Re: [FairfieldLife] What is "spiritual?"
I don't know. Never heard the phrase spiritual absolutism before. Nor falling into extremes. Can sort of grok both. Well a friend did warn me about FFL. But no one's ever mentioned death threats before. Yikes! Since mid May when I joined I think I once saw a reply to Curtis. I just can't remember what his handle is. Anyway, pray to God. But tie up your camel. Both are spiritual. Even if you prefer one more than the other. Or love the cracked pot unconditionally. Just don't fill it with water and put it on dining room table. Or love the shooter unconditionally. Just don't go the movies on the same night he does. And warn your loved ones. Heck, even warn your unloved ones. And if possible, help shooter heal need to shoot. From: Vaj To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 7:25 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] What is "spiritual?" On Jul 20, 2012, at 7:57 AM, Share Long wrote: > The Great Oz has spoken! > > Now the Great Ozette will too! > > It's all spiritual. Wow. Spiritual absolutism. Is that what they mean by "falling into extremes"? > > Best mileage around (-: > > btw, is it possible to know who curtis is? A spiritual musician, folk music preservationist, performer and educator. C. was targeted by a former "enlightened" member of FFL who tried to cause harm to him by spreading and seeding lies here, and on the web about who he was, in a serious attempt to damage his work life and his mission. Numerous folks here have had similar experiences, from attempts to damage people where they work to out-and-out death threats. Two of my death threats came from "spiritual" people from the FF, IA exchange. Imagine that!
Re: [FairfieldLife] What is "spiritual?"
On Jul 20, 2012, at 7:57 AM, Share Long wrote: > The Great Oz has spoken! > > Now the Great Ozette will too! > > It's all spiritual. Wow. Spiritual absolutism. Is that what they mean by "falling into extremes"? > > Best mileage around (-: > > btw, is it possible to know who curtis is? A spiritual musician, folk music preservationist, performer and educator. C. was targeted by a former "enlightened" member of FFL who tried to cause harm to him by spreading and seeding lies here, and on the web about who he was, in a serious attempt to damage his work life and his mission. Numerous folks here have had similar experiences, from attempts to damage people where they work to out-and-out death threats. Two of my death threats came from "spiritual" people from the FF, IA exchange. Imagine that!
Re: [FairfieldLife] What is "spiritual?"
The Great Oz has spoken! Now the Great Ozette will too! It's all spiritual. Best mileage around (-: btw, is it possible to know who curtis is? From: turquoiseb To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 2:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] What is "spiritual?" Epithets have been hurled recently claiming that some on this forum are "not spiritual." This is interesting to me, because I often find those so accused to be among the most "spiritual" here. This leads me to believe that I have different definitions of what it means to be "spiritual" or what a "spiritual" topic is than many others. For me, playing "dueling authorities," and re-debating *purely theoretical* aspects of spiritual teaching is not "spiritual." Your "authority" says X, mine says Y. Big whoop. :-) If I were to name some of the posters whom I feel are among the "most spiritual" here, it would be the ones 1) who tend to have something *original* to say, some insights or experiences that spring from their own lives, 2) who aren't trying to "sell" these insights or exper- iences as some kind of Truth, or as something that others should believe or strive for, and 3) who seem to have a life that is occasionally filled with the joy of living. Think Marek. I tend to consider him among the "most spiritual" posters here on FFL, even though he rarely gets into dogma or the beliefs that others parrot and endlessly debate. His posts tend to be about the joys of surfing, or occasionally about the realities of being a Public Defender in a Prison Nation. They're "here and now," about his life, and the lessons he gains from just living it, and trying to live it well. Curtis, of course, falls into this category. I think that any of his posts about what it's like to busk music on the streets for a living, or cook a great meal, are more "spiritual" than any theoretical discussion about God or enlightenment or siddhis. Merudanda is almost always here and now, and Xeno (although he occasionally gets deeper into the theoretical than I enjoy) is also almost always *original*, not relying on The Words Of Others. I miss Sal and Ruth, because they were REAL, and came up with original thought. I think Rick's posts are consistently "spiritual," and in the best possible way. He just relates what he's been up to lately with his BATGAP project, or passes along tidbits of information he thinks might be of interest to others. And there are many others (whose names escape me right now) who I consider "spiritual" on this forum. Please don't feel left out if I didn't name you explicitly. Hmm. It strikes me that that last quality -- not feeling left out if someone doesn't notice and comment on their posts, and instead just posting, without wanting or needing a reply or an argument or some kind of "recognition" for what you said -- is pretty much my definition of "spiritual." Your mileage may vary.
[FairfieldLife] What is "spiritual?"
Epithets have been hurled recently claiming that some on this forum are "not spiritual." This is interesting to me, because I often find those so accused to be among the most "spiritual" here. This leads me to believe that I have different definitions of what it means to be "spiritual" or what a "spiritual" topic is than many others. For me, playing "dueling authorities," and re-debating *purely theoretical* aspects of spiritual teaching is not "spiritual." Your "authority" says X, mine says Y. Big whoop. :-) If I were to name some of the posters whom I feel are among the "most spiritual" here, it would be the ones 1) who tend to have something *original* to say, some insights or experiences that spring from their own lives, 2) who aren't trying to "sell" these insights or exper- iences as some kind of Truth, or as something that others should believe or strive for, and 3) who seem to have a life that is occasionally filled with the joy of living. Think Marek. I tend to consider him among the "most spiritual" posters here on FFL, even though he rarely gets into dogma or the beliefs that others parrot and endlessly debate. His posts tend to be about the joys of surfing, or occasionally about the realities of being a Public Defender in a Prison Nation. They're "here and now," about his life, and the lessons he gains from just living it, and trying to live it well. Curtis, of course, falls into this category. I think that any of his posts about what it's like to busk music on the streets for a living, or cook a great meal, are more "spiritual" than any theoretical discussion about God or enlightenment or siddhis. Merudanda is almost always here and now, and Xeno (although he occasionally gets deeper into the theoretical than I enjoy) is also almost always *original*, not relying on The Words Of Others. I miss Sal and Ruth, because they were REAL, and came up with original thought. I think Rick's posts are consistently "spiritual," and in the best possible way. He just relates what he's been up to lately with his BATGAP project, or passes along tidbits of information he thinks might be of interest to others. And there are many others (whose names escape me right now) who I consider "spiritual" on this forum. Please don't feel left out if I didn't name you explicitly. Hmm. It strikes me that that last quality -- not feeling left out if someone doesn't notice and comment on their posts, and instead just posting, without wanting or needing a reply or an argument or some kind of "recognition" for what you said -- is pretty much my definition of "spiritual." Your mileage may vary.
