[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Okay, it's Sunday morning now. Maybe we can get go get some bacon and eggs! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Excellent, Steve...simply EXCELLENT!  But, I've seen you do better, so keep trying - it is Saturday night, after all.  Perhaps you can go find Ann on the dance floor and ask her to take you for a spin.   From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 8:11 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do? Â
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
You may be confusing me with Buzz Lightyear. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Yes, Judy's the *best* Steve - but do keep trying, if at first to infinity, you don't succeed, try, try, again.  From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 10:01 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Non sequitur. Standing in opposition and putting down are two different things. I will let you win your battles on technical points. It is what brings you satisfaction, and wins you respect from others. You are FFL's #1 poster, so I'm glad there is something to show for the time you put in here.  Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. Aw, gee, Steve, you forgot already. I beat you to the punch on declining to argue with your idiotic attempt at a putdown. You're just too damned good Judy.Â
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do? Keep up the good work, Steve. Judy needs a good smack-down once in a while and you're just the guy to do it. http://youtu.be/jGIAJ3IHML0 (Guffaw), where do you FIND these things?!
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Took you longer than I expected, but not bad. BTW, I do have picture of me with the Three Stooges when I was 5 or 6, when they were at the St. Louis Arena. One with the Lone Ranger too, I believe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do? Keep up the good work, Steve. Judy needs a good smack-down once in a while and you're just the guy to do it. http://youtu.be/jGIAJ3IHML0
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
The Stooges!! I tracked down and bought, both The Three Stooges Meet Hercules, and The Three Stooges In Outer Space - just to cover the entire spectrum of human existence. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: Took you longer than I expected, but not bad. BTW, I do have picture of me with the Three Stooges when I was 5 or 6, when they were at the St. Louis Arena. One with the Lone Ranger too, I believe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do? Keep up the good work, Steve. Judy needs a good smack-down once in a while and you're just the guy to do it. http://youtu.be/jGIAJ3IHML0
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
For some reason I feel like laughing this morning, and you are adding fuel to the fire. Thanks. (-: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: The Stooges!! I tracked down and bought, both The Three Stooges Meet Hercules, and The Three Stooges In Outer Space - just to cover the entire spectrum of human existence. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: Took you longer than I expected, but not bad. BTW, I do have picture of me with the Three Stooges when I was 5 or 6, when they were at the St. Louis Arena. One with the Lone Ranger too, I believe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do? Keep up the good work, Steve. Judy needs a good smack-down once in a while and you're just the guy to do it. http://youtu.be/jGIAJ3IHML0
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!)
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do?
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Non sequitur. Standing in opposition and putting down are two different things. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. Aw, gee, Steve, you forgot already. I beat you to the punch on declining to argue with your idiotic attempt at a putdown. How'd I do?
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Non sequitur. Standing in opposition and putting down are two different things. I will let you win your battles on technical points. It is what brings you satisfaction, and wins you respect from others. You are FFL's #1 poster, so I'm glad there is something to show for the time you put in here. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. Aw, gee, Steve, you forgot already. I beat you to the punch on declining to argue with your idiotic attempt at a putdown. You're just too damned good Judy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Excellent, Steve...simply EXCELLENT! But, I've seen you do better, so keep trying - it is Saturday night, after all. Perhaps you can go find Ann on the dance floor and ask her to take you for a spin. From: seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 8:11 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Yes, Judy's the *best* Steve - but do keep trying, if at first to infinity, you don't succeed, try, try, again. From: seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 10:01 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Non sequitur. Standing in opposition and putting down are two different things. I will let you win your battles on technical points. It is what brings you satisfaction, and wins you respect from others. You are FFL's #1 poster, so I'm glad there is something to show for the time you put in here. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. Aw, gee, Steve, you forgot already. I beat you to the punch on declining to argue with your idiotic attempt at a putdown. You're just too damned good Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: (snip) I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. For the record, Steve is one of the most aggressive put-downers (down-putters?) on FFL. (And no, not just of me by any means!) I guess I should say thank you. To stand in opposition to you, on most things, would not bother me in the least. Would probably put me in the normal range on most scales. Oooopsie, did I forget the article? P.S. I am sorry I declined to participate in one of your never ending, Judy WINS, arguments a couple days ago. Maybe I can make it up to you somehow. How'd I do? Keep up the good work, Steve. Judy needs a good smack-down once in a while and you're just the guy to do it. http://youtu.be/jGIAJ3IHML0
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Thanks Steve - one can never be angry at you for a long time and I only just got a little upset. I was attending an interview in San Diego yesterday and would have to haul my ass back there again - it's back to Torrey Pines beach and that Trader Joe's in Rancho Bernardo. I was expecting to find a contract here in the San Francisco area considering the majority of the jobs are here - well tough luck losers, looks like the winner again is SoCal that will be benefiting from all my yogic talents, powers and love :-) On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:15 PM, seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.comwrote: ** Ok Ravi. Good to know. Thank you for your thorough analysis. Wishing you all the best - sincerely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Steve, No this doesn't cut it yet - you don't have any data to conclude it's mean-spirited and intolerant. All you can say was that my post was violative and confrontational, as you can see from the various responses there is no consensus on if my post was offensive, abusive, mean-spirited, intolerant, playful and/or humorous. But if you would ask me it was designed to offend and provoke Share and others like you to react wildly and I absolutely succeeded. Those who know me intimately will vouch for my good-spiritedness, tolerance, playfulness, humor but also my confrontational, violative side to provoke others. What you need is a timeout and some retrospection contemplation to acknowledge that you really fucked up in your response. That you presently lack any tools to effectively consider the context and rationally, dispassionately, meaningfully assemble all the data in the content of the post and elsewhere to provide any meaningful insights. All you came up with some crude, offensive, abusive, over the top, slanderous response. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:11 AM, seventhray27 wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Probably over the line Steve? Â What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Â Thanks for withdrawing it. Â Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. Â His use of the word fucking? Â Okay, I'll settle for mean spirited and intolerant.That was the way I perceived his comments below, and I replied in a strong fashion, drawing a comparison I should not have made. But you are right. It is often not a friendly place here, and Ravi dishes his strong opinons that I often perceive to be quite biased. Others see it differently. But when I see what I perceive to be bullying, perhaps the broadest sense of the word, I will address it in what I feel to be an appropiate way. From: seventhray27 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Dear Ravi, Please pardon my interruption with one of my last post until late tonight, to sincerely congratulate you on your position Torrey Pines/San Diego! Whooo Hooo! I am so happy for you! I wish you great success and everything that comes with that! We are all lucky to have you on FFL. A real man. A real Krishna. Kali's pimp at best! I will celebrate this weekend knowing you will be in warm weather and near good people you met before you left there, will be there again! I can't wait for the sunsets posted of Torrey Pines, a special place in this world.. :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Thanks Steve - one can never be angry at you for a long time and I only just got a little upset. I was attending an interview in San Diego yesterday and would have to haul my ass back there again - it's back to Torrey Pines beach and that Trader Joe's in Rancho Bernardo. I was expecting to find a contract here in the San Francisco area considering the majority of the jobs are here - well tough luck losers, looks like the winner again is SoCal that will be benefiting from all my yogic talents, powers and love :-) On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:15 PM, seventhray27 steve.sundur@...wrote: ** Ok Ravi. Good to know. Thank you for your thorough analysis. Wishing you all the best - sincerely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Steve, No this doesn't cut it yet - you don't have any data to conclude it's mean-spirited and intolerant. All you can say was that my post was violative and confrontational, as you can see from the various responses there is no consensus on if my post was offensive, abusive, mean-spirited, intolerant, playful and/or humorous. But if you would ask me it was designed to offend and provoke Share and others like you to react wildly and I absolutely succeeded. Those who know me intimately will vouch for my good-spiritedness, tolerance, playfulness, humor but also my confrontational, violative side to provoke others. What you need is a timeout and some retrospection contemplation to acknowledge that you really fucked up in your response. That you presently lack any tools to effectively consider the context and rationally, dispassionately, meaningfully assemble all the data in the content of the post and elsewhere to provide any meaningful insights. All you came up with some crude, offensive, abusive, over the top, slanderous response. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:11 AM, seventhray27 wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Probably over the line Steve? Ãâ What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Ãâ Thanks for withdrawing it. Ãâ Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. Ãâ His use of the word fucking? Ãâ Okay, I'll settle for mean spirited and intolerant.That was the way I perceived his comments below, and I replied in a strong fashion, drawing a comparison I should not have made. But you are right. It is often not a friendly place here, and Ravi dishes his strong opinons that I often perceive to be quite biased. Others see it differently. But when I see what I perceive to be bullying, perhaps the broadest sense of the word, I will address it in what I feel to be an appropiate way. From: seventhray27 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Ãâ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Thank you dear - love :-). Yeah gotta update those Sunset pictures - those Sunsets on the beach, next best thing to sex..LOL On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:05 PM, obbajeeba no_re...@yahoogroups.comwrote: ** Dear Ravi, Please pardon my interruption with one of my last post until late tonight, to sincerely congratulate you on your position Torrey Pines/San Diego! Whooo Hooo! I am so happy for you! I wish you great success and everything that comes with that! We are all lucky to have you on FFL. A real man. A real Krishna. Kali's pimp at best! I will celebrate this weekend knowing you will be in warm weather and near good people you met before you left there, will be there again! I can't wait for the sunsets posted of Torrey Pines, a special place in this world.. :) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Thanks Steve - one can never be angry at you for a long time and I only just got a little upset. I was attending an interview in San Diego yesterday and would have to haul my ass back there again - it's back to Torrey Pines beach and that Trader Joe's in Rancho Bernardo. I was expecting to find a contract here in the San Francisco area considering the majority of the jobs are here - well tough luck losers, looks like the winner again is SoCal that will be benefiting from all my yogic talents, powers and love :-) On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:15 PM, seventhray27 wrote: ** Ok Ravi. Good to know. Thank you for your thorough analysis. Wishing you all the best - sincerely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Steve, No this doesn't cut it yet - you don't have any data to conclude it's mean-spirited and intolerant. All you can say was that my post was violative and confrontational, as you can see from the various responses there is no consensus on if my post was offensive, abusive, mean-spirited, intolerant, playful and/or humorous. But if you would ask me it was designed to offend and provoke Share and others like you to react wildly and I absolutely succeeded. Those who know me intimately will vouch for my good-spiritedness, tolerance, playfulness, humor but also my confrontational, violative side to provoke others. What you need is a timeout and some retrospection contemplation to acknowledge that you really fucked up in your response. That you presently lack any tools to effectively consider the context and rationally, dispassionately, meaningfully assemble all the data in the content of the post and elsewhere to provide any meaningful insights. All you came up with some crude, offensive, abusive, over the top, slanderous response. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:11 AM, seventhray27 wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Probably over the line Steve? Â What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Â Thanks for withdrawing it. Â Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. Â His use of the word fucking? Â Okay, I'll settle for mean spirited and intolerant.That was the way I perceived his comments below, and I replied in a strong fashion, drawing a comparison I should not have made. But you are right. It is often not a friendly place here, and Ravi dishes his strong opinons that I often perceive to be quite biased. Others see it differently. But when I see what I perceive to be bullying, perhaps the broadest sense of the word, I will address it in what I feel to be an appropiate way. From: seventhray27 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. Steve, I also liked that very nice description after the not so nice post of Alex to me, you know the flipper video you posted. This put a smile on my face. It was just the right thing for me to see at the time.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
My pleasure Steve! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: Dammit Jim, I have smiled this wide in a long time! Thanks --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ no_reply@ wrote: Yeah, I agree - Steve is a stand up guy. I think there is a reason they call the US Midwest, the Heartland. The coasts are all about edge and growth, but would not be so if the center was not all about harmony and love, supporting us fruits and nuts. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. Thank you for those kind words. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Xeno, yes, but I just had to share the nothing that happened (-: Anyway, thank you for beautiful snow shoe crop circles photos. Never heard of such before. Thank you too for story of unexpected release between the two diagnoses. I like enlightenment that can blown out of the water. As for chakra rot over the age of 50, I heard it was over the age of 70 (-: From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:40 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: EGYRUTOLTSGFPLYF XT, I just popped into BC (-: sfl I would congratulate you, except if this is true, nothing happened. From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: That's the wonderful thing about it all: we don't have to do a dang thing to keep it up. Life Being Totality, Whatever You Want To Call It is keeping Itself up All by Itself. What say you to that Mr. Taxi? lifE beinG totalitY, whateveR yoU wanT tO calL iT iS keepinG itselF uP alL bY itselF. From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:12 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly. Really nice. Keep it up (metaphorically speaking).
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Thanks Shokacharya. The good feeling is mutual. I always enjoy your contributions here. We don't really get those first accounts about India and elsewhere from anyone else. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. snip I have to join the chorus here, even if belated. Steve is simply a nice guy, I never felt any kind of aggressions or put-downs from him. Steve, I also liked that very nice description after the not so nice post of Alex to me, you know the flipper video you posted. This put a smile on my face. It was just the right thing for me to see at the time.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Dredge up the past if need be. But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Probably over the line Steve? Â What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Â Thanks for withdrawing it. Â Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. Â His use of the word fucking? Â Okay, I'll settle for mean spirited and intolerant.That was the way I perceived his comments below, and I replied in a strong fashion, drawing a comparison I should not have made. But you are right. It is often not a friendly place here, and Ravi dishes his strong opinons that I often perceive to be quite biased. Others see it differently. But when I see what I perceive to be bullying, perhaps the broadest sense of the word, I will address it in what I feel to be an appropiate way. From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Dredge up the past if need be. But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:  I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:  Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Ravi, given the interconnectedness of all life, I'm guessing that whoever and whereever she is, your true love can feel the energy and vibration of these kinds of expressions of yours. Are they drawing her to you? Would any of the 3 signs below entice her to even knock on your door? So, why don't you choose which one you think is better. From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Dredge up the past if need be. But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Right. Like you're so objective. But what is very funny is your accusing me of not having the most active sense of humour. One, because I do and I express it often here. And two, because you don't. IMO. From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Dredge up the past if need be. But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. Looks to me like fairly standard Ravi. Also, it seems his post to you before that one (it's below too) was a lot milder, and that your response to that one was in your patented passive-aggressive mode (hand in hand smiley smile) instead of being straightforward. So he came back with the post you claim was over the top in an effort to get what he was saying to sink in, to get an honest reaction from you. And your reaction to that? You attack *me*. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Alleged wrong doings?? You mean, like Steve's comparison of Ravi to a suspected murderer because Ravi criticized you? Like Steve telling Ravi he needed a real woman? Like your accusation that obba and Ann and Emily and I were cowardly and despicable for allegedly ganging up on you? Exactly where did you see me making anything comparable to those allegations? Ravi wrote the post you're so angry about. But right, focus on me and my alleged wrongdoings. Dredge up the past if need be. Let's see, I believe it was Steve who tried to dredge up the past, was it not? And I who refused to play that game? And you who has dredged up the past with your absurd allegations about having been ganged up on? But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. As it happens, Share, I *agree* with Ravi's opinion of both you and Steve. Steve is mind-bogglingly undiscerning; and you have walled yourself up in a fortress of denial and platitudes and posturing and evasion and dishonesty, buttressed by hostility. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. (Friends is plural, not singular possessive.) Yes, Ravi and I spoke frankly to each other. Ravi spoke frankly to you. But you have not responded in kind. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:  Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, because that would require a vulnerability not present in her. From: Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 7:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Dredge up the past if need be. But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. How recently? I could find no evidence of this going back to the beginning of February Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. And appropriately so, IMHO, whatever the case may have been. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?ÃÂ Right.ÃÂ I thought not.ÃÂ Even though it was obviously way over the top.ÃÂ And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.ÃÂ But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.ÃÂ Dredge up the past if need be.ÃÂ But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.ÃÂ So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.ÃÂ Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ÃÂ I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ÃÂ Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.ÃÂ Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.ÃÂ The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Right. Like you're so objective. But what is very funny is your accusing me of not having the most active sense of humour. One, because I do and I express it often here. And two, because you don't. IMO. Let's just say there is no consensus here on either count. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?ÃÂ Right.ÃÂ I thought not.ÃÂ Even though it was obviously way over the top.ÃÂ And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.ÃÂ But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.ÃÂ Dredge up the past if need be.ÃÂ But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.ÃÂ So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.ÃÂ Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ÃÂ I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ÃÂ Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.ÃÂ Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.ÃÂ The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Dear Share, you forgot the H. Love and light, Emily From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Right. Like you're so objective. But what is very funny is your accusing me of not having the most active sense of humour. One, because I do and I express it often here. And two, because you don't. IMO. Let's just say there is no consensus here on either count. From: Ann To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below? Right. I thought not. Even though it was obviously way over the top. And it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi. But right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings. Dredge up the past if need be. But definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction. So much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other. Each to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote:  Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThink of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Right. Like you're so objective. But what is very funny is your accusing me of not having the most active sense of humour. One, because I do and I express it often here. And two, because you don't. IMO. It's fine, I can live you with not thinking I'm funny as long as you realize how cool I am. From: Ann awoelflebater@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThink of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Dear Share, you forgot the H.  Love and light, Emily Crickey Em, glad you're back. This has was a tiny stroke of brilliance (and funny too.) From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Right. Like you're so objective. But what is very funny is your accusing me of not having the most active sense of humour. One, because I do and I express it often here. And two, because you don't. IMO. Let's just say there is no consensus here on either count. From: Ann To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] à--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?ÃâàRight.ÃâàI thought not.ÃâàEven though it was obviously way over the top.ÃâàAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.ÃâàBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.ÃâàDredge up the past if need be.ÃâàBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.ÃâàSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.ÃâàEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃâàNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ÃâàI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃâàThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ÃâàDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.ÃâàWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.ÃâàThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃâàThink of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. She appears to be suggesting that you are hypocritical for not having said anything to Steve about his lacking intelligence or jumping on his white horse when he allegedly posted in support of you. No, it doesn't make any sense.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, because that would require a vulnerability not present in her. Â Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, because that would require a vulnerability not present in her. Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. If that invulnerability leaves them unable to dance or play *with* people, it would seem to be a pretty serious disadvantage. I'd suggest that there may be a kind of core invulnerability that comes from spiritual development, but that when it's authentic, its effect is to make it possible to be *more* vulnerable in one's interpersonal interactions. One isn't afraid to be vulnerable to another person, because that core cannot be shaken. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
FWIW, Xeno, in two posts today, we have examples of what I would characterize as faux vulnerability-- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/335956 --and faux invulnerability: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/335974 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, because that would require a vulnerability not present in her. Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. If that invulnerability leaves them unable to dance or play *with* people, it would seem to be a pretty serious disadvantage. I'd suggest that there may be a kind of core invulnerability that comes from spiritual development, but that when it's authentic, its effect is to make it possible to be *more* vulnerable in one's interpersonal interactions. One isn't afraid to be vulnerable to another person, because that core cannot be shaken. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, because that would require a vulnerability not present in her. Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. If that invulnerability leaves them unable to dance or play *with* people, it would seem to be a pretty serious disadvantage. I'd suggest that there may be a kind of core invulnerability that comes from spiritual development, but that when it's authentic, its effect is to make it possible to be *more* vulnerable in one's interpersonal interactions. One isn't afraid to be vulnerable to another person, because that core cannot be shaken. That would be a good way to describe it, because fear diminishes. A different kind of intimacy arises, not based on trading handicaps. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Judy, I like this a lot, thank you. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:07 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, because that would require a vulnerability not present in her. Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. If that invulnerability leaves them unable to dance or play *with* people, it would seem to be a pretty serious disadvantage. I'd suggest that there may be a kind of core invulnerability that comes from spiritual development, but that when it's authentic, its effect is to make it possible to be *more* vulnerable in one's interpersonal interactions. One isn't afraid to be vulnerable to another person, because that core cannot be shaken. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: schnipp Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Sounds like you've surrendered to God :) Gotta go, have a good day. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:55 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: I'd suggest that there may be a kind of core invulnerability that comes from spiritual development, but that when it's authentic, its effect is to make it possible to be *more* vulnerable in one's interpersonal interactions. One isn't afraid to be vulnerable to another person, because that core cannot be shaken. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: That would be a good way to describe it, because fear diminishes. A different kind of intimacy arises, not based on trading handicaps. Yep - no more zero sum game, based on artificial boundaries - the board just continues to expand, plenty for everyone.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Sounds like you've surrendered to God :) Â Gotta go, have a good day. Â Damn, I hope so! otherwise, I am in deep sh*t!! :-) From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 10:55 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: schnipp Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly. Really nice. Keep it up (metaphorically speaking).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
That's the wonderful thing about it all: we don't have to do a dang thing to keep it up. Life Being Totality, Whatever You Want To Call It is keeping Itself up All by Itself. What say you to that Mr. Taxi? From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:12 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly. Really nice. Keep it up (metaphorically speaking).
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: That's the wonderful thing about it all: we don't have to do a dang thing to keep it up. Life Being Totality, Whatever You Want To Call It is keeping Itself up All by Itself. What say you to that Mr. Taxi? lifE beinG totalitY, whateveR yoU wanT tO calL iT iS keepinG itselF uP alL bY itselF. From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:12 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly. Really nice. Keep it up (metaphorically speaking).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
EGYRUTOLTSGFPLYF XT, I just popped into BC (-: sfl From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: That's the wonderful thing about it all: we don't have to do a dang thing to keep it up. Life Being Totality, Whatever You Want To Call It is keeping Itself up All by Itself. What say you to that Mr. Taxi? lifE beinG totalitY, whateveR yoU wanT tO calL iT iS keepinG itselF uP alL bY itselF. From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:12 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly. Really nice. Keep it up (metaphorically speaking).
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: EGYRUTOLTSGFPLYF XT, I just popped into BC (-: sfl I would congratulate you, except if this is true, nothing happened. From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: That's the wonderful thing about it all:ÃÂ we don't have to do a dang thing to keep it up.ÃÂ Life Being Totality, Whatever You Want To Call It is keeping Itself up All by Itself.ÃÂ What say you to that Mr. Taxi? lifE beinG totalitY, whateveR yoU wanT tO calL iT iS keepinG itselF uP alL bY itselF. From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:12 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a sort of psychological invulnerability. I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their direction. I do not experience myself as either having a personality, an individual nature, or not. My personality is here, and my infinity is here too. My personality changes according to how infused with infinity it is. The more it is integrated with infinity, or Being, from inside, or out, the future results of anything I express become clearer to me, like knowing the wake of the boat, even before it begins to move. There is a constant interplay between my personality and my infinite nature, how the infinite nature expresses itself through the personality, and the constant push of the personality to express the infinite. On the foundation of infinity, the personality endlessly shifts and learns and refines and expresses itself - infinity in a point. The values of the personality then track the progress of this process of becoming completely unbounded and infinite, changing and refining accordingly. Really nice. Keep it up (metaphorically speaking).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Steve, No this doesn't cut it yet - you don't have any data to conclude it's mean-spirited and intolerant. All you can say was that my post was violative and confrontational, as you can see from the various responses there is no consensus on if my post was offensive, abusive, mean-spirited, intolerant, playful and/or humorous. But if you would ask me it was designed to offend and provoke Share and others like you to react wildly and I absolutely succeeded. Those who know me intimately will vouch for my good-spiritedness, tolerance, playfulness, humor but also my confrontational, violative side to provoke others. What you need is a timeout and some retrospection contemplation to acknowledge that you really fucked up in your response. That you presently lack any tools to effectively consider the context and rationally, dispassionately, meaningfully assemble all the data in the content of the post and elsewhere to provide any meaningful insights. All you came up with some crude, offensive, abusive, over the top, slanderous response. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:11 AM, seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.comwrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Probably over the line Steve? Â What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Â Thanks for withdrawing it. Â Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. Â His use of the word fucking? Â Okay, I'll settle for mean spirited and intolerant.That was the way I perceived his comments below, and I replied in a strong fashion, drawing a comparison I should not have made. But you are right. It is often not a friendly place here, and Ravi dishes his strong opinons that I often perceive to be quite biased. Others see it differently. But when I see what I perceive to be bullying, perhaps the broadest sense of the word, I will address it in what I feel to be an appropiate way. From: seventhray27 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Â --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Ravi, given the interconnectedness of all life, I'm guessing that whoever and whereever she is, your true love can feel the energy and vibration of these kinds of expressions of yours. Are they drawing her to you? Would any of the 3 signs below entice her to even knock on your door? So, why don't you choose which one you think is better. All 3 dear Share - it would be awesome for her to be vulnerable, authentic and free of delusional fantasies. But you have to realize I don't have any instruments that immediately detect this and I have every time in the past fallen in love before my intellectual process kicked in. Perhaps future may be different but I haven't gotten over the incredibly complex, exhausting, intense last one so it's not like I'm on prowl. So nothing is possible without the grace of the existence aligning with my desire. My behavior with a woman whom I would love is completely different - so your question is pointless. I have talked of my confrontations in my post to Steve - it's not like I am desperate, acting out of some pathological need to violate, confront someone - it often arises from watching people like you. Many times totally spontaneous, completely bypassing my intellect - it's not something I artificially construct, though I practice experimenting, visualizing and exploring all kinds of situations and responses - much like an actor. Anyway clever change of topic - my main post was of your use of endless platitudes as your primary mode of communication and inauthentic exchanges of feel good pleasantries - it arouses a complex set of emotions including aggravation, hilarity among others. Of course you have cleverly avoided all that. You show a complete lack of integrity by supporting Steve's slanderous allegations and doubling down by some sort of weird moral posturing and condemnation of some fictional ganging up on FFL. So let's revert to the main topic if you are interested - in this case your mention of astral, celestial planes - which I referred to as platitudes and delusional beliefs and inauthentic response to my challenge. -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
The first thing I thought of, when you wrote of possible signs for your door, Ravi, was a doormat I saw for sale, a couple of years ago, at Bed, Bath and Beyond, reading, I Live Next To Stupid, with two versions, an arrow pointing left, or right. The kinda stuff I see and almost explode laughing, and then walk away still chuckling, and feeling a little guilty about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: ** Ravi, given the interconnectedness of all life, I'm guessing that whoever and whereever she is, your true love can feel the energy and vibration of these kinds of expressions of yours. Are they drawing her to you? Would any of the 3 signs below entice her to even knock on your door? So, why don't you choose which one you think is better. All 3 dear Share - it would be awesome for her to be vulnerable, authentic and free of delusional fantasies. But you have to realize I don't have any instruments that immediately detect this and I have every time in the past fallen in love before my intellectual process kicked in. Perhaps future may be different but I haven't gotten over the incredibly complex, exhausting, intense last one so it's not like I'm on prowl. So nothing is possible without the grace of the existence aligning with my desire. My behavior with a woman whom I would love is completely different - so your question is pointless. I have talked of my confrontations in my post to Steve - it's not like I am desperate, acting out of some pathological need to violate, confront someone - it often arises from watching people like you. Many times totally spontaneous, completely bypassing my intellect - it's not something I artificially construct, though I practice experimenting, visualizing and exploring all kinds of situations and responses - much like an actor. Anyway clever change of topic - my main post was of your use of endless platitudes as your primary mode of communication and inauthentic exchanges of feel good pleasantries - it arouses a complex set of emotions including aggravation, hilarity among others. Of course you have cleverly avoided all that. You show a complete lack of integrity by supporting Steve's slanderous allegations and doubling down by some sort of weird moral posturing and condemnation of some fictional ganging up on FFL. So let's revert to the main topic if you are interested - in this case your mention of astral, celestial planes - which I referred to as platitudes and delusional beliefs and inauthentic response to my challenge. -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. Thank you for those kind words. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThink of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Yeah, I agree - Steve is a stand up guy. I think there is a reason they call the US Midwest, the Heartland. The coasts are all about edge and growth, but would not be so if the center was not all about harmony and love, supporting us fruits and nuts. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. Thank you for those kind words. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] ÃÂ
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Ok Ravi. Good to know. Thank you for your thorough analysis. Wishing you all the best - sincerely. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Steve, No this doesn't cut it yet - you don't have any data to conclude it's mean-spirited and intolerant. All you can say was that my post was violative and confrontational, as you can see from the various responses there is no consensus on if my post was offensive, abusive, mean-spirited, intolerant, playful and/or humorous. But if you would ask me it was designed to offend and provoke Share and others like you to react wildly and I absolutely succeeded. Those who know me intimately will vouch for my good-spiritedness, tolerance, playfulness, humor but also my confrontational, violative side to provoke others. What you need is a timeout and some retrospection contemplation to acknowledge that you really fucked up in your response. That you presently lack any tools to effectively consider the context and rationally, dispassionately, meaningfully assemble all the data in the content of the post and elsewhere to provide any meaningful insights. All you came up with some crude, offensive, abusive, over the top, slanderous response. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:11 AM, seventhray27 steve.sundur@...wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Probably over the line Steve? Ã What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Ã Thanks for withdrawing it. Ã Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. Ã His use of the word fucking? Ã Okay, I'll settle for mean spirited and intolerant.That was the way I perceived his comments below, and I replied in a strong fashion, drawing a comparison I should not have made. But you are right. It is often not a friendly place here, and Ravi dishes his strong opinons that I often perceive to be quite biased. Others see it differently. But when I see what I perceive to be bullying, perhaps the broadest sense of the word, I will address it in what I feel to be an appropiate way. From: seventhray27 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Ã --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Dammit Jim, I have smiled this wide in a long time! Thanks --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Yeah, I agree - Steve is a stand up guy. I think there is a reason they call the US Midwest, the Heartland. The coasts are all about edge and growth, but would not be so if the center was not all about harmony and love, supporting us fruits and nuts. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. Thank you for those kind words. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms.àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Yeah, I agree - Steve is a stand up guy. I think there is a reason they call the US Midwest, the Heartland. The coasts are all about edge and growth, but would not be so if the center was not all about harmony and love, supporting us fruits and nuts. Speak for yourself you quack. I seem to be of the avian variety, I think Barry called me a loon. Come to think of it, a quack like you is also a bird. I knew birds of a feather flocked... and all of that, but now it becomes clearer. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Steve has also recently been a generous supporter of yours. Of course in that case there was no mention of knights on white horses, lack of intelligence, etc. I like Steve, and have always liked him. He is generous and one of the more humble of the contributors here. I don't always agree with him but I admire the part of him that can laugh at himself, admit error and apologize. As to being a generous supporter of mine I am not sure what you are speaking about but I have always found him to carry an intention to be fair and he comes across as good natured. Thank you for those kind words. I am not sure what you mean by your second sentence. From: Ann awoelflebater@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:02 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: So Judy, any criticisms for Ravi's over the top post below?àRight.àI thought not.àEven though it was obviously way over the top.àAnd it is the one that prompted Steve to respond to Ravi.àBut right, focus on Steve and me and our alleged wrong doings.àDredge up the past if need be.àBut definitely ignore Ravi's extreme over reaction.àSo much for friend's being able to speak frankly with each other.àEach to our own opinion on Ravi's post. I found it rather humorous because it was typical of his style and the playfulness in it felt less than 'over the top' to me. But I have found that you don't have the most active sense of humour, especially when something is directed at you. You like to 'play' but only when it deflects or is a way for you to skirt around things. Still, you do have your supporter in Steve so that is nice for you. He is very staunch. Judy to Ravi in Mission Accomplished thread: Good enough, Ravi, thanks. We should all be able to speak frankly to those we care about. From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àNot clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àI shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] àThe celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: àDoc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness.àWant to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Hmmm, no, they are mistaken. Sorry. :-) In my experience, they are both accessed the same way, and are occurring in the same frequency range. Because of the distinguishing characteristics of the Celestial worlds, I personally would not refer to them as the upper astral, but in terms of direct experience, Celestial reality is found on the same high frequency continuum, as the lower astral worlds. Simply polar ends of the same spectrum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. From: doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... no_reply@... wrote: Hmmm, no, they are mistaken. Sorry. :-) In my experience, they are both accessed the same way, and are occurring in the same frequency range. Because of the distinguishing characteristics of the Celestial worlds, I personally would not refer to them as the upper astral, but in terms of direct experience, Celestial reality is found on the same high frequency continuum, as the lower astral worlds. Simply polar ends of the same spectrum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. How have you two experienced these thing? Are you just regurgitating what others have said about these concepts, or are you living them? How do you determine which conceptualisation is correct? Interesting page on Wikipedia - 'Planes [of existence]' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane_(esotericism) Suppose experience was unified - unity - how many planes of existence would there be?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumb...@rocketmail.com doctordumb...@rocketmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Xeno I would be happy to regurgitate in this context if I had to. I mean, I really don't want to experiment with exploring the astral realm. And I'm pretty clear when an energy feels celestial and when it doesn't. So in that sense I am, as you say, living what I've learned. Your question about Unity seems rhetorical. Was it? Logically Unity would be one plane of existence. But I'll have to get back to you on that (-: From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartax...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:00 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@... wrote: Hmmm, no, they are mistaken. Sorry. :-) In my experience, they are both accessed the same way, and are occurring in the same frequency range. Because of the distinguishing characteristics of the Celestial worlds, I personally would not refer to them as the upper astral, but in terms of direct experience, Celestial reality is found on the same high frequency continuum, as the lower astral worlds. Simply polar ends of the same spectrum. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. How have you two experienced these thing? Are you just regurgitating what others have said about these concepts, or are you living them? How do you determine which conceptualisation is correct? Interesting page on Wikipedia - 'Planes [of existence]' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane_(esotericism) Suppose experience was unified - unity - how many planes of existence would there be?
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@... doctordumbass@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True? I doubt it. I would say, and I know that Rama did say, that the thing that most opens one up to astral entities is spending any time whatsoever thinking about astral entities. What you focus on you become. (schnipp)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators. This is what is commonly called the astral world (by dopes like Lenz), but is actually a subset, based on limited access. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ wrote: Freebie from Doc: This word astral that you and Fred use, could be called ass-tral - lol, because those that focus on the astral world, vs. Celestial, have a low consciousness. Its like breaking into someone's basement, and really should be avoided for all the trouble it causes. The horror movie makers seem to profit, but that's about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: Thanks for this. I've heard similar ideas from tantric teacher David Deida. Also I'm thinking that pushing it out opens one's aura to astral entities. True?
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will naturally be experiencing the Celestial world, or I suppose, upper astral. Also, the dynamics are just like anything else - with more experience, one has greater discrimination, and freedom of motion. If the reverse is true, (and one's consciousness is full of suspended solids - lol), and one forces one's way into the astral, they will probably see and meet lower entities. Not necessarily demons and criminals, but tricksters and manipulators.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of subtle sight. Of course, once a person is familiar with the full scope of Being in the astral world, one goes wherever one wants to - Um, kinda like in real life. However, it is important to note what one sees with each exploration, most of which will take a matter of seconds, popping in and out. If the consciousness is clean, it will
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
yea, pretty weak to throw out an accusation like that on an internet forum and then to claim that since no said anything that the claim stands. either that, or just childish --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience unpleasant entities are merely seeing the astral manifestation of their consciousness. Astral means the entire universe of
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Oh Devious is Me Share - LOL..no this is not about ganging about - if my comments were lashing out because of a lack of woman, or lack of respect for woman you think any of the women I mentioned would have let it pass. You only need to go through FFL archives to realize it's not. Clever, devious but bullshit Share. That there is some cowardly, despicable ganging up on FFL is a fiction of yours. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: -- *From:* seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical. The sight one gets from practicing Patanjali's sutra, or by some other means like peyote (ick) or mescaline (ugh) or LSD (yuck), will bring you into that world, according to your level of consciousness at the time. Those that experience
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Oh Devious is Me Share - LOL..no this is not about ganging about - if my comments were lashing out because of a lack of woman, or lack of respect for woman you think any of the women I mentioned would have let it pass. You only need to go through FFL archives to realize it's not. Clever, devious but bullshit Share. That there is some cowardly, despicable ganging up on FFL is a fiction of yours. Are you that dessperate for a fight, Ravi that you feel to need to totally twist what Share said here? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: ** Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: -- *From:* seventhray27 steve.sundur@... *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: yea, pretty weak to throw out an accusation like that on an internet forum and then to claim that since no said anything that the claim stands. I think he was making a more general observation here, Steve, in the form of rhetorical questions. But we sure do see an example of what he's talking about in Share's response to you. either that, or just childish --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] Think of it this way - the astral world, meaning all of it, parallels our consciousness, like two thermometers, side by side, each reading the same thing. Astral is a higher vibration than physical.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
I'm sorry Judy, I don't see it. I see Share making a broad statement about treating people (in general) with respect. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: yea, pretty weak to throw out an accusation like that on an internet forum and then to claim that since no said anything that the claim stands. I think he was making a more general observation here, Steve, in the form of rhetorical questions. But we sure do see an example of what he's talking about in Share's response to you. either that, or just childish --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:*
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: I'm sorry Judy, I don't see it. I see Share making a broad statement about treating people (in general) with respect. Yes, as Ravi said, there's nothing intelligent in your blind support for her. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: yea, pretty weak to throw out an accusation like that on an internet forum and then to claim that since no said anything that the claim stands. I think he was making a more general observation here, Steve, in the form of rhetorical questions. But we sure do see an example of what he's talking about in Share's response to you. either that, or just childish --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Steve - Look you are so dumb that I am not going to bother addressing your stupid comments to my response. You didn't address anything relevant in my post to Share - just a blind, idiotic, dumb reaction. Your basic premise and the comparison to a guy who abused and killed his girlfriend is so offensive and disgustingly slanderous to the reality of who I am that it shows the level you stoop to. Those who know me intimately and even some of my friends at Amma who have been offended by my stance against Amma would find these deeply offensive. They know in spite of being thoroughly slandered and harassed by my ex - how much I loved my family, I willingly gave everything just so they are happy - never gave it much thought. I restarted my life with zero dollars, I continue to make personal sacrifice so they are not disturbed. I have had to decline the security of a full time employment at the last two places of employment and opt for independent contracts so I can continue to support them and enjoy the kind of lifestyle I would like for myself. When people hear of the amount of alimony and child support I pay they are shocked and suggest means to avoid it and I cut them off and let them know that it's fair, that I am quite happy to pay it and that it's my pleasure to fulfill my personal obligations. If you are going to participate intelligently and have me respond to you, you have to stop making these offensive, slanderous remarks here. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:35 PM, seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.comwrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say that there is a definite distinction between the celestial and astral realms. The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. -- *From:* doctordumbass@ *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 9:05 AM *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I'm sorry Judy, I don't see it. I see Share making a broad statement about treating people (in general) with respect. Yes, as Ravi said, there's nothing intelligent in your blind support for her. And maybe one day, perhaps in the afterlife, I will understand how you were able to decipher every nuance of Robin's discussions here such that, in every case he was found to be completely straighforward and without flaws in his interactions. And how those critics of his, were in every case misguided in their opinions. Yes, I will look forward to that quickening. with numerous people here such that in every case --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: yea, pretty weak to throw out an accusation like that on an internet forum and then to claim that since no said anything that the claim stands. I think he was making a more general observation here, Steve, in the form of rhetorical questions. But we sure do see an example of what he's talking about in Share's response to you. either that, or just childish --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: I'm sorry Judy, I don't see it. I see Share making a broad statement about treating people (in general) with respect. Yes, as Ravi said, there's nothing intelligent in your blind support for her. And maybe one day, perhaps in the afterlife, I will understand how you were able to decipher every nuance of Robin's discussions here such that, in every case he was found to be completely straighforward and without flaws in his interactions. And how those critics of his, were in every case misguided in their opinions. It's not as if we needed additional evidence of your lack of intelligent brain cells, but what the heck, if you're bent on providing it, nobody's going to stop you.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: snip It's not as if we needed additional evidence of your lack of intelligent brain cells, but what the heck, if you're bent on providing it, nobody's going to stop you. I am going to spare myself the waste of time and you, the unbridled pleasure of getting into one your convoluted, never ending, Judy wins again! arguments. Sort of like how McDonalds stopped saying how burgers have been sold, it's almost innumerable how many arguments you've won. They haven't all been pretty. They haven't all made sense. And in the early days one argument could go one for days and weeks, but over several decades and different venues, the end the result has never varied.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: snip And maybe one day, perhaps in the afterlife, I will understand how you were able to decipher every nuance of Robin's discussions here such that, in every case he was found to be completely straighforward and without flaws in his interactions. And how those critics of his, were in every case misguided in their opinions. It's not as if we needed additional evidence of your lack of intelligent brain cells, but what the heck, if you're bent on providing it, nobody's going to stop you. I am going to spare myself the waste of time and you, the unbridled pleasure of getting into one your convoluted, never ending, Judy wins again! arguments. Oh, you were unable to recognize what I wrote above as my refusal to get into an argument with you? Sort of like how McDonalds stopped saying how burgers have been sold, it's almost innumerable how many arguments you've won. They haven't all been pretty. They haven't all made sense. And in the early days one argument could go one for days and weeks, but over several decades and different venues, the end the result has never varied.
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: snip Oh, you were unable to recognize what I wrote above as my refusal to get into an argument with you? I wish you a good nights sleep!
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: Steve - Look you are so dumb that I am not going to bother addressing your stupid comments to my response. You didn't address anything relevant in my post to Share - just a blind, idiotic, dumb reaction. Your basic premise and the comparison to a guy who abused and killed his girlfriend is so offensive and disgustingly slanderous to the reality of who I am that it shows the level you stoop to. Those who know me intimately and even some of my friends at Amma who have been offended by my stance against Amma would find these deeply offensive. They know in spite of being thoroughly slandered and harassed by my ex - how much I loved my family, I willingly gave everything just so they are happy - never gave it much thought. I restarted my life with zero dollars, I continue to make personal sacrifice so they are not disturbed. I have had to decline the security of a full time employment at the last two places of employment and opt for independent contracts so I can continue to support them and enjoy the kind of lifestyle I would like for myself. When people hear of the amount of alimony and child support I pay they are shocked and suggest means to avoid it and I cut them off and let them know that it's fair, that I am quite happy to pay it and that it's my pleasure to fulfill my personal obligations. If you are going to participate intelligently and have me respond to you, you have to stop making these offensive, slanderous remarks here. Ravi, you owe nobody this explanation of your personal life. The fact that you offered this up to whoever might read it here is testimony to your courage and your integrity. I, for one, applaud you your strength and I see you now in a renewed sense of discovery - as a man and as a decent human being. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:35 PM, seventhray27 steve.sundur@...wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Probably over the line Steve? What you wrote is far closer to the A word than anything Ravi wrote. Thanks for withdrawing it. Now what about what Ravi wrote is abusive, given that this is FFL, and not an episode of Barney and Friends. His use of the word fucking? From: seventhray27 steve.sun...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:03 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? I find comments like this offensive and abusive Ravi. The comparison I made was probably over line. But I will tell you, I will not back down from adressing the crap you toss around here, in name of your great enlightenment. I withdraw that comparison.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Thanks dear Ann - yes I certainly didn't want to. I was forced to because of Steve's slanderous comparisons and some crude psychological analysis of my posts total devoid of any reality - not for the first time either. It's baffling, this totally wild, idiotic reaction of his because he is not a new poster, he certainly sees me indulging in healthy interactions with other women here and he knows my personal history because I have talked about these very things before. He surely must know Share's history from posts here, complaints from various posters including several women on her devious, manipulative behavior and her inauthentic passive-aggressive behavior. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Ann awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Steve - Look you are so dumb that I am not going to bother addressing your stupid comments to my response. You didn't address anything relevant in my post to Share - just a blind, idiotic, dumb reaction. Your basic premise and the comparison to a guy who abused and killed his girlfriend is so offensive and disgustingly slanderous to the reality of who I am that it shows the level you stoop to. Those who know me intimately and even some of my friends at Amma who have been offended by my stance against Amma would find these deeply offensive. They know in spite of being thoroughly slandered and harassed by my ex - how much I loved my family, I willingly gave everything just so they are happy - never gave it much thought. I restarted my life with zero dollars, I continue to make personal sacrifice so they are not disturbed. I have had to decline the security of a full time employment at the last two places of employment and opt for independent contracts so I can continue to support them and enjoy the kind of lifestyle I would like for myself. When people hear of the amount of alimony and child support I pay they are shocked and suggest means to avoid it and I cut them off and let them know that it's fair, that I am quite happy to pay it and that it's my pleasure to fulfill my personal obligations. If you are going to participate intelligently and have me respond to you, you have to stop making these offensive, slanderous remarks here. Ravi, you owe nobody this explanation of your personal life. The fact that you offered this up to whoever might read it here is testimony to your courage and your integrity. I, for one, applaud you your strength and I see you now in a renewed sense of discovery - as a man and as a decent human being. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:35 PM, seventhray27 wrote: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re:
[FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]
Share and her posse have ganged up on more people here than anyone to date since I arrived. Her statement below iscowardly and despicable. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@... wrote: I'm sorry Judy, I don't see it. I see Share making a broad statement about treating people (in general) with respect. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray27 steve.sundur@ wrote: yea, pretty weak to throw out an accusation like that on an internet forum and then to claim that since no said anything that the claim stands. I think he was making a more general observation here, Steve, in the form of rhetorical questions. But we sure do see an example of what he's talking about in Share's response to you. either that, or just childish --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Thanks Steve, I appreciate the support by an individual. OTOH I really don't want rallying around by any group, men or women, especially if it means ganging up on someone. I find that cowardly and despicable no matter who they're ganging up against. Just MHO (-: From: seventhray27 steve.sundur@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:35 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons]  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: You have always needed some intelligent brain cells and unfortunately they don't grow around dead cells, tough luck Steve baby but I will always find my Devi if needed because I'm sure there are tons of women who don't need to insulate themselves into invulnerability with some elaborate, bizarre, delusional beliefs. Nothing remotely intelligent in your blind support for Share. At least nothing you would understand, in your incessant aggrandizing. Seen any women here rally around Share? How about Obba? Emily? Ann? Judy? Oh wait what is this silence - goddammit someone say something. Oh Ravi, really. Is your reasoning so weak that you have to rely on a fallacy of popular belief. I believe you are capable of better that this. I think what is happening, and it was predicted, is that western culture is still not a good fit for you. I suppose it must be something similiar to small man syndrome, that makes you feel you need to dominate, when most others are content to just along, share, and be happy. But you insist on being Ravi Yogi, the Great Telugu Brahmin. Well, last time I looked, it did get you at least two likes on your Facebook, so that's a start at least. On Feb 19, 2013, at 3:30 PM, seventhray27 wrote: You need a real woman Ravi. This Devi crap ain't cutting it. Either that or you're channeling Oscar Pistorius. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote: Not clear enough, hmm.. - OK - I'm working on a sign for my door 1) Leave your fucking platitudes at the doorstep 2) Leave your inauthentic bullshit at the doorstep 3) Leave your delusional fantasies at the doorstep Which one do you think is better my beloved Auntie Share? On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** I shall go forth dearest Ravi but only if we can go hand in hand smiley smile (-: -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:16 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Asstral [was Re: The Use of the Second Attention, Pros and Cons] The celestial realm is NOT the upper astral according to them. Oh dear Share - with the above statement the automated platitude detector of FFL has recorded this as your 1 millionth platitude on FFL. You are hereby declared to be the avatar of Mother Saraswati. You no longer need to visit any healers, quantum light weavers - your weaknesses have been reduced to naught in one fell swoop, you have been totally healed - no longer you are one of the billions with positives and negatives. Go forth and start your own cult O' Wise lady. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Share Long wrote: ** Doc, I appreciate what you say about astral being a reflection of consciousness. Want to add that 2 spiritual teachers I respect a lot say
