--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
"tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Peter writes:
> What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> if someone talks about some sort of Realization
> experience?
>
> Tom
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[
--- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Peter writes:
> What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> if someone talks about some sort of Realization
> experience?
>
> T
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > >
> > > But my original point is not addressed in your rep
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But ok, so its YOU Barry who is that asshole who I think has rocks
> for brains NOT jim. :)
See, that just shows you how wrong you can be.
I have rocks for *balls*, not brains. It costs
me more because I have to buy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
"tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Peter writes:
> What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> if someone talks about some sort of Realization
> experience?
>
> Tom
Actually I think it's Bevan.
Sal
On Dec 16, 2005, at 10:29 AM, Peter wrote:
I always think that above is in operation regardless
of who says what. You have made a critique of me in
the past as coming across as an absolutest and I was
surprised I came across this way, but when I read some
o
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
>
> Peter writes:
> What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> if someone talks about some sort of Realization
> experience?
>
> Tom T opinion:
> It would app
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > But my original point is not addressed in your reply. My point
> > was not about poeple having experiences and reporting them. My
>
Peter writes:
What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
if someone talks about some sort of Realization
experience?
Tom T opinion:
It would appear that the self appointed Dogma/thought patrol has to
have everything posted in the scient
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > To tell the truth, that's why I replied a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But my original point is not addressed in your reply. My point
> was not about poeple having experiences and reporting them. My
> concern was about people not having experiences, yet still
> reporting experiences.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > To tell the truth, that's why I replied as I did to
> > > the recent poster who wants people to jump through
> > > hoops to "prove"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> > degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> > if someone talks about some s
--- braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
>
> Then thats fine. I thought he might be trying to
> make a point of
> substance. But nothing wrong with saying "It seems
> to me that
> but thats just my opinion. I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > So lets try the experiment. No gottcha games here.
> > Just list the
> > the Experience posts you have in mind, and the
> > hostile response you
> > have in min
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I ask the opposite, and inverted, question of Peter's: why not more
> > questioning of experience postings?
>
> Ask anything you want
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> To tell the truth, that's why I replied as I did to
> the recent poster who wants people to jump through
> hoops to "prove" any claim they make here. IMO, life's
> too short to deal with pissants who want "proof" of
> s
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Then thats fine. I thought he might be trying to make a point of
substance. But nothing wrong with saying "It seems to me that
but thats just my opinion. I could be mistaken."
Yahoo! Grou
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > To tell the truth, that's why I replied as I did to
> > the recent poster who wants people to jump through
> > hoops to "prove" any claim they make here. IMO, life's
> > too short to deal with pissants who want "pro
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now this is a nice post that someone can respond to,
> which I'll do
>
>
> >
> > Yes, I tink everyone goes through that process when
> > experiences are
> > discussed.
--- braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So lets try the experiment. No gottcha games here.
> Just list the
> the Experience posts you have in mind, and the
> hostile response you
> have in mind. Lets collectively look at the words
> and see whats there.
>
>
>
> > Some
> > "new" poste
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > > > Fear, plain and simple.
> > >
> > > I'd agree with fear in the sense of "fear of
> > > losing one's self (small s)." When someone
> > > writes of an experience they have had, I
> > > usually get a non-verbal "
--- braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now this is a nice post that someone can respond to,
which I'll do
>
> Yes, I tink everyone goes through that process when
> experiences are
> discussed. Though, to my memory, few have been
> discussed recently and
> none have been criticized. Thus th
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I ask the opposite, and inverted, question of Peter's: why not more
> questioning of experience postings?
Ask anything you want, any time you want. But don't
get all pissy if the person doesn't feel like replying
to y
> > > Fear, plain and simple.
> >
> > I'd agree with fear in the sense of "fear of
> > losing one's self (small s)." When someone
> > writes of an experience they have had, I
> > usually get a non-verbal "hit" on what they've
> > written that has nothing to do with the words.
> > As Vaj has ment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When someone
> writes of an experience they have had, I
> usually get a non-verbal "hit" on what they've
> written that has nothing to do with the words.
> As Vaj has mentioned with regard to "Advaitaspeak,"
> *anyone* c
--- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > What strikes me as odd in these discussions is
> the
> > > degree of host
You're right. It's just idle speculation.
--- braaahmaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> > What strikes me as odd in these discussions is
> the
> > > degree of hostility. Why do people get so
> pissed-off
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > What strikes me as odd in these discussio
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> > degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> > if someone talks about
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> > What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> > degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> > if someone talks about some sort of Realization
> > experience?
> >
> Fear, plain and simple.
If t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What strikes me as odd in these discussions is the
> degree of hostility. Why do people get so pissed-off
> if someone talks about some sort of Realization
> experience?
Could you be more specific?
Who has gotten pissed-of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > However, it is possible that the "logic" of one
> > state of
> > consciousness may not be able to evaluate the logic
> > of another. Skip
> > Alexiander used to
--- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> However, it is possible that the "logic" of one
> state of
> consciousness may not be able to evaluate the logic
> of another. Skip
> Alexiander used to make an analogy between
> enlightenment and Piaget's
> stages of development.
>
> You can *exp
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2005, at 7:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> You seem to approach Realization as some sort of
> >> intellectual exercise. You
On Dec 15, 2005, at 11:50 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- Vaj wrote: Each darshana has it's own internal logic. If knowledge is structured in consciousness then each darshana/View relating to a specific state of consciousness will be unique but appropriately descriptive of that state. It's fa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
--- Anonymousff wrote:
> > If on the otherhand, you beleive Dr. Stuphens points are wrong and
> you
> > are making universal claims about all others' experiences, then the
> > follow-up post to this on "Cultism and Fr
--- Vaj wrote:
>
> Each darshana has it's own internal logic. If knowledge is structured
> in consciousness then each darshana/View relating to a specific state
> of consciousness will be unique but appropriately descriptive of that
> state. It's fashionable, esp. among paths that are incomp
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis"
>
> > The young lady in question said it was her
> > experience that her mind was never going to figure it out. Not
Now.
> > Not ever.
>
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Dec 14, 2005, at 8:36 PM, anonymousff wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > To me, the latter is far more effective and inviting. And it
doesn't
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > And two, it is a heal
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > And two, it is a healthy thing to do in speaking about it
> [enlightenment] as if it is just another experience. Because
You don't seem t be a fellow who parctices what he preaches.
=
All valid observations and insights that you need to
temper your own experience with, not deconstruct the
validity of another's experience. You can only talk
about what you experience, not another. And certainly
don't expect social
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > You seem to approach Realization as some sort of
> > intellectual exercise. You seek conceptual consistancy
> > and coherence like it was
On Dec 15, 2005, at 7:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You seem to approach Realization as some sort of intellectual exercise. You seek conceptual consistancy and coherence like it was some sort of waking state intellectual product.
On Dec 15, 2005, at 12:53 AM, anonymousff wrote:The self-proclamation part has always struck me as odd. Linked to the absolutist interpretations of what IT IS. As if there is some insecurity. THIS has to be IT. And odd that there are strong mandates of how IT can be spoken of. And how IT cannot.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> You seem to approach Realization as some sort of
> intellectual exercise. You seek conceptual consistancy
> and coherence like it was some sort of waking state
> intellectual product.
Why the surprise? That is exactly how
You seem to approach Realization as some sort of
intellectual exercise. You seek conceptual consistancy
and coherence like it was some sort of waking state
intellectual product. You're not going to find that.
While there is comminality to realization, there is
also "difference". The "difference" is
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> And two, it is a healthy thing to do in speaking about it
[enlightenment] as if it is just another experience. Because it
is...just...another...experience.
And yet so many disagree that it is an experience (if
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 14, 2005, at 8:36 PM, anonymousff wrote:
>
> >
> > To me, the latter is far more effective and inviting. And it doesn't
> > have heavy-handedness of cultish procliamations "this is the way it
> > is, period. This in
52 matches
Mail list logo
