[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> >
> Who said anything about a 'negative explaination'. I was talking
> about rationalizing an action that did not work according to plan.
> Plan fails - redifine it to fit the outcome - 'rationalize'. What was
> the conference for? For the mayors, no it was just COSMIC wheel
> spinning... We really didn't intend for it to suceed, ya that's the
> ticket. Again this shows how easyly any action can be rationalized.
> 
> JohnY
>
You make a good point, except when the intent of those around 
Maharishi is to gain enlightenment, vs. say, money. Maharishi states 
explicity in the Gita that following transcending, the type of action 
necessary to stabilize pure consciousness is not important (i.e. it 
could be anything). So for the TMO, whether or not a conference is a 
bust or not is really not as important as the activity carried out by 
them to stabilize pure consciousness.

On the other hand, I personally did not enjoy working for the TMO. On 
the other hand, as a means to an end, it was fine. 






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[jyouells2000]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle 
> for
> > Guru
> > > > >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his 
> flunkies to
> > set up
> > > > >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would 
> start
> > in 3
> > > > >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > > > >
> > > > This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had
> > unstructured lives
> > > > and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was
> > applied to
> > > > scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals
> > accustomed to
> > > > scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things
> > with a few
> > > > weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s
> > conference was
> > > > organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were
> > invited. Only the
> > > > Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some 
> strings
> > to get
> > > > approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had 
> come.
> > The
> > > > first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day 
> by
> > giving
> > > > him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential
> > participants, or to give the
> > > organizers something to do?
> > 
> > There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.
> 
> And we MUST NOT EVER suggest or even *consider* a
> less-than-100 percent negative explanation for
> anything MMY or the TMO does that seems odd to us,
> EVEN if that explanation actually makes sense--
> because that would mean we were  True
> Believers.
> 
> The corollary: It is NEVER the negative interpretation
> that is off the wall, ONLY the positive one.  In fact,
> the more negative it is, the saner it is, and vice-
> versa.
>
Who said anything about a 'negative explaination'. I was talking
about rationalizing an action that did not work according to plan.
Plan fails - redifine it to fit the outcome - 'rationalize'. What was
the conference for? For the mayors, no it was just COSMIC wheel
spinning... We really didn't intend for it to suceed, ya that's the
ticket. Again this shows how easyly any action can be rationalized.

JohnY






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88  wrote:
> 
> > Hey, T -- 'Fascism posing as spirituality' is bang on. Truth is 
> > exactly what you experience. The only reality that is is the one 
> > you experience.
> 
> Except, of course, for those whose experience is
> consonant with what MMY teaches.  They are seriously
> deluded.
>


Something else we agree on...

Guess I have to dump Sal now...





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read 
> and 
> > respond to each other's 
> > > posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly.  
> > > snip> > >
> > 
> > Hi, Way -- I'm just getting caught up since I looked in last. I 
> > noticed that Judy and Lawson monopolized the newsgroup for many 
> > messages. I don't read their drivel, but I was sort of wondering if 
> > their private mutual admiration set was a contest to see who could 
> > insert his/her nose the fartherest up the other's butt. They are 
> > getting to be more and more turd clones of each other. -- best 
> > watched from a distance, I suppose, like a train wreck or the TMO.
> 
> Funny how gerbal knows Lawson and I are "getting to
> be more and more turd clones of each other" even
> without reading our posts, ain't it?
> 
> (Actually, *not* reading our posts is the only way
> you could have this impression, since we disagree
> quite often--just did, in fact.)
>

But everyone knows we only did that to cover our tracks...






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle 
> for
> > Guru
> > > > >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his 
> flunkies to
> > set up
> > > > >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would 
> start
> > in 3
> > > > >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > > > >
> > > > This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had
> > unstructured lives
> > > > and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was
> > applied to
> > > > scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals
> > accustomed to
> > > > scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things
> > with a few
> > > > weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s
> > conference was
> > > > organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were
> > invited. Only the
> > > > Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some 
> strings
> > to get
> > > > approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had 
> come.
> > The
> > > > first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day 
> by
> > giving
> > > > him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential
> > participants, or to give the
> > > organizers something to do?
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.
> > 
> > JohnY
> 
> Or diverted back to TM-speak, something nice, safe, meaningless and 
> sure to stop any further thought on the matter. *When doubt arises, 
> stop thinking* would seem to be the fundamentlist lunatic's answer to 
> whenever might go against whatever the current version of the 
> supposed purity of the teaching might be.
>

So you think that it's a GOOD thing that all the people involved were doing 
busy work for 
no reason?






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hey, T -- 'Fascism posing as spirituality' is bang on. Truth is 
> exactly what you experience. The only reality that is is the one 
> you experience.

Except, of course, for those whose experience is
consonant with what MMY teaches.  They are seriously
deluded.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:

> > > > All the world¹s mayors were invited. Only the Mayor
> > > > of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some 
> > > > strings to get approval to come. He freaked when he
> > > > realized no one else had come. The first thing he did
> > > > was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by
> > > > giving him tons of attention and somehow, he went
> > > > away happy.
> > >
> > > Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the
> > > potential participants, or to give the organizers
> > > something to do?
> > 
> > There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.
> > 
> > JohnY
> 
> Or diverted back to TM-speak, something nice, safe,
> meaningless and sure to stop any further thought on
> the matter.

"Was the conference meant for the potential
participants, or to give the organizers something
to do?" is TM-speak??

And just how does it "stop any further thought on
the matter"?

Seems to me it's gerbal's comment that is the
attempt to stop any further thought on the matter,
by labeling Lawson's question "TM-speak," even
though it's obviously not.

> *When doubt arises, stop thinking* would seem to be the 
> fundamentlist lunatic's answer to whenever might go against 
> whatever the current version of the supposed purity of the
> teaching might be.

Looks an awful lot like projection to me, "purity"
in gerbal's case being unalloyed loathing for MMY
and the TMO.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > He did say this [become in tune with my thinking]
> > > > explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very
> > > > much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m 
> > > > saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² 
> > > > (referring to the number of people in the audience.) 
> > > > ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning 
> > > > we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.)
> > >
> > > Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all
> > > knowers of Reality.
> > 
> > Eggzactly.
> 
> Segue time again...
> 
> 
> 
> The "the" Word
> 
> What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the 
> True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the 
> phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of 
> TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. 
> But what *is* it in them that feels attacked?
> 
> I think that the answer lies in one word used by one 
> poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, "It's 
> based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on 
> Absolute Truth." The respondent insisted on redefining 
> Rick's statement using her own definition: "Or, that he 
> has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics 
> of consciousness."
> 
> There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion 
> speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is 
> in them that feels threatened and "attacked" when other
> people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of 
> seeing things. Anyone get what it is?
> 
> It's the word "the." She specifies that Maharishi has a 
> handle on "the truth," not "a truth."
> 
> What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't 
> even realize it when their own language gives them away, 
> is the belief that there is only *one* truth. 
> 
> They cannot admit to the possibility of there being 
> another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra-
> dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, "There can 
> only be one." And naturally, these people feel that they 
> know what that single, solitary truth is.
> 
> The TBs feel personally attacked when someone attacks an
> idea they believe in because they have been told for 
> decades by Maharishi and his parrots that there *is* 
> only one truth, and that they are privy to it because he 
> was gracious enough to share it with TBs like themselves. 
> And *only* the TBs. If someone doesn't believe that the 
> TM truth is THE truth, well then at the very least (in 
> the eyes of the TBs) the non-believers have "misunder-
> stood what was being said." More likely these deluded
> souls (the critics) are motivated by jealousy of those
> who know "THE" truth.
> 
> I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this 
> strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much
> experience with life could they possibly had to believe
> that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just
> fascism posing as spirituality.
> 
> 

Hey, T -- 'Fascism posing as spirituality' is bang on. Truth is 
exactly what you experience. The only reality that is is the one you 
experience. If you don't experience it, then, it isn't. If your mind 
is obsessed with story after story about what "the truth" is/might 
be/ought to be/or what Mahesh says it is or might be or what you 
think he might have meant when he said or you thought he said ... you 
get my drift -- then there's no possibility of experiencing truth, 
only our stories are experienced and this becomes your truth and you 
turn that into your 'fascism posing as spirituality'. -- People 
defend their fascism like religious extremists defend their sacred 
symbols. You could kill a billion people and it would not be as bad, 
say, as even suggesting bombing the Ka'ba or St. Peter's in Rome! The 
FBI could ruin the lives of many innocent people but it wouldn't be 
as bad as burning the American flag. 
TM used to be a really good thing. Mahesh single handedly turned it 
into his private fascist enterprise to dominate and manipulate the 
lives and resources of as many people as possible. Take a good look 
at the TMO as you read through that disgusting book "Mein Kampf". 
Mahesh had Devindra read it to him. This was in either the late 60's 
or very early 70's. Look what happened in the TMO at around this 
time. 






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71"  
> wrote:
> >
> > Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read 
and 
> respond to each other's 
> > posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly.  
> > snip> > >
> 
> Hi, Way -- I'm just getting caught up since I looked in last. I 
> noticed that Judy and Lawson monopolized the newsgroup for many 
> messages. I don't read their drivel, but I was sort of wondering if 
> their private mutual admiration set was a contest to see who could 
> insert his/her nose the fartherest up the other's butt. They are 
> getting to be more and more turd clones of each other. -- best 
> watched from a distance, I suppose, like a train wreck or the TMO.

Funny how gerbal knows Lawson and I are "getting to
be more and more turd clones of each other" even
without reading our posts, ain't it?

(Actually, *not* reading our posts is the only way
you could have this impression, since we disagree
quite often--just did, in fact.)







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 5:02 PM, gerbal88 wrote:
> 
> > Thanks to you and Sal and a few others, I think there might be hope
> > for sorthing through the huge pile of crap Mahesh sold us and
> > winnowing out the something of value.
> 
> I think this is it--FF Life and the other places we've made friends, 
> thanks to MMY and the TMO.  I know without them I would have had a 
much 
> less fulfilling life up until now.  I feel I owe him a lot of thanks 
> for that alone.
> 
> Sal

Yes, there are things for which we can be grateful. We made a lot of 
friends because of Mahesh and many of those friends are far more 
important now than anything Mahesh did or was trying to do. - A 
special debt of gratitude goes to Rick for this great site, and, I 
suppose, too, to Judy who reminds us just how degenerate things can 
get without those good and valuable friends.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote:
> > >
> > > on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle 
for
> Guru
> > > >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his 
flunkies to
> set up
> > > >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would 
start
> in 3
> > > >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > > >
> > > This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had
> unstructured lives
> > > and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was
> applied to
> > > scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals
> accustomed to
> > > scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things
> with a few
> > > weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s
> conference was
> > > organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were
> invited. Only the
> > > Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some 
strings
> to get
> > > approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had 
come.
> The
> > > first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day 
by
> giving
> > > him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.
> > >
> >
> > Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential
> participants, or to give the
> > organizers something to do?
> >
> 
> 
> There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.
> 
> JohnY

Or diverted back to TM-speak, something nice, safe, meaningless and 
sure to stop any further thought on the matter. *When doubt arises, 
stop thinking* would seem to be the fundamentlist lunatic's answer to 
whenever might go against whatever the current version of the 
supposed purity of the teaching might be.  







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and 
respond to each other's 
> posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly.  
> snip> > >

Hi, Way -- I'm just getting caught up since I looked in last. I 
noticed that Judy and Lawson monopolized the newsgroup for many 
messages. I don't read their drivel, but I was sort of wondering if 
their private mutual admiration set was a contest to see who could 
insert his/her nose the fartherest up the other's butt. They are 
getting to be more and more turd clones of each other. -- best 
watched from a distance, I suppose, like a train wreck or the TMO.

> Sal wrote:
> > > Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at 
> > all.  
> > > You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying 
things 
> > > they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry 
(and 
> > > others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world 
goes 
> > > around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be 
> > true," to 
> > > every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people 
say 
> > > what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless 
they 
> > are 
> > > purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what 
most 
> > > communication is based on.  What you are putting forth 
basically 
> > means 
> > > the end of any and all honest communication.
> > > 
> > > If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a 
> > conversation 
> > > going with anyone?
> > > 
> > > Sal
> gerbal wrote: 
> > Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be 
sent 
> > to some far off place to "go and teach". 
> > 
> > Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her 
odd 
> > way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her 
> > version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or 
> > statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down; 
she 
> > just enjoys the thought that she can influence the thinking of 
> > others. 
> > 
> > She used to be sharper and could actually zero in on relatively 
> > useful false statements of conclusions or false reasoning. But 
these 
> > days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of 
hers 
> > was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or 
wasn't 
> > defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of 
his 
> > (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't 
> > defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made 
any 
> > mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother 
with. I
> > m sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my 
> > shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does.
> > 
> > Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people 
> > thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like 
so 
> > many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state 
of 
> > need. I guess she has followers, Lawson seems to have his nose 
> > permanently affixed in one of her orifices, but I can't see she 
has 
> > an actual following. 
> > 
> > Keep up the good work Sal. We always need to be reminded that 
fancy 
> > words are not necessarily meaningful words and are not always 
likly 
> > to be coming from a good and well intentioned source.
> >
>







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

More same old-same old demonizing of those perceived
to be True Believers from Barry.  Can anybody find
anything in this current rant that Barry has not
said here before multiple times?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > He did say this [become in tune with my thinking]
> > > > explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very
> > > > much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m 
> > > > saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² 
> > > > (referring to the number of people in the audience.) 
> > > > ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning 
> > > > we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.)
> > >
> > > Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all
> > > knowers of Reality.
> > 
> > Eggzactly.
> 
> Segue time again...
> 
> 
> 
> The "the" Word
> 
> What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the 
> True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the 
> phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of 
> TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. 

This mantra one of Barry's many unexamined
assumptions that he takes to be The Truth.

And it may be in some cases, but by no means
all.  There's more than one "mechanics" involved,
depending on the individual in question.

> But what *is* it in them that feels attacked?

Barry obviously doesn't perceive the irony in
asking such a question in a rant that itself
personally attacks those he considers True Believers.

> I think that the answer lies in one word used by one 
> poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, "It's 
> based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on 
> Absolute Truth." The respondent

Moi, of course.

If Barry were to think about it for a moment, he'd
have to acknowledge that I challenge anti-Semitism,
homophobia, racism, and male chauvinism in precisely
the same way and with the same forcefulness that I
do unreasonable criticism of MMY/the TMO.

The only one of the groups targeted by such bigotry
to which I belong is the female sex, so it's pretty
clear that with that one exception, in these cases
I couldn't possibly feel personally attacked by the
bigotry. It's the bigotry itself that offends me.

It's in my nature to challenge unfair attacks of
groups of people and was long before I ever started
TM.  On what basis would Barry claim that when I
challenge unfair attacks on TM, in that single case
I do so because I'm feeling *personally* attacked?

> insisted on redefining 

Suggested redefining, Barry means.

> Rick's statement using her own definition: "Or, that he 
> has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics 
> of consciousness."

> There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion 
> speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is 
> in them that feels threatened and "attacked" when other
> people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of 
> seeing things. Anyone get what it is?
> 
> It's the word "the." She specifies that Maharishi has a 
> handle on "the truth," not "a truth."

Barry fails to notice that I was redefining Rick's
statement *down*, from "Maharishi has a handle on
Absolute Truth" to "Maharishi has a handle on the
truth about the nature and mechanics of consciousness."

> What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't 
> even realize it when their own language gives them away, 
> is the belief that there is only *one* truth.

The problem with Barry's contention is that the
notion that there is only one Ultimate Truth 
pervades teaching about enlightenment and is
perhaps the single principle that the vast majority
of enlightenment traditions hold in common.

Whatever the specific metaphysics of the various
traditions, the assumption is that all who reach
enlightenment, no matter the tradition, will 
experience the same Ultimate Truth.

> They cannot admit to the possibility of there being 
> another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra-
> dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, "There can 
> only be one." And naturally, these people feel that they 
> know what that single, solitary truth is.

> I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this 
> strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much
> experience with life could they possibly had to believe
> that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just
> fascism posing as spirituality.

Continuing the theme of Barry's inadvertent irony,
Barry feels that he knows The Truth: that there *is*
no "single, solitary" truth.

>From the way Barry compulsively demonizes anyone who
expresses a different view, as he does in this post,
it's clear that he feels personally attacked when
The Truth he believes in--that there is no single
truth--is challenged.

He's completely oblivious to the fact that he's
subject to precisely the same tendency for which
he demonizes those he calls True Believers.  He's

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> 
> > Marklar: Young one, your Marklar is wise and true.
> 
> Funny bit.  Larry, Daryl, and Daryl taken to extremes.
>

The episode was funny. Marklar (the leader) called out to the crowd and asked 
for Marklar to 
step forward. When some guy stepped out, he said, "No, not YOU, Marklar, 
MARKLAR."

The guy nodded, stepped back and someone else stepped out.





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is.  Glenn
> > > > > Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently
> > > > > headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had
> > > > > said as "So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.'"
> > > > > 
> > > > > On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies
> > > > > to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here
> > > > > who haven't spoken up.
> > > > > 
> > > > > "Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that
> > > > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > > > 
> > > > > "No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that
> > > > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > > > 
> > > > > "So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh?"
> > > > 
> > > > So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh?
> > > 
> > > You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's
> > > semen on it?
> > > 
> > > > Actually, it sounds  like something that someone with
> > > > undiagnosed ADD would say...
> > > > 
> > > > ...I resemble that remark.
> > > 
> > > Looks more like MPD at this point...
> > 
> > In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems 
> plausible that someone 
> > with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest 
> to fragment 
> > personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any 
> consistent physiological 
> > correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period.
> 
> Actually, I was referring facetiously to your
> "I resemble that remark" (i.e., the remark you
> had just made).  I don't think Sal has MPD.
>

I don't either. I was merely going off on a tangent, which, for some reason, I 
often do...







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- sparaig  wrote:
> 
> > > In some cases, it might be a degree of
> > > fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone 
> > > with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might
> > > find it easiest to fragment 
> > > personality, along with attention itself. Not sure
> > > if there's any consistent physiological 
> > > correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe
> > > in it period.
> > 
> > It's hard to believe until you start working with it
> > clinically. Then you say, Oh!"
> 
> Some of the stuff I've read about different
> personalities needing different eyeglass
> prescriptions, reacting differently to 
> medications, etc., is really mind-boggling.
> Sure makes you rethink what "personality"
> is.
> 
> Why do most of us have only one??
>

Of course, a question arises: DO we only have one, or do we simply maintain an 
inner 
narrative thatis shared by multiple personalities?

Recall the split-brain people and their situation...






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Ingegerd]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> > > > He did say this [become in tune with my thinking]
> > > > explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very
> > > > much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m 
> > > > saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² 
> > > > (referring to the number of people in the audience.) 
> > > > ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning 
> > > > we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.)
> > >
> > > Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to 
all
> > > knowers of Reality.
> > 
> > Eggzactly.
> 
> Segue time again...
> 
> 
> 
> The "the" Word
> 
> What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the 
> True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the 
> phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of 
> TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. 
> But what *is* it in them that feels attacked?
> 
> I think that the answer lies in one word used by one 
> poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, "It's 
> based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on 
> Absolute Truth." The respondent insisted on redefining 
> Rick's statement using her own definition: "Or, that he 
> has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics 
> of consciousness."
> 
> There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion 
> speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is 
> in them that feels threatened and "attacked" when other
> people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of 
> seeing things. Anyone get what it is?
> 
> It's the word "the." She specifies that Maharishi has a 
> handle on "the truth," not "a truth."
> 
> What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't 
> even realize it when their own language gives them away, 
> is the belief that there is only *one* truth. 
> 
> They cannot admit to the possibility of there being 
> another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra-
> dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, "There can 
> only be one." And naturally, these people feel that they 
> know what that single, solitary truth is.
> 
> The TBs feel personally attacked when someone attacks an
> idea they believe in because they have been told for 
> decades by Maharishi and his parrots that there *is* 
> only one truth, and that they are privy to it because he 
> was gracious enough to share it with TBs like themselves. 
> And *only* the TBs. If someone doesn't believe that the 
> TM truth is THE truth, well then at the very least (in 
> the eyes of the TBs) the non-believers have "misunder-
> stood what was being said." More likely these deluded
> souls (the critics) are motivated by jealousy of those
> who know "THE" truth.
> 
> I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this 
> strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much
> experience with life could they possibly had to believe
> that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just
> fascism posing as spirituality.
> 
> 
>
You are right. Many of us ex-TB's had that experience that MMY was 
speaking The Truth - he was The One that did know The Ultimate 
Truth - and we had to accept it, because we did not have a 
consciousness that was able to know The Truth. And we saw everything 
MMY did - as a path to reach a Higher Consciousness - even when it 
gave a lot of Stress - but we called it unstressing.
Today I can't believe that I did accept so much as I did - .
Ingegerd





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[TurquoiseB]

> > > He did say this [become in tune with my thinking]
> > > explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it was very
> > > much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m 
> > > saying one things and 1,000 things are being heard.² 
> > > (referring to the number of people in the audience.) 
> > > ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning 
> > > we all will have attuned ourselves to his thinking.)
> >
> > Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all
> > knowers of Reality.
> 
> Eggzactly.

Segue time again...



The "the" Word

What *is* the phenomenon that manifests itself in the 
True Believers of the TMO? The *mechanics* of the 
phenomenon are clear -- they treat every criticism of 
TM, TMers and the TMO as if it were a personal attack. 
But what *is* it in them that feels attacked?

I think that the answer lies in one word used by one 
poster here in a recent exchange. Rick suggested, "It's 
based on the assumption that Maharishi has a handle on 
Absolute Truth." The respondent insisted on redefining 
Rick's statement using her own definition: "Or, that he 
has a handle on the truth about the nature and mechanics 
of consciousness."

There is a word in that sentence that in my opinion 
speaks volumes about the TM mentality, and what it is 
in them that feels threatened and "attacked" when other
people question the TM dogma or propose other ways of 
seeing things. Anyone get what it is?

It's the word "the." She specifies that Maharishi has a 
handle on "the truth," not "a truth."

What the TBs are attached to, so much so that they don't 
even realize it when their own language gives them away, 
is the belief that there is only *one* truth. 

They cannot admit to the possibility of there being 
another truth, or multiple truths, or even worse, contra-
dictory truths. Like in the Highlander movies, "There can 
only be one." And naturally, these people feel that they 
know what that single, solitary truth is.

The TBs feel personally attacked when someone attacks an
idea they believe in because they have been told for 
decades by Maharishi and his parrots that there *is* 
only one truth, and that they are privy to it because he 
was gracious enough to share it with TBs like themselves. 
And *only* the TBs. If someone doesn't believe that the 
TM truth is THE truth, well then at the very least (in 
the eyes of the TBs) the non-believers have "misunder-
stood what was being said." More likely these deluded
souls (the critics) are motivated by jealousy of those
who know "THE" truth.

I'm sorry, but the people who think and act like this 
strike me as being really silly fucks. I mean, how much
experience with life could they possibly had to believe
that there is only one truth and one reality? It's just
fascism posing as spirituality.









To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote:
> > >
> > > on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle 
for
> Guru
> > > >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his 
flunkies to
> set up
> > > >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would 
start
> in 3
> > > >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > > >
> > > This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had
> unstructured lives
> > > and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was
> applied to
> > > scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals
> accustomed to
> > > scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things
> with a few
> > > weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s
> conference was
> > > organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were
> invited. Only the
> > > Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some 
strings
> to get
> > > approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had 
come.
> The
> > > first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day 
by
> giving
> > > him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.
> > >
> >
> > Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential
> participants, or to give the
> > organizers something to do?
> 
> There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.

And we MUST NOT EVER suggest or even *consider* a
less-than-100 percent negative explanation for
anything MMY or the TMO does that seems odd to us,
EVEN if that explanation actually makes sense--
because that would mean we were  True
Believers.

The corollary: It is NEVER the negative interpretation
that is off the wall, ONLY the positive one.  In fact,
the more negative it is, the saner it is, and vice-
versa.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Marklar: Young one, your Marklar is wise and true.

Funny bit.  Larry, Daryl, and Daryl taken to extremes.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > In some cases, it might be a degree of
> > fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone 
> > with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might
> > find it easiest to fragment 
> > personality, along with attention itself. Not sure
> > if there's any consistent physiological 
> > correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe
> > in it period.
> 
> It's hard to believe until you start working with it
> clinically. Then you say, Oh!"

Some of the stuff I've read about different
personalities needing different eyeglass
prescriptions, reacting differently to 
medications, etc., is really mind-boggling.
Sure makes you rethink what "personality"
is.

Why do most of us have only one??







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is.  Glenn
> > > > Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently
> > > > headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had
> > > > said as "So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.'"
> > > > 
> > > > On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies
> > > > to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here
> > > > who haven't spoken up.
> > > > 
> > > > "Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that
> > > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > > 
> > > > "No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that
> > > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > > 
> > > > "So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh?"
> > > 
> > > So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh?
> > 
> > You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's
> > semen on it?
> > 
> > > Actually, it sounds  like something that someone with
> > > undiagnosed ADD would say...
> > > 
> > > ...I resemble that remark.
> > 
> > Looks more like MPD at this point...
> 
> In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems 
plausible that someone 
> with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest 
to fragment 
> personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any 
consistent physiological 
> correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period.

Actually, I was referring facetiously to your
"I resemble that remark" (i.e., the remark you
had just made).  I don't think Sal has MPD.









To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote:
> > >
> > > on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for
> Guru
> > > >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to
> set up
> > > >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start
> in 3
> > > >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > > >
> > > This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had
> unstructured lives
> > > and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was
> applied to
> > > scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals
> accustomed to
> > > scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things
> with a few
> > > weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s
> conference was
> > > organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were
> invited. Only the
> > > Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings
> to get
> > > approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come.
> The
> > > first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by
> giving
> > > him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.
> > >
> >
> > Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential
> participants, or to give the
> > organizers something to do?
> >
> 
> 
> There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.

Well, yeah. If the primary purpose of the stuff that MMY puts the "Inner 
Circle" of the TMO 
through is simply to test them (in most senses of the word), then yeah, it 
explains an 
awful lot.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > Um, it doesn't "just happen" to refute it, it's
> > > > > chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute
> > > > > it.  (Actually the correct term here is "rebut,"
> > > > > not "refute," unless we're talking about correcting
> > > > > a misquote.  "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut"
> > > > > simply means to challenge.)
> > > > 
> > > > Is this one of those "damned if you do, damned if
> > > > you don't" arguments?
> > > > 
> > > > Or perhaps marklar is marklar?
> > > 
> > > Huh??
> > 
> > You said: "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut" simply means
> > to challenge."
> 
> Urk.  So I did.  I meant "refute" means to prove wrong...
> 
> > marklar is marklar.
> 
> No idea what marklar is.  But your "damned if you do"
> wisecrack almost made me pee my pants now that you've
> pointed out my error.
>

It's the most important word in the language of some aliens that appear in a 
Southpark 
episode. it's one of the better ones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictional_races_in_South_Park#Marklar

Marklar: Greetings, Marklar! I am Marklar! This is Marklar.
You see, young marklar. Those marklars don't care about marklar marklar. They 
just want 
to take your marklar and marklar their own marklar. The only marklar for this 
is to 
marklar.

Kyle: Marklar, these marklars want to change your marklar. They don't want this 
Marklar or 
any of his marklars to live here because it's bad for their marklar. They use 
Marklar to try 
and force marklars to believe their marklar. If you let them stay here, they 
will build 
marklars and marklars. They will take all your marklars and replace them with 
their 
Marklar. These marklars have no good marklar to live on Marklar, so they must 
come here 
to Marklar. Please, let these marklars stay where they can grow and prosper 
without any 
marklars, marklars, or marklars.

Marklar: Young one, your Marklar is wise and true.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[jyouells2000]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer groups@ wrote:
> >
> > on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for
Guru
> > >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to
set up
> > >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would start
in 3
> > >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > >
> > This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had
unstructured lives
> > and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was
applied to
> > scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals
accustomed to
> > scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things
with a few
> > weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s
conference was
> > organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were
invited. Only the
> > Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings
to get
> > approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come.
The
> > first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by
giving
> > him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.
> >
>
> Support of nature? Was the conference meant for the potential
participants, or to give the
> organizers something to do?
>


There, this shows how easy any action can be rationalized.

JohnY







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Peter]

--- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"
>  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is. 
> Glenn
> > > > Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory
> recently
> > > > headlined a post about something a
> right-wingnut had
> > > > said as "So Wrong That It Redefines
> 'Wrongness.'"
> > > > 
> > > > On a far lesser scale of significance, that
> applies
> > > > to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps
> others here
> > > > who haven't spoken up.
> > > > 
> > > > "Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner
> with that
> > > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > > 
> > > > "No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with
> that
> > > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > > 
> > > > "So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh?
> Huh?"
> > > 
> > > So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh?
> > 
> > You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's
> > semen on it?
> > 
> > > Actually, it sounds  like something that someone
> with
> > > undiagnosed ADD would say...
> > > 
> > > ...I resemble that remark.
> > 
> > Looks more like MPD at this point...
> >
> 
> 
> In some cases, it might be a degree of
> fragmentation. It seems plausible that someone 
> with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might
> find it easiest to fragment 
> personality, along with attention itself. Not sure
> if there's any consistent physiological 
> correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe
> in it period.

It's hard to believe until you start working with it
clinically. Then you say, Oh!"



> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!' 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
>  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > > > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  
> What 
> > would
> > > > > > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > 
> > > > How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for
> > > > complimenting you on something you said that was
> > > > totally wrong.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > But she may not think it is totally wrong. 
> > > 
> > > Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on
> > > opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by
> > > emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and
> > > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and
> > > obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that
> > > such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point
> > > that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically
> > > flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the
> > > argument --our mind goes blank.
> > 
> > I wish I could believe that, but in this case her
> > mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the
> > argument so precisely *away* from the logic that
> > it had to have been calculated.  You'd have to
> > know what the logic *was* to do that.
> > 
> > Also, she's done it before, several times, including
> > in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM.
> 
> P.S.: And she's not even that rabid a TM critic.
>


Eh. She's got certain strong opinions and anyone that doesn't share those 
opinions might 
be seen as a threat to her. Better to denounce such people rather than 
re-evaluate the 
opinion. Also, she may just see red whenever she sees anything by you so 
there's a guilt-
by-association thing going on and it dictates how she reacts to anything you or 
any other 
pro-TMer says. 

Been there, done that, though not-so-much about TM itself, I think.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is.  Glenn
> > > Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently
> > > headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had
> > > said as "So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.'"
> > > 
> > > On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies
> > > to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here
> > > who haven't spoken up.
> > > 
> > > "Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that
> > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > 
> > > "No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that
> > > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > > 
> > > "So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh?"
> > 
> > So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh?
> 
> You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's
> semen on it?
> 
> > Actually, it sounds  like something that someone with
> > undiagnosed ADD would say...
> > 
> > ...I resemble that remark.
> 
> Looks more like MPD at this point...
>


In some cases, it might be a degree of fragmentation. It seems plausible that 
someone 
with extreme ADHD *and* an abused background might find it easiest to fragment 
personality, along with attention itself. Not sure if there's any consistent 
physiological 
correlates to MPD however. Some people don't believe in it period.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Say, gerbal, why don't you affix your nose a little
> > > more permanently in one of Sal's orifices?  She loves
> > > that stuff.  You'll have to share with Curtis, but 
> > > I'm sure said orifice is big enough to accommodate
> > > both your noses at once.
> > 
> > Sorry Judy. I've already establihed my preeiminence in this
> > position and none others need apply!
> 
> Selfish, or do you just have a really big nose?

A gentleman never tells...

> 
> > Uh, oh. She might wonder what that line is about since she
> > hasn't kill-filed you yet.
>







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > Um, it doesn't "just happen" to refute it, it's
> > > > chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute
> > > > it.  (Actually the correct term here is "rebut,"
> > > > not "refute," unless we're talking about correcting
> > > > a misquote.  "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut"
> > > > simply means to challenge.)
> > > 
> > > Is this one of those "damned if you do, damned if
> > > you don't" arguments?
> > > 
> > > Or perhaps marklar is marklar?
> > 
> > Huh??
> 
> You said: "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut" simply means
> to challenge."

Urk.  So I did.  I meant "refute" means to prove wrong...

> marklar is marklar.

No idea what marklar is.  But your "damned if you do"
wisecrack almost made me pee my pants now that you've
pointed out my error.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What 
> would
> > > > > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > > How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for
> > > complimenting you on something you said that was
> > > totally wrong.
> > >
> > 
> > But she may not think it is totally wrong. 
> > 
> > Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on
> > opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by
> > emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and
> > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and
> > obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that
> > such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point
> > that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically
> > flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the
> > argument --our mind goes blank.
> 
> I wish I could believe that, but in this case her
> mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the
> argument so precisely *away* from the logic that
> it had to have been calculated.  You'd have to
> know what the logic *was* to do that.
> 
> Also, she's done it before, several times, including
> in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM.
>


That's my girl!





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is.  Glenn
> > Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently
> > headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had
> > said as "So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.'"
> > 
> > On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies
> > to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here
> > who haven't spoken up.
> > 
> > "Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that
> > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > 
> > "No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that
> > woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> > 
> > "So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh?"
> 
> So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh?

You mean, Monica's blue dress with Clinton's
semen on it?

> Actually, it sounds  like something that someone with
> undiagnosed ADD would say...
> 
> ...I resemble that remark.

Looks more like MPD at this point...







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > > 
> > [...]
> > > > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > > > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > > > on alt.m.t.
> > > 
> > > And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when
> > > your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start
> > > to insult and then just hope the poster goes away.
> > > 
> > > Yawn.
> > 
> > Unlike yourself, who killfiles a potential suitor simply
> > because you don't give a sh*t about what he says...
> > 
> > [note to all: I am not really a potential suitor of Sal's
> > but it's fun to carry on a one-sided flirtation that she
> > will never see. It proves Judy's point that killfiiling
> > cedes the field to someone and lets them say whatever they
> > want without challenge]
> 
> It also leaves them vulnerable to the manipulations
> of dishonest posters who snip significant context
> or otherwise distort what the folks they've killfiled
> have written, leaving them in blissful delusion.
>


Uh, oh. Someone finally quoted my remarks to Sal. 






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  
What 
> would
> > > > > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > > How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for
> > > complimenting you on something you said that was
> > > totally wrong.
> > >
> > 
> > But she may not think it is totally wrong. 
> > 
> > Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on
> > opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by
> > emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and
> > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and
> > obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that
> > such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point
> > that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically
> > flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the
> > argument --our mind goes blank.
> 
> I wish I could believe that, but in this case her
> mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the
> argument so precisely *away* from the logic that
> it had to have been calculated.  You'd have to
> know what the logic *was* to do that.
> 
> Also, she's done it before, several times, including
> in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM.

P.S.: And she's not even that rabid a TM critic.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Say, gerbal, why don't you affix your nose a little
> > more permanently in one of Sal's orifices?  She loves
> > that stuff.  You'll have to share with Curtis, but 
> > I'm sure said orifice is big enough to accommodate
> > both your noses at once.
> 
> Sorry Judy. I've already establihed my preeiminence in this
> position and none others need apply!

Selfish, or do you just have a really big nose?

> Uh, oh. She might wonder what that line is about since she
> hasn't kill-filed you yet.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Let's take another example.
> > > >
> > > > Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a
> > > > male chauvinist.
> > > >
> > > > And I respond, "Well, he does say women should
> > > > stay at home and raise the children."
> > > >
> > > > Would you assume I *believed* women should stay
> > > > at home and raise the children?
> > > >
> > > No.  But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all 
> along 
> > > is, "Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the 
> children, 
> > > but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist."
> > > 
> > > See the difference? :)
> > 
> > Except, what you clipped was Judy's explanation that she DOES 
> believe that MMY ***IS*** a 
> > male chauvinist, so, you've presented us with two most-plausible 
> scenarios:
> > 
> > you don't really read  what Judy writes, but only those parts that 
> seem to verify what you 
> > already believe, OR
> > 
> > you DID read what Judy wrote, and carefully snipt the context since 
> it would have obviated 
> > the point you were trying to make by quoting her.
> > 
> > BTW, how does an October wedding sound?
> 
> An October surprise, huh?
>

If/when she figures out what I've been doing and goes back and reads my 
responses to 
her, we may see another "October Sky."

Bam, boom, to the moon, Alice.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Um, it doesn't "just happen" to refute it, it's
> > > chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute
> > > it.  (Actually the correct term here is "rebut,"
> > > not "refute," unless we're talking about correcting
> > > a misquote.  "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut"
> > > simply means to challenge.)
> > 
> > Is this one of those "damned if you do, damned if
> > you don't" arguments?
> > 
> > Or perhaps marklar is marklar?
> 
> Huh??
>


You said: "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut" simply means to challenge."


marklar is marklar.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> > > 
> > > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > > >
> > > > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What 
would
> > > > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > 
> > How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for
> > complimenting you on something you said that was
> > totally wrong.
> >
> 
> But she may not think it is totally wrong. 
> 
> Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on
> opinion, colored, even more than in most forums, by
> emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and
> Maharishi Mahesh Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and
> obvious in a few pathological cases on both sides) that
> such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point
> that we simply CANNOT see that an argument is logically
> flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the
> argument --our mind goes blank.

I wish I could believe that, but in this case her
mind didn't go blank, because she twisted the
argument so precisely *away* from the logic that
it had to have been calculated.  You'd have to
know what the logic *was* to do that.

Also, she's done it before, several times, including
in discussions that weren't even about MMY or TM.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Say, gerbal, why don't you affix your nose a little
> more permanently in one of Sal's orifices?  She loves
> that stuff.  You'll have to share with Curtis, but 
> I'm sure said orifice is big enough to accommodate
> both your noses at once.
>

Sorry Judy. I've already establihed my preeiminence in this position and none 
others need 
apply!

Uh, oh. She might wonder what that line is about since she hasn't kill-filed 
you yet.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is.  Glenn
> Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently
> headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had
> said as "So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.'"
> 
> On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies
> to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here
> who haven't spoken up.
> 
> "Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that
> woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> 
> "No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that
> woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"
> 
> "So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh?"
>

So how DO you explain the blue dress, huh?

Actually, it sounds  like something that someone with undiagnosed ADD would 
say...

...I resemble that remark.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> [...]
> > > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > > on alt.m.t.
> > 
> > And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when
> > your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start
> > to insult and then just hope the poster goes away.
> > 
> > Yawn.
> 
> Unlike yourself, who killfiles a potential suitor simply
> because you don't give a sh*t about what he says...
> 
> [note to all: I am not really a potential suitor of Sal's
> but it's fun to carry on a one-sided flirtation that she
> will never see. It proves Judy's point that killfiiling
> cedes the field to someone and lets them say whatever they
> want without challenge]

It also leaves them vulnerable to the manipulations
of dishonest posters who snip significant context
or otherwise distort what the folks they've killfiled
have written, leaving them in blissful delusion.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> > 
> > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > >
> > > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
> > > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> 
> How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for
> complimenting you on something you said that was
> totally wrong.
>

But she may not think it is totally wrong. 

Much of what is discussed on this forum is based on opinion, colored, even more 
than in 
most forums, by emotional attachment to the primary topics (TM and Maharishi 
Mahesh 
Yogi). It is entirely plausible (and obvious in a few pathological cases on 
both sides) that 
such attachments might cloud our judgement to the point that we simply CANNOT 
see 
that an argument is logically flawed. We litterally don't see that part of the 
argument --our 
mind goes blank.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> [...]
> > Um, it doesn't "just happen" to refute it, it's
> > chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute
> > it.  (Actually the correct term here is "rebut,"
> > not "refute," unless we're talking about correcting
> > a misquote.  "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut"
> > simply means to challenge.)
> 
> Is this one of those "damned if you do, damned if
> you don't" arguments?
> 
> Or perhaps marklar is marklar?

Huh??






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71"  wrote:
> >
> > Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig
> > read and respond to each other's posts, but not many other
> > people do - at least not regularly.
> > snip> > >
> 
> Exactly right, wayback and Gerbal.

Quite a lengthy chain now of people with their
noses up other people's orifices, as gerbal so
delicately puts it.

I guess they figure it gives them some protection
against the pro-TM viewpoint.




 I refuse to read her high horse
> drivel anymore and so are many others. It's a complete waste of
> timethe arguments are circular, and, quite frankly, there are many
> more topics (and posters) of interested on this forum than the "My
> name is Judy and I'm so bright and you're so dumb and let me tell you
> why" routine that she endlessly engages in. She's pathetic and 
obnoxious.
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> [...]
> > Barry knows I'm in the last category too, but he
> > simply ignores the context and makes the default
> > assumption that I agree with anything I quote 
> > MMY as saying, because he can always use that
> > as a putdown.
> 
> I honestly think that Barry came back to this forum
> simply to take snipes at TBers, mostly you, but
> potentially others as well.

Of course he did.  That's all he's done since he
returned, and at even greater length and frequency
than before he left.

> Very sad.

Indeed.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did
> > > in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying
> > > home and raising the children).
> > >
> > > Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who
> > > was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw
> > > man, in other words.
> > 
> > And those weren't the posts I was referring to.
> > >
> > > Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
> > > "goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.
> > >
> > > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > > on alt.m.t.
> > 
> > And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, 
> > whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope 
> > the poster goes away.
> > 
> > Yawn.
> > 
> > 
> > Sal
> >
> Absolutely correct, Sal. She has made herself utterly irrelevant on
> this forum.
>

Another member of the Judy Stein Worship Club, I see...







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> > How it works is, when someone says something that
> > is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
> > the people who use this dodge regularly (neither
> > of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the
> > exact argument that we who are TM teachers were
> > taught to use in this situation. It takes the
> > form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or
> > "Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever
> > form it takes, what they say just "happens" to
> > refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma,
> > or the criticism.
> >
> > But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
> > it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
> > this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
> > believe about the point under discussion.
> 
> Exactly, and it's hardly just Judy and Lawson, I know others (not on 
> this forum) that use this dodge as well.  It's an effective way of 
> basically putting forth something (oftentimes something really dumb or 
> illogical) and then not having to take responsibility for it.

O Radient One, your logic is beyond compare, as is your physical and inner 
beauty.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Um, it doesn't "just happen" to refute it, it's
> chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute
> it.  (Actually the correct term here is "rebut,"
> not "refute," unless we're talking about correcting
> a misquote.  "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut"
> simply means to challenge.)

Is this one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" arguments?

Or perhaps marklar is marklar?





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > Let's take another example.
> > >
> > > Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a
> > > male chauvinist.
> > >
> > > And I respond, "Well, he does say women should
> > > stay at home and raise the children."
> > >
> > > Would you assume I *believed* women should stay
> > > at home and raise the children?
> > >
> > No.  But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all 
along 
> > is, "Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the 
children, 
> > but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist."
> > 
> > See the difference? :)
> 
> Except, what you clipped was Judy's explanation that she DOES 
believe that MMY ***IS*** a 
> male chauvinist, so, you've presented us with two most-plausible 
scenarios:
> 
> you don't really read  what Judy writes, but only those parts that 
seem to verify what you 
> already believe, OR
> 
> you DID read what Judy wrote, and carefully snipt the context since 
it would have obviated 
> the point you were trying to make by quoting her.
> 
> BTW, how does an October wedding sound?

An October surprise, huh?







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> There was excellent advice given in one of the early posts of this
> thread. It is: "I am suggesting, in fact I am asking, that you
> consider NOT READING the
> posts of those who upset you, like Judy."
> The underlying theme of her posts is usually the same. "You can't
> follow my superior logic. Let me try again to explain it to you,
> little feller." Her point is only to "win" and be as condescending as
> possible doing it. Ever hear her say "hey, thanks. I was wrong"?
> Ignore her pointless posts as I shall do from now on.
>

Translation: Judy uses language and logic WY better than I do and it bugs 
the heck out 
of me...






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
 wrote:
> >
> > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > 
> > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
> > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> >
> 
> Of course, she's only talking about how Barry and a few others
> deal with a specific situation, and not about ALL communication
> in general, but hey, you can high-five people for whatever reason
> you want.
> 
> I mean, "Major Combat Operations Over" and all that.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> > wrote:

> > > Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible
> > > difference at all.  You're implying that people
> > > *may* go around routinely saying things they may
> > > or  may not believe, so that invalidates what
> > > Barry (and others) claim MMY said.

I'm really fascinated by how wrong this is.  Glenn
Greenwald of the blog Unclaimed Territory recently
headlined a post about something a right-wingnut had
said as "So Wrong That It Redefines 'Wrongness.'"

On a far lesser scale of significance, that applies
to Sal and Curtis and gerbal, and perhaps others here
who haven't spoken up.

"Bill Clinton said, 'I did not have dinner with that
woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"

"No, no, he said, 'I did not have SEX with that
woman, Monica Lewinsky.'"

"So how do you explain the BLUE DRESS, huh? Huh?"







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:
> 
[...]
> > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > on alt.m.t.
> 
> And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, 
> whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope 
> the poster goes away.
> 
> Yawn.
> 

Unlike yourself, who killfiles a potential suitor simply because you don't give 
a sh*t about 
what he says...

[note to all: I am not really a potential suitor of Sal's but it's fun to carry 
on a one-sided 
flirtation that she will never see. It proves Judy's point that killfiiling 
cedes the field to 
someone and lets them say whatever they want without challenge]






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[geezerfreak]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and
respond to each other's 
> posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly.  
> snip> > >

Exactly right, wayback and Gerbal. I refuse to read her high horse
drivel anymore and so are many others. It's a complete waste of
timethe arguments are circular, and, quite frankly, there are many
more topics (and posters) of interested on this forum than the "My
name is Judy and I'm so bright and you're so dumb and let me tell you
why" routine that she endlessly engages in. She's pathetic and obnoxious.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Barry knows I'm in the last category too, but he
> simply ignores the context and makes the default
> assumption that I agree with anything I quote 
> MMY as saying, because he can always use that
> as a putdown.
>

I honestly think that Barry came back to this forum simply to take snipes at 
TBers, mostly 
you, but potentially others as well.

Very sad.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Let's take another example.
> >
> > Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a
> > male chauvinist.
> >
> > And I respond, "Well, he does say women should
> > stay at home and raise the children."
> >
> > Would you assume I *believed* women should stay
> > at home and raise the children?
> >
> No.  But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along 
> is, "Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, 
> but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist."
> 
> See the difference? :)

Except, what you clipped was Judy's explanation that she DOES believe that MMY 
***IS*** a 
male chauvinist, so, you've presented us with two most-plausible scenarios:

you don't really read  what Judy writes, but only those parts that seem to 
verify what you 
already believe, OR

you DID read what Judy wrote, and carefully snipt the context since it would 
have obviated 
the point you were trying to make by quoting her.


BTW, how does an October wedding sound?





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> As it happens, I *don't* believe women should stay
> in the home and raise children.  I don't support
> MMY's male chauvinism at all.  I was quoting MMY to
> the first person not to support MMY's views but to
> point out that MMY is indeed a male chauvinist.
> 

In his defense, he's talking from a religious perspective that has valid 
biological roots: in 
general, women DO make better primary care-givers than men, and there are 
relatively few 
cases of wicked stepmothers, and MANY cases of abusive stepfathers.


> Good grief, people, get a grip!
>







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
wrote:

> > You and other pro-TMers who use MMY's quotes to back up what 
> > you've said either believe them to be true--or else are trying
> > to deceive.  So which is it?
> 
> Or, O LIght of My LIfe [she still has me kill-filed], they're
> backing up their argument about what MMY says and apparently 
> believes, by quoting him, regardless of whether or not they 
> agree with what he says or believes...

Naaaw.  Couldn't be.  Pro-TMers NEVER quote MMY
unless they believe what they're quoting him as
saying, or unless they're lying.

And anti-TMers NEVER quote MMY unless they're
doing so to show he's insane.  But anti-TMes,
of course, NEVER lie, and they ALWAYS quote
MMY accurately, so there's no reason for the
pro-TMers to quote MMY to them in the first
place.

Life is apparently a whole lot simpler than you
or I ever thought, Lawson.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> "What you are putting forth basically means
> the end of any and all honest communication."
> 
> Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
> have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
>

Of course, she's only talking about how Barry and a few others deal with a 
specific 
situation, and not about ALL communication in general, but hey, you can 
high-five people 
for whatever reason you want.

I mean, "Major Combat Operations Over" and all that.

 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> > >>> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> > >>> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
> > >>
> > >>> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
> > >> simply cannot seem to make it.
> > >>
> > >> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
> > >> he thinks are *lies*?
> > >
> > > I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
> > > but that has nothing to do with the point I was
> > > making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
> > > the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
> > > believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
> > > what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
> > > it, but that's beside the point.
> > 
> > OK...
> > 
> > >> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite
> > >> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
> > >> know what it is you're driving at.
> > >
> > > It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
> > > make it any clearer.
> > >
> > > When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
> > > that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
> > > what he says without offering an opinion about
> > > whether they believe what he says is true, or
> > > (b) indicating that they believe what they're
> > > quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
> > > indicating that they believe what they're quoting
> > > him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
> > > context.
> > >
> > > Barry and some others here automatically assume
> > > that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
> > > expressing their belief that whatever they're
> > > quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
> > > course, isn't necessarily the case.
> > >
> > > If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
> > > says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
> > > do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
> > > at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
> > > believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
> > > believe it, they might not believe it, they might
> > > think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
> > > likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
> > > in many cases what they think on that issue may
> > > not even be relevant to the point they're making.
> > 
> > Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all.  
> > You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things 
> > they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and 
> > others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes 
> > around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be true," to 
> > every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say 
> > what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are 
> > purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what most 
> > communication is based on.  What you are putting forth basically means 
> > the end of any and all honest communication.
> > 
> > If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation 
> > going with anyone?
> > 
> > Sal
> >
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant.
> >
> > Look, let's make it *real simple*.
> >
> > If I were to say, "George Bush says God tells him
> > what to do," would you automatically assume I
> > believed God tells George Bush what to do?
> >
> > Or would you need some *context* to determine
> > whether that's what I believed?
> 
> Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to make a 
> point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as *evidence* or backup 
> that what they said is true.  What you are saying is that people are 
> offering MMY's quotes whether or not they believe them to be true, 
> whether or not they back up their (the poster's) point.  I'd say the 
> context in which this happens on this board pretty much negates that, 
> and it's nuts to think otherwise.  You and other pro-TMers who use 
> MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be 
> true--or else are trying to deceive.  So which is it?

Or, O LIght of My LIfe [she still has me kill-filed], they're backing up their 
argument about 
what MMY says and apparently believes, by quoting him, regardless of whether or 
not they 
agree with what he says or believes...






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  
wrote:
> > >
> > > For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface
> > > behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime
> > > in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly
> > > impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I
> > > experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of
> > > the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did
> > > not experience him as this "Blazing Brahman" his
> > > surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago.
> > > I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an
> > > infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this
> > > until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then
> > > one day: POW! 
> > 
> > I've heard people on FFL say this often over
> > the last year, and noticed that no one ever
> > asks them the obvious question. That is,
> > why do you think that it is *Maharishi's*
> > "presence" or SSRS's "presence" that you're
> > perceiving? 
> > 
> > It sounds more likely to me that what you 
> > and other folks like Jim are experiencing 
> > is your *own* energy on a good day, and 
> > mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's.
> 
> To be sure, we are aware of our own energies and often project 
them 
> onto what we feel we like or dislike. 
> 
> I got to spend a lot of time around Mahesh. Later, after TM, I 
worked 
> with a few people who were certified sociopathic individuals. It 
was 
> like being around Mahesh. 
> 
> The energy of the sociopathic type invades your space, ignores 
> your "boundaries" (much like Judy is so often want to do in an 
effort 
> to squelch critical thought about the realities of Mahesh and his 
> delusional thinking that she'd rather not have to face), pushes 
our 
> buttons, pulls your strings and just generally plays with your 
head.
> 
> Mahesh, like many another sociopathic type enjoyed manipulating 
> others. Mahesh enjoyed it on a grand scale because he could. No 
one 
> called his bluff and was still there the next day to do it again. 
> Anyone who seemed to clever, too intelligent, too insightful was 
sent 
> on some mission of no return.
>
Boy, you got royally f*cked over by Mahesh, huh? Why not just let go 
of it, much as Turquoise advocates for the [unidentified] TBs here?

Or do you get a payoff from feeling this way?






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and 
respond to each other's 
> posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly.  
> snip> 

mutual admiration society, now nice for them






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 

> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> > >>> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> > >>> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
> > >>
> > >>> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
> > >> simply cannot seem to make it.
> > >>
> > >> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
> > >> he thinks are *lies*?
> > >
> > > I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
> > > but that has nothing to do with the point I was
> > > making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
> > > the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
> > > believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
> > > what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
> > > it, but that's beside the point.
> > 
> > OK...
> > 
> > >> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite
> > >> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
> > >> know what it is you're driving at.
> > >
> > > It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
> > > make it any clearer.
> > >
> > > When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
> > > that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
> > > what he says without offering an opinion about
> > > whether they believe what he says is true, or
> > > (b) indicating that they believe what they're
> > > quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
> > > indicating that they believe what they're quoting
> > > him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
> > > context.
> > >
> > > Barry and some others here automatically assume
> > > that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
> > > expressing their belief that whatever they're
> > > quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
> > > course, isn't necessarily the case.
> > >
> > > If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
> > > says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
> > > do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
> > > at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
> > > believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
> > > believe it, they might not believe it, they might
> > > think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
> > > likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
> > > in many cases what they think on that issue may
> > > not even be relevant to the point they're making.
> > 
> > Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at 
> all.  
> > You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying 
things 
> > they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and 
> > others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world 
goes 
> > around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be 
> true," to 
> > every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people 
say 
> > what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they 
> are 
> > purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what 
most 
> > communication is based on.  What you are putting forth basically 
> means 
> > the end of any and all honest communication.
> > 
> > If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a 
> conversation 
> > going with anyone?
> > 
> > Sal
> 
> Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be 
sent 
> to some far off place to "go and teach". 
> 
> Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her
> odd way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms 
> her version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or 
> statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down

No, actually Sal got what I said completely, pathetically,
miserably, embarrassingly wrong, and I was attempting to
restate my very simple, obvious, and utterly uncontroversial
point so she'd understand it.

Clearly you missed the point as well.


> days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of 
> hers was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or 
> wasn't defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the 
> feasibility of his (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was 
> saying she didn't defend him, she just defended him. I don't know 
> if anyone made any mention of it because it was simply too off the 
> wall to bother with.

Right, you can't even reconstruct what I said, but
you know it was off the wall.

> I'm sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my 
> shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does.

In this case I suspect you "forgot the rest" so as not
to give me any clue as to what post you were referring
to; that way you could be sure I wouldn't be able to
dig it out and demonstrate how you had failed to
unders

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 5:02 PM, gerbal88 wrote:

> Thanks to you and Sal and a few others, I think there might be hope
> for sorthing through the huge pile of crap Mahesh sold us and
> winnowing out the something of value.

I think this is it--FF Life and the other places we've made friends, 
thanks to MMY and the TMO.  I know without them I would have had a much 
less fulfilling life up until now.  I feel I owe him a lot of thanks 
for that alone.

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[wayback71]

Gerbal, I am guessing that at this point, Judy and Sparaig read and respond to 
each other's 
posts, but not many other people do - at least not regularly.  
snip> > >
Sal wrote:
> > Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at 
> all.  
> > You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things 
> > they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and 
> > others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes 
> > around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be 
> true," to 
> > every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say 
> > what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they 
> are 
> > purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what most 
> > communication is based on.  What you are putting forth basically 
> means 
> > the end of any and all honest communication.
> > 
> > If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a 
> conversation 
> > going with anyone?
> > 
> > Sal
gerbal wrote: 
> Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be sent 
> to some far off place to "go and teach". 
> 
> Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her odd 
> way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her 
> version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or 
> statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down; she 
> just enjoys the thought that she can influence the thinking of 
> others. 
> 
> She used to be sharper and could actually zero in on relatively 
> useful false statements of conclusions or false reasoning. But these 
> days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of hers 
> was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or wasn't 
> defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of his 
> (and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't 
> defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made any 
> mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother with. I
> m sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my 
> shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does.
> 
> Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people 
> thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like so 
> many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state of 
> need. I guess she has followers, Lawson seems to have his nose 
> permanently affixed in one of her orifices, but I can't see she has 
> an actual following. 
> 
> Keep up the good work Sal. We always need to be reminded that fancy 
> words are not necessarily meaningful words and are not always likly 
> to be coming from a good and well intentioned source.
>







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > 
> > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  
> > What would have taken me pages summed up in one short 
> > phrase.
> 
> I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages)
> on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here 
> still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic-
> ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it 
> often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they 
> use it.
> 
> Remember what I said in recent posts about those
> who have adopted the True Believer mentality being
> actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and
> lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge 
> is one way that they avoid having to do so.
> 
> How it works is, when someone says something that
> is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
> the people who use this dodge regularly (neither 
> of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the 
> exact argument that we who are TM teachers were 
> taught to use in this situation. It takes the 
> form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or 
> "Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever 
> form it takes, what they say just "happens" to 
> refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, 
> or the criticism.
> 
> But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
> it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
> this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
> believe about the point under discussion. If someone 
> comes back in response to the dodge and claims that 
> they are just parroting the TM party line (which, 
> of course, they are by "quoting" it), they can say, 
> "Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/
> whoever said that."
> 
> The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've
> been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas
> at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When
> challenged, they always have the "out" of claiming,
> "Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes
> you think that's what *I* believe?"
> 
> Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge 
> is used here and challenged, and notice that the
> person who uses it almost *never* says what he or
> she really believes. They'll pretend to get all
> uptight about people "mistakenly" assuming that
> what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to
> fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all
> the furor that they've stirred up, somehow "forget"
> to say what it is they really believe.

Thanks, Turquoise B, for your posts. I don't think I totally agree 
with every word you say, but I like the way you say it and it gives 
me pause to consider.

I was about to give up on FFL, but someone sent me a note saying you 
had returned from holiday and had a lot to say. 

Thanks to you and Sal and a few others, I think there might be hope 
for sorthing through the huge pile of crap Mahesh sold us and 
winnowing out the something of value.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> >>>
> >>> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> >>> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> >>> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
> >>
> >>> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
> >> simply cannot seem to make it.
> >>
> >> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
> >> he thinks are *lies*?
> >
> > I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
> > but that has nothing to do with the point I was
> > making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
> > the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
> > believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
> > what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
> > it, but that's beside the point.
> 
> OK...
> 
> >> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite
> >> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
> >> know what it is you're driving at.
> >
> > It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
> > make it any clearer.
> >
> > When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
> > that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
> > what he says without offering an opinion about
> > whether they believe what he says is true, or
> > (b) indicating that they believe what they're
> > quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
> > indicating that they believe what they're quoting
> > him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
> > context.
> >
> > Barry and some others here automatically assume
> > that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
> > expressing their belief that whatever they're
> > quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
> > course, isn't necessarily the case.
> >
> > If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
> > says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
> > do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
> > at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
> > believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
> > believe it, they might not believe it, they might
> > think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
> > likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
> > in many cases what they think on that issue may
> > not even be relevant to the point they're making.
> 
> Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at 
all.  
> You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things 
> they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and 
> others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes 
> around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be 
true," to 
> every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say 
> what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they 
are 
> purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what most 
> communication is based on.  What you are putting forth basically 
means 
> the end of any and all honest communication.
> 
> If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a 
conversation 
> going with anyone?
> 
> Sal

Careful, Sal, she'll try to banish you! 8-)8-] 8-} -- you'll be sent 
to some far off place to "go and teach". 

Judy doesn't have conversations; from what I can gather from her odd 
way of stating what she calls obvious, she simply transforms her 
version of a statement into a convoluted notion of events or 
statements she feels comfortable arguing with or putting down; she 
just enjoys the thought that she can influence the thinking of 
others. 

She used to be sharper and could actually zero in on relatively 
useful false statements of conclusions or false reasoning. But these 
days she's simply getting weird. I think the last thing I saw of hers 
was something to the effect that she didn't defend Mahesh (or wasn't 
defending Mahesh), she was simply pointing out the feasibility of his 
(and I forget the rest). It seemed like she was saying she didn't 
defend him, she just defended him. I don't know if anyone made any 
mention of it because it was simply too off the wall to bother with. I
m sure she'll dig it out, re-post it, defend it and point out my 
shortcomings as if it mattered; but to her, I suppose it does.

Maybe (as in MAYBE) Mahesh managed to influence the way people 
thought; the TMO would seem to be an apt example. But you, like so 
many others, have seen through Judy's very sad and pityable state of 
need. I guess she has followers, Lawson seems to have his nose 
permanently affixed in one of her orifices, but I can't see she has 
an actual following. 

Keep up the good work Sal. We always need to be reminded that fancy 
words are not necessarily meaningful words and are not always likly 
to be coming from a good and well intentioned source.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROT

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The energy of the sociopathic type invades your space, ignores 
> your "boundaries" (much like Judy is so often want to do in an 
> effort to squelch critical thought about the realities of Mahesh 
> and his delusional thinking that she'd rather not have to face),

LOL!!







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  wrote:
> >
> > For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface
> > behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime
> > in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly
> > impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I
> > experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of
> > the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did
> > not experience him as this "Blazing Brahman" his
> > surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago.
> > I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an
> > infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this
> > until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then
> > one day: POW! 
> 
> I've heard people on FFL say this often over
> the last year, and noticed that no one ever
> asks them the obvious question. That is,
> why do you think that it is *Maharishi's*
> "presence" or SSRS's "presence" that you're
> perceiving? 
> 
> It sounds more likely to me that what you 
> and other folks like Jim are experiencing 
> is your *own* energy on a good day, and 
> mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's.

To be sure, we are aware of our own energies and often project them 
onto what we feel we like or dislike. 

I got to spend a lot of time around Mahesh. Later, after TM, I worked 
with a few people who were certified sociopathic individuals. It was 
like being around Mahesh. 

The energy of the sociopathic type invades your space, ignores 
your "boundaries" (much like Judy is so often want to do in an effort 
to squelch critical thought about the realities of Mahesh and his 
delusional thinking that she'd rather not have to face), pushes our 
buttons, pulls your strings and just generally plays with your head.

Mahesh, like many another sociopathic type enjoyed manipulating 
others. Mahesh enjoyed it on a grand scale because he could. No one 
called his bluff and was still there the next day to do it again. 
Anyone who seemed to clever, too intelligent, too insightful was sent 
on some mission of no return. 






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote
> > I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning
> > yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as
> > that eventually you would all be in the same state
> > of consciousness he was.
> 
> In my honest and long-considered opinion, 
> all of Maharishi's students have *always* 
> been in the same state of consciousness 
> as he is -- normal old waking state. The
> problems arise when one or more of the
> students start to achieve what the teacher 
> never has.

The normal old waking state of the sociopathic type is somewhat 
different from the "normal" old waking state of most folks. When 
Mahesh sensed competition or that someone could see through his 
pretend importance, he got rid of them. 

Remember what he said about Lillian Rosen: when people give advanced 
techniques they can be seen as gurus; I know that with Lillian I am 
taking no chances.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, johnlasher20002000 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer  wrote:
> >
> > on 8/26/06 2:04 PM, chaim_laib at chaim_laib@ wrote:
> > 
> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > >> 
> > >> > , "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >>> >> 
> > >>> >>  I *never* encountered any
> > >>> >> teaching in the TM context about "blind devotion
> > >>> >> to one's teacher" or "becoming in tune with one's
> > >>> >> teacher's thinking" as "the quintessence of spiritual
> > >>> >> practice."
> > >>> >> 
> > >> > 
> > >> > Although Maharishi may not have ever said this explicitly-I
> want you,
> > >> > my followers, to become in tune with my thinking-he certainly
> > >> > requested this, no, demanded it in every way.
> > > 
> > He did say this explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it
> was very
> > much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying 
one
> things
> > and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of
> people in the
> > audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning 
we
> all will
> > have attuned ourselves to his thinking.)
>
> Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all
> knowers of Reality.

Eggzactly.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[johnlasher20002000]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 8/26/06 2:04 PM, chaim_laib at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> >> 
> >> > , "authfriend"  wrote:
> >>> >> 
> >>> >>  I *never* encountered any
> >>> >> teaching in the TM context about "blind devotion
> >>> >> to one's teacher" or "becoming in tune with one's
> >>> >> teacher's thinking" as "the quintessence of spiritual
> >>> >> practice."
> >>> >> 
> >> > 
> >> > Although Maharishi may not have ever said this explicitly-I
want you,
> >> > my followers, to become in tune with my thinking-he certainly
> >> > requested this, no, demanded it in every way.
> > 
> He did say this explicitly. Many times. On International Staff it
was very
> much in the air. At Poland Spring, he said ³right now I¹m saying one
things
> and 1,000 things are being heard.² (referring to the number of
people in the
> audience.) ³Eventually you¹ll all hear the same thing.² (Meaning we
all will
> have attuned ourselves to his thinking.)
Or attuned to Reality which is one and therefore the same to all
knowers of Reality.





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[nablus108]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > 
> > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  
> > What would have taken me pages summed up in one short 
> > phrase.
> 
> I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages)
> on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here 
> still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic-
> ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it 
> often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they 
> use it.
> 
> Remember what I said in recent posts about those
> who have adopted the True Believer mentality being
> actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and
> lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge 
> is one way that they avoid having to do so.
> 
> How it works is, when someone says something that
> is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
> the people who use this dodge regularly (neither 
> of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the 
> exact argument that we who are TM teachers were 
> taught to use in this situation. It takes the 
> form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or 
> "Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever 
> form it takes, what they say just "happens" to 
> refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, 
> or the criticism.
> 
> But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
> it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
> this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
> believe about the point under discussion. If someone 
> comes back in response to the dodge and claims that 
> they are just parroting the TM party line (which, 
> of course, they are by "quoting" it), they can say, 
> "Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/
> whoever said that."
> 
> The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've
> been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas
> at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When
> challenged, they always have the "out" of claiming,
> "Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes
> you think that's what *I* believe?"
> 
> Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge 
> is used here and challenged, and notice that the
> person who uses it almost *never* says what he or
> she really believes. They'll pretend to get all
> uptight about people "mistakenly" assuming that
> what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to
> fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all
> the furor that they've stirred up, somehow "forget"
> to say what it is they really believe.
>
I have a suggestion; pack up and get back to alt.med where you 
belong. FFL was way more interesting before you started flooding this 
place.





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> 
> > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > the end of any and all honest communication."
> >
> > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
> > have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.
> 
> Thanks.

How unbelievably dishonest, to thank someone for
complimenting you on something you said that was
totally wrong.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> > How it works is, when someone says something that
> > is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
> > the people who use this dodge regularly (neither
> > of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the
> > exact argument that we who are TM teachers were
> > taught to use in this situation. It takes the
> > form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or
> > "Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever
> > form it takes, what they say just "happens" to
> > refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma,
> > or the criticism.
> >
> > But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
> > it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
> > this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
> > believe about the point under discussion.
> 
> Exactly, and it's hardly just Judy and Lawson, I know 
> others (not on this forum) that use this dodge as well.
> It's an effective way of basically putting forth something
> (oftentimes something really dumb or illogical) and then
> not having to take responsibility for it.

No, Sal, it's not a dodge, at least not with Lawson
and me.  I'm perfectly happy to say whether I
believe something or not, even when it isn't relevant
to whatever is being discussed.  And so is Lawson.

And just for the record, if there is *anybody* on
this forum who is not willing to take responsibility
for what they say, it's Barry.

If you think I'm off base, ask him to cite an instance
where Lawson or I refused to say what we believe.

For that matter, *you* cite such an instance.  If
you decline, I think I'm justified in saying you
refuse to take responsibility for what *you* say.

*All* of this is just more "True Believer" demonizing.
Why are the True Non-Believers so threatened by
pro-TMers?







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:

> > > Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
> > > "goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.
> > >
> > > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > > on alt.m.t.
> > 
> > And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when
> > your point, whatever it may have been, is gone, start
> > to insult and then just hope the poster goes away.

And yet another tactic you invariably fall back
on is snipping context, in this case *why* you
reminded me of this particular fundie Christian.

That way you can make it seem as if I just likened
you to a fundie Christian without any basis, purely
as an insult.

That was quite reprehensibly dishonest, Sal.  And
you do that kind of thing *a lot*.

And one more thing: As a point of fact, I virtually
*never* insult someone unless I've first shown their
argument to be nonsense.  It's not something I "fall
back on," it's something I *add* after reasoned
analysis.



> > Yawn.
> > 
> > Sal
> >
> Absolutely correct, Sal. She has made herself utterly irrelevant on
> this forum.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[gerbal88]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> on 8/26/06 3:28 PM, gerbal88 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 
> >> > I really think that in Mahesh's mind, if he could hussle for 
Guru
> >> > Dev, then how hard could it be for a couple of his flunkies to 
set up
> >> > hotels for 600 attending the course he just decided would 
start in 3
> >> > weeks or 2 months.
> > 
> This worked pretty well for ATRs, etc., because TMers had 
unstructured lives
> and could change directions pretty fast. But the same tactic was 
applied to
> scientific symposiums the movement would set up. Professionals 
accustomed to
> scheduling their lives a year ahead were invited to these things 
with a few
> weeks notice or less. And most were flops. One time a mayor¹s 
conference was
> organized like this in Arosa. All the world¹s mayors were invited. 
Only the
> Mayor of Winnepeg showed up. He had really had to pull some strings 
to get
> approval to come. He freaked when he realized no one else had come. 
The
> first thing he did was ask for a drink. Maharishi saved the day by 
giving
> him tons of attention and somehow, he went away happy.


I suppose that "saving the day" was, for Mahesh, confirmation of his 
wonderfultivity. 

My personal time around Mahesh, which for nearly 18 months was all-
day-every-day, confirms, for me, at least, that Mahesh lives in the 
bubble of his own private world. He opines upon what should be done 
about the world he thinks exists outside his bubble and expects the 
flunkies to accomplish this: do nothing, accomplish everything.

I saw/knew an egomaniacal megalomaniac whose mantra was *see, I'm 
right.* 







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "geezerfreak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> The underlying theme of her posts is usually the same. "You can't
> follow my superior logic. Let me try again to explain it to you,
> little feller." Her point is only to "win" and be as condescending
> as possible doing it.

Goodness knows, Barry is *never* condescending,
and his logic is always flawless and his facts
unassailable, right, geezerfreak?

> Ever hear her say "hey, thanks. I was wrong"?

You never have??  You must not have been paying
very close attention.

But then, you claim you don't read my posts, so
how could you have?







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:

> How it works is, when someone says something that
> is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
> the people who use this dodge regularly (neither
> of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the
> exact argument that we who are TM teachers were
> taught to use in this situation. It takes the
> form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or
> "Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever
> form it takes, what they say just "happens" to
> refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma,
> or the criticism.
>
> But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
> it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
> this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
> believe about the point under discussion.

Exactly, and it's hardly just Judy and Lawson, I know others (not on 
this forum) that use this dodge as well.  It's an effective way of 
basically putting forth something (oftentimes something really dumb or 
illogical) and then not having to take responsibility for it.

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did
> > in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying
> > home and raising the children).
> >
> > Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who
> > was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw
> > man, in other words.
> 
> And those weren't the posts I was referring to.

Non sequitur.  You've completely lost the thread.

You were castigating me for quoting MMY when I
didn't believe what he said was true, remember,
calling me dishonest for making a distinction
between "MMY sez..." and "What MMY sez is true"?

I just gave you two--three, including the one right
below--instances in which it would be perfectly
legitimate to quote MMY without believing what he
said was true.

> > Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
> > "goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.
> >
> > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > on alt.m.t.
> 
> And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, 
> whatever it may have been, is gone,

Um, Sal, it's *your* point that has been very
thoroughly demolished.

> start to insult and then just hope the poster goes away.

Whereas your tactic is to find some way to avoid
responding to the other person's arguments and just
hope the poster goes away.  Usually you do this by
tying the argument up in knots until it no longer has
anything to do with your original (now long since
refuted) point.

But I'm happy to continue the argument as long as
you like.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[jim_flanegin]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter  
wrote:
> >
> > For me, if I just took MMY's personality and surface
> > behavior I'd have dismissed MMY and the TMO sometime
> > in the late 70's. However I have been profoundly
> > impacted by MMY's techniques and his presence. I
> > experience MMY as radiating an all consuming energy of
> > the Transcendent. He is incredibly powerful. If I did
> > not experience him as this "Blazing Brahman" his
> > surface behavior would have turned me off decades ago.
> > I find SSRS to be radiating this same energy; an
> > infinite vastness. I didn't experience SSRS like this
> > until after two years of interacting wityh him. Then
> > one day: POW! 
> 
> I've heard people on FFL say this often over
> the last year, and noticed that no one ever
> asks them the obvious question. That is,
> why do you think that it is *Maharishi's*
> "presence" or SSRS's "presence" that you're
> perceiving? 
> 
> It sounds more likely to me that what you 
> and other folks like Jim are experiencing 
> is your *own* energy on a good day, and 
> mistaking it for Maharishi's or SSRS's.
>

Hi Barry, isn't your statement above like saying the sun really 
doesn't give off any heat- what we are experiencing on a cloudless 
day is our own increased metabolism?

Unlike those you are addressing, there is nothing...absolutely 
nothing in it for me whether or not Maharishi or Brahmananda 
Saraswati are or were or will be enlightened. To use a crude phrase, 
I could give a rat's ass, either way.

Nonetheless I also do not doubt my perception. Just like anything 
else, something is true for me if it continues to be true according 
to my direct perception. And as far as I can tell, both Brahmananda 
Saraswati and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi are supremely enlightened. SSRS 
too. 

It is not a difficult thing to assertain, and really needs no 
thought to confirm. It is simply energy signature matching, as all 
Self realized souls have a very distinct and unmistakeable energy 
signature.

However if you continue your belief that Maharishi is not 
enlightened, I have absolutely no argument with that.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[geezerfreak]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did
> > in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying
> > home and raising the children).
> >
> > Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who
> > was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw
> > man, in other words.
> 
> And those weren't the posts I was referring to.
> >
> > Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
> > "goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.
> >
> > I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> > It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> > on alt.m.t.
> 
> And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, 
> whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope 
> the poster goes away.
> 
> Yawn.
> 
> 
> Sal
>
Absolutely correct, Sal. She has made herself utterly irrelevant on
this forum. 





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > > the end of any and all honest communication."
> > 
> > Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  
> > What would have taken me pages summed up in one short 
> > phrase.
> 
> I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages)
> on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here 
> still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic-
> ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it 
> often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they 
> use it.

Except, of course, that it isn't a dodge.

> Remember what I said in recent posts about those
> who have adopted the True Believer mentality being
> actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and
> lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge 
> is one way that they avoid having to do so.
> 
> How it works is, when someone says something that
> is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
> the people who use this dodge regularly (neither 
> of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the 
> exact argument that we who are TM teachers were 
> taught to use in this situation. It takes the 
> form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or 
> "Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever 
> form it takes, what they say just "happens" to 
> refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, 
> or the criticism.

Um, it doesn't "just happen" to refute it, it's
chosen quite deliberately because it *does* refute
it.  (Actually the correct term here is "rebut,"
not "refute," unless we're talking about correcting
a misquote.  "Rebut" means to prove wrong; "rebut"
simply means to challenge.)

Barry's just like the fundie Christian I described
to Sal.  He can't conceive of somebody making a
devil's advocate-type argument.

> But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
> it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
> this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
> believe about the point under discussion.

Often what they believe is irrelevant, depending on
the context.  If the context is *what* MMY says,
whether they believe it is irrelevant.  It's only
relevant if they're arguing that what MMY says is
*true* (or untrue, as the case may be).

> If someone comes back in response to the dodge

Not a dodge.  Or it's Barry's dodge to claim it's
a dodge.

 and claims that 
> they are just parroting the TM party line (which, 
> of course, they are by "quoting" it), they can say, 
> "Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/
> whoever said that."

They sure can.  MMY says women should stay home and
raise the children.  *I* certainly didn't say that.

> The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've
> been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas
> at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When
> challenged, they always have the "out" of claiming,
> "Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes
> you think that's what *I* believe?"
> 
> Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge 
> is used here and challenged, and notice that the
> person who uses it almost *never* says what he or
> she really believes. They'll pretend to get all
> uptight about people "mistakenly" assuming that
> what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to
> fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all
> the furor that they've stirred up, somehow "forget"
> to say what it is they really believe.

And if you see this happening, try this: *Ask* the
person what they believe.  If they tell you, then
you'll know Barry was off base.

I can't think of a time when I was asked what I
believed that I didn't respond in detail, even if
it wasn't relevant to the discussion in question.

I can't remember a time when Lawson wasn't willing
to say what he believed either in response to a
question.

I'd challenge Barry to cite an example of either,
except that, as he claims, he's not trying to
convince anybody of anything, so he doesn't feel
the need to support or be accountable for anything
he says.

Oh, but wait a minute.  He claims he's not trying
to convince anybody of anything, yet above he insists
that if readers "watch" for "the dodge," they'll
find it and realize he's not off base.

Ah, well, as we all know, a foolish consistency is
the hobgoblin of small minds.  Barry's repeated
inconsistencies and self-contradictions must mean
he has a truly enormous mind, right?







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[geezerfreak]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.  If
> > > Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it,
> > > and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going
> > > to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes,
> > > would you assume Barry believes the world is about
> > > to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes?  Or
> > > would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back
> > > up his point that MMY has lost it?
> > 
> > The latter, which is exactly *my* point.  Barry quotes
> > some goofy quote to show the goofiness.  You guys (pro-TMers)
> > quote some invariably goofy thing and then try to rationalize
> > it, no matter how absurd it may be on its face. As you say,
> > it's all in the context.
> 
> Yeah, except that we don't always do that, Sal.
> 
> Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did
> in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying
> home and raising the children).
> 
> Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who
> was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw
> man, in other words.
> 
> Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
> "goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.
> 
> I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> on alt.m.t.
> 
> I once got into an argument with him about a fine
> point of Christian theology concerning baptism.
> He was arguing the fundie view, naturally (that
> only adult baptism is biblical), and I was arguing
> the mainstream Protestant view, that infant baptism
> is also biblical.
> 
> He knew I wasn't a believer, and he couldn't figure
> out for the *life* of him why I'd be defending infant
> baptism as having biblical support when baptism in
> general wasn't something I believed in.  He simply
> couldn't grasp the notion of my playing devil's
> advocate against his extreme views.
>
There was excellent advice given in one of the early posts of this
thread. It is: "I am suggesting, in fact I am asking, that you
consider NOT READING the
posts of those who upset you, like Judy."
The underlying theme of her posts is usually the same. "You can't
follow my superior logic. Let me try again to explain it to you,
little feller." Her point is only to "win" and be as condescending as
possible doing it. Ever hear her say "hey, thanks. I was wrong"?
Ignore her pointless posts as I shall do from now on.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:26 PM, authfriend wrote:

> Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did
> in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying
> home and raising the children).
>
> Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who
> was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw
> man, in other words.

And those weren't the posts I was referring to.
>
> Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
> "goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.
>
> I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
> It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
> on alt.m.t.

And another tactic you invariably fall back on...when your point, 
whatever it may have been, is gone, start to insult and then just hope 
the poster goes away.

Yawn.


Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.  If
> > Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it,
> > and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going
> > to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes,
> > would you assume Barry believes the world is about
> > to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes?  Or
> > would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back
> > up his point that MMY has lost it?
> 
> The latter, which is exactly *my* point.  Barry quotes
> some goofy quote to show the goofiness.  You guys (pro-TMers)
> quote some invariably goofy thing and then try to rationalize
> it, no matter how absurd it may be on its face. As you say,
> it's all in the context.

Yeah, except that we don't always do that, Sal.

Sometimes we do what Barry does (as I just did
in the case of MMY's dictum about women staying
home and raising the children).

Sometimes we're just correcting somebody who
was misrepresenting MMY--eliminating a straw
man, in other words.

Sometimes we play devil's advocate because the
"goofy" interpretation is so, well, goofy.

I just realized who you keep reminding me of.
It's the fundie Christian who used to hang out
on alt.m.t.

I once got into an argument with him about a fine
point of Christian theology concerning baptism.
He was arguing the fundie view, naturally (that
only adult baptism is biblical), and I was arguing
the mainstream Protestant view, that infant baptism
is also biblical.

He knew I wasn't a believer, and he couldn't figure
out for the *life* of him why I'd be defending infant
baptism as having biblical support when baptism in
general wasn't something I believed in.  He simply
couldn't grasp the notion of my playing devil's
advocate against his extreme views.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Let's take another example.
> >
> > Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a
> > male chauvinist.
> >
> > And I respond, "Well, he does say women should
> > stay at home and raise the children."
> >
> > Would you assume I *believed* women should stay
> > at home and raise the children?
> >
> No.

Good.  That's the point I was trying to make.

>  But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been
> saying all along is, "Well, he does say women should
> stay home and raise the children, but that doesn't
> necessarily make him a male chauvinist."
> 
> See the difference? :)

Well, it's not what I've said, Sal, to the contrary.

And in any case, a pro-TMer who *did* say that
would be making it quite clear they *did* believe
what they were quoting.  You would know what they
believed from the context.

So you're actually reinforcing my point.

I think part of your problem is that you assume,
perhaps unconsciously, that being pro-TM
automatically means believing everything MMY says.

It doesn't.  Some pro-TMers do believe everything
MMY says.  Some believe some things he says and
not others.  Some believe some things he says,
don't believe others, and haven't a clue about
still others.

I'm in the last category, FYI.  So you need to
know the *context* of my quoting MMY to know
whether I agree, disagree, or don't have a view
either way; or in some cases I may have a view,
but it's not relevant to the context.

Barry knows I'm in the last category too, but he
simply ignores the context and makes the default
assumption that I agree with anything I quote 
MMY as saying, because he can always use that
as a putdown.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[TurquoiseB]

> > "What you are putting forth basically means
> > the end of any and all honest communication."
> 
> Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  
> What would have taken me pages summed up in one short 
> phrase.

I'm going to spend a few more words (if not pages)
on this, because I suspect a lot of folks here 
still don't get the exact mechanics of this partic-
ular dodge. Since a couple of people here use it 
often, I think it's worth explaining *how* they 
use it.

Remember what I said in recent posts about those
who have adopted the True Believer mentality being
actually *afraid* to put their own doubts about and
lack of belief in the TM dogma into words? This dodge 
is one way that they avoid having to do so.

How it works is, when someone says something that
is contrary to the TM dogma, or that challenges it,
the people who use this dodge regularly (neither 
of them TM teachers) reply using pretty much the 
exact argument that we who are TM teachers were 
taught to use in this situation. It takes the 
form, "Well, MMY says..." or "The TMO says..." or 
"Scientific experiment X says..." And whatever 
form it takes, what they say just "happens" to 
refutes the point that is contrary to the dogma, 
or the criticism.

But (and here's the brilliant part), it refutes
it in a completely spineless way. The persons using
this particular dodge never have to say what *they*
believe about the point under discussion. If someone 
comes back in response to the dodge and claims that 
they are just parroting the TM party line (which, 
of course, they are by "quoting" it), they can say, 
"Hey! *I* didn't say that. Maharishi/Hagelin/the TMO/
whoever said that."

The dodge is a way to do exactly what they've
been taught to do -- protect the TM dogma and ideas
at any cost -- without *appearing* to do so. When
challenged, they always have the "out" of claiming,
"Hey! I was just quoting someone else...what makes
you think that's what *I* believe?"

Think I'm off base? Watch, next time this dodge 
is used here and challenged, and notice that the
person who uses it almost *never* says what he or
she really believes. They'll pretend to get all
uptight about people "mistakenly" assuming that
what they said is what *they* believe, pretend to
fly into a snit over it, and then somehow in all
the furor that they've stirred up, somehow "forget"
to say what it is they really believe.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 11:19 AM, authfriend wrote:

> That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.  If
> Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it,
> and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going
> to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes,
> would you assume Barry believes the world is about
> to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes?  Or
> would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back
> up his point that MMY has lost it?

The latter, which is exactly *my* point.  Barry quotes some goofy quote 
to show the goofiness.  You guys (pro-TMers) quote some invariably 
goofy thing and then try to rationalize it, no matter how absurd it may 
be on its face. As you say, it's all in the context.

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant.
> >
> > Look, let's make it *real simple*.
> >
> > If I were to say, "George Bush says God tells him
> > what to do," would you automatically assume I
> > believed God tells George Bush what to do?
> >
> > Or would you need some *context* to determine
> > whether that's what I believed?
> 
> Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to
> make a point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as
> *evidence* or backup that what they said is true.  What
> you are saying is that people are offering MMY's quotes
> whether or not they believe them to be true, whether or
> not they back up their (the poster's) point.

Just to reiterate: No, I certainly never suggested
that when a poster quotes MMY, it's not to back up
the poster's point.  It's *always* to back up the
poster's point.

The poster's point, however, may be that MMY is
wrong or crazy or lying; or simply that he said
B rather than A.  The context in which they quote
MMY should tell you that.

And to add one final point: If you really can't
tell from the context whether the poster believes
what they've quoted MMY as saying is true, and
it's actually relevant in context, then ASK, don't
assume.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:42 AM, authfriend wrote:

> Let's take another example.
>
> Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a
> male chauvinist.
>
> And I respond, "Well, he does say women should
> stay at home and raise the children."
>
> Would you assume I *believed* women should stay
> at home and raise the children?
>
No.  But what you and the others (pro-TMers) have been saying all along 
is, "Well, he does say women should stay home and raise the children, 
but that doesn't necessarily make him a male chauvinist."

See the difference? :)


Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant.
> >
> > Look, let's make it *real simple*.
> >
> > If I were to say, "George Bush says God tells him
> > what to do," would you automatically assume I
> > believed God tells George Bush what to do?
> >
> > Or would you need some *context* to determine
> > whether that's what I believed?
> 
> Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying
> to make a point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as
> *evidence* or backup that what they said is true.  What
> you are saying is that people are offering MMY's quotes
> whether or not they believe them to be true, whether or
> not they back up their (the poster's) point.

It depends entirely on what the poster's point *is*.

We have frequent discussions here about what MMY
thinks about something or other, and people quote him
to back up their assertions as to what he thinks.
In many cases the poster's point is that what MMY
thinks is crazy, or wrong, or a lie.  They don't
quote him because they believe what he says is true,
they quote him to back up their point about what
he thinks.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.  If
Barry, for example, has said that MMY has lost it,
and then quoted MMY as saying the world is going
to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes,
would you assume Barry believes the world is about
to end if TM-Sidhas don't all go to the domes?  Or
would you assume that Barry is quoting MMY to back
up his point that MMY has lost it?

> I'd say the context in which this happens on this board
> pretty much negates that, and it's nuts to think otherwise.

Pretty much negates what?  I'm not following.
Seems to me it's more often the case on this
forum that people quote MMY when they *don't*
agree with him than when they do.

> You and other pro-TMers who use 
> MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be 
> true--or else are trying to deceive.  So which is it?

False dichotomy.  Nobody's trying to deceive.

As to whether pro-TMers believe MMY's quotes to be
true, it depends entirely on what we're using the
quotes to back up.  Please see the example I just
gave Curtis re MMY as male chauvinist.  In that case
I would be using the quote to back up my view that
MMY is a male chauvinist, not to back up a belief
that women should stay in the home and raise
children, because I don't believe that at all, and
it wasn't the issue in any case.  The issue was
*what* he has said, not whether what he has said
is *true*.  Those are two separate issues.

In other cases I might well use a MMY quote to
back up something I believed--but you'd have to
know the *context*.  What point was I making?
What was I responding to?  If someone claims that
TM requires effort, and I disagree, I might quote
MMY to the effect that TM should be effortless.
If my point is that TM is effortless, then you
can assume I'm quoting MMY because I believe what
he says is true.

It all depends on the context, Sal.  Go back to
the beginning: It's the difference between what
MMY has said, and whether what he has said is
true.

I'm making an incredibly simple point, one that
isn't the slightest bit controversial, but you're
so anxious to dump on me that you've gotten it all
tangled up in a very elaborate misunderstanding.

*That's* the kind of thing that impedes honest
communication.







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "What you are putting forth basically means
> the end of any and all honest communication."
> 
> Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
> have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.

And it would have been just as insane as what
Sal said.

It's truly perplexing that *anybody* could get
what I'm saying so completely, totally, off-
the-wall wrong.  It isn't even *controversial*.

Let's take another example.

Suppose somebody says they don't think MMY is a
male chauvinist.

And I respond, "Well, he does say women should
stay at home and raise the children."

Would you assume I *believed* women should stay
at home and raise the children?

Or would you assume that I was pointing out that
what he says indicates that he's a male
chauvinist, contrary to what the first person
said?

The context of the exchange would suggest the
latter, would it not?

In context, there should be no impediment to
honest communication in this exchange.  I'm
disagreeing with the first person about whether
MMY is a male chauvinist, and I'm citing what MMY
has said to support my disagreement.

What would impede honest communication would be
if somebody else started berating me for supporting
MMY's male chauvinism.  I didn't express an opinion
either way about whether women should stay in the
home and raise children, so there's no basis for
making such an assumption.

Barry makes similar assumptions all the time, that
if a TMer quotes MMY about anything, it must mean
the TMer believes what MMY says is true.  But that
isn't necessarily the case, as the above example
shows.

As it happens, I *don't* believe women should stay
in the home and raise children.  I don't support
MMY's male chauvinism at all.  I was quoting MMY to
the first person not to support MMY's views but to
point out that MMY is indeed a male chauvinist.

Good grief, people, get a grip!







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:00 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:

> "What you are putting forth basically means
> the end of any and all honest communication."
>
> Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
> have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.

Thanks.
>
>
Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:07 AM, authfriend wrote:

> Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant.
>
> Look, let's make it *real simple*.
>
> If I were to say, "George Bush says God tells him
> what to do," would you automatically assume I
> believed God tells George Bush what to do?
>
> Or would you need some *context* to determine
> whether that's what I believed?

Judy, you might not do this, but when people are trying to make a 
point, and they offer quotes, it is usually as *evidence* or backup 
that what they said is true.  What you are saying is that people are 
offering MMY's quotes whether or not they believe them to be true, 
whether or not they back up their (the poster's) point.  I'd say the 
context in which this happens on this board pretty much negates that, 
and it's nuts to think otherwise.  You and other pro-TMers who use 
MMY's quotes to back up what you've said either believe them to be 
true--or else are trying to deceive.  So which is it?

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> >>>
> >>> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> >>> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> >>> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
> >>
> >>> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
> >> simply cannot seem to make it.
> >>
> >> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
> >> he thinks are *lies*?
> >
> > I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
> > but that has nothing to do with the point I was
> > making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
> > the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
> > believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
> > what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
> > it, but that's beside the point.
> 
> OK...
> 
> >> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite
> >> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
> >> know what it is you're driving at.
> >
> > It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
> > make it any clearer.
> >
> > When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
> > that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
> > what he says without offering an opinion about
> > whether they believe what he says is true, or
> > (b) indicating that they believe what they're
> > quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
> > indicating that they believe what they're quoting
> > him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
> > context.
> >
> > Barry and some others here automatically assume
> > that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
> > expressing their belief that whatever they're
> > quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
> > course, isn't necessarily the case.
> >
> > If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
> > says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
> > do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
> > at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
> > believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
> > believe it, they might not believe it, they might
> > think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
> > likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
> > in many cases what they think on that issue may
> > not even be relevant to the point they're making.
> 
> Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference
> at all.  You're implying that people *may* go around routinely 
> saying things they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates 
> what Barry (and others) claim MMY said.  That's insane.

No, sorry, it's your interpretation of what I said
that's insane.  I have *no* idea how you could
possibly have come up with what you just said on
the basis of what I wrote.

What I said was that a person may quote someone
else without necessarily believing that what the
other person said is true.  It depends on the
context.

> *Nobody* in the world goes around appending "and what I
> just said I firmly believe to be true," to every statement,
> or to any of them for that matter.

Absolutely correct, and absolutely irrelevant.
We're talking (or I'm talking; apparently you
aren't) about quoting someone *else*, and
whether person doing the quoting believes what
they're quoting to be true.

> Most people say what they believe to be true at that point
> in time-- unless they are purposely trying to deceive--and
> leave it at that.

Also absolutely correct, and also absolutely irrelevant.

Look, let's make it *real simple*.

If I were to say, "George Bush says God tells him
what to do," would you automatically assume I
believed God tells George Bush what to do?

Or would you need some *context* to determine
whether that's what I believed?









  It's what most communication is based on.  What you are putting 
forth basically means 
> the end of any and all honest communication.
> 
> If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a 
conversation 
> going with anyone?
> 
> Sal
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[curtisdeltablues]

"What you are putting forth basically means
the end of any and all honest communication."

Wow, you hit that one out of the park Sal.  High five.  What would
have taken me pages summed up in one short phrase.




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> >>>
> >>> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> >>> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> >>> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
> >>
> >>> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
> >> simply cannot seem to make it.
> >>
> >> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
> >> he thinks are *lies*?
> >
> > I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
> > but that has nothing to do with the point I was
> > making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
> > the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
> > believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
> > what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
> > it, but that's beside the point.
> 
> OK...
> 
> >> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite
> >> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
> >> know what it is you're driving at.
> >
> > It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
> > make it any clearer.
> >
> > When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
> > that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
> > what he says without offering an opinion about
> > whether they believe what he says is true, or
> > (b) indicating that they believe what they're
> > quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
> > indicating that they believe what they're quoting
> > him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
> > context.
> >
> > Barry and some others here automatically assume
> > that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
> > expressing their belief that whatever they're
> > quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
> > course, isn't necessarily the case.
> >
> > If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
> > says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
> > do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
> > at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
> > believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
> > believe it, they might not believe it, they might
> > think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
> > likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
> > in many cases what they think on that issue may
> > not even be relevant to the point they're making.
> 
> Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all.  
> You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things 
> they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and 
> others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes 
> around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be true," to 
> every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say 
> what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are 
> purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what most 
> communication is based on.  What you are putting forth basically means 
> the end of any and all honest communication.
> 
> If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation 
> going with anyone?
> 
> Sal
>






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:07 AM, authfriend wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
>>> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
>>> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
>>
>>> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
>> simply cannot seem to make it.
>>
>> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
>> he thinks are *lies*?
>
> I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
> but that has nothing to do with the point I was
> making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
> the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
> believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
> what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
> it, but that's beside the point.

OK...

>> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite
>> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
>> know what it is you're driving at.
>
> It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
> make it any clearer.
>
> When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
> that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
> what he says without offering an opinion about
> whether they believe what he says is true, or
> (b) indicating that they believe what they're
> quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
> indicating that they believe what they're quoting
> him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
> context.
>
> Barry and some others here automatically assume
> that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
> expressing their belief that whatever they're
> quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
> course, isn't necessarily the case.
>
> If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
> says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
> do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
> at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
> believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
> believe it, they might not believe it, they might
> think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
> likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
> in many cases what they think on that issue may
> not even be relevant to the point they're making.

Judy, you are making distinctions with no visible difference at all.  
You're implying that people *may* go around routinely saying things 
they may or  may not believe, so that invalidates what Barry (and 
others) claim MMY said.  That's insane. *Nobody* in the world goes 
around appending "and what I just said I firmly believe to be true," to 
every statement, or to any of them for that matter. Most people say 
what they believe to be true at that point in time-- unless they are 
purposely trying to deceive--and leave it at that.  It's what most 
communication is based on.  What you are putting forth basically means 
the end of any and all honest communication.

If this is what you really believe, how to you ever get a conversation 
going with anyone?

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
> >
> > P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> > "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> > may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."
> 
> > It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
> simply cannot seem to make it.
> 
> OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things
> he thinks are *lies*?

I don't pretend to know whether he does, actually,
but that has nothing to do with the point I was
making.  "Is true" in my formulation refers to what
the person quoting MMY believes, not what MMY
believes.  It's likely that someone who believes
what MMY says is true also assumes that MMY believes
it, but that's beside the point.

> The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite 
> understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to
> know what it is you're driving at.

It's *so* obvious that I'm not quite sure how to
make it any clearer.

When a person quotes MMY (or anybody else, for
that matter), they can (a) simply be reporting
what he says without offering an opinion about
whether they believe what he says is true, or
(b) indicating that they believe what they're
quoting him as saying is true, or even (c)
indicating that they believe what they're quoting
him as saying is *not* true.  It depends on the
context.

Barry and some others here automatically assume
that when a TMer says "MMY says..." the TMer is
expressing their belief that whatever they're
quoting MMY as saying is true.  But that, of
course, isn't necessarily the case.

If it isn't clear from the context (e.g., "MMY
says X, but that's a load of crap," or "MMY says
do X, so you'd better start doing X right away"),
at the very least you'd want to *ask* whether they
believe what they're quoting is true.  They might
believe it, they might not believe it, they might
think it was likely, they might think it *wasn't*
likely, or they might have no earthly idea.  And
in many cases what they think on that issue may
not even be relevant to the point they're making.

Does that help any?






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[Sal Sunshine]

On Aug 27, 2006, at 2:29 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
> "What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
> may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true.

> It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
simply cannot seem to make it.


OK, Judy so then you think MMY goes around stating things he thinks are 
*lies*?  The distinction may be obvious, but I guess I don't quite 
understand.  You've said this now so many times I'd like to know what 
it is you're driving at.

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Becoming in Tune with One's Teacher's Thinking

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> >
> > > I wasn't there, of course, but just from your quote
> > > I wouldn't be sure he was referring to attuning
> > > yourselves to his thinking in any case, so much as
> > > that eventually you would all be in the same state
> > > of consciousness he was.
> > 
> > In my honest and long-considered opinion, 
> > all of Maharishi's students have *always* 
> > been in the same state of consciousness 
> > as he is -- normal old waking state. The
> > problems arise when one or more of the
> > students start to achieve what the teacher 
> > never has.
> 
> 

P.S.: Notice, once again, that Barry has conflated
"What MMY sez..." (or in this case, "What MMY
may have meant...") with "What MMY sez is true."

It's really a very obvious distinction, but Barry
simply cannot seem to make it.

Could that be because the former gives him no
opportunity to recycle his old MMY-is-a-fraud-
and-you-stupid-TBs-believe-him mantras?







To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/