 
pleasant in spite of the sexist overtone. I figured I could let it go and focus 
on a different aspect of what he was saying although I considered addressing 
the fact that he used a metaphor that implied some man had "broken" the 
spirited filly and rode her off after dominating and taming her.
And since I know that that is not actually the case I can ignore it and just 
let it go - this time. Now I can think of others who I might not be so 
forgiving of...

But Judy, I love you for what you wrote; you are still the dominant lioness 
here and let no one forget it. I certainly won't. And lions just won't accept a 
saddle, let alone a bridle.

>I get to
> decide whether I find it offensive, not her, and *certainly*
> not you.
> 
> Get it now?
> 
> You've just told us that you enjoy making sexist remarks.
> Now we know something about you we didn't know before.
> Everyone is entitled to decide on their own behalf whether
> they find that cute, or deplorable.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[seekliberation]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> 
> Don't know about this, but W. is known to have said--before
> he was elected, I believe, but definitely before 9/11--that
> the way to be a great president was to start a war and win it,
> as his father had.
>

GWB was just simply an idiot with narcissistic tendencies.  I'm convinced he 
just wanted to be a hero, and saw Iraq as a path to that.  There are attempts 
to justify it by speaking of all of Saddam's horrific actsbut i'd rather 
see some consistency on that, because North Korea, Burma, and Rwanda all make 
Saddam look like 'leader of the year'.  

It also makes sense why Colin Powell ditched the Republican party, given that 
they pretty much threw him under the bus.  

seekliberation

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> On Dec 16, 2012, at 4:49 PM, "feste37"  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > > !
> > > 
> > > It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
> > > to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
> > > ignoring the sexism. Since the compliment wasn't directed
> > > at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
> > > see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
> > > said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
> > > come out smelling like a rose.
> > >
> > 
> > I'm not sorry about it at all. I like it. I chose it deliberately, with a 
> > little bit of a smile.
> > 
> 
> An evil smile I reckon. You got jealous on Ann's husband and cast a spell on 
> her. Stay away from Ann and her husband you evil bastard !!!

God Ravi, you are one funny, playful guy and I love you for that. You are the 
ultimate knight but I think the colour is black instead of white, so much 
sexier. You got it going on - you just keep being you and it will all be fine.

> > What you are doing here is what you do so often -- getting offended on 
> > behalf of someone who is not the least bit offended. Seems silly to me. 
> > Haven't you got better things to do, old girl?
> > 
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The seduction of the beautiful

[emptybill]

Thanks Emily,

That's the one I meant to post. Thanks to Judy for alerting me.
It's a beautiful aria and revealing. Men act so emotionally crude
at times but this is their other side.

As a Russian Archbishop told me:

When their dicks get hard their hearts get soft.
When their dicks get soft their hearts get hard.

Such is the definition of the brutish man.
This is why men need women - mothers,
sisters, lovers to refine them.

However, see what it got Masetto in the aria -
just a candidacy for being a wuss.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn 
wrote:
>
> Can't go wrong with Dmitri's voice...a dream come true. Â Pair that
with Ann's husband's qualities and I might consider marriage one day.
Kidding! Â I looked up the story of Don Giovanni - oh my. Â Here
is a cute blurb on a canadian opera singer's thoughts while trying to
learn the Batti batti aria:
>
>
http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/mozart-don-giovanni-k-527-\
zerlinas-batti-batti-aria/
>
>
> I grew up with opera and classical, but I didn't care for most of it
as no one else I knew was forced to listen to it. Â My grandparents
had season tickets forever to the symphony, to the opera, to the ballet.
 I had little TV before 12 and none after for many years.  I was
a huge book reader. Â No real exposure to pop culture until Pop got
us a radio of our own as he was walking out the door when we hit our
teen years. Â I craved pop culture; I wanted to relate. Â With all
that crosses FFL, I feel that I've caught up on pop culture and now
this...coming full circle I am and I am so delighted I can appreciate
opera and classical now. Â Ha hatime for a glass of ginger ale.
 I'm getting all mushy and don't want to make myself ill with all
this gratitude talk. Â  Â
>
>
>
> >
> > From: emptybill emptybill@...
> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:47 PM
> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful
> >
> >
> >Â
> >Ladies â€" You just wish you
> could be seduced like this:
> >Don Giovanni â€" La ci darem la
> mano
> >Sung byDmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0
> >
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[seekliberation]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> Either we're talking past each other or you don't read what is written 
> properly. I was mentioning 500 years as an example of how long you could 
> linger on the other side WITHOUT a body and thus without the possebility to 
> think your mantra. That's quite a long time though probably above average. 
> And that's why there should be a certain ugency in this matter since noone 
> really knows for sure how long it will take to be back in a body and be able 
> to resume Sadhana.

I had a longer reply written, then erased it allit's futile.  You're 
convinced you're in direct control of your spirituality, while I think that 
divinity has a plan for us all in the midst of our individual efforts.  When I 
studied astrology, this is explained in terms of the difference between the 8th 
and 9th house.  They both result in people being spiritual, but the 8th house 
leans more towards spirituality, while 9th house leans more towards religion.  
The 8th house indicates spiritual development through one's own initiative, 
while the 9th house more so through revelation.  An example of an 8th house 
type of person would be Sanjaya in the Bhagavad Gita, someone who is psychic 
and achieves spiritual realizations through his own efforts.  Then you have 
Arjuna, who has no significant or indicated spiritual practice, but has reality 
revealed directly to him directly by God.  In other words, individual effort vs 
revelation.  

However, i've heard that the 12th house is the only one that really gets us out 
of this cycle of birth and death, and it also has a slightly different approach 
to the subject of spirituality.  Ketu, is also imperative in terms of its 
placement in the chart for enlightenment.  Given the fact that we don't have 
absolute control over the position of the planets at the time of birth, that's 
enough for me to look at meditation and spirituality as something I do because 
its my nature, not because I think i'm going to save the world or my own sould 
if I just 'hurry up' or 'try harder'.  But then again, I have 3 planets in the 
9th house, and only 1 in the 8th, so that's probably why I lean that way, not 
because it's the absolute truth...which I also can't say I really know.

seekliberation

[FairfieldLife] Re: The seduction of the beautiful

[seventhray27]

Always one of my favorites.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0Xk6LoRVsc



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> >
> > Can't go wrong with Dmitri's voice...a dream come true. Pair
> > that with Ann's husband's qualities and I might consider
> > marriage one day. Kidding! I looked up the story of Don
> > Giovanni - oh my. Here is a cute blurb on a canadian opera
> > singer's thoughts while trying to learn the Batti batti aria:
> >
> >
http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/mozart-don-giovanni-k-527-\
zerlinas-batti-batti-aria/
>
> I loved this! Great find.
>
> It's such a pretty aria musically, it's a shock when you
> first see a translation of the lyrics.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I grew up with opera and classical, but I didn't care for most of it
as no one else I knew was forced to listen to it. Â My grandparents
had season tickets forever to the symphony, to the opera, to the ballet.
 I had little TV before 12 and none after for many years.  I was
a huge book reader. Â No real exposure to pop culture until Pop got
us a radio of our own as he was walking out the door when we hit our
teen years. Â I craved pop culture; I wanted to relate. Â With all
that crosses FFL, I feel that I've caught up on pop culture and now
this...coming full circle I am and I am so delighted I can appreciate
opera and classical now. Â Ha hatime for a glass of ginger ale.
 I'm getting all mushy and don't want to make myself ill with all
this gratitude talk. Â  Â
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > From: emptybill emptybill@
> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:47 PM
> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful
> > >
> > >
> > >Â
> > >Ladies â€" You just wish you
> > could be seduced like this:
> > >Don Giovanni â€" La ci darem la
> > mano
> > >Sung byDmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The seduction of the beautiful

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Can't go wrong with Dmitri's voice...a dream come true. Pair
> that with Ann's husband's qualities and I might consider
> marriage one day. Kidding! I looked up the story of Don
> Giovanni - oh my. Here is a cute blurb on a canadian opera
> singer's thoughts while trying to learn the Batti batti aria:
> 
> http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/mozart-don-giovanni-k-527-zerlinas-batti-batti-aria/

I loved this! Great find.

It's such a pretty aria musically, it's a shock when you
first see a translation of the lyrics.






> I grew up with opera and classical, but I didn't care for most of it as no 
> one else I knew was forced to listen to it.  My grandparents had season 
> tickets forever to the symphony, to the opera, to the ballet.  I had little 
> TV before 12 and none after for many years.  I was a huge book reader.  No 
> real exposure to pop culture until Pop got us a radio of our own as he was 
> walking out the door when we hit our teen years.  I craved pop culture; I 
> wanted to relate.  With all that crosses FFL, I feel that I've caught up on 
> pop culture and now this...coming full circle I am and I am so delighted I 
> can appreciate opera and classical now.  Ha hatime for a glass of ginger 
> ale.  I'm getting all mushy and don't want to make myself ill with all this 
> gratitude talk.    
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > From: emptybill 
> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:47 PM
> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful
> > 
> >
> >  
> >Ladies â€" You just wish you
> could be seduced like this:
> >Don Giovanni â€" La ci darem la
> mano
> >Sung byDmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0
> > 
> >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Emily Reyn  wrote:

> Can't go wrong with Dmitri's voice...a dream come true.  Pair that with
> Ann's husband's qualities and I might consider marriage one day.


LOL..he doesn't even post here and he's trending today on FFL
#annssexyhusband - Go Niners !!!

Re: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful

[Emily Reyn]

Can't go wrong with Dmitri's voice...a dream come true.  Pair that with Ann's 
husband's qualities and I might consider marriage one day. Kidding!  I looked 
up the story of Don Giovanni - oh my.  Here is a cute blurb on a canadian opera 
singer's thoughts while trying to learn the Batti batti aria:

http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/mozart-don-giovanni-k-527-zerlinas-batti-batti-aria/


I grew up with opera and classical, but I didn't care for most of it as no one 
else I knew was forced to listen to it.  My grandparents had season tickets 
forever to the symphony, to the opera, to the ballet.  I had little TV before 
12 and none after for many years.  I was a huge book reader.  No real exposure 
to pop culture until Pop got us a radio of our own as he was walking out the 
door when we hit our teen years.  I craved pop culture; I wanted to relate.  
With all that crosses FFL, I feel that I've caught up on pop culture and now 
this...coming full circle I am and I am so delighted I can appreciate opera and 
classical now.  Ha hatime for a glass of ginger ale.  I'm getting all mushy 
and don't want to make myself ill with all this gratitude talk.    



>
> From: emptybill 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:47 PM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful
> 
>
>  
>Ladies – You just wish you
could be seduced like this:
>Don Giovanni – La ci darem la
mano
>Sung byDmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0
> 
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely to Xeno

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Xeno you've chosen to snip the rest of my post which explains what I meant.  
> Just to be more clear, I was writing of course about something Emily 
> attributed to me yesterday.
> Which philosophy is your question and snipping an expression of?

I think you misunderstood the intent of my short post.

1. You said 'I don't even THINK the word imbecile'

But of course you have to think a word to write it, especially in some kind of 
context.

2. 'let alone express it.'

To write it and to post it you also have to express it in some manner even if 
you do not intend to use the word directed at someone, which is how the word is 
typically used. And you must also know something of what the word means, and 
suppose that others also know what it means, otherwise posting it would require 
you to define it so you would be understood. This is not a serious post by me. 
I have been lightly touching in on FFL - its nice to be away - and did not feel 
like some serious discussion. So, I was not even bringing up the subject of 
whatever the discussion was, which was why it was snipped. I do believe I know 
what you intended by the remark, but I was having fun with it. Do not take me 
seriously here. Your situation with Emily was not in my mind at all. I don't 
even know what it is/was.

> 
>  From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 9:19 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> stooopid"
>  
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the word 
> > imbecile much less express it.
> 
> And so, Share, how did you manage to write the above passage? In case you 
> think this is a criticism, this is a philosophical question.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The seduction of the heart

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> 
> The seduction of the body is crass and savage compared to the
> seduction of the heart and at last … the soul.
> 
> Don Giovanni and Zerlina's Aria (Mozart)
> 
> Sung by Dmitri Hvorostovsky and Angela Kirchschlager
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Lui9SBYIfOc&feature=endscreen
> 

Do you have the wrong link here? This one is also "La ci darem
la mano," just with a different soprano. Did you mean to link
to a video of Zerlina's aria ("Batti, batti")?

Here's one with Kirschlager:

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

[FairfieldLife] The seduction of the heart

[emptybill]

The seduction of the body is crass and savage compared to the seduction
of the heart and at last … the soul.

Don Giovanni and Zerlina's Aria (Mozart)

Sung by Dmitri Hvorostovsky and Angela Kirchschlager

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Lui9SBYIfOc&feature=endscreen

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
>  
> > George W. Bush is the bigger culprit because he's the one that
> > actually executed the war in Iraq, thinking that Saddam had WMD.
> 
> *Pretending* that Saddam had WMD. He almost certainly knew
> otherwise.

That makes George W. a liar.  This corresponds to his jyotish chart which shows 
the conjunction of Saturn and Mercury in the first house.  Specifically, Saturn 
is a malefic planet that suppresses anything it associates with.  Mercury is 
the planet of information and news.  Thus, the truth is suppressed in the chart 
of this person.



> 
> > He made a fool of General Colin Powell who made a ridiculous 
> > presentation at the UN to convince world leaders of the non-
> > existent WMD in Iraq.
> 
> As did Powell.

That makes him a conspirator.

> 
> > I'm beginning to believe that George W. is and was a member
> > of a secret society that is planning for a "new world order",
> > just as his father before him had proclaimed.
> 
> Don't know about this, but W. is known to have said--before
> he was elected, I believe, but definitely before 9/11--that
> the way to be a great president was to start a war and win it,
> as his father had.

If he was the president of a third world country, he could be tried for crimes 
against humanity.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[Buck]

> 
> > 
> > >
> > > Nablusoss writes:
> > >  A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short 
> > > time we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of 
> > > urgency, is a no-good waste of time. If you need someone to rub your back 
> > > or tell you what you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.<>
> > >
> > 
> > Death, like an overflowing stream,
> > Sweeps us away; our life's a dream,
> > An empty tale, a morning flow'r,
> > Cut down and wither'd in an hour.
> >
> Our age to sev'nty years is set;
> How short the time! How frail the state!
> And if to eighty we arrive,
> We'd rather sigh and groan than live.
>
Teach us, Om Unified Field, how frail is life;
And kindly lengthen out the span,
Till a wise care of piety
Fit us to die and dwell with Thee. 
 
> >  
> > > Absolutely Nablusoss, 
> > > 
> > > This was said before but the urgency of it deserves to be brought up 
> > > again:
> > > 
> > > "Well understand, actually most of the research thus far on the Meissner 
> > > Effect
> > > (ME) was on 'meditators' in a population. The "yogic flying" studies came 
> > > along later and evidently are only pilot at best. By comparison with the 
> > > meditation population studies the "yogic flying" studies are infant. This 
> > > is a lot of the
> > > urgency now to get 2000 sidhas or "yogic flyers" together to research 
> > > long-term.
> > > By hook or crook. By Western meditators or hired in pundit boys from 
> > > India if the experienced westerners of the old TM-movement will not show 
> > > up. This is
> > > incredibly high-minded stuff.
> > > 
> > > Even a small fraction of individuals in the population engaging in 
> > > meditation
> > > practice has been found to reduce stress in cities, states, nations, and 
> > > the
> > > world, as seen by reduced war deaths, terrorism, and crime and increased
> > > cooperation, cultural exchanges, and creativity."
> > > 
> > > -Buck
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >  
> > > > > > Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment 
> > > > > > ever. But when you drop the body, how long will you be without a 
> > > > > > nervous-system and gravity, 10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 
> > > > > > years ? It depends on the circumstances and individual karma. In 
> > > > > > any case you'll be out of circulation for a long time without the 
> > > > > > ability to meditate. Therefore Buck is right, there is no time to 
> > > > > > waste. This is a fact. Which shouldn't produce any fear whatsoever, 
> > > > > > but urgency is certainly appropiate. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > first off...you're right, we don't really know how long we'll be out 
> > > > > of circulation, but my main point is that even if it takes us another 
> > > > > 500 years of being in this cycle of birth and deathso what?  What 
> > > > > is the concern?  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Either we're talking past each other or you don't read what is written 
> > > > properly. I was mentioning 500 years as an example of how long you 
> > > > could linger on the other side WITHOUT a body and thus without the 
> > > > possebility to think your mantra. That's quite a long time though 
> > > > probably above average. And that's why there should be a certain ugency 
> > > > in this matter since noone really knows for sure how long it will take 
> > > > to be back in a body and be able to resume Sadhana.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It's like we don't trust divinity to carry out its plan.  The sense of 
> > > > urgency you're talking aboutI'm not saying to not be spiritual, or 
> > > > ignore enlightenment, but introducing a sense of urgency is very 
> > > > contradictory to the state of consciousness we're aspiring to.  
> > > > Second...my general view is that I never trust or have any faith in any 
> > > > teaching or philosophy that introduces a sense of urgency towards 
> > > > anything.  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the 
> > > > short time we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain 
> > > > amount of urgency, is a no-good vaste of time. If you need someone to 
> > > > rub your back or tell you what you like to hear then have a 
> > > > Thai-massage.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful

[Share Long]

Thank you but this is more my style:  
Josh Groban and Sarah Brightman
All I Ask of You  


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




 From: emptybill 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 6:47 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful
 

  
Ladies – You just wish you
could be seduced like this:
Don Giovanni – La ci darem la
mano
Sung byDmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[Buck]

> 
> >
> > Nablusoss writes:
> >  A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short 
> > time we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of 
> > urgency, is a no-good waste of time. If you need someone to rub your back 
> > or tell you what you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.<>
> >
> 
> Death, like an overflowing stream,
> Sweeps us away; our life's a dream,
> An empty tale, a morning flow'r,
> Cut down and wither'd in an hour.
>
Our age to sev'nty years is set;
How short the time! How frail the state!
And if to eighty we arrive,
We'd rather sigh and groan than live.

>  
> > Absolutely Nablusoss, 
> > 
> > This was said before but the urgency of it deserves to be brought up again:
> > 
> > "Well understand, actually most of the research thus far on the Meissner 
> > Effect
> > (ME) was on 'meditators' in a population. The "yogic flying" studies came 
> > along later and evidently are only pilot at best. By comparison with the 
> > meditation population studies the "yogic flying" studies are infant. This 
> > is a lot of the
> > urgency now to get 2000 sidhas or "yogic flyers" together to research 
> > long-term.
> > By hook or crook. By Western meditators or hired in pundit boys from India 
> > if the experienced westerners of the old TM-movement will not show up. This 
> > is
> > incredibly high-minded stuff.
> > 
> > Even a small fraction of individuals in the population engaging in 
> > meditation
> > practice has been found to reduce stress in cities, states, nations, and the
> > world, as seen by reduced war deaths, terrorism, and crime and increased
> > cooperation, cultural exchanges, and creativity."
> > 
> > -Buck
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> > > > wrote:
> > > >  
> > > > > Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment ever. 
> > > > > But when you drop the body, how long will you be without a 
> > > > > nervous-system and gravity, 10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 years 
> > > > > ? It depends on the circumstances and individual karma. In any case 
> > > > > you'll be out of circulation for a long time without the ability to 
> > > > > meditate. Therefore Buck is right, there is no time to waste. This is 
> > > > > a fact. Which shouldn't produce any fear whatsoever, but urgency is 
> > > > > certainly appropiate. 
> > > > 
> > > > first off...you're right, we don't really know how long we'll be out of 
> > > > circulation, but my main point is that even if it takes us another 500 
> > > > years of being in this cycle of birth and deathso what?  What is 
> > > > the concern?  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Either we're talking past each other or you don't read what is written 
> > > properly. I was mentioning 500 years as an example of how long you could 
> > > linger on the other side WITHOUT a body and thus without the possebility 
> > > to think your mantra. That's quite a long time though probably above 
> > > average. And that's why there should be a certain ugency in this matter 
> > > since noone really knows for sure how long it will take to be back in a 
> > > body and be able to resume Sadhana.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It's like we don't trust divinity to carry out its plan.  The sense of 
> > > urgency you're talking aboutI'm not saying to not be spiritual, or 
> > > ignore enlightenment, but introducing a sense of urgency is very 
> > > contradictory to the state of consciousness we're aspiring to.  
> > > Second...my general view is that I never trust or have any faith in any 
> > > teaching or philosophy that introduces a sense of urgency towards 
> > > anything.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short 
> > > time we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of 
> > > urgency, is a no-good vaste of time. If you need someone to rub your back 
> > > or tell you what you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Dec 16, 2012, at 4:49 PM, "feste37"  wrote:

> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > !
> > 
> > It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
> > to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
> > ignoring the sexism. Since the compliment wasn't directed
> > at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
> > see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
> > said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
> > come out smelling like a rose.
> >
> 
> I'm not sorry about it at all. I like it. I chose it deliberately, with a 
> little bit of a smile.
> 

An evil smile I reckon. You got jealous on Ann's husband and cast a spell on 
her. Stay away from Ann and her husband you evil bastard !!!
> What you are doing here is what you do so often -- getting offended on behalf 
> of someone who is not the least bit offended. Seems silly to me. Haven't you 
> got better things to do, old girl?
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[Buck]

>
> Nablusoss writes:
>  A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short 
> time we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of 
> urgency, is a no-good waste of time. If you need someone to rub your back or 
> tell you what you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.<>
>

Death, like an overflowing stream,
Sweeps us away; our life's a dream,
An empty tale, a morning flow'r,
Cut down and wither'd in an hour.

 
> Absolutely Nablusoss, 
> 
> This was said before but the urgency of it deserves to be brought up again:
> 
> "Well understand, actually most of the research thus far on the Meissner 
> Effect
> (ME) was on 'meditators' in a population. The "yogic flying" studies came 
> along later and evidently are only pilot at best. By comparison with the 
> meditation population studies the "yogic flying" studies are infant. This is 
> a lot of the
> urgency now to get 2000 sidhas or "yogic flyers" together to research 
> long-term.
> By hook or crook. By Western meditators or hired in pundit boys from India if 
> the experienced westerners of the old TM-movement will not show up. This is
> incredibly high-minded stuff.
> 
> Even a small fraction of individuals in the population engaging in meditation
> practice has been found to reduce stress in cities, states, nations, and the
> world, as seen by reduced war deaths, terrorism, and crime and increased
> cooperation, cultural exchanges, and creativity."
> 
> -Buck
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> > > wrote:
> > >  
> > > > Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment ever. 
> > > > But when you drop the body, how long will you be without a 
> > > > nervous-system and gravity, 10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 years ? 
> > > > It depends on the circumstances and individual karma. In any case 
> > > > you'll be out of circulation for a long time without the ability to 
> > > > meditate. Therefore Buck is right, there is no time to waste. This is a 
> > > > fact. Which shouldn't produce any fear whatsoever, but urgency is 
> > > > certainly appropiate. 
> > > 
> > > first off...you're right, we don't really know how long we'll be out of 
> > > circulation, but my main point is that even if it takes us another 500 
> > > years of being in this cycle of birth and deathso what?  What is the 
> > > concern?  
> > 
> > 
> > Either we're talking past each other or you don't read what is written 
> > properly. I was mentioning 500 years as an example of how long you could 
> > linger on the other side WITHOUT a body and thus without the possebility to 
> > think your mantra. That's quite a long time though probably above average. 
> > And that's why there should be a certain ugency in this matter since noone 
> > really knows for sure how long it will take to be back in a body and be 
> > able to resume Sadhana.
> > 
> > 
> > It's like we don't trust divinity to carry out its plan.  The sense of 
> > urgency you're talking aboutI'm not saying to not be spiritual, or 
> > ignore enlightenment, but introducing a sense of urgency is very 
> > contradictory to the state of consciousness we're aspiring to.  Second...my 
> > general view is that I never trust or have any faith in any teaching or 
> > philosophy that introduces a sense of urgency towards anything.  
> > 
> > 
> > A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short 
> > time we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of 
> > urgency, is a no-good vaste of time. If you need someone to rub your back 
> > or tell you what you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> > > > > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> > > > > peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> > > > > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
> > > > 
> > > > Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
> > > > can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
> > > > you've used to express it.
> > > 
> > > Unlike you, Ann had no objection to it. In fact, she picked
> > > it up and ran with it. Lighten up, authfriend!
> > 
> > It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
> > to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
> > ignoring the sexism. Since the compliment wasn't directed
> > at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
> > see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
> > said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
> > come out smelling like a rose.
> 
> I'm not sorry about it at all. I like it. I chose it
> deliberately, with a little bit of a smile. What you are
> doing here is what you do so often -- getting offended on
> behalf of someone who is not the least bit offended.

Let me say it another way: That Ann did not express offense
does NOT mean that the metaphor wasn't sexist, or that sexism
isn't offensive. I wasn't offended on Ann's behalf; she gets
to decide whether she was offended by your sexism. I get to
decide whether I find it offensive, not her, and *certainly*
not you.

Get it now?

You've just told us that you enjoy making sexist remarks.
Now we know something about you we didn't know before.
Everyone is entitled to decide on their own behalf whether
they find that cute, or deplorable.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> > > > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> > > > peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> > > > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
> > > 
> > > Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
> > > can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
> > > you've used to express it.
> > 
> > Unlike you, Ann had no objection to it. In fact, she picked
> > it up and ran with it. Lighten up, authfriend!
> 
> It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
> to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
> ignoring the sexism. Since the compliment wasn't directed
> at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
> see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
> said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
> come out smelling like a rose.
>

I'm not sorry about it at all. I like it. I chose it deliberately, with a 
little bit of a smile. What you are doing here is what you do so often -- 
getting offended on behalf of someone who is not the least bit offended. Seems 
silly to me. Haven't you got better things to do, old girl?

[FairfieldLife] The seduction of the beautiful

[emptybill]

Ladies – You just wish you could be seduced like this:

Don Giovanni – La ci darem la mano

Sung by Dmitri Hvorostovsky and Renee Fleming

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iZHwbxLBO0

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > >
> > > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> > > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> > > peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> > > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
> > 
> > Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
> > can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
> > you've used to express it.
> 
> Unlike you, Ann had no objection to it. In fact, she picked
> it up and ran with it. Lighten up, authfriend!

It's a sexist metaphor regardless of whether Ann objected
to it. She was responding graciously to the compliment and
ignoring the sexism. Since the compliment wasn't directed
at me, I have no need to be gracious and can call it as I
see it, see? Don't be such a pompous ass. You could have
said, "Yes, I guess it was, sorry about that!" and have
come out smelling like a rose.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is "he" a "she" or vice versa? Does it make a difference?

[Emily Reyn]

Dear laughinggull, somehow I missed the original, but Richard's handsome face 
has been posted before, by "hisself" I believe, so not to worry if you did too. 
 He thought it was funny, I'm guessing, with the LOL and all.  



>
> From: laughinggull108 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:24 PM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is "he" a "she" or vice versa? Does it make a 
>difference?
> 
>
>  
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  
>wrote:
>>
>> laughinggull108:
>> > An interesting discussion might be *how* we respond (or not)
>> > to others on an online forum because of gender, and how that
>> > might *change* if someone isn't the gender we think he/she
>> > is...
>> >
>> Maybe, but on a forum such as this, it seems to be more fun to
>> respond to messages based on a person's birth circumstances,
>> or what state or city they might live in. Go figure.
>> 
>> How an anonymous poster responds in regard to where a
>> person  lives or what country or state they live in. For Barry, it's
>> important that anyone that lives in Texas is a 'prairie dog
>> fucker'. Or, like when Judy refers to my Yahoo! email address
>> as if it was my real name. There's nothing wrong with this if
>> it makes you feel better to depersonalize your debater. LoL!
>> 
>> You've heard of 'My Space'.
>> 
>> And, you've heard of 'Facebook'.
>> 
>> My new social networking site will be called 'My Face'.
>> 
>> Just post pictures of your face, nothing else, and then post
>> comments about each others face. That's the ticket. Everyone
>> loves to make comments about other people's faces. I'll be a
>> millionaire before the year ends!
>> 
>> You want to be the first subscriber?
>> 
>> P.S. I noticed you didn't post a picture of your face when
>> you posted a picture of my face to FFL recently. LoL!
>> 
>> 328838
>>
>
>Richard, you waxed me real good. I've deleted the message and would like to 
>say I'm sorry. It seemed funny at the time but I should have thought about it 
>a little more before posting. And happy holidays!
>
>
> 
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

Yeah why am I freaking out like this empty baby. I definitely love feste baby 
and Barry baby but I thought they were piling on Ann's husband & me. This shows 
I am not completely healed. Anyway Devi & I are strolling along the beach - we 
will sort this out.


On Dec 16, 2012, at 4:11 PM, "emptybill"  wrote:

> Ravioli,
> 
> Here you are, screeching like an obsessive old lady
> with nothing better to do. Is this what your balls are
> for ... or do you just make this stuff up 'cause you can't
> think of anything informative to say?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula
>  wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb
> no_reply@yahoogroups.comwrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater no_reply@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> > >
> > > I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> > > sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
> > >
> > > :-)
> >
> >
> > Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
> > asshole !!!
> >
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Dec 15 00:00:00 2012
End Date (UTC): Sat Dec 22 00:00:00 2012
265 messages as of (UTC) Mon Dec 17 00:11:25 2012

29 Emily Reyn 
26 seventhray27 
22 Robin Carlsen 
21 Buck 
16 Ravi Chivukula 
14 turquoiseb 
14 awoelflebater 
13 laughinggull108 
13 Share Long 
10 feste37 
10 Bhairitu 
 9 nablusoss1008 
 8 "Richard J. Williams" 
 7 curtisdeltablues 
 7 Alex Stanley 
 6 authfriend 
 5 seekliberation 
 5 Mike Dixon 
 4 salyavin808 
 4 emptybill 
 4 John 
 3 doctordumb...@rocketmail.com, UNEXPECTED_DATA_AFTER_ADDRESS@".SYNTAX-ERROR.
 3 card 
 2 sri...@ymail.com, UNEXPECTED_DATA_AFTER_ADDRESS@".SYNTAX-ERROR.
 2 maskedzebra 
 2 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 2 Dick Mays 
 2 "emilymae.reyn" 
 1 obbajeeba 
 1 merlin 

Posters: 30
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: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[emptybill]

Ravioli,

Here you are, screeching like an obsessive old lady
with nothing better to do.  Is this what your balls are
for ... or do you just make this stuff up 'cause you can't
think of anything informative to say?



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula
 wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb
no_reply@yahoogroups.comwrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater no_reply@ wrote:
> > >
> > > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> >
> > I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> > sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
> >
> > :-)
>
>
> Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
> asshole !!!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> >
> > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> > peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
> 
> Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
> can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
> you've used to express it.
>

Unlike you, Ann had no objection to it. In fact, she picked it up and ran with 
it. Lighten up, authfriend!

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"  wrote:
 
> George W. Bush is the bigger culprit because he's the one that
> actually executed the war in Iraq, thinking that Saddam had WMD.

*Pretending* that Saddam had WMD. He almost certainly knew
otherwise.

> He made a fool of General Colin Powell who made a ridiculous 
> presentation at the UN to convince world leaders of the non-
> existent WMD in Iraq.

As did Powell.

> I'm beginning to believe that George W. is and was a member
> of a secret society that is planning for a "new world order",
> just as his father before him had proclaimed.

Don't know about this, but W. is known to have said--before
he was elected, I believe, but definitely before 9/11--that
the way to be a great president was to start a war and win it,
as his father had.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Dec 16, 2012, at 3:43 PM, "authfriend"  wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  
> wrote:
> >
> > CORRECTION: Stay away from the innocent purity of Ann's
> > husband & I
> 
> You had the pronoun ("me") right the first time, my friend.
> 

Damn I thought I had the formula on the usage of "me" vs "I" nailed -  oh well, 
you got me there :-)


> 
> > you creepy, evil Sorcerer from Iowa.
> > 
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> > 
> > > Stay away from me and Ann's hubby - you creepy, evil
> > > Sorcerer from Iowa.
> 
> 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Dec 16, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:37 PM, authfriend  wrote:
>>  
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>> >
>> > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
>> > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
>> > peculiar magic he possessed that enabled him to saddle up
>> > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
>> 
>> Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
>> can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
>> you've used to express it.
> 
> That's because he IS a sexist pig in addition to being an evil sorcerer - duh 
> !!! 

No wait - evil Sorcerers are sexist pigs - duh  !!!

> 
>> 
>> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> CORRECTION: Stay away from the innocent purity of Ann's
> husband & I

You had the pronoun ("me") right the first time, my friend.


> you creepy, evil Sorcerer from Iowa.
> 
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> 
> > Stay away from me and Ann's hubby - you creepy, evil
> > Sorcerer from Iowa.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:37 PM, authfriend  wrote:

> **
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> >
> > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> > every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> > peculiar magic he possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> > that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.
>
> Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
> can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
> you've used to express it.
>

That's because he IS a sexist pig in addition to being an evil sorcerer -
duh !!!


>  
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

CORRECTION: Stay away from the innocent purity of Ann's husband & I you
creepy, evil Sorcerer from Iowa.

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Ravi Chivukula wrote:

> Stay away from me and Ann's hubby - you creepy, evil Sorcerer from Iowa.
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:04 PM, feste37  wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post from
>> now on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he possessed that
>> enabled him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her off into the
>> sunset.
>>
>>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in
> every post from now on. I for one would like to know what
> peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled him to saddle up
> that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset.

Yeesh. Although I'm in full sympathy with the sentiment, I
can't help pointing out what an incredibly sexist metaphor
you've used to express it.

[FairfieldLife] A question for DrDumbass

[nablusoss1008]

In your opinion, is it at all possible to be established in Unity Consciousness 
and then revert back to ordinary wakingstate ? Is it so that for Unity to be 
developed Cosmic Consciousness must be a 24/7 reality, and CC is irreverasble ?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Ravi Chivukula wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:26 PM, awoelflebater 
> wrote:
>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>> >
>> > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post
>> from now on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he possessed
>> that enabled him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her off into the
>> sunset.
>>
>> Hey Feste! I've missed posting to you and, maybe it takes one to know
>> one, but if I am "spirited" you are "feisty", as I already told you.
>>
>> Here are some of the qualities my husband possesses - the ones that keep
>> us together:
>>
>> He is a rebel.
>> He has a wounded side which reveals his humanity (as well as his
>> occasional inaccessibility).
>> He is handsome.
>> He has a *huge* heart.
>> He is generous.
>> He has a funny streak which is spontaneous, unstudied and natural.
>> He loves me for my individuality and spunkiness.
>> He thinks I am a 'gift' in his life, someone who has helped reveal many
>> more levels and aspects of  it than he ever thought possible.
>> We essentially embrace identical values.
>> He does all the cooking.
>>
>> These aren't all of the reasons we've been working it out for 25 years
>> but enough to keep me from bucking him off and galloping away.
>>
>
> That's sweet dear Ann - something to work on for your next incarnation
> Barry baby.
>

This is the best part - "He has a wounded side which reveals his humanity
(as well as his occasional inaccessibility).". Lucky bastard, how I wish
you were younger and I were him - damn.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Is "he" a "she" or vice versa? Does it make a difference?

[laughinggull108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> laughinggull108:
> > An interesting discussion might be *how* we respond (or not)
> > to others on an online forum because of gender, and how that
> > might *change* if someone isn't the gender we think he/she
> > is...
> >
> Maybe, but on a forum such as this, it seems to be more fun to
> respond to messages based on a person's birth circumstances,
> or what state or city they might live in. Go figure.
> 
> How an anonymous poster responds in regard to where a
> person  lives or what country or state they live in. For Barry, it's
> important that anyone that lives in Texas is a 'prairie dog
> fucker'. Or, like when Judy refers to my Yahoo! email address
> as if it was my real name. There's nothing wrong with this if
> it makes you feel better to depersonalize your debater. LoL!
> 
> You've heard of 'My Space'.
> 
> And, you've heard of 'Facebook'.
> 
> My new social networking site will be called 'My Face'.
> 
> Just post pictures of your face, nothing else, and then post
> comments about each others face. That's the ticket. Everyone
> loves to make comments about other people's faces. I'll be a
> millionaire before the year ends!
> 
> You want to be the first subscriber?
> 
> P.S. I noticed you didn't post a picture of your face when
> you posted a picture of my face to FFL recently. LoL!
> 
> 328838
>

Richard, you waxed me real good. I've deleted the message and would like to say 
I'm sorry. It seemed funny at the time but I should have thought about it a 
little more before posting. And happy holidays!

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:26 PM, awoelflebater wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> >
> > On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post
> from now on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he possessed
> that enabled him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her off into the
> sunset.
>
> Hey Feste! I've missed posting to you and, maybe it takes one to know one,
> but if I am "spirited" you are "feisty", as I already told you.
>
> Here are some of the qualities my husband possesses - the ones that keep
> us together:
>
> He is a rebel.
> He has a wounded side which reveals his humanity (as well as his
> occasional inaccessibility).
> He is handsome.
> He has a *huge* heart.
> He is generous.
> He has a funny streak which is spontaneous, unstudied and natural.
> He loves me for my individuality and spunkiness.
> He thinks I am a 'gift' in his life, someone who has helped reveal many
> more levels and aspects of  it than he ever thought possible.
> We essentially embrace identical values.
> He does all the cooking.
>
> These aren't all of the reasons we've been working it out for 25 years but
> enough to keep me from bucking him off and galloping away.
>

That's sweet dear Ann - something to work on for your next incarnation
Barry baby.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

Stay away from me and Ann's hubby - you creepy, evil Sorcerer from Iowa.

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:04 PM, feste37  wrote:

> **
>
>
> On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post from
> now on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he possessed that
> enabled him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her off into the
> sunset.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb  >wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> > >
> > > I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> > > sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
> > >
> > > :-)
> >
> >
> > Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
> > asshole !!!
> >
>
>  
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: He Preached:

[Buck]

>
>  In 17th
> century England George Fox preached 
> rejection of the hierarchy, dogma, and other "empty 
> forms" of the established churches of his day.  He 
> believed that an element of God's spirit is present in 
> all human beings and that turning to the "Inner 
> Light" in meditation allows direct communication 
> with God for everyone without the intercession of 
> clergy.  
> 
> >
> > "The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is
> > significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of 
> > consciousness.
> > So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught 
> > up
> > in small things, and then it will be yours." Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
> >
>

She Preached:
"The Grace cannot be purchased, 
it can only be obtained through systematic removal of the barriers which 
prevent it."
-Ida P. Rolf

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Emily Reyn]

Thank you Curtis.  True story, actually.  I'm not very creative. Ha. And, I 
don't take those stinkin' horse pills anymore.  P.S. I adore Jon Stewart.

I agree with you on the "draft" issue here on FFL.  You were very accommodating 
and I appreciate the fact you read the drama I put forth, despite what Richard 
said.  Regards, Emilina.  



>
> From: curtisdeltablues 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:31 AM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
>stooopid"
> 
>
>  
>Hey Emily, I wanted to high five you on your image of the person puking up the 
>vitamin on the way to work.  You really stuck the landing with the last 
>reference to smelling like too much perfume and cough drops.  Inventive 
>details like that delight me.
>
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  
>wrote:
>>
>> You see,this started out so *boring*and ended up so interesting.  Yes, I 
>> think the two of you should discuss 1) the *method* Robin used on LG and 2) 
>> grace.  I'm more interested in grace, of course.  Now, I will  laugh my way 
>> through the next walk with the dog.  And I will be quiet today and practice 
>> listening. 
>> 
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > 
>> > 
>> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>> > >
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
>> > >  wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > 
>> > > > 
>> > > > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity 
>> > > > > here. There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only 
>> > > > > getting what she deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be 
>> > > > > Camille Claudel. Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where 
>> > > > > Dostoyevsky's intent was to create
>> > > > 
>> > > >  I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
>> > > > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once 
>> > > > more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will 
>> > > > have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do 
>> > > > some good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to 
>> > > > these other horses. > 
>> > > > 
>> > > > 
>> > > > M:  Let's see here, ,...uhOh, I think I get it now.
>> > > > 
>> > > > Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide schtick has 
>> > > > become the man, and as the Beatles say:
>> > > > 
>> > > > "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry Fields Nothing 
>> > > > is real And nothing to get hung about. Strawberry Fields forever"
>> > > > 
>> > > > (Insert guitar riff here.) 
>> > > > 
>> > > > The tell:
>> > > > 
>> > > >  "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful 
>> > > > nature".
>> > > > 
>> > > > See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, and Ann's 
>> > > > challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was being chastised.
>> > > > 
>> > > > The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it:
>> > > > 
>> > > > "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously 
>> > > > defeated you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a virtual 
>> > > > exile."
>> > > > 
>> > > > Let the cackling commence.
>> > > 
>> > > Dear Curtis,
>> > > 
>> > > I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are 
>> > > interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which 
>> > > has drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever.
>> > 
>> > M: That is correct, the whole Share interaction with others doesn't 
>> > interest me at all.
>> > 
>> > R: You would make a moral stand against my method of expressing my 
>> > conviction about a matter that I can consider serious enough to warrant 
>> > being as ironic as I can be?
>> > 
>> > M: I was not making a moral stand, I was sorting it out for myself.  I 
>> > have been having some trouble following your post's intent and wanted to 
>> > figure it out.  Obviously many others have no trouble at all following 
>> > your method of communication here.  But like Buck it makes following the 
>> > ball a bit difficult sometimes as you slip in and out of what you are 
>> > calling your "ironic" character.
>> > 
>> > R:
>> > > 
>> > > Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of 
>> > > irony proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your 
>> > > exposing what is going on here somehow in that revealing is something 
>> > > higher than my deploying my Buck in the Dome side?
>> > 
>> > M: Higher, lower, those are all your own judgements.  It isn't my style so 
>> > obviously I have my preferences.  It is hard to pull off in writing so 
>> > many levels of communication without any support from voice tone or 
>> > expressions.
>> > 
>> > R:> 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[Buck]

Nablusoss writes:
 A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short time 
we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of urgency, is 
a no-good waste of time. If you need someone to rub your back or tell you what 
you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.<>

Absolutely Nablusoss, 

This was said before but the urgency of it deserves to be brought up again:

"Well understand, actually most of the research thus far on the Meissner Effect
(ME) was on 'meditators' in a population. The "yogic flying" studies came along 
later and evidently are only pilot at best. By comparison with the meditation 
population studies the "yogic flying" studies are infant. This is a lot of the
urgency now to get 2000 sidhas or "yogic flyers" together to research long-term.
By hook or crook. By Western meditators or hired in pundit boys from India if 
the experienced westerners of the old TM-movement will not show up. This is
incredibly high-minded stuff.

Even a small fraction of individuals in the population engaging in meditation
practice has been found to reduce stress in cities, states, nations, and the
world, as seen by reduced war deaths, terrorism, and crime and increased
cooperation, cultural exchanges, and creativity."

-Buck

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> > wrote:
> >  
> > > Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment ever. But 
> > > when you drop the body, how long will you be without a nervous-system and 
> > > gravity, 10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 years ? It depends on the 
> > > circumstances and individual karma. In any case you'll be out of 
> > > circulation for a long time without the ability to meditate. Therefore 
> > > Buck is right, there is no time to waste. This is a fact. Which shouldn't 
> > > produce any fear whatsoever, but urgency is certainly appropiate. 
> > 
> > first off...you're right, we don't really know how long we'll be out of 
> > circulation, but my main point is that even if it takes us another 500 
> > years of being in this cycle of birth and deathso what?  What is the 
> > concern?  
> 
> 
> Either we're talking past each other or you don't read what is written 
> properly. I was mentioning 500 years as an example of how long you could 
> linger on the other side WITHOUT a body and thus without the possebility to 
> think your mantra. That's quite a long time though probably above average. 
> And that's why there should be a certain ugency in this matter since noone 
> really knows for sure how long it will take to be back in a body and be able 
> to resume Sadhana.
> 
> 
> It's like we don't trust divinity to carry out its plan.  The sense of 
> urgency you're talking aboutI'm not saying to not be spiritual, or ignore 
> enlightenment, but introducing a sense of urgency is very contradictory to 
> the state of consciousness we're aspiring to.  Second...my general view is 
> that I never trust or have any faith in any teaching or philosophy that 
> introduces a sense of urgency towards anything.  
> 
> 
> A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short time 
> we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of urgency, 
> is a no-good vaste of time. If you need someone to rub your back or tell you 
> what you like to hear then have a Thai-massage.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post
from now on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he 
possessed that enabled him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her
off into the sunset.
Hey Feste! I've missed posting to you and, maybe it takes one to know
one, but if I am "spirited" you are "feisty", as I already told you.
Here are some of the qualities my husband possesses - the ones that keep
us together:
He is a rebel.He has a wounded side which reveals his humanity (as well
as his occasional inaccessibility).He is handsome.He has a huge heart.He
is generous.He has a funny streak which is spontaneous, unstudied and
natural.He loves me for my individuality and spunkiness.He thinks I am a
'gift' in his life, someone who has helped reveal many more levels and
aspects of  it than he ever thought possible.We essentially embrace
identical values.He does all the cooking.
These aren't all of the reasons we've been working it out for 25 years
but enough to keep me from bucking him off and galloping away.
By the way, nice Wallace Stevens discussion earlier.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@
wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb
no_reply@yahoogroups.comwrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> > >
> > > I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> > > sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
> > >
> > > :-)
> >
> >
> > Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
> > asshole !!!
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: He Preached:

[Buck]

 In 17th
century England George Fox preached 
rejection of the hierarchy, dogma, and other "empty 
forms" of the established churches of his day.  He 
believed that an element of God's spirit is present in 
all human beings and that turning to the "Inner 
Light" in meditation allows direct communication 
with God for everyone without the intercession of 
clergy.  

>
> "The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is
> significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of 
> consciousness.
> So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up
> in small things, and then it will be yours." Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
>

[FairfieldLife] He Preached:

[Buck]

"The whole purpose of life is to gain enlightenment. Nothing else is
significant compared to that completely natural, exalted state of consciousness.
So always strive for that. Set your life around that goal. Don't get caught up
in small things, and then it will be yours." Maharishi Mahesh Yogi 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post from now 
> on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he  possessed that 
> enabled him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her off into the 
> sunset. 

Agreed. Those of us who are discerning, recognize a truly extraordinary 
character in the person of Ann Woelfle Bater. Her presence on this forum is 
perhaps (speaking personally) the most interesting and sensitive. And her: "If 
I were a man I'd want to be me", for me beats Faulkner--but you first have to 
get the felicity, irony, and truth of what is behind that confession. That 
could kill you with its humour and gravity. Ann Woelfle Bater is the only 
person I have ever met who would be capable of saying something that perfect. A 
declaration that is still going around the universe. And have you heard her 
talk about horses? 

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> > >
> > > I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> > > sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
> > >
> > > :-)
> > 
> > 
> > Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
> > asshole !!!
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Share Long]

I'm still reading Mindsight by Dr. Daniel Siegel who incorporates various forms 
of mindfulness into his therapy practice.  Funnily enough I'm just reading the 
chapter in which he distinguishes between implicit and explicit memory.  He 
points out that even with PTSD there may be little or no explicit memory.  But 
implicit memories can surface as vivid flashbacks even decades after a 
traumatic event.  During the original event certain memory blocking chemicals 
flood the brain.  And even though the hippocampus is disabled, implicit 
memories of the traumatic experience will nonetheless be encoded into the 
nervous system.  These are what can influence behavior in some problematic 
ways.  Of course such understanding is not pertinent and or useful to 
everyone.  But it may be a relief to some to know that there might be 
physiological reasons for certain circumstances of their current life that have 
little to do with their ability to get over the past and
 just be in the present.  I believe in the power of intention.  But sometimes 
that is not enough.  IMO.  



 From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:02 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
stooopid"
 

  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > >
> > > My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not 
> > > all that it's cracked up to be. It is a New Age cliche 
> > > and refers to something for which human beings are not 
> > > designed. We live simultaneously in past, present, and 
> > > future. That's our nature. It is a quintessential human 
> > > act to think back to the past, and constantly interpret 
> > > and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are wired 
> > > to spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better 
> > > or worse. My cat can do neither of those things. He is 
> > > pretty good at living in the moment, but I have no desire 
> > > to emulate him. 
> > 
> > Well said, but the issue to me seems to revolve more 
> > around which species have the ability to *not* submit
> > to the pressures of past, present, and future when 
> > dealing with present events, not the tendency to do so.
> > 
> > That issue brings up the issue of free will, and of 
> > being capable of influencing one's passage through 
> > time and space. Is one a "prisoner" of one's previous
> > passages through time and space, or merely influenced
> > by them?
> > 
> > I'm going to go for the latter. The samskaras are 
> > present, *in* the present. The compulsion to submit
> > to them and keep doing the same old same old is not. 
> > 
> > Not for human beings, anyway. I can't speak for your
> > cat.  :-)
> 
> I would like to think you are right, but I can't say that 
> I feel free of those old ghosts that loiter in the psyche. 
> I tend to agree with Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It 
> is not even past." 

That said, it need not ever become the present.

Only obeisance to the past creates that. Having
a greater allegiance to the present creates the
possibility of new timelines. IMO, of course.


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[feste37]

On the contrary, I think we should mention Ann's hubby in every post from now 
on. I for one would like to know what peculiar magic he  possessed that enabled 
him to saddle up that spirited filly and ride her off into the sunset. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> >
> > I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> > sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
> >
> > :-)
> 
> 
> Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
> asshole !!!
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Ravi Chivukula]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:42 AM, turquoiseb wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
>
> I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
>
> :-)


Leave Ann's hubby out of this you paranoid, delusional, narcissistic
asshole !!!

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> John jr_esq:
> > According to the latest news. He's going to take a very 
> > demanding job that requires diplomacy and travel.
> > 
> Do you think Kerry will travel to Cambodia to spend Christmas?
> 
> "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
> authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein 
> because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass 
> destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our 
> security." - John Kerry


George W. Bush is the bigger culprit because he's the one that actually 
executed the war in Iraq, thinking that Saddam had WMD.  He made a fool of 
General Colin Powell who made a ridiculous presentation at the UN to convince 
world leaders of the non-existent WMD in Iraq.

I'm beginning to believe that George W. is and was a member of a secret society 
that is planning for a "new world order", just as his father before him had 
proclaimed.








>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater no_reply@ wrote:
> >
> > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
>
> I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.
Aw, don't worry Barry, I'm much nicer to him than I am to you.
>
> :-)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > If I were a man I'd want to be me.
> 
> I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
> sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time.

Ooh, stinging. I'll bet this will just devastate Ann.

(Actually, I bet she'll show it to her hubby, and he'll
hurt himself laughing. But we can certainly understand
why a woman like Ann would be a nightmare for Barry.)

[FairfieldLife] Re: To FFL: Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear Robin, to accentuate my creepiness and pay you back for your 
> > > > playful
> > > > response to me, I posted a link to the magazine knowing full well you 
> > > > couldn't
> > > > access the poem. Only back issues are available online. I cackled to 
> > > > make a
> > > > point - that I can be creepy if I choose - it's my right.
> > > > 
> > > > Robin1: It certainly *is* your right, Emily--just as Long as you are 
> > > > ready to be called on it. "Cackle" reminds me both of what Curtis has 
> > > > said directly--and also Feste, who called authfriend "the witch from 
> > > > New Jersey". I would like dearly to find out if indeed she is a witch. 
> > > > If she is, that would explain quite a lot, I think. But if she is not, 
> > > > that too would explain a lot.
> > > > 
> > > > I will take this incident--your knowing that I could not liberate the 
> > > > poem from the link you gave me--as classic Emily mischief and 
> > > > playfulness--I do not think it descends to the level of creepiness. I 
> > > > really don't, Emily. But I shall be wary of you from now on--when you 
> > > > make promises to me.
> > > > 
> > > > Emily1: But, I know you want to read it and I want you to read it, so 
> > > > here is my
> > > > Christmas present to you, my sweet. A take-off on Wallace Stevens
> > > > 
> > > > Robin1:I receive your Christmas present to me, Emily, in the 
> > > > Christ-cheer that I know was behind it: that ontological moment when 
> > > > God was born as one of his creatures--Don't believe everything that 
> > > > Curtis says about that guy--or his sweet mother. Merry Christmas, 
> > > > Emily--I liked the poem, as I will explain a little further down in 
> > > > this post. I believe Curtis has powerful convictions, but I don't 
> > > > necessarily feel I know what they are. But he is just the beautiful 
> > > > adversary that I desire. (I am speaking at the most subtle level of 
> > > > things, by the way; on the more mundane level of reality, we are just 
> > > > two friends who sometimes have different opinions on many matters.)
> > > > 
> > > > Emily1: To FFL: My heart and mind and soul and being is grateful to all 
> > > > of you every
> > > > day. You have made an enormous difference in my life and have helped me 
> > > > recover
> > > > from the deep state of melancholy I was in. I laugh at you all and
> > > > myself.at your/my expense, not at your/my expense, all the time. You
> > > > deserve it. Love, Emily.
> > > > 
> > > > Robin1: This all seems true to me, Emily. And there are those of us who 
> > > > because you can say this, love you (there are other reasons too; but 
> > > > this, what you have said here, that is enough). I take it back, Emily: 
> > > > *You are not creepy".
> > > > 
> > > > Title:
> > > > 
> > > > Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens
> > > > ~Jeff Gundy
> > > > 
> > > > On the page, left column:
> > > > 
> > > > ...He never supposed divine
> > > > Things might not look divine, nor that if nothing
> > > > Was divine then all things were, the world itself,
> > > > And that if nothing was the truth, then all
> > > > Things were the truth, the world itself was the truth.
> > > > 
> > > > ~Wallace Stevens
> > > > 
> > > > Right column:
> > > > 
> > > > Sea gull quartering the wind. Heron along the shore,
> > > > then pinwheeling back, low to the water. Wind in poplar,
> > > > 
> > > > cedar, beech, and pine, each speaking in a different voice.
> > > > Wind in me, in the book of vanished Stevens, in you -
> > > > 
> > > > more voices. Why sort them into human and other?
> > > > Even the branches the neighbor brought in his barrow
> > > > 
> > > > and piled in a heap while Loki barked at him - even
> > > > the cut branches have a voice, through a dry and thin one.
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, Stevens, you considered but threw away the idea
> > > > that the world itself is the truth. It might have saved you
> > > > 
> > > > some trouble. The blue jay and downy woodpecker,
> > > > clouds that sift the sunlight into something else,
> > > > 
> > > > the ant that tracks the sand and beach grass, six crows
> > > > in a dead tree like notes for an unfinished symphony -
> > > > 
> > > > all voices that seem true to me. When Loki and I walked
> > > > the ravine, he roamed ahead, aquiver with attention,
> > > > 
> > > > probing for traces and invisible signs. He ranged away
> > > > until I called out, turned back only when I yelled, "Loki,"
> > > > 
> > > > "Loki!"looked and loped off to sniff another mystery
> > > > involving dirt and leaves and a creature long gone.
> > > > 
> > > > I could only watch and call, having no leash, no hold
> > > > on him except my little 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[seventhray27]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not all that it's
cracked up to be. It is a New Age cliche and refers to something for
which human beings are not designed.

Really, who cares if it is cliche.  I think there comes a point (or
hopefully there comes a point) when we realize, "I only have control
over this present moment, so I can going to try to make the most of it."
I mean isn't that how it is supposed to work? And hopefully this is a
decision you've made many years ago, and also one you continue to make
every day.

Isn't this how you avoid, or at least minimize regret?

   We live simultaneously in past, present, and future. That's our
nature.

I would say so.  Hopefully we learn from the past.  I mean everything
that has happened in the past has coming barreling up to this present
moment, right?

It is a quintessential human act to think back to the past, and
constantly interpret and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are
wired to spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better or worse.

For me, I don't spend a lot of time thinking about the future.  I mean,
there are scenarios that float in and out, but they are only
possibilities, and I think it is trap to spend too much time thinking
about them.

On the other hand, there are practical matters that require some
planning and foresight.  On the other hand,  practical matters have
never been my strength.  As has been pointed out here, I tend to be more
emotionally driven.  But I think that has worked for me for the most
part.

Bottom line, for me, I like this phrase, "Living in the moment"

  My cat can do neither of those things. He is pretty good at living in
the moment, but I have no desire to emulate him.


I am not sure if they can contemplate the future, but they certainly
seem to able to remember the past and adjust their behavior accordingly.


> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> >
> > Goodness Ann, you are hysterically funny. Â I am creepily
connected to you. Â "If I were a man, I'd want to be me." Â Ahh ha
ha ha ha ha. Â Those lines were priceless. Â I did look up Camille
Claudel. Â I wouldn't want to be her - poor woman - her mother
refused to let her out of the asylum.Â
> >
> > O.K. Â Now I will go for the day (promise - I feel so guilty for
posting so much) and come back to listen. Â I have to look up Robin's
past posts on "grace." Â My memory sucks with all this living in the
moment crap. Â Maybe I'll use the advanced search on that. Â And I
want to find those pictures of penguins to show Share how supportive I
feel towards her in Reality. Â Love ya, Ann. Â Sincerely, Emily.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > From: awoelflebater no_re...@yahoogroups.com
> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:12 AM
> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or
"reeely stooopid"
> > >
> > >
> > >Â
> > >
> > >
> > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"
 wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater 
wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long 
wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't
even THINK the word imbecile much less express it.  Emily
recently asked a question about TM and I followed up with a similar
question to Steve.  Not sure how my asking a question of Steve is
saying anything at all about Emily.  And it's true that I ONCE
called Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the person who is
multiplying it.ÂÂ
> > >> > >
> > >> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me
something I did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy
here.
> > >> >
> > >> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be
friends too, you know.
> > >>
> > >> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your*
animosity here.
> > >
> > >Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the
'now'. There is no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the
one who is already persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in
pointing this out, what else could you have done given your propensity
for finding the truth and reality in all things? Please, please accept
my most profound offering which is in the form of my regret in this
matter. It won't happen again (well, maybe can I exempt Barry from this
promise?).
> > >
> > >>There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting
what she deserves.
> > >
> > >I know this now and stand humbly corrected. Emily you ARE a creep
and creepy to boot.
> > >
> > >>If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel.
> > >
> > >And if Share were a man she wants to be Steve. If I were a man I'd
want to be me.
> > >
> > >>Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent
was to create a charac

[FairfieldLife] Re: To FFL: Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Robin, to accentuate my creepiness and pay you back for your playful
> > > response to me, I posted a link to the magazine knowing full well you 
> > > couldn't
> > > access the poem. Only back issues are available online. I cackled to make 
> > > a
> > > point - that I can be creepy if I choose - it's my right.
> > > 
> > > Robin1: It certainly *is* your right, Emily--just as Long as you are 
> > > ready to be called on it. "Cackle" reminds me both of what Curtis has 
> > > said directly--and also Feste, who called authfriend "the witch from New 
> > > Jersey". I would like dearly to find out if indeed she is a witch. If she 
> > > is, that would explain quite a lot, I think. But if she is not, that too 
> > > would explain a lot.
> > > 
> > > I will take this incident--your knowing that I could not liberate the 
> > > poem from the link you gave me--as classic Emily mischief and 
> > > playfulness--I do not think it descends to the level of creepiness. I 
> > > really don't, Emily. But I shall be wary of you from now on--when you 
> > > make promises to me.
> > > 
> > > Emily1: But, I know you want to read it and I want you to read it, so 
> > > here is my
> > > Christmas present to you, my sweet. A take-off on Wallace Stevens
> > > 
> > > Robin1:I receive your Christmas present to me, Emily, in the Christ-cheer 
> > > that I know was behind it: that ontological moment when God was born as 
> > > one of his creatures--Don't believe everything that Curtis says about 
> > > that guy--or his sweet mother. Merry Christmas, Emily--I liked the poem, 
> > > as I will explain a little further down in this post. I believe Curtis 
> > > has powerful convictions, but I don't necessarily feel I know what they 
> > > are. But he is just the beautiful adversary that I desire. (I am speaking 
> > > at the most subtle level of things, by the way; on the more mundane level 
> > > of reality, we are just two friends who sometimes have different opinions 
> > > on many matters.)
> > > 
> > > Emily1: To FFL: My heart and mind and soul and being is grateful to all 
> > > of you every
> > > day. You have made an enormous difference in my life and have helped me 
> > > recover
> > > from the deep state of melancholy I was in. I laugh at you all and
> > > myself.at your/my expense, not at your/my expense, all the time. You
> > > deserve it. Love, Emily.
> > > 
> > > Robin1: This all seems true to me, Emily. And there are those of us who 
> > > because you can say this, love you (there are other reasons too; but 
> > > this, what you have said here, that is enough). I take it back, Emily: 
> > > *You are not creepy".
> > > 
> > > Title:
> > > 
> > > Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens
> > > ~Jeff Gundy
> > > 
> > > On the page, left column:
> > > 
> > > ...He never supposed divine
> > > Things might not look divine, nor that if nothing
> > > Was divine then all things were, the world itself,
> > > And that if nothing was the truth, then all
> > > Things were the truth, the world itself was the truth.
> > > 
> > > ~Wallace Stevens
> > > 
> > > Right column:
> > > 
> > > Sea gull quartering the wind. Heron along the shore,
> > > then pinwheeling back, low to the water. Wind in poplar,
> > > 
> > > cedar, beech, and pine, each speaking in a different voice.
> > > Wind in me, in the book of vanished Stevens, in you -
> > > 
> > > more voices. Why sort them into human and other?
> > > Even the branches the neighbor brought in his barrow
> > > 
> > > and piled in a heap while Loki barked at him - even
> > > the cut branches have a voice, through a dry and thin one.
> > > 
> > > Oh, Stevens, you considered but threw away the idea
> > > that the world itself is the truth. It might have saved you
> > > 
> > > some trouble. The blue jay and downy woodpecker,
> > > clouds that sift the sunlight into something else,
> > > 
> > > the ant that tracks the sand and beach grass, six crows
> > > in a dead tree like notes for an unfinished symphony -
> > > 
> > > all voices that seem true to me. When Loki and I walked
> > > the ravine, he roamed ahead, aquiver with attention,
> > > 
> > > probing for traces and invisible signs. He ranged away
> > > until I called out, turned back only when I yelled, "Loki,"
> > > 
> > > "Loki!"looked and loped off to sniff another mystery
> > > involving dirt and leaves and a creature long gone.
> > > 
> > > I could only watch and call, having no leash, no hold
> > > on him except my little voice and his willingness to listen.
> > > 
> > > All I saw really was Loki's seeing, snuffling through birches and 
> > > hemlocks,
> > > over the old earth for remnants
> > > 
> > > made as others walked, sniffed pissed, as the buried
> > > water bubbled up, filled the pools, trickled on its

[FairfieldLife] Re: To FFL: Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Robin, to accentuate my creepiness and pay you back for your playful
> > response to me, I posted a link to the magazine knowing full well you 
> > couldn't
> > access the poem. Only back issues are available online. I cackled to make a
> > point - that I can be creepy if I choose - it's my right.
> > 
> > Robin1: It certainly *is* your right, Emily--just as Long as you are ready 
> > to be called on it. "Cackle" reminds me both of what Curtis has said 
> > directly--and also Feste, who called authfriend "the witch from New 
> > Jersey". I would like dearly to find out if indeed she is a witch. If she 
> > is, that would explain quite a lot, I think. But if she is not, that too 
> > would explain a lot.
> > 
> > I will take this incident--your knowing that I could not liberate the poem 
> > from the link you gave me--as classic Emily mischief and playfulness--I do 
> > not think it descends to the level of creepiness. I really don't, Emily. 
> > But I shall be wary of you from now on--when you make promises to me.
> > 
> > Emily1: But, I know you want to read it and I want you to read it, so here 
> > is my
> > Christmas present to you, my sweet. A take-off on Wallace Stevens
> > 
> > Robin1:I receive your Christmas present to me, Emily, in the Christ-cheer 
> > that I know was behind it: that ontological moment when God was born as one 
> > of his creatures--Don't believe everything that Curtis says about that 
> > guy--or his sweet mother. Merry Christmas, Emily--I liked the poem, as I 
> > will explain a little further down in this post. I believe Curtis has 
> > powerful convictions, but I don't necessarily feel I know what they are. 
> > But he is just the beautiful adversary that I desire. (I am speaking at the 
> > most subtle level of things, by the way; on the more mundane level of 
> > reality, we are just two friends who sometimes have different opinions on 
> > many matters.)
> > 
> > Emily1: To FFL: My heart and mind and soul and being is grateful to all of 
> > you every
> > day. You have made an enormous difference in my life and have helped me 
> > recover
> > from the deep state of melancholy I was in. I laugh at you all and
> > myself.at your/my expense, not at your/my expense, all the time. You
> > deserve it. Love, Emily.
> > 
> > Robin1: This all seems true to me, Emily. And there are those of us who 
> > because you can say this, love you (there are other reasons too; but this, 
> > what you have said here, that is enough). I take it back, Emily: *You are 
> > not creepy".
> > 
> > Title:
> > 
> > Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens
> > ~Jeff Gundy
> > 
> > On the page, left column:
> > 
> > ...He never supposed divine
> > Things might not look divine, nor that if nothing
> > Was divine then all things were, the world itself,
> > And that if nothing was the truth, then all
> > Things were the truth, the world itself was the truth.
> > 
> > ~Wallace Stevens
> > 
> > Right column:
> > 
> > Sea gull quartering the wind. Heron along the shore,
> > then pinwheeling back, low to the water. Wind in poplar,
> > 
> > cedar, beech, and pine, each speaking in a different voice.
> > Wind in me, in the book of vanished Stevens, in you -
> > 
> > more voices. Why sort them into human and other?
> > Even the branches the neighbor brought in his barrow
> > 
> > and piled in a heap while Loki barked at him - even
> > the cut branches have a voice, through a dry and thin one.
> > 
> > Oh, Stevens, you considered but threw away the idea
> > that the world itself is the truth. It might have saved you
> > 
> > some trouble. The blue jay and downy woodpecker,
> > clouds that sift the sunlight into something else,
> > 
> > the ant that tracks the sand and beach grass, six crows
> > in a dead tree like notes for an unfinished symphony -
> > 
> > all voices that seem true to me. When Loki and I walked
> > the ravine, he roamed ahead, aquiver with attention,
> > 
> > probing for traces and invisible signs. He ranged away
> > until I called out, turned back only when I yelled, "Loki,"
> > 
> > "Loki!"looked and loped off to sniff another mystery
> > involving dirt and leaves and a creature long gone.
> > 
> > I could only watch and call, having no leash, no hold
> > on him except my little voice and his willingness to listen.
> > 
> > All I saw really was Loki's seeing, snuffling through birches and hemlocks,
> > over the old earth for remnants
> > 
> > made as others walked, sniffed pissed, as the buried
> > water bubbled up, filled the pools, trickled on its way.
> > 
Robin: In some way which caught me unawares I feel that Jeff Gundy has pointed
up what is sublimely skewed in Stevens's poetry: Stevens possesses a marvellous
ear for sound, an elegance of vocabulary that cannot be surpassed--his poems
have a pristine brilliance to them. They are the manifesta

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > >
> > > My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not 
> > > all that it's cracked up to be. It is a New Age cliche 
> > > and refers to something for which human beings are not 
> > > designed. We live simultaneously in past, present, and 
> > > future. That's our nature. It is a quintessential human 
> > > act to think back to the past, and constantly interpret 
> > > and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are wired 
> > > to spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better 
> > > or worse. My cat can do neither of those things. He is 
> > > pretty good at living in the moment, but I have no desire 
> > > to emulate him. 
> > 
> > Well said, but the issue to me seems to revolve more 
> > around which species have the ability to *not* submit
> > to the pressures of past, present, and future when 
> > dealing with present events, not the tendency to do so.
> > 
> > That issue brings up the issue of free will, and of 
> > being capable of influencing one's passage through 
> > time and space. Is one a "prisoner" of one's previous
> > passages through time and space, or merely influenced
> > by them?
> > 
> > I'm going to go for the latter. The samskaras are 
> > present, *in* the present. The compulsion to submit
> > to them and keep doing the same old same old is not. 
> > 
> > Not for human beings, anyway. I can't speak for your
> > cat.  :-)
> 
> 
> I would like to think you are right, but I can't say that I feel free of 
> those old ghosts that loiter in the psyche. I tend to agree with Faulkner, 
> "The past is never dead. It is not even past." 

Ah! this is so bloody good, Bill.

And, feste, by letting loose this quote you actually resolved something in my 
mind about time.

Time appears to me to be a very personal thing--and one great idea. I wish I 
had thought of it. But the Faulkner statement, for me, that actually gets it.


 
 
 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Goodness Ann, you are hysterically funny.  I am creepily connected to 
> > > > you.  "If I were a man, I'd want to be me."  Ahh ha ha ha ha ha. 
> > > >  Those lines were priceless.  I did look up Camille Claudel.  I 
> > > > wouldn't want to be her - poor woman - her mother refused to let her 
> > > > out of the asylum. 
> > > > 
> > > > O.K.  Now I will go for the day (promise - I feel so guilty for 
> > > > posting so much) and come back to listen.  I have to look up Robin's 
> > > > past posts on "grace."  My memory sucks with all this living in the 
> > > > moment crap.  Maybe I'll use the advanced search on that.  And I want 
> > > > to find those pictures of penguins to show Share how supportive I feel 
> > > > towards her in Reality.  Love ya, Ann.  Sincerely, Emily.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > From: awoelflebater 
> > > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:12 AM
> > > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
> > > > >"reeely stooopid"
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > >  
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even 
> > > > >> > > THINK the word imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently 
> > > > >> > > asked a question about TM and I followed up with a similar 
> > > > >> > > question to Steve.  Not sure how my asking a question of 
> > > > >> > > Steve is saying anything at all about Emily.  And it's true 
> > > > >> > > that I ONCE called Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the 
> > > > >> > > person who is multiplying it.  
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me 
> > > > >> > > something I did not say or even think, that is what I'd call 
> > > > >> > > creepy here.
> > > > >> > 
> > > > >> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be 
> > > > >> > friends too, you know. 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity 
> > > > >> here. 
> > > > >
> > > > >Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the 'now'. 
> > > > >There is no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the one 
> > > > >who is already persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in pointing 
> > > > >this out, what else could you have done given your propensity for 
> > > > >finding the truth and reality in all things? Please, pleas

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> > >
> > > My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not 
> > > all that it's cracked up to be. It is a New Age cliche 
> > > and refers to something for which human beings are not 
> > > designed. We live simultaneously in past, present, and 
> > > future. That's our nature. It is a quintessential human 
> > > act to think back to the past, and constantly interpret 
> > > and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are wired 
> > > to spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better 
> > > or worse. My cat can do neither of those things. He is 
> > > pretty good at living in the moment, but I have no desire 
> > > to emulate him. 
> > 
> > Well said, but the issue to me seems to revolve more 
> > around which species have the ability to *not* submit
> > to the pressures of past, present, and future when 
> > dealing with present events, not the tendency to do so.
> > 
> > That issue brings up the issue of free will, and of 
> > being capable of influencing one's passage through 
> > time and space. Is one a "prisoner" of one's previous
> > passages through time and space, or merely influenced
> > by them?
> > 
> > I'm going to go for the latter. The samskaras are 
> > present, *in* the present. The compulsion to submit
> > to them and keep doing the same old same old is not. 
> > 
> > Not for human beings, anyway. I can't speak for your
> > cat.  :-)
> 
> I would like to think you are right, but I can't say that 
> I feel free of those old ghosts that loiter in the psyche. 
> I tend to agree with Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It 
> is not even past." 

That said, it need not ever become the present.

Only obeisance to the past creates that. Having
a greater allegiance to the present creates the
possibility of new timelines. IMO, of course.

[FairfieldLife] Re: To FFL: Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> Dear Robin, to accentuate my creepiness and pay you back for your playful
> response to me, I posted a link to the magazine knowing full well you couldn't
> access the poem. Only back issues are available online. I cackled to make a
> point - that I can be creepy if I choose - it's my right.
> 
> Robin1: It certainly *is* your right, Emily--just as Long as you are ready to 
> be called on it. "Cackle" reminds me both of what Curtis has said 
> directly--and also Feste, who called authfriend "the witch from New Jersey". 
> I would like dearly to find out if indeed she is a witch. If she is, that 
> would explain quite a lot, I think. But if she is not, that too would explain 
> a lot.
> 
> I will take this incident--your knowing that I could not liberate the poem 
> from the link you gave me--as classic Emily mischief and playfulness--I do 
> not think it descends to the level of creepiness. I really don't, Emily. But 
> I shall be wary of you from now on--when you make promises to me.
> 
> Emily1: But, I know you want to read it and I want you to read it, so here is 
> my
> Christmas present to you, my sweet. A take-off on Wallace Stevens
> 
> Robin1:I receive your Christmas present to me, Emily, in the Christ-cheer 
> that I know was behind it: that ontological moment when God was born as one 
> of his creatures--Don't believe everything that Curtis says about that 
> guy--or his sweet mother. Merry Christmas, Emily--I liked the poem, as I will 
> explain a little further down in this post. I believe Curtis has powerful 
> convictions, but I don't necessarily feel I know what they are. But he is 
> just the beautiful adversary that I desire. (I am speaking at the most subtle 
> level of things, by the way; on the more mundane level of reality, we are 
> just two friends who sometimes have different opinions on many matters.)
> 
> Emily1: To FFL: My heart and mind and soul and being is grateful to all of 
> you every
> day. You have made an enormous difference in my life and have helped me 
> recover
> from the deep state of melancholy I was in. I laugh at you all and
> myself.at your/my expense, not at your/my expense, all the time. You
> deserve it. Love, Emily.
> 
> Robin1: This all seems true to me, Emily. And there are those of us who 
> because you can say this, love you (there are other reasons too; but this, 
> what you have said here, that is enough). I take it back, Emily: *You are not 
> creepy".
> 
> Title:
> 
> Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens
> ~Jeff Gundy
> 
> On the page, left column:
> 
> ...He never supposed divine
> Things might not look divine, nor that if nothing
> Was divine then all things were, the world itself,
> And that if nothing was the truth, then all
> Things were the truth, the world itself was the truth.
> 
> ~Wallace Stevens
> 
> Right column:
> 
> Sea gull quartering the wind. Heron along the shore,
> then pinwheeling back, low to the water. Wind in poplar,
> 
> cedar, beech, and pine, each speaking in a different voice.
> Wind in me, in the book of vanished Stevens, in you -
> 
> more voices. Why sort them into human and other?
> Even the branches the neighbor brought in his barrow
> 
> and piled in a heap while Loki barked at him - even
> the cut branches have a voice, through a dry and thin one.
> 
> Oh, Stevens, you considered but threw away the idea
> that the world itself is the truth. It might have saved you
> 
> some trouble. The blue jay and downy woodpecker,
> clouds that sift the sunlight into something else,
> 
> the ant that tracks the sand and beach grass, six crows
> in a dead tree like notes for an unfinished symphony -
> 
> all voices that seem true to me. When Loki and I walked
> the ravine, he roamed ahead, aquiver with attention,
> 
> probing for traces and invisible signs. He ranged away
> until I called out, turned back only when I yelled, "Loki,"
> 
> "Loki!"looked and loped off to sniff another mystery
> involving dirt and leaves and a creature long gone.
> 
> I could only watch and call, having no leash, no hold
> on him except my little voice and his willingness to listen.
> 
> All I saw really was Loki's seeing, snuffling through birches and hemlocks,
> over the old earth for remnants
> 
> made as others walked, sniffed pissed, as the buried
> water bubbled up, filled the pools, trickled on its way.
> 
> Robin: In some way which caught me unawares I feel that Jeff Gundy has 
> pointed up what is sublimely skewed in Stevens's poetry: Stevens possesses a 
> marvellous ear for sound, an elegance of vocabulary that cannot be 
> surpassed--his poems have a pristine brilliance to them. They are the 
> manifestation of a kind of religious irony--and they are always aesthetically 
> and intellectually realized. But *no one can feel who the poet is as a 
> person*; he has achieved (in my mind) a form of objectivity which is 
> complete, but in that objectivity, the frail a

Re: [FairfieldLife] Sanest and wisest "gun control" comment I've seen yet

[Bhairitu]

On 12/16/2012 09:22 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> [https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/30340_1015117901\
> 6976275_2015052488_n.jpg]
> https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/30340_10151179016\
> 976275_2015052488_n.jpg
>  6976275_2015052488_n.jpg>
>
>

Apparently Connecticut has gun registration similar to California and 
the kid went to buy a gun at a store on Tuesday they refused to sell one 
to him.  So you can't blame gun laws.  So they blame video games.  They 
blame loners who don't have a Facebook account (I don't have one either 
but you can find me right away since I have a web site under my real 
name). And OMG, the mom was a "prepper!"  He didn't have any friends but 
Newtown is one of these upscale communities probably about as friendly 
as nearby Walnut Creek which is composed of snobs and pseudo-snobs.  
When I was in Danville which is even more upscale I got into a 
conversation with folks next to my table on the Starbucks patio 
immediately.  And guess what we talked about?  How snobby Walnut Creek is.

And what would have happened if he hopped a commuter train, gone to Wall 
Street and shot one of the bankster CEOs?  Block parties? Those CEOs are 
responsible for far more deaths and should be in prison.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[feste37]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
> >
> > My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not 
> > all that it's cracked up to be. It is a New Age cliche 
> > and refers to something for which human beings are not 
> > designed. We live simultaneously in past, present, and 
> > future. That's our nature. It is a quintessential human 
> > act to think back to the past, and constantly interpret 
> > and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are wired 
> > to spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better 
> > or worse. My cat can do neither of those things. He is 
> > pretty good at living in the moment, but I have no desire 
> > to emulate him. 
> 
> Well said, but the issue to me seems to revolve more 
> around which species have the ability to *not* submit
> to the pressures of past, present, and future when 
> dealing with present events, not the tendency to do so.
> 
> That issue brings up the issue of free will, and of 
> being capable of influencing one's passage through 
> time and space. Is one a "prisoner" of one's previous
> passages through time and space, or merely influenced
> by them?
> 
> I'm going to go for the latter. The samskaras are 
> present, *in* the present. The compulsion to submit
> to them and keep doing the same old same old is not. 
> 
> Not for human beings, anyway. I can't speak for your
> cat.  :-)


I would like to think you are right, but I can't say that I feel free of those 
old ghosts that loiter in the psyche. I tend to agree with Faulkner, "The past 
is never dead. It is not even past." 


> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> > >
> > > Goodness Ann, you are hysterically funny.  I am creepily connected to 
> > > you.  "If I were a man, I'd want to be me."  Ahh ha ha ha ha ha. 
> > >  Those lines were priceless.  I did look up Camille Claudel.  I 
> > > wouldn't want to be her - poor woman - her mother refused to let her out 
> > > of the asylum. 
> > > 
> > > O.K.  Now I will go for the day (promise - I feel so guilty for posting 
> > > so much) and come back to listen.  I have to look up Robin's past posts 
> > > on "grace."  My memory sucks with all this living in the moment crap. 
> > >  Maybe I'll use the advanced search on that.  And I want to find those 
> > > pictures of penguins to show Share how supportive I feel towards her in 
> > > Reality.  Love ya, Ann.  Sincerely, Emily.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > From: awoelflebater 
> > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:12 AM
> > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> > > >stooopid"
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
> > > >wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK 
> > > >> > > the word imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a 
> > > >> > > question about TM and I followed up with a similar question to 
> > > >> > > Steve.  Not sure how my asking a question of Steve is saying 
> > > >> > > anything at all about Emily.  And it's true that I ONCE called 
> > > >> > > Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the person who is 
> > > >> > > multiplying it.  
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me 
> > > >> > > something I did not say or even think, that is what I'd call 
> > > >> > > creepy here.
> > > >> > 
> > > >> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be 
> > > >> > friends too, you know. 
> > > >> 
> > > >> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity 
> > > >> here. 
> > > >
> > > >Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the 'now'. 
> > > >There is no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the one who 
> > > >is already persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in pointing this 
> > > >out, what else could you have done given your propensity for finding the 
> > > >truth and reality in all things? Please, please accept my most profound 
> > > >offering which is in the form of my regret in this matter. It won't 
> > > >happen again (well, maybe can I exempt Barry from this promise?).
> > > >
> > > >>There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what 
> > > >>she deserves. 
> > > >
> > > >I know this now and stand humbly corrected. Emily you ARE a creep and 
> > > >creepy to boot.
> > > >
> > > >>If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. 
> > > >
> > > >And if Share were a man she wants to be Steve. If I were a man I'd want 
> > > >to be me.

[FairfieldLife] Re: To FFL: Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens

[Robin Carlsen]

Dear Robin, to accentuate my creepiness and pay you back for your playful
response to me, I posted a link to the magazine knowing full well you couldn't
access the poem. Only back issues are available online. I cackled to make a
point - that I can be creepy if I choose - it's my right.

Robin1: It certainly *is* your right, Emily--just as Long as you are ready to 
be called on it. "Cackle" reminds me both of what Curtis has said directly--and 
also Feste, who called authfriend "the witch from New Jersey". I would like 
dearly to find out if indeed she is a witch. If she is, that would explain 
quite a lot, I think. But if she is not, that too would explain a lot.

I will take this incident--your knowing that I could not liberate the poem from 
the link you gave me--as classic Emily mischief and playfulness--I do not think 
it descends to the level of creepiness. I really don't, Emily. But I shall be 
wary of you from now on--when you make promises to me.

Emily1: But, I know you want to read it and I want you to read it, so here is my
Christmas present to you, my sweet. A take-off on Wallace Stevens

Robin1:I receive your Christmas present to me, Emily, in the Christ-cheer that 
I know was behind it: that ontological moment when God was born as one of his 
creatures--Don't believe everything that Curtis says about that guy--or his 
sweet mother. Merry Christmas, Emily--I liked the poem, as I will explain a 
little further down in this post. I believe Curtis has powerful convictions, 
but I don't necessarily feel I know what they are. But he is just the beautiful 
adversary that I desire. (I am speaking at the most subtle level of things, by 
the way; on the more mundane level of reality, we are just two friends who 
sometimes have different opinions on many matters.)

Emily1: To FFL: My heart and mind and soul and being is grateful to all of you 
every
day. You have made an enormous difference in my life and have helped me recover
from the deep state of melancholy I was in. I laugh at you all and
myself.at your/my expense, not at your/my expense, all the time. You
deserve it. Love, Emily.

Robin1: This all seems true to me, Emily. And there are those of us who because 
you can say this, love you (there are other reasons too; but this, what you 
have said here, that is enough). I take it back, Emily: *You are not creepy".

Title:

Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens
~Jeff Gundy

On the page, left column:

...He never supposed divine
Things might not look divine, nor that if nothing
Was divine then all things were, the world itself,
And that if nothing was the truth, then all
Things were the truth, the world itself was the truth.

~Wallace Stevens

Right column:

Sea gull quartering the wind. Heron along the shore,
then pinwheeling back, low to the water. Wind in poplar,

cedar, beech, and pine, each speaking in a different voice.
Wind in me, in the book of vanished Stevens, in you -

more voices. Why sort them into human and other?
Even the branches the neighbor brought in his barrow

and piled in a heap while Loki barked at him - even
the cut branches have a voice, through a dry and thin one.

Oh, Stevens, you considered but threw away the idea
that the world itself is the truth. It might have saved you

some trouble. The blue jay and downy woodpecker,
clouds that sift the sunlight into something else,

the ant that tracks the sand and beach grass, six crows
in a dead tree like notes for an unfinished symphony -

all voices that seem true to me. When Loki and I walked
the ravine, he roamed ahead, aquiver with attention,

probing for traces and invisible signs. He ranged away
until I called out, turned back only when I yelled, "Loki,"

"Loki!"looked and loped off to sniff another mystery
involving dirt and leaves and a creature long gone.

I could only watch and call, having no leash, no hold
on him except my little voice and his willingness to listen.

All I saw really was Loki's seeing, snuffling through birches and hemlocks,
over the old earth for remnants

made as others walked, sniffed pissed, as the buried
water bubbled up, filled the pools, trickled on its way.

Robin: In some way which caught me unawares I feel that Jeff Gundy has pointed 
up what is sublimely skewed in Stevens's poetry: Stevens possesses a marvellous 
ear for sound, an elegance of vocabulary that cannot be surpassed--his poems 
have a pristine brilliance to them. They are the manifestation of a kind of 
religious irony--and they are always aesthetically and intellectually realized. 
But *no one can feel who the poet is as a person*; he has achieved (in my mind) 
a form of objectivity which is complete, but in that objectivity, the frail and 
fallible and suffering subjective person is silent. Stevens is dazzling and 
metaphysical and glorious, but he is somewhere mute--almost, as if he were deaf 
but heard sounds that no one else can hear, meditated on meanings that are too 
perfect for the rest of us to even know. 

I 

[FairfieldLife] Is it Nature's plan for man to suffer? Explained by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

[nablusoss1008]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyPJaxF1S4w

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> wrote:
>  
> > Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment ever. But 
> > when you drop the body, how long will you be without a nervous-system and 
> > gravity, 10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 years ? It depends on the 
> > circumstances and individual karma. In any case you'll be out of 
> > circulation for a long time without the ability to meditate. Therefore Buck 
> > is right, there is no time to waste. This is a fact. Which shouldn't 
> > produce any fear whatsoever, but urgency is certainly appropiate. 
> 
> first off...you're right, we don't really know how long we'll be out of 
> circulation, but my main point is that even if it takes us another 500 years 
> of being in this cycle of birth and deathso what?  What is the concern?  


Either we're talking past each other or you don't read what is written 
properly. I was mentioning 500 years as an example of how long you could linger 
on the other side WITHOUT a body and thus without the possebility to think your 
mantra. That's quite a long time though probably above average. And that's why 
there should be a certain ugency in this matter since noone really knows for 
sure how long it will take to be back in a body and be able to resume Sadhana.


It's like we don't trust divinity to carry out its plan.  The sense of urgency 
you're talking aboutI'm not saying to not be spiritual, or ignore 
enlightenment, but introducing a sense of urgency is very contradictory to the 
state of consciousness we're aspiring to.  Second...my general view is that I 
never trust or have any faith in any teaching or philosophy that introduces a 
sense of urgency towards anything.  


A philosophy, spiritual path or Guru that doesn't put value on the short time 
we have in each life to evolve and thus stress a certain amount of urgency, is 
a no-good vaste of time. If you need someone to rub your back or tell you what 
you like to hear then have a Thai-massage. 

[FairfieldLife] Share maybe stops going down rabbit hole...

[Share Long]

...better known as Kramer Stops Talking 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEJbXXs7dpw

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37"  wrote:
>
> My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not 
> all that it's cracked up to be. It is a New Age cliche 
> and refers to something for which human beings are not 
> designed. We live simultaneously in past, present, and 
> future. That's our nature. It is a quintessential human 
> act to think back to the past, and constantly interpret 
> and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are wired 
> to spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better 
> or worse. My cat can do neither of those things. He is 
> pretty good at living in the moment, but I have no desire 
> to emulate him. 

Well said, but the issue to me seems to revolve more 
around which species have the ability to *not* submit
to the pressures of past, present, and future when 
dealing with present events, not the tendency to do so.

That issue brings up the issue of free will, and of 
being capable of influencing one's passage through 
time and space. Is one a "prisoner" of one's previous
passages through time and space, or merely influenced
by them?

I'm going to go for the latter. The samskaras are 
present, *in* the present. The compulsion to submit
to them and keep doing the same old same old is not. 

Not for human beings, anyway. I can't speak for your
cat.  :-)

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >
> > Goodness Ann, you are hysterically funny.  I am creepily connected to you. 
> >  "If I were a man, I'd want to be me."  Ahh ha ha ha ha ha.  Those lines 
> > were priceless.  I did look up Camille Claudel.  I wouldn't want to be 
> > her - poor woman - her mother refused to let her out of the asylum. 
> > 
> > O.K.  Now I will go for the day (promise - I feel so guilty for posting so 
> > much) and come back to listen.  I have to look up Robin's past posts on 
> > "grace."  My memory sucks with all this living in the moment crap.  Maybe 
> > I'll use the advanced search on that.  And I want to find those pictures 
> > of penguins to show Share how supportive I feel towards her in Reality. 
> >  Love ya, Ann.  Sincerely, Emily.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > From: awoelflebater 
> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:12 AM
> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> > >stooopid"
> > > 
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > >
> > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > 
> > >> > 
> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK 
> > >> > > the word imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a 
> > >> > > question about TM and I followed up with a similar question to 
> > >> > > Steve.  Not sure how my asking a question of Steve is saying 
> > >> > > anything at all about Emily.  And it's true that I ONCE called 
> > >> > > Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the person who is 
> > >> > > multiplying it.  
> > >> > > 
> > >> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me 
> > >> > > something I did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy 
> > >> > > here.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be friends 
> > >> > too, you know. 
> > >> 
> > >> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
> > >
> > >Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the 'now'. There 
> > >is no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the one who is 
> > >already persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in pointing this out, 
> > >what else could you have done given your propensity for finding the truth 
> > >and reality in all things? Please, please accept my most profound offering 
> > >which is in the form of my regret in this matter. It won't happen again 
> > >(well, maybe can I exempt Barry from this promise?).
> > >
> > >>There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
> > >>deserves. 
> > >
> > >I know this now and stand humbly corrected. Emily you ARE a creep and 
> > >creepy to boot.
> > >
> > >>If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. 
> > >
> > >And if Share were a man she wants to be Steve. If I were a man I'd want to 
> > >be me.
> > >
> > >>Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to 
> > >>create a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful 
> > >>nature". I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can 
> > >>resist the temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this 
> > >>once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I 
> > >>will have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile.
> > >
> > >Just try it, buster. But I agree, I will ke

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[feste37]

My feeling about "living in the moment" is that it's not all that it's cracked 
up to be. It is a New Age cliche and refers to something for which human beings 
are not designed. We live simultaneously in past, present, and future. That's 
our nature. It is a quintessential human act to think back to the past, and 
constantly interpret and reinterpret it for ourselves, and we also are wired to 
spend a lot of time envisaging the future, for better or worse. My cat can do 
neither of those things. He is pretty good at living in the moment, but I have 
no desire to emulate him. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Goodness Ann, you are hysterically funny.  I am creepily connected to you. 
>  "If I were a man, I'd want to be me."  Ahh ha ha ha ha ha.  Those lines 
> were priceless.  I did look up Camille Claudel.  I wouldn't want to be her 
> - poor woman - her mother refused to let her out of the asylum. 
> 
> O.K.  Now I will go for the day (promise - I feel so guilty for posting so 
> much) and come back to listen.  I have to look up Robin's past posts on 
> "grace."  My memory sucks with all this living in the moment crap.  Maybe 
> I'll use the advanced search on that.  And I want to find those pictures of 
> penguins to show Share how supportive I feel towards her in Reality.  Love 
> ya, Ann.  Sincerely, Emily.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > From: awoelflebater 
> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:12 AM
> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> >stooopid"
> > 
> >
> >  
> >
> >
> >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the 
> >> > > word imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a 
> >> > > question about TM and I followed up with a similar question to 
> >> > > Steve.  Not sure how my asking a question of Steve is saying 
> >> > > anything at all about Emily.  And it's true that I ONCE called 
> >> > > Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the person who is 
> >> > > multiplying it.  
> >> > > 
> >> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something 
> >> > > I did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here.
> >> > 
> >> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be friends 
> >> > too, you know. 
> >> 
> >> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
> >
> >Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the 'now'. There 
> >is no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the one who is already 
> >persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in pointing this out, what else 
> >could you have done given your propensity for finding the truth and reality 
> >in all things? Please, please accept my most profound offering which is in 
> >the form of my regret in this matter. It won't happen again (well, maybe can 
> >I exempt Barry from this promise?).
> >
> >>There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
> >>deserves. 
> >
> >I know this now and stand humbly corrected. Emily you ARE a creep and creepy 
> >to boot.
> >
> >>If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. 
> >
> >And if Share were a man she wants to be Steve. If I were a man I'd want to 
> >be me.
> >
> >>Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to 
> >>create a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful 
> >>nature". I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist 
> >>the temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once 
> >>more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have 
> >>to send you (this time) into a virtual exile.
> >
> >Just try it, buster. But I agree, I will keep my head down because the fury 
> >of the onslaught could come from anywhere and I may not be up to the task of 
> >surviving. There are more than a few white knights here on this forum.
> >
> >> I am trying to do some good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more 
> >> wisely to these other horses. 
> >
> >I'm doin' my best but sometimes those 'heehaws' just burst out of me and I'm 
> >just not sure where they come from. I could be the neuroplasticity talking 
> >but something tells me it's the devil in me. I think you may have been right 
> >about that.
> >> 
> >> > > BTW how I remember this sequence:  lines on stone, lines on sand, 
> >> > > lines on water, lines on air.  
> >> > > 
> >> > > 
> >> > > 
> >> > >  From: Emily Reyn 
> >> > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> >> > > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:45 PM
> >> > > Subject: Re: [Fairfi

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[seekliberation]

I find that quote rather hilarious, in the sense that for some odd reason 
people think Democrats are anti-war and Republicans are Pro-war.  Both Dems and 
Reps are the same species wearing 2 different masks.

seekliberation

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> John jr_esq:
> > According to the latest news. He's going to take a very 
> > demanding job that requires diplomacy and travel.
> > 
> Do you think Kerry will travel to Cambodia to spend Christmas?
> 
> "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
> authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein 
> because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass 
> destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our 
> security." - John Kerry
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> If I were a man I'd want to be me.

I cannot help but go on the record here and feel
sorry for Ann's hubby, not for the first time. 

:-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[Richard J. Williams]

John jr_esq:
> According to the latest news. He's going to take a very 
> demanding job that requires diplomacy and travel.
> 
Do you think Kerry will travel to Cambodia to spend Christmas?

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein 
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass 
destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our 
security." - John Kerry

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[curtisdeltablues]

Hey Emily, I wanted to high five you on your image of the person puking up the 
vitamin on the way to work.  You really stuck the landing with the last 
reference to smelling like too much perfume and cough drops.  Inventive details 
like that delight me.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> You see,this started out so *boring*and ended up so interesting.  Yes, I 
> think the two of you should discuss 1) the *method* Robin used on LG and 2) 
> grace.  I'm more interested in grace, of course.  Now, I will  laugh my way 
> through the next walk with the dog.  And I will be quiet today and practice 
> listening.  
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity 
> > > > > here. There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting 
> > > > > what she deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille 
> > > > > Claudel. Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's 
> > > > > intent was to create
> > > > 
> > > >  I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
> > > > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once 
> > > > more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will 
> > > > have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do 
> > > > some good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to 
> > > > these other horses. > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > M:  Let's see here, ,...uhOh, I think I get it now.
> > > > 
> > > > Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide schtick has 
> > > > become the man, and as the Beatles say:
> > > > 
> > > > "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry Fields Nothing 
> > > > is real And nothing to get hung about. Strawberry Fields forever"
> > > > 
> > > > (Insert guitar riff here.) 
> > > > 
> > > > The tell:
> > > > 
> > > >  "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature".
> > > > 
> > > > See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, and Ann's 
> > > > challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was being chastised.
> > > > 
> > > > The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it:
> > > > 
> > > > "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously 
> > > > defeated you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a virtual 
> > > > exile."
> > > > 
> > > > Let the cackling commence.
> > > 
> > > Dear Curtis,
> > > 
> > > I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are 
> > > interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which 
> > > has drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever.
> > 
> > M: That is correct, the whole Share interaction with others doesn't 
> > interest me at all.
> > 
> > R: You would make a moral stand against my method of expressing my 
> > conviction about a matter that I can consider serious enough to warrant 
> > being as ironic as I can be?
> > 
> > M: I was not making a moral stand, I was sorting it out for myself.  I have 
> > been having some trouble following your post's intent and wanted to figure 
> > it out.  Obviously many others have no trouble at all following your method 
> > of communication here.  But like Buck it makes following the ball a bit 
> > difficult sometimes as you slip in and out of what you are calling your 
> > "ironic" character.
> > 
> > R:
> > > 
> > > Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of 
> > > irony proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your 
> > > exposing what is going on here somehow in that revealing is something 
> > > higher than my deploying my Buck in the Dome side?
> > 
> > M: Higher, lower, those are all your own judgements.  It isn't my style so 
> > obviously I have my preferences.  It is hard to pull off in writing so many 
> > levels of communication without any support from voice tone or expressions.
> > 
> > R:> 
> > > Let's fight out this issue--I won't stoop to irony, and you won't 
> > > therefore have some criticism to make of me. Do you know what the issue 
> > > is, Curtis? You have already given your judgment of that issue in a post. 
> > > Do you stand behind that judgment?
> > 
> > M: You lost me here. There is the Share deal and then there is my 
> > observation of how you are communicating.  Did you read Dune BTW?  My 
> > reference there is not all all unflattering, it is one of my favorite books 
> > precisely for how they depict very complex multilayered communications.  
> > Which issue do you mean?  I lost interest in your POV on Share after the 
> > post I commented on a long

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Emily Reyn]

Goodness Ann, you are hysterically funny.  I am creepily connected to you.  "If 
I were a man, I'd want to be me."  Ahh ha ha ha ha ha.  Those lines were 
priceless.  I did look up Camille Claudel.  I wouldn't want to be her - poor 
woman - her mother refused to let her out of the asylum. 

O.K.  Now I will go for the day (promise - I feel so guilty for posting so 
much) and come back to listen.  I have to look up Robin's past posts on 
"grace."  My memory sucks with all this living in the moment crap.  Maybe I'll 
use the advanced search on that.  And I want to find those pictures of penguins 
to show Share how supportive I feel towards her in Reality.  Love ya, Ann.  
Sincerely, Emily.



>
> From: awoelflebater 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:12 AM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
>stooopid"
> 
>
>  
>
>
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> 
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
>> >
>> > 
>> > 
>> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>> > >
>> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the word 
>> > > imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a question about 
>> > > TM and I followed up with a similar question to Steve.  Not sure how my 
>> > > asking a question of Steve is saying anything at all about Emily.  And 
>> > > it's true that I ONCE called Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the 
>> > > person who is multiplying it.  
>> > > 
>> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something I 
>> > > did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here.
>> > 
>> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be friends too, 
>> > you know. 
>> 
>> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
>
>Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the 'now'. There is 
>no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the one who is already 
>persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in pointing this out, what else 
>could you have done given your propensity for finding the truth and reality in 
>all things? Please, please accept my most profound offering which is in the 
>form of my regret in this matter. It won't happen again (well, maybe can I 
>exempt Barry from this promise?).
>
>>There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
>>deserves. 
>
>I know this now and stand humbly corrected. Emily you ARE a creep and creepy 
>to boot.
>
>>If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. 
>
>And if Share were a man she wants to be Steve. If I were a man I'd want to be 
>me.
>
>>Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to 
>>create a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature". 
>>I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
>>temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and 
>>you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send you 
>>(this time) into a virtual exile.
>
>Just try it, buster. But I agree, I will keep my head down because the fury of 
>the onslaught could come from anywhere and I may not be up to the task of 
>surviving. There are more than a few white knights here on this forum.
>
>> I am trying to do some good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more 
>> wisely to these other horses. 
>
>I'm doin' my best but sometimes those 'heehaws' just burst out of me and I'm 
>just not sure where they come from. I could be the neuroplasticity talking but 
>something tells me it's the devil in me. I think you may have been right about 
>that.
>> 
>> > > BTW how I remember this sequence:  lines on stone, lines on sand, lines 
>> > > on water, lines on air.  
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > >  From: Emily Reyn 
>> > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
>> > > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:45 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
>> > > "reeely stooopid"
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > >   
>> > > Steve:  I was being sincere - you really have been laying down some 
>> > > funny stuff, IMO.   You are never the butt of my joke.  I almost 
>> > > always laugh in the spirit of the moment and never with mean intention - 
>> > > and I'm quite serious about that.  I laugh at the human condition and 
>> > > our attempts to communicate with each other and I do it so that I don't 
>> > > grieve too hard when things are tough.  I should really get a volunteer 
>> > > position as I've already filled out the application - I just have to 
>> > > make the call.  
>> > > 
>> > > I don't always explain the way I interpret FFL and I probably won't.  I 
>> > > run it through a lot of different filters some days.  Which means that 
>> > > I "misinterpret" at times 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[seekliberation]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
wrote:
 
> Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment ever. But 
> when you drop the body, how long will you be without a nervous-system and 
> gravity, 10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 years ? It depends on the 
> circumstances and individual karma. In any case you'll be out of circulation 
> for a long time without the ability to meditate. Therefore Buck is right, 
> there is no time to waste. This is a fact. Which shouldn't produce any fear 
> whatsoever, but urgency is certainly appropiate. 

first off...you're right, we don't really know how long we'll be out of 
circulation, but my main point is that even if it takes us another 500 years of 
being in this cycle of birth and deathso what?  What is the concern?  It's 
like we don't trust divinity to carry out its plan.  The sense of urgency 
you're talking aboutI'm not saying to not be spiritual, or ignore 
enlightenment, but introducing a sense of urgency is very contradictory to the 
state of consciousness we're aspiring to.  Second...my general view is that I 
never trust or have any faith in any teaching or philosophy that introduces a 
sense of urgency towards anything.  

for example, when we were all in grade school, if you're in the 3rd 
gradedoes it really help that much to have a sense of urgency towards 
graduating?  There's no urgency that a 3rd grader can have that's going to make 
them graduate any sooner.  I look at spirituality the same way.  I'm 
engagedbut this thought or idea that if I try harder, have a greater sense 
of urgency, and by doing so i'll achieve greater spiritual heights, IMO it is 
narcissism and arrogance.  

seekliberation.  


> Diet/Ayurveda, Vastu, Jyotish is becoming stronger founded in the population 
> every year. Maharishi planned for 10,000 years, not just for one short 
> lifetime. The Saints didn't live in Vastu dwellings, but they will have the 
> opportunity, thanks to the tireless effort by Maharshi next time they come.
>

[FairfieldLife] David Essel: Maharishi and Me: Amazing!

[nablusoss1008]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_ixy17PrXs

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[emilymae.reyn]

You see,this started out so *boring*and ended up so interesting.  Yes, I 
think the two of you should discuss 1) the *method* Robin used on LG and 2) 
grace.  I'm more interested in grace, of course.  Now, I will  laugh my way 
through the next walk with the dog.  And I will be quiet today and practice 
listening.  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity 
> > > > here. There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting 
> > > > what she deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille 
> > > > Claudel. Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's 
> > > > intent was to create
> > > 
> > >  I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
> > > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once 
> > > more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will 
> > > have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do some 
> > > good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to these other 
> > > horses. > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > M:  Let's see here, ,...uhOh, I think I get it now.
> > > 
> > > Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide schtick has 
> > > become the man, and as the Beatles say:
> > > 
> > > "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry Fields Nothing is 
> > > real And nothing to get hung about. Strawberry Fields forever"
> > > 
> > > (Insert guitar riff here.) 
> > > 
> > > The tell:
> > > 
> > >  "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature".
> > > 
> > > See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, and Ann's 
> > > challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was being chastised.
> > > 
> > > The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it:
> > > 
> > > "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously 
> > > defeated you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a virtual 
> > > exile."
> > > 
> > > Let the cackling commence.
> > 
> > Dear Curtis,
> > 
> > I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are 
> > interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which has 
> > drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever.
> 
> M: That is correct, the whole Share interaction with others doesn't interest 
> me at all.
> 
> R: You would make a moral stand against my method of expressing my conviction 
> about a matter that I can consider serious enough to warrant being as ironic 
> as I can be?
> 
> M: I was not making a moral stand, I was sorting it out for myself.  I have 
> been having some trouble following your post's intent and wanted to figure it 
> out.  Obviously many others have no trouble at all following your method of 
> communication here.  But like Buck it makes following the ball a bit 
> difficult sometimes as you slip in and out of what you are calling your 
> "ironic" character.
> 
> R:
> > 
> > Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of 
> > irony proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your 
> > exposing what is going on here somehow in that revealing is something 
> > higher than my deploying my Buck in the Dome side?
> 
> M: Higher, lower, those are all your own judgements.  It isn't my style so 
> obviously I have my preferences.  It is hard to pull off in writing so many 
> levels of communication without any support from voice tone or expressions.
> 
> R:> 
> > Let's fight out this issue--I won't stoop to irony, and you won't therefore 
> > have some criticism to make of me. Do you know what the issue is, Curtis? 
> > You have already given your judgment of that issue in a post. Do you stand 
> > behind that judgment?
> 
> M: You lost me here. There is the Share deal and then there is my observation 
> of how you are communicating.  Did you read Dune BTW?  My reference there is 
> not all all unflattering, it is one of my favorite books precisely for how 
> they depict very complex multilayered communications.  Which issue do you 
> mean?  I lost interest in your POV on Share after the post I commented on a 
> long time ago where you were trying to get her to experience something about 
> herself.  I don't believe this discussion needs to be framed as a fight.
> 
> R:
> > 
> > What I would like to see you do, Curtis--and this would surprise me--is 
> > explain why you would in your having (quite effectively) told the FFL 
> > readers what's up here feel you had essentially (if implicitly) somehow 
> > looked after and answered the issue. Like what Emily is saying in her last 
> > post.
> 
> M: I find your style of interaction interesti

[FairfieldLife] Re: Is "he" a "she" or vice versa? Does it make a difference?

[Richard J. Williams]

> > > An interesting discussion might be *how* we respond (or not)
> > > to others on an online forum because of gender, and how that
> > > might *change* if someone isn't the gender we think he/she
> > > is...
> > >
> > Maybe, but on a forum such as this, it seems to be more fun to
> > respond to messages based on a person's birth circumstances,
> > or what state or city they might live in. Go figure.
> >
> > How an anonymous poster responds in regard to where a
> > person  lives or what country or state they live in. For
> > Barry, it's important that anyone that lives in Texas
> > is a 'prairie dog fucker'.
> >
turquoiseb:
> Now you've done it, varmit. You've gone and pissed
> off the former Texan in me. I do *NOT* believe that
> everyone in Texas gets it on with small prairie
> rodents. That is a base lie, if anyone ever said
> it of me.
> 
But, did you enjoy? LoL!

> To the contrary, I believe that there are too few people
> in Texas intelligent enough *to* fuck a prairie dog for
> the practice to have become a widespread phenomenon.
> 
Thanks for proving my case - I knew I could count on you.

> http://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/2012/12/13
> 
> 
> :-)
>
http://tinyurl.com/cpldsck

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[awoelflebater]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the word 
> > > imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a question about TM 
> > > and I followed up with a similar question to Steve.  Not sure how my 
> > > asking a question of Steve is saying anything at all about Emily.  And 
> > > it's true that I ONCE called Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the 
> > > person who is multiplying it.  
> > > 
> > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something I 
> > > did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here.
> > 
> > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be friends too, 
> > you know. 
> 
> And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 

Yes, and I am ashamed and abject, right here and right in the 'now'. There is 
no escaping the 'fact' of my unwarranted attack on the one who is already 
persecuted mercilessly here. You were right in pointing this out, what else 
could you have done given your propensity for finding the truth and reality in 
all things? Please, please accept my most profound offering which is in the 
form of my regret in this matter. It won't happen again (well, maybe can I 
exempt Barry from this promise?).
 
>There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
>deserves. 

I know this now and stand humbly corrected. Emily you ARE a creep and creepy to 
boot.

>If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. 

And if Share were a man she wants to be Steve. If I were a man I'd want to be 
me.

>Ravi was referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create 
>a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature". I hope 
>this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the temptation to 
>take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and you don't realize 
>how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a 
>virtual exile.

Just try it, buster. But I agree, I will keep my head down because the fury of 
the onslaught could come from anywhere and I may not be up to the task of 
surviving. There are more than a few white knights here on this forum.

> I am trying to do some good around here, Ann: please learn to whisper more 
> wisely to these other horses. 

I'm doin' my best but sometimes those 'heehaws' just burst out of me and I'm 
just not sure where they come from. I could be the neuroplasticity talking but 
something tells me it's the devil in me. I think you may have been right about 
that.
> 
> > > BTW how I remember this sequence:  lines on stone, lines on sand, lines 
> > > on water, lines on air.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: Emily Reyn 
> > > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> > > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:45 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
> > > "reeely stooopid"
> > >  
> > > 
> > >   
> > > Steve:  I was being sincere - you really have been laying down some 
> > > funny stuff, IMO.   You are never the butt of my joke.  I almost always 
> > > laugh in the spirit of the moment and never with mean intention - and I'm 
> > > quite serious about that.  I laugh at the human condition and our 
> > > attempts to communicate with each other and I do it so that I don't 
> > > grieve too hard when things are tough.  I should really get a volunteer 
> > > position as I've already filled out the application - I just have to make 
> > > the call.  
> > > 
> > > I don't always explain the way I interpret FFL and I probably won't.  I 
> > > run it through a lot of different filters some days.  Which means that I 
> > > "misinterpret" at times on purpose for a different effect - easy to do 
> > > with words on paper. And it is well known now, thanks to Share, that I 
> > > have a "creepy" sense of humor.  And I am a TM imbecile.  
> > > 
> > > And I wasn't feeling particularly up today, if truth be told, so I really 
> > > appreciated your posts.  And, I love a good beer.  Had to give it up 
> > > when I was diagnosed as gluten intolerant, but I'm going to cheat after 
> > > what Emptybill posted today.   Emily
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > From: seventhray27 
> > > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > >Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 6:04 PM
> > > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> > > >stooopid"
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > >whether Emily was being sincere or making fun of me, I really don't 
> > > >care.  If I can be the butt of her joke, so be it.
> > > >(and yes, I need to check out the link)
> > > >
> > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seekliberation"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> >
> > Placebo?  No son, this kind of spirituality ain't no placebo.  It is for 
> > real and it is reality. You're living in the Maya-n age.  Maharishi did'nt 
> > need to make no excuses for he came up with help time and again for your 
> > sorry ass.  Make excuses?  Look at the illumined on BATGAP.COM, they are 
> > mostly a bunch of illumined veteran TM'ers .  There's a town full of 
> > illumined here on earth right here too, Fairfield present-tense. Someone 
> > seems to have missed the bus.  Stop your whining and come back to 
> > meditation.  Be on time.  Time is short on earth, make use of it while you 
> > got it.  Be on time this time.  Repent and come back before it is too late,
> > -Buck in the Dome  
> 
> 
> What you are saying inspires the same anxiety that made me leave the TMO in 
> the first place.  You're saying 'time is short' and 'come back before it's 
> too late'.  According to vedic teachings, we are in a cycle of birth and 
> death.  We continue to be born and die over and over until we reach a state 
> where our concsiousness is fully developed.  Therefore, we shouldn't be in a 
> state of anxiety in terms of this lifetime.  I remember when I was at MIU/MUM 
> (I was there when the name changed), some teachers would try to warn us not 
> to fall off the path, and to achieve enlightenment in this lifetime.  What 
> i'm wondering is whether or not they really believe that we're in a cycle of 
> birth and death then?  Do they really believe this is our only chance?  Is 
> MMY's teachings the only teachings in the history of the world that can lead 
> us to enlightenment, and he's the last teacher of this kind for the rest of 
> eternity?  
> 
> Enlightenment is inevitable for all souls, not just those of us who learned 
> TM in this life.  Warning people to take advantage of this here and now as if 
> it's their last chance is simply putting them in a state of anxietythe 
> exact opposite of enlightenment.  As for me, i'll stay on the program, but 
> refuse to live in fear of not getting as much out of a lifetime as I can.  My 
> perception of worrying about getting enlightened in this lifetime is like a 
> soldier who is afraid of dying in combat.  You're missing the key element 
> that is supposed to be intrinsic to the path you chose.  It's a sign that a 
> person doesn't really have faith in cosmic intelligence.  I remember a 
> recording of Alan Watts that accused modern new-age teachings of 
> enlightenment to be nothing more than people trying to get 'one-up on the 
> universe'.  Not that there's anything wrong with spirituality or aspirations 
> for enlightenment, but the anxiety of not achieving it implies that we don't 
> really have faith in divinity in the first place.  We don't really have faith 
> that nature will take care of our soul in the long run, and we seem to think 
> that enlightened teachings are somehow going to disappear all of a sudden.
> 
> Regarding Sthapatya Veda, did Buddha live in a Sthapatya Veda home?  What 
> about MMY, Guru Dev, Alan Watts, Eckardt Tolle?  Or reallyanyone who we 
> consider highly evolved or enlightened?  I don't believe any of them did live 
> in those types of homes.  
> 
> I'm not saying I think Sthapatya Veda is completely bogus.  It's just like 
> training in martial arts.  If you're a top contender for a world title, then 
> yes...a very carefully planned diet could make a difference between winning 
> and losing.  But your diet is really only a small percentage of what it takes 
> to win.  The first 99% is years of blood, sweat, tears, wins and losses, 
> etc...  It's not really until you get to a very high competitive level that 
> something as minor as diet is going to start becoming important.  I think 
> it's the same way with enlightenment.  If you're a really young soul, whether 
> or not you live in a Sthapatya Ved home is not going to make you or break you 
> in terms of spiritual growth (IMO).  You've still got the first 99% to 
> complete.  
> 
> seekliberation
>

Buck didn't say that this is your last chance for enlightenment ever. But when 
you drop the body, how long will you be without a nervous-system and gravity, 
10 years, 50 years, 300 years, 500 years ? It depends on the circumstances and 
individual karma. In any case you'll be out of circulation for a long time 
without the ability to meditate. Therefore Buck is right, there is no time to 
waste. This is a fact. Which shouldn't produce any fear whatsoever, but urgency 
is certainly appropiate. 

Diet/Ayurveda, Vastu, Jyotish is becoming stronger founded in the population 
every year. Maharishi planned for 10,000 years, not just for one short 
lifetime. The Saints didn't live in Vastu dwellings, but they will have the 
opportunity, thanks to the tireless effort by Maharshi next time they come.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely to Xeno

[Emily Reyn]

Share, my take on Xeno's question is that in order to write it you must have 
thought it, and then you expressed it, by writing it, even if only in the 
moment.  



>
> From: Share Long 
>To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 7:38 AM
>Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
>to Xeno
> 
>
>  
>Xeno you've chosen to snip the rest of my post which explains what I meant.  
>Just to be more clear, I was writing of course about something Emily 
>attributed to me yesterday.
>Which philosophy is your question and snipping an expression of?
>
>
>
> From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 9:19 AM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
>stooopid"
> 
>
>  
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>>
>> dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the word 
>> imbecile much less express it.
>
>And so, Share, how did you manage to write the above passage? In case you 
>think this is a criticism, this is a philosophical question.
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: "Earnest Confusion" to Steve

[seventhray27]

Okay, now we've got "Prairie Dog", (I like that Richard), "Raunchy Dog,
and "Junkyard Dog", (okay, that wasn't nice of me), but I needed
something to make a troika!


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
 wrote:
>
>
>
> seventhray27:
> > Oh shit, I forgot Richard...
> >
> Well, I'm leaning toward 'Prairie Dog', the beer that
> made willytex famous, or maybe 'Armadillo Ale'. LoL!
>
> But, I've always been partial to Shiner Bock from the
> Spoetzl Brewery in Shiner, Texas.
>
> http://www.shiner.com/
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoetzl_Brewery
>
> Beer guide to breweries, brewpubs, bars, stores, events
> and festivals, and recent visits in the Austin area:
>
> http://beeradvocate.com/beerfly/city/30
>
> 'Best Microbrews in Texas -- Top 3 Craft Beers in the
> Lone Star State'
> http://tinyurl.com/cbodyt9
>

[FairfieldLife] Sucked Down the Rabbit Hole Again

[Richard J. Williams]

> > I am not sure I follow you here...
> > 
turquoiseb:
> We all knew it was just a matter of time until Robin
> threw down the "Enter into a Confrontation with me
> or else" gauntlet, didn't we? 
>
So, its all about Robin. 

> It's literally a duel to determine "where the grace 
> might be in this matter." 
> 

It's the same 'grace' that gave you your 'free will'. 

> What a twat. 
>
Well, at least you formatted your message for easy reading
online. Although you didn't add much to the dialog,
there's a lot to be said for not being to lazy to format,
but hey, you forgot to 'snip', so I'm doing it for you,
and changing the subject line for your benefit. LoL! 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Is "he" a "she" or vice versa? Does it make a difference?

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
 wrote:
>
> laughinggull108:
> > An interesting discussion might be *how* we respond (or not)
> > to others on an online forum because of gender, and how that
> > might *change* if someone isn't the gender we think he/she
> > is...
>
> Maybe, but on a forum such as this, it seems to be more fun to
> respond to messages based on a person's birth circumstances,
> or what state or city they might live in. Go figure.
>
> How an anonymous poster responds in regard to where a
> person  lives or what country or state they live in. For
> Barry, it's important that anyone that lives in Texas
> is a 'prairie dog fucker'.

Now you've done it, varmit. You've gone and pissed
off the former Texan in me. I do *NOT* believe that
everyone in Texas gets it on with small prairie
rodents. That is a base lie, if anyone ever said
it of me.

To the contrary, I believe that there are too few people
in Texas intelligent enough *to* fuck a prairie dog for
the practice to have become a widespread phenomenon.

http://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/2012/12/13


:-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[seventhray27]

Two very excellent Gurus. Obviously good advice follows.  Another Guru
of high regard is Lassiananda.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
 wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > And I'll reveal another thing. This idea of responding in a
> > non-reactive way, (or at least to some extent) is something I
> > learned from Alex. He has no idea that he taught me a lesson in
> > this.
>
> This is the great blessing of Gulabjamunanda's guru, Swami
Tandoorchickenanda, who cognized this technique in sutra form: "Witness
the heat. Release the sweet."
>

[FairfieldLife] To FFL: Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens

[emilymae.reyn]

Dear Robin, to accentuate my creepiness and pay you back for your playful 
response to me, I posted a link to the magazine knowing full well you couldn't 
access the poem.  Only back issues are available online.  I cackled to make a 
point - that I can be creepy if I choose - it's my right. 

But, I know you want to read it and I want you to read it, so here is my 
Christmas present to you, my sweet.  A take-off on Wallace Stevens

To FFL:  My heart and mind and soul and being is grateful to all of you every 
day.  You have made an enormous difference in my life and have helped me 
recover from the deep state of melancholy I was in.  I laugh at you all and 
myself.at your/my expense, not at your/my expense, all the time.  You 
deserve it.  Love, Emily.  

Title:

Walk With Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens
~Jeff Gundy

On the page, left column: 

...He never supposed divine
Things might not look divine, nor that if nothing
Was divine then all things were, the world itself,
And that if nothing was the truth, then all
Things were the truth, the world itself was the truth.

~Wallace Stevens

Right column:

Sea gull quartering the wind.  Heron along the shore,
then pinwheeling back, low to the water.  Wind in poplar,

cedar, beech, and pine, each speaking in a different voice.
Wind in me, in the book  of vanished Stevens, in you - 

more voices.  Why sort them into human and other?
Even the branches the neighbor brought in his barrow

and piled in a heap while Loki barked at him - even
the cut branches have a voice, through a dry and thin one.

Oh, Stevens, you considered but threw away the idea
that the world itself is the truth.  It might have saved you

some trouble.  The blue jay and downy woodpecker, 
clouds that sift the sunlight into something else,

the ant that tracks the sand and beach grass, six crows
in a dead tree like notes for an unfinished symphony - 

all voices that seem true to me.  When Loki and I walked
the ravine, he roamed ahead, aquiver with attention,

probing for traces and invisible signs.  He ranged away
until I called out, turned back only when I yelled, "Loki,"

"Loki!"looked and loped off to sniff another mystery
involving dirt and leaves and a creature long gone.

I could only watch and call, having no leash, no hold
on him except my little voice and his willingness to listen.

All I saw really was Loki's seeing, snuffling through birches and hemlocks,
over the old earth for remnants

made as others walked, sniffed pissed, as the buried
water bubbled up, filled the pools, trickled on its way.

[FairfieldLife] John Kerry To Be Secretary of State

[John]

According to the latest news. He's going to take a very demanding job that 
requires diplomacy and travel.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/john-kerry-secretary-of-state_n_2306877.html

[FairfieldLife] Sanest and wisest "gun control" comment I've seen yet

[turquoiseb]

[https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/30340_1015117901\
6976275_2015052488_n.jpg]
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/30340_10151179016\
976275_2015052488_n.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid" to LG

[seventhray27]

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

snip

   I hope I remember it when my Mom is badgering me to get my hair
cut.  According to her generation, women my age really shouldn't
have long hair. Â


That is funny

[FairfieldLife] Re: Is "he" a "she" or vice versa? Does it make a difference?

[Richard J. Williams]

laughinggull108:
> An interesting discussion might be *how* we respond (or not)
> to others on an online forum because of gender, and how that
> might *change* if someone isn't the gender we think he/she
> is...
>
Maybe, but on a forum such as this, it seems to be more fun to
respond to messages based on a person's birth circumstances,
or what state or city they might live in. Go figure.

How an anonymous poster responds in regard to where a
person  lives or what country or state they live in. For Barry, it's
important that anyone that lives in Texas is a 'prairie dog
fucker'. Or, like when Judy refers to my Yahoo! email address
as if it was my real name. There's nothing wrong with this if
it makes you feel better to depersonalize your debater. LoL!

You've heard of 'My Space'.

And, you've heard of 'Facebook'.

My new social networking site will be called 'My Face'.

Just post pictures of your face, nothing else, and then post
comments about each others face. That's the ticket. Everyone
loves to make comments about other people's faces. I'll be a
millionaire before the year ends!

You want to be the first subscriber?

P.S. I noticed you didn't post a picture of your face when
you posted a picture of my face to FFL recently. LoL!

328838

[FairfieldLife] Re: Sthapatya Veda is just a Placebo Effect

[seekliberation]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> Placebo?  No son, this kind of spirituality ain't no placebo.  It is for real 
> and it is reality. You're living in the Maya-n age.  Maharishi did'nt need to 
> make no excuses for he came up with help time and again for your sorry ass.  
> Make excuses?  Look at the illumined on BATGAP.COM, they are mostly a bunch 
> of illumined veteran TM'ers .  There's a town full of illumined here on earth 
> right here too, Fairfield present-tense. Someone seems to have missed the 
> bus.  Stop your whining and come back to meditation.  Be on time.  Time is 
> short on earth, make use of it while you got it.  Be on time this time.  
> Repent and come back before it is too late,
> -Buck in the Dome  


What you are saying inspires the same anxiety that made me leave the TMO in the 
first place.  You're saying 'time is short' and 'come back before it's too 
late'.  According to vedic teachings, we are in a cycle of birth and death.  We 
continue to be born and die over and over until we reach a state where our 
concsiousness is fully developed.  Therefore, we shouldn't be in a state of 
anxiety in terms of this lifetime.  I remember when I was at MIU/MUM (I was 
there when the name changed), some teachers would try to warn us not to fall 
off the path, and to achieve enlightenment in this lifetime.  What i'm 
wondering is whether or not they really believe that we're in a cycle of birth 
and death then?  Do they really believe this is our only chance?  Is MMY's 
teachings the only teachings in the history of the world that can lead us to 
enlightenment, and he's the last teacher of this kind for the rest of eternity? 
 

Enlightenment is inevitable for all souls, not just those of us who learned TM 
in this life.  Warning people to take advantage of this here and now as if it's 
their last chance is simply putting them in a state of anxietythe exact 
opposite of enlightenment.  As for me, i'll stay on the program, but refuse to 
live in fear of not getting as much out of a lifetime as I can.  My perception 
of worrying about getting enlightened in this lifetime is like a soldier who is 
afraid of dying in combat.  You're missing the key element that is supposed to 
be intrinsic to the path you chose.  It's a sign that a person doesn't really 
have faith in cosmic intelligence.  I remember a recording of Alan Watts that 
accused modern new-age teachings of enlightenment to be nothing more than 
people trying to get 'one-up on the universe'.  Not that there's anything wrong 
with spirituality or aspirations for enlightenment, but the anxiety of not 
achieving it implies that we don't really have faith in divinity in the first 
place.  We don't really have faith that nature will take care of our soul in 
the long run, and we seem to think that enlightened teachings are somehow going 
to disappear all of a sudden.

Regarding Sthapatya Veda, did Buddha live in a Sthapatya Veda home?  What about 
MMY, Guru Dev, Alan Watts, Eckardt Tolle?  Or reallyanyone who we consider 
highly evolved or enlightened?  I don't believe any of them did live in those 
types of homes.  

I'm not saying I think Sthapatya Veda is completely bogus.  It's just like 
training in martial arts.  If you're a top contender for a world title, then 
yes...a very carefully planned diet could make a difference between winning and 
losing.  But your diet is really only a small percentage of what it takes to 
win.  The first 99% is years of blood, sweat, tears, wins and losses, etc...  
It's not really until you get to a very high competitive level that something 
as minor as diet is going to start becoming important.  I think it's the same 
way with enlightenment.  If you're a really young soul, whether or not you live 
in a Sthapatya Ved home is not going to make you or break you in terms of 
spiritual growth (IMO).  You've still got the first 99% to complete.  

seekliberation




> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Placebo. Nice way to look at it. I always thought of it 
> > > > as the carrot and the stick. M always needed a way to 
> > > > keep people interested in the movement and gaining 
> > > > enlightenment. At first it was the 5-8 year plan, then 
> > > > rounding courses, then age of enlightenment courses, 
> > > > then Sidhis, then ayurveda, jyotish,yagyas and then 
> > > > he says * if I had this knowledge(SV) we would be 
> > > > through.* He always found a way to keep the TBs 
> > > > thinking *it* was just around the corner. The Gita 
> > > > clearly says *only after many life times of this 
> > > > practice does one come to Me*. Of course ,that was 
> > > > explained away as *Life times* just meant, each time 
> > > > you transcended. Why wouldn't Krishna have put it 
> > > > that way in the first 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Dear Robin, you must stop taking so many things at face value - it will be 
> your downfall here. You will overreact, you will trigger without knowing it, 
> your panties will always be in a twist, which will be extremely uncomfortable 
> for you, as a man. (Doesn't bother me in the slightest by the way.)  You 
> will feel persecuted.  You will spend way too much time defending your ego, 
> no not your ego, your first person ontology.
> 
> *I* am coming to terms with my creepiness; I think it likely that Barry and 
> Curtis agree with you.  It has been a hard pill to swallow - like one of 
> those vitamin horse pills that one swallows in the morning before jumping in 
> the car to battle traffic to work and then, a few miles down the road, one 
> realizes that while it is supposed to be good for you, it is making you feel 
> so nauseas that you have to pull over and puke it up, along with the coffee, 
> while wearing a nice corporate suit - and then vomit goes all over the silk 
> scarf and stinks up the car and you walk into the morning meeting smelling 
> like too much perfume and a cherry lozenge.  
> 
> For you Robin, there is a lovely poem in a magazine I get this month called 
> "Walk with Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens."  I'm so creepy that I am 
> dedicating it to you, but I won't type it out for you because I am lazy.  
> 
> Here is the link to the Table of Contents - you will have to click on it to 
> see who wrote it (I am a creepy gal, aren't I):
> 
> http://thesunmagazine.org/issues/444 

I apologize, Emily. But as you will see, CURTIS HAS GIVEN ME AN OUT. He makes 
the case that I am only interesting in setting up that "cackling" 
phenomenon--meanwhile overlooking the fact that I insulted you out of pique. I 
felt much more important after Curtis having essentially said I was doing a 
Buck-in-the-Dome move on my adversaries--with a wink-wink to all those who have 
wanted to form this secret guild. Whereas--if the truth be known, Emily--I was 
just mad at you for how you wrote that post.

Curtis's sincerity--in some ultimate way--has meant he has the high moral 
ground here, and I defer to him in this. (Meanwhile I get to feel damn good, 
because had he taken me literally--as I intended--I think I would look a lot 
more stupid than I do now, when he believes I am saying: "I think I know I mean 
a 'Yes' but it's all wrong, that is I think I disagree".)

I can't get access to that poem, by the way.

I want to start all over again, Emily. I think you utterly sincere (like Prince 
Myshkin has already said to you--one of my favourite characters in all of 
literature, by the way). I also think AWB utterly sincere.

My first person ontology got objectified very recently. And you should be able 
to tell.

I am on page 97 of your book, and enjoying it immensely.

> 
> 
> 
> >
> > From: Robin Carlsen 
> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:06 AM
> >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> >stooopid"
> > 
> >
> >  
> >Why do you have to be so creepy, Emily? 
> >
> >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
> >>
> >> Share, *I* wrote the word imbecile.  *I* attributed it to me.  *I 
> >> was making fun of myself.*  I do that a lot.  *You* never used the 
> >> word to describe me.  *No one* has ever called me an imbecile here 
> >> except perhaps Barry, I forget.  Please *STOP* assuming that I am out 
> >> to get you and hold some animosity towards you.   *I* have *let go*, 
> >> which frees me up to have fun with you again.  I appreciate the time 
> >> you took on the question I asked and laughinggull's response. *I* am not a 
> >> creepy person, I assure you.  *I* am using that word because you did 
> >> say that about me and I am playing with it now.  *You* said it and it 
> >> is fair game and *I* am taking the sting out of it by using it.  You 
> >> may apologize to me if you want to, because it wasn't very nice, but *I* 
> >> forgive you because I realize you don't understand my sense of humor. 
> >>  I will spend one more post today on penguins.  My aunt is a 
> >> wildlife photographer and I
>  have a couple of wonderful shots
> >>  of penguins that you will appreciate if I can get them uploaded to a 
> >> link.   
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> >
> >> > From: Share Long 
> >> >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> >> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 5:08 AM
> >> >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
> >> >"reeely stooopid"
> >> > 
> >> >
> >> >  
> >> >dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the 
> >> >word imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a question 
> >> >about TM and I followed up with a similar question to Steve.  Not sure 
> >> >how my asking a questio

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
> > > There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
> > > deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. Ravi was 
> > > referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create
> > 
> >  I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
> > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and 
> > you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send 
> > you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do some good around 
> > here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to these other horses. > 
> > 
> > 
> > M:  Let's see here, ,...uhOh, I think I get it now.
> > 
> > Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide schtick has 
> > become the man, and as the Beatles say:
> > 
> > "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry Fields Nothing is 
> > real And nothing to get hung about. Strawberry Fields forever"
> > 
> > (Insert guitar riff here.) 
> > 
> > The tell:
> > 
> >  "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature".
> > 
> > See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, and Ann's 
> > challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was being chastised.
> > 
> > The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it:
> > 
> > "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously 
> > defeated you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile."
> > 
> > Let the cackling commence.
> 
> Dear Curtis,
> 
> I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are 
> interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which has 
> drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever.

M: That is correct, the whole Share interaction with others doesn't interest me 
at all.

R: You would make a moral stand against my method of expressing my conviction 
about a matter that I can consider serious enough to warrant being as ironic as 
I can be?

M: I was not making a moral stand, I was sorting it out for myself.  I have 
been having some trouble following your post's intent and wanted to figure it 
out.  Obviously many others have no trouble at all following your method of 
communication here.  But like Buck it makes following the ball a bit difficult 
sometimes as you slip in and out of what you are calling your "ironic" 
character.

R:
> 
> Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of 
> irony proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your 
> exposing what is going on here somehow in that revealing is something higher 
> than my deploying my Buck in the Dome side?

M: Higher, lower, those are all your own judgements.  It isn't my style so 
obviously I have my preferences.  It is hard to pull off in writing so many 
levels of communication without any support from voice tone or expressions.

R:> 
> Let's fight out this issue--I won't stoop to irony, and you won't therefore 
> have some criticism to make of me. Do you know what the issue is, Curtis? You 
> have already given your judgment of that issue in a post. Do you stand behind 
> that judgment?

M: You lost me here. There is the Share deal and then there is my observation 
of how you are communicating.  Did you read Dune BTW?  My reference there is 
not all all unflattering, it is one of my favorite books precisely for how they 
depict very complex multilayered communications.  Which issue do you mean?  I 
lost interest in your POV on Share after the post I commented on a long time 
ago where you were trying to get her to experience something about herself.  I 
don't believe this discussion needs to be framed as a fight.

R:
> 
> What I would like to see you do, Curtis--and this would surprise me--is 
> explain why you would in your having (quite effectively) told the FFL readers 
> what's up here feel you had essentially (if implicitly) somehow looked after 
> and answered the issue. Like what Emily is saying in her last post.

M: I find your style of interaction interesting.  I don't find the interactions 
people are having with Share interesting.  People are making their own choices 
how they want to show up here, and I consider it all very boring.  I'm sure 
inside it all it is fascinating for the participants just as my choices of 
interactions fascinate me.


R:> 
> Are you willing to address Emily or Ann's point, Curtis? I think your 
> avoidance of the issue far more significant a 'tell' than your ability to see 
> what I am up to here. My response is to a sense of what is really going on; 
> your response would make it (the issue Emily for instance is raising) 
> something less mo

[FairfieldLife] Re: "Earnest Confusion" to Steve

[Richard J. Williams]

> > ...black coffee from a tin cup made from coffee-grounds 
> > boiled in a pot cowboy style over an open fire, sipped 
> > in the early morning before meditation. Good Morning.   
> >
Alex Stanley:   
> destroying perfectly good coffee beans goes beyond 
> all possible bounds of decency.
>
Make sure you strain the boiled black coffee through your 
sock before pouring into the tin can?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[turquoiseb]

We all knew it was just a matter of time until Robin
threw down the "Enter into a Confrontation with me
or else" gauntlet, didn't we? 

It's literally a duel to determine "where the grace 
might be in this matter." 

What a twat. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> > 
> > > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
> > > There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
> > > deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. Ravi was 
> > > referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create
> > 
> >  I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
> > temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and 
> > you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send 
> > you (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do some good around 
> > here, Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to these other horses. > 
> > 
> > 
> > M:  Let's see here, ,...uhOh, I think I get it now.
> > 
> > Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide 
> > schtick has become the man, and as the Beatles say:
> > 
> > "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry 
> > Fields Nothing is real And nothing to get hung about. 
> > Strawberry Fields forever"
> > 
> > (Insert guitar riff here.) 
> > 
> > The tell:
> > 
> > "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful 
> > nature".
> > 
> > See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, 
> > and Ann's challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was 
> > being chastised.
> > 
> > The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it:
> > 
> > "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how 
> > ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send you 
> > (this time) into a virtual exile."
> > 
> > Let the cackling commence.
> 
> Dear Curtis,
> 
> I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are 
> interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which has 
> drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever. You would make a moral stand against 
> my method of expressing my conviction about a matter that I can consider 
> serious enough to warrant being as ironic as I can be?
> 
> Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of 
> irony proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your 
> exposing what is going on here somehow in that revealing is something higher 
> than my deploying my Buck in the Dome side?
> 
> Let's fight out this issue--I won't stoop to irony, and you won't therefore 
> have some criticism to make of me. Do you know what the issue is, Curtis? You 
> have already given your judgment of that issue in a post. Do you stand behind 
> that judgment?
> 
> What I would like to see you do, Curtis--and this would surprise me--is 
> explain why you would in your having (quite effectively) told the FFL readers 
> what's up here feel you had essentially (if implicitly) somehow looked after 
> and answered the issue. Like what Emily is saying in her last post.
> 
> Are you willing to address Emily or Ann's point, Curtis? I think your 
> avoidance of the issue far more significant a 'tell' than your ability to see 
> what I am up to here. My response is to a sense of what is really going on; 
> your response would make it (the issue Emily for instance is raising) 
> something less morally or psychologically significant than your having caught 
> me in my customary way of handling a dispute when one party is stonewalling.
> 
> The issue, Curtis: what is it? I understand it--or think I understand it--in 
> a deep enough way to take the liberty of testing where the grace might be in 
> this matter. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: "Earnest Confusion" to Steve

[Richard J. Williams]

seventhray27:
> Oh shit, I forgot Richard...
>
Well, I'm leaning toward 'Prairie Dog', the beer that
made willytex famous, or maybe 'Armadillo Ale'. LoL!

But, I've always been partial to Shiner Bock from the 
Spoetzl Brewery in Shiner, Texas.

http://www.shiner.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoetzl_Brewery

Beer guide to breweries, brewpubs, bars, stores, events 
and festivals, and recent visits in the Austin area:
 
http://beeradvocate.com/beerfly/city/30

'Best Microbrews in Texas -- Top 3 Craft Beers in the 
Lone Star State'
http://tinyurl.com/cbodyt9

Re: [FairfieldLife] Breaking Abbey

[Share Long]

Just wondering:  what is it about an upper class British accent that makes 
swearing so funny?  I don't have TV but am familiar with Downton Abbey which 
I've borrowed  from the FF public library.  Not at all familiar with Breaking 
Bad except I've seen it mentioned here.  Anyway, for some strange reason what 
comes to mind is the very first time I saw Andy Kaufman perform.  It was right 
before a movie showing at MIU during the 1975-76 school year.  He was 
introduced as a TM teacher from South America.  He launched into what I later 
realized was one of his standard routines.  Of course audience members in the 
know were giggling or shushing the gigglers.  I had been meditating less than a 
year at that point and was totally taken in by the joke.  IMO he was a comic 
genius.     



 From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:17 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Breaking Abbey
 

  
A complete Stephen Colbert original -- the men of 
Downton Abbey do Breaking Bad:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/41/december-13-2012/uncensored---breaking-abbey


 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Emily Reyn]

Dear Robin, you must stop taking so many things at face value - it will be your 
downfall here. You will overreact, you will trigger without knowing it, your 
panties will always be in a twist, which will be extremely uncomfortable for 
you, as a man. (Doesn't bother me in the slightest by the way.)  You will feel 
persecuted.  You will spend way too much time defending your ego, no not your 
ego, your first person ontology.

*I* am coming to terms with my creepiness; I think it likely that Barry and 
Curtis agree with you.  It has been a hard pill to swallow - like one of those 
vitamin horse pills that one swallows in the morning before jumping in the car 
to battle traffic to work and then, a few miles down the road, one realizes 
that while it is supposed to be good for you, it is making you feel so nauseas 
that you have to pull over and puke it up, along with the coffee, while wearing 
a nice corporate suit - and then vomit goes all over the silk scarf and stinks 
up the car and you walk into the morning meeting smelling like too much perfume 
and a cherry lozenge.  

For you Robin, there is a lovely poem in a magazine I get this month called 
"Walk with Grand-Dog and Wallace Stevens."  I'm so creepy that I am dedicating 
it to you, but I won't type it out for you because I am lazy.  

Here is the link to the Table of Contents - you will have to click on it to see 
who wrote it (I am a creepy gal, aren't I):

http://thesunmagazine.org/issues/444 



>
> From: Robin Carlsen 
>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:06 AM
>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
>stooopid"
> 
>
>  
>Why do you have to be so creepy, Emily? 
>
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>>
>> Share, *I* wrote the word imbecile.  *I* attributed it to me.  *I was 
>> making fun of myself.*  I do that a lot.  *You* never used the word to 
>> describe me.  *No one* has ever called me an imbecile here except perhaps 
>> Barry, I forget.  Please *STOP* assuming that I am out to get you and hold 
>> some animosity towards you.   *I* have *let go*, which frees me up to have 
>> fun with you again.  I appreciate the time you took on the question I asked 
>> and laughinggull's response. *I* am not a creepy person, I assure you.  *I* 
>> am using that word because you did say that about me and I am playing with 
>> it now.  *You* said it and it is fair game and *I* am taking the sting out 
>> of it by using it.  You may apologize to me if you want to, because it 
>> wasn't very nice, but *I* forgive you because I realize you don't understand 
>> my sense of humor.  I will spend one more post today on penguins.  My aunt 
>> is a wildlife photographer and I
 have a couple of wonderful shots
>>  of penguins that you will appreciate if I can get them uploaded to a link. 
>>   
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> > From: Share Long 
>> >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
>> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 5:08 AM
>> >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
>> >"reeely stooopid"
>> > 
>> >
>> >  
>> >dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the word 
>> >imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a question about TM 
>> >and I followed up with a similar question to Steve.  Not sure how my 
>> >asking a question of Steve is saying anything at all about Emily.  And 
>> >it's true that I ONCE called Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the 
>> >person who is multiplying it.  
>> >
>> >In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something I did 
>> >not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >BTW how I remember this sequence:  lines on stone, lines on sand, lines on 
>> >water, lines on air.  
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Emily Reyn 
>> >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
>> >Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:45 PM
>> >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
>> >"reeely stooopid"
>> > 
>> >
>> >  
>> >Steve:  I was being sincere - you really have been laying down some funny 
>> >stuff, IMO.   You are never the butt of my joke.  I almost always laugh 
>> >in the spirit of the moment and never with mean intention - and I'm quite 
>> >serious about that.  I laugh at the human condition and our attempts to 
>> >communicate with each other and I do it so that I don't grieve too hard 
>> >when things are tough.  I should really get a volunteer position as I've 
>> >already filled out the application - I just have to make the call.  
>> >
>> >
>> >I don't always explain the way I interpret FFL and I probably won't.  I 
>> >run it through a lot of different filters some days.  Which means that I 
>> >"misinterpret" at times on purpose for a different effect - easy to do with 
>> >words on paper. And it is well know

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Robin Carlsen]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
> > There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
> > deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. Ravi was 
> > referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create
> 
>  I hope this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the 
> temptation to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and 
> you don't realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I will have to send you 
> (this time) into a virtual exile. I am trying to do some good around here, 
> Ann: please learn to whisper more wisely to these other horses. > 
> 
> 
> M:  Let's see here, ,...uhOh, I think I get it now.
> 
> Robin is the new Buck. And FFL is the new Dune. The snide schtick has become 
> the man, and as the Beatles say:
> 
> "Let me take you down `Cause I'm going to... Strawberry Fields Nothing is 
> real And nothing to get hung about. Strawberry Fields forever"
> 
> (Insert guitar riff here.) 
> 
> The tell:
> 
>  "a character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature".
> 
> See, I am catching on to the formula. Share has been dissed, and Ann's 
> challenge supported, but it looks like Ann was being chastised.
> 
> The overkill, but it makes sure Ann is in on it:
> 
> "if she does this once more--and you don't realize how ignominiously defeated 
> you are, I will have to send you (this time) into a virtual exile."
> 
> Let the cackling commence.

Dear Curtis,

I am not sure I follow you here. But I am aware of one thing: You are 
interested in my tactics, but not, I see, interested in the issue which has 
drawn me into Strawberry Fields forever. You would make a moral stand against 
my method of expressing my conviction about a matter that I can consider 
serious enough to warrant being as ironic as I can be?

Do you wish to discuss the issue, Curtis? You would imply that my use of irony 
proves something underhanded and insincere about me, whereas your exposing what 
is going on here somehow in that revealing is something higher than my 
deploying my Buck in the Dome side?

Let's fight out this issue--I won't stoop to irony, and you won't therefore 
have some criticism to make of me. Do you know what the issue is, Curtis? You 
have already given your judgment of that issue in a post. Do you stand behind 
that judgment?

What I would like to see you do, Curtis--and this would surprise me--is explain 
why you would in your having (quite effectively) told the FFL readers what's up 
here feel you had essentially (if implicitly) somehow looked after and answered 
the issue. Like what Emily is saying in her last post.

Are you willing to address Emily or Ann's point, Curtis? I think your avoidance 
of the issue far more significant a 'tell' than your ability to see what I am 
up to here. My response is to a sense of what is really going on; your response 
would make it (the issue Emily for instance is raising) something less morally 
or psychologically significant than your having caught me in my customary way 
of handling a dispute when one party is stonewalling.

The issue, Curtis: what is it? I understand it--or think I understand it--in a 
deep enough way to take the liberty of testing where the grace might be in this 
matter. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the 
> > > > word imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a question 
> > > > about TM and I followed up with a similar question to Steve.  Not sure 
> > > > how my asking a question of Steve is saying anything at all about 
> > > > Emily.  And it's true that I ONCE called Emily's sense of humor 
> > > > creepy.  She is the person who is multiplying it.  
> > > > 
> > > > In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something I 
> > > > did not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here.
> > > 
> > > Why this sudden animosity towards Emily? Steve and her can be friends 
> > > too, you know. 
> > 
> > And why don't you just leave this be, Ann? I feel *your* animosity here. 
> > There is someone who is being persecuted. Emily is only getting what she 
> > deserves. If I were a woman I would want to be Camille Claudel. Ravi was 
> > referring to Prince Myshkin--where Dostoyevsky's intent was to create a 
> > character "entirely positive...with an absolutely beautiful nature". I hope 
> > this once, the object of your gratuitous hatred can resist the temptation 
> > to take it to you, Ann--because if she does this once more--and you don't 
> > realize how ignominiously defeated you are, I

[FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely stooopid"

[Robin Carlsen]

Why do you have to be so creepy, Emily? 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Share, *I* wrote the word imbecile.  *I* attributed it to me.  *I was 
> making fun of myself.*  I do that a lot.  *You* never used the word to 
> describe me.  *No one* has ever called me an imbecile here except perhaps 
> Barry, I forget.  Please *STOP* assuming that I am out to get you and hold 
> some animosity towards you.   *I* have *let go*, which frees me up to have 
> fun with you again.  I appreciate the time you took on the question I asked 
> and laughinggull's response. *I* am not a creepy person, I assure you.  *I* 
> am using that word because you did say that about me and I am playing with it 
> now.  *You* said it and it is fair game and *I* am taking the sting out of 
> it by using it.  You may apologize to me if you want to, because it wasn't 
> very nice, but *I* forgive you because I realize you don't understand my 
> sense of humor.  I will spend one more post today on penguins.  My aunt is 
> a wildlife photographer and I have a couple of wonderful shots
>  of penguins that you will appreciate if I can get them uploaded to a link. 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > From: Share Long 
> >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> >Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 5:08 AM
> >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> >stooopid"
> > 
> >
> >  
> >dear FFL, just to set the record straight:  I don't even THINK the word 
> >imbecile much less express it.  Emily recently asked a question about TM 
> >and I followed up with a similar question to Steve.  Not sure how my asking 
> >a question of Steve is saying anything at all about Emily.  And it's true 
> >that I ONCE called Emily's sense of humor creepy.  She is the person who is 
> >multiplying it.  
> >
> >In this post of hers it is the indirectly attributing to me something I did 
> >not say or even think, that is what I'd call creepy here.
> >
> >
> >
> >BTW how I remember this sequence:  lines on stone, lines on sand, lines on 
> >water, lines on air.  
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Emily Reyn 
> >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
> >Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:45 PM
> >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> >stooopid"
> > 
> >
> >  
> >Steve:  I was being sincere - you really have been laying down some funny 
> >stuff, IMO.   You are never the butt of my joke.  I almost always laugh in 
> >the spirit of the moment and never with mean intention - and I'm quite 
> >serious about that.  I laugh at the human condition and our attempts to 
> >communicate with each other and I do it so that I don't grieve too hard when 
> >things are tough.  I should really get a volunteer position as I've already 
> >filled out the application - I just have to make the call.  
> >
> >
> >I don't always explain the way I interpret FFL and I probably won't.  I run 
> >it through a lot of different filters some days.  Which means that I 
> >"misinterpret" at times on purpose for a different effect - easy to do with 
> >words on paper. And it is well known now, thanks to Share, that I have a 
> >"creepy" sense of humor.  And I am a TM imbecile.  
> >
> >
> >And I wasn't feeling particularly up today, if truth be told, so I really 
> >appreciated your posts.  And, I love a good beer.  Had to give it up when 
> >I was diagnosed as gluten intolerant, but I'm going to cheat after what 
> >Emptybill posted today.   Emily
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> From: seventhray27 
> >>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> >>Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 6:04 PM
> >>Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or "reeely 
> >>stooopid"
> >> 
> >>
> >>  
> >>whether Emily was being sincere or making fun of me, I really don't care.  
> >>If I can be the butt of her joke, so be it.
> >>(and yes, I need to check out the link)
> >>
> >>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If you ever figure out why Emily is laughing, Steve, you'll be where Ted 
> >>> wrote about sex with Sylvia.
> >>> 
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Ahh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haahh ha ha ha ha ha ha 
> >>> > ahah ha ha ha ha ha. Steve, I don't know what is up for 
> >>> > you, but you are really making me laugh these days.  A ha ha ha 
> >>> > ha ha ha ha ha...
> >>> > 
> >>> > 
> >>> > 
> >>> > >
> >>> > > From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@
> >>> > >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> >>> > >Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 2:18 PM
> >>> > >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Which is worse,,,"really stupid" or 
> >>> > >"reeely stooopid"
> >>> > > 
> >>> > >
> >>> > >  
> >>> > >
> >>> > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen"  
>