[FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of what a life on the Highest Path can do then you should keep it up so any lurkers can get a feel for the sort of mature behaviour you can develop. And run a mile.There's your legacy. Congratulations. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now Google Groups) and so I decided to join. What a disappointment! It was like a bar room brawl - Judy was there and Barry and Lon P. Stacks (RIP) and they were thrashing it out with that Asshole Nick (Andrew Skolnick) the science journalist. Judy did her best to defend her position
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook Trung Nghĩa | Facebook Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com Preview by Yahoo From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you arenot in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of what a life on the Highest Path can do then you should keep it up so any lurkers can get a feel for the sort of mature behaviour you can develop. And run a mile.There's your legacy. Congratulations. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
Ah, it reminds me of my school days. Sweet memories... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of what a life on the Highest Path can do then you should keep it up so any lurkers can get a feel for the sort of mature behaviour you can develop. And run a mile.There's your legacy. Congratulations. Years ago, when the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
Sal, I guess Share will have to take you to task cuz you just NUKED this Marshy sycophant! Well done, and well said. From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 2:47 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you arenot in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of what a life on the Highest Path can do then you should keep it up so any lurkers can get a feel for the sort of mature behaviour you can develop. And run a mile.There's your legacy. Congratulations. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
Played fine on my ipad in Mercury browser, which is not logged into FB. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoi...@yahoo.com mailto:turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote : I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
How do you like the Mercury browser? From: j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 7:04 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick Played fine on my ipad in Mercury browser, which is not logged into FB. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote : I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook Trung Nghĩa | Facebook Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com Preview by Yahoo From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you arenot in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of what a life on the Highest Path can do then you should keep it up so any lurkers can get a feel for the sort of mature behaviour you can develop. And run a mile.There's your legacy
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Sal, I guess Share will have to take you to task cuz you just NUKED this Marshy sycophant! Well done, and well said. Well, I don't mind what he's into. Just that he expects me to be into it or he'll throw a tantrum. From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 2:47 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you should, you are the biggest buffoon here, that you admit that you want to deliberately ruin it because you don't like having your beliefs criticised or that isn't a pro-TM site is quite pathetic but you lack the perspective to see that obviously. It should have rung an alarm bell with Rick but he doesn't seem to care either. But nor do I because if you are a shining example of what a life on the Highest Path can do then you should keep it up so any lurkers can get a feel for the sort of mature behaviour you can develop. And run a mile.There's your legacy. Congratulations. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion
Mercury browser (was: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick)
I quite like it. I used to use Chrome, but Google decided to completely ruin it. So, I searched for a replacement and found Mercury. It has some handy multitouch gestures for navigating web pages that I find very convenient. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackso...@yahoo.com wrote : How do you like the Mercury browser? From: j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2014 7:04 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick Played fine on my ipad in Mercury browser, which is not logged into FB.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
According to Barry, he never reads messages from Willytex. According to Judy, Barry is a liar. Go figure. On 9/4/2014 2:16 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf image https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo *From:* salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ** ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you arenot in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. When I joined FFL I was still a twice-a-day siddha, I just wanted to read the Kaplan letter and see what the fuss was about. So I joined up and then all the utter bullshit I had witnessed by people in the TMO, all the crappy philosophy from Marshy that had been bugging me, all the scams, all the obvious cultishness, delusion and True Believerism, it all crystalised into a proper understanding and made me realise that it was all merely a hopeful delusion, I'd been had and that was that. And so were you. Reading this list over the years, and in particular the responses of the TB's, has been a big help in the transition from cult thinking back to sanity, your brand of insanity helped a lot there. Thanks. My contribution has been to apply some basic scientific principles to obvious bullshit like yagyas and yogic flying You either know how to think in an open minded critical manner or you don't. You don't Tricky, not by a long shot. You are a believer - nothing wrong with that, I don't slag people off for their beliefs - you got taught something when you were young and don't you want to start disbelieving after all these years. Too much intellectual leg work involved I guess. The longer you've been involved, the harder it is to leave, so when any contrary evidence comes along it's much easier to put your hands over your ears and go laa laa laa. I wonder if you ever even realised there was an alternative? So you spend your day posting one line missives that even you don't understand - your hit rate with the non sequitur gag was less than 5% - and links to irrelevant books and articles. Just suppose one of your lurkers does what I always do and followed the link? Duh, you should really have thought about that little scenario but I don't think it would matter if you had. You are a True Believer and the idea of challenging your own beliefs is anathema, we see it everywhere, the TMO loves science but only if it supports them. If there's a chance it won't they don't bother. You fall into a typical religious role of only looking as far into it as to have your beliefs confirmed. Which isn't really taking part. So when you encounter a contrary POV you throw your toys out of the pram and spam it with your usual bullshit. So, thank you for explaining your reasons - I suppose we should be happy there is one. You say you don't care but you
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. On 9/4/2014 1:47 AM, salyavin808 wrote: Well Tricky, let me tell you something. You failed. Dismally. Your posts read like they were written by an autistic savant who failed the Turing test. In fact, you are one of the people that seriously made me wonder whether I had backed a losing horse in the first place. Do you have an anti-social problem? Why is it so difficult for you to carry on a decent conversation? If I wanted to exchange fluff or drivel with you I would have put For Salyavin808 in the subject line. Look me straight in the eye and see if I give a shit what you materialists do with your spare time. Have a nice day. Non secateurs. It doesn't follow that you can have a nice day when fluff isn't a type of materialism.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
I don't have a Facebook account (don't want nor need one, have my own websites), and it played find on my Android phone using the Chrome browser. It does really nail the Willy Wanker's hysterics. On 09/04/2014 12:16 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf image https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo **
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
I'll also add that I found the video on YouTube by searching for 'Copoeira Knockout' Funny Capoeira Knockout - Video http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM Funny Capoeira Knockout - Video http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM Funny Capoeira Knockout - Video View on youtu.be http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com wrote : Played fine on my ipad in Mercury browser, which is not logged into FB. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoi...@yahoo.com mailto:turquoi...@yahoo.com wrote : I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
On 9/4/2014 10:30 AM, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife] wrote: I don't have a Facebook account (don't want nor need one, have my own websites), and it played find on my Android phone using the Chrome browser. It does really nail the Willy Wanker's hysterics. But, did you enjoy? On 09/04/2014 12:16 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf image https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo **
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
kudos to Barry for that funny video. I really enjoyed it. Poor guy though, he got it pretty hard. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, j_alexander_stanley@... wrote : I'll also add that I found the video on YouTube by searching for 'Copoeira Knockout' Funny Capoeira Knockout - Video http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM Funny Capoeira Knockout - Video http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM Funny Capoeira Knockout - Video View on youtu.be http://youtu.be/7157QMW9abM Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, j_alexander_stanley@... wrote : Played fine on my ipad in Mercury browser, which is not logged into FB. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote : I wish I could find a non-Facebook version of this video to post. With this one, you probably can't see it unless you have a FB account. Too bad, if that's true. It's a perfect re-enactment of the Willytex-Salyavin championship fight below. Willytex postures, but Sal delivers the goods. :-) :-) :-) Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Trung Nghĩa | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Capoeira ! View on www.facebook.com https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817135784963858fref=nf Preview by Yahoo
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now Google Groups) and so I decided to join. What a disappointment! It was like a bar room brawl - Judy was there and Barry and Lon P. Stacks (RIP) and they were thrashing it out with that Asshole Nick (Andrew Skolnick) the science journalist. Judy did her best to defend her position but for appearances the whole group was just an exercise in futility - it was, and still is, a cess-pool of misinformation. So, I decided to post some of my own messages, not so much to prove anything, but just to improve the look and feel. Anyone surfing there would have thought TMers were all buffoons and gimcracks, for all appearances. So, I started writing up some nifty essays with fancy subject lines, not so much to get attention but to make the place look like a forum with useful and insightful analysis. So, for years I posted my essays to AMT to try and make the forum look good. I must have posted 8,000 essay from 1999 - 2003. I didn't get a response from Judy for close to fours years to any of my cogent postings. And, only two from Barry. Maybe they were JELLOS - I don't know. Then, they started spewing and posting political propaganda, in what I thought was an attempt to make the site look like a pile of crap and they tried to make the place look like a dung heap. One day I disputed Judy's claim that George W. Bush was a liar and so I posted a retort. That's about when it hit the fan! Ever since then she has hated my guts - nothing to do with TM or the mechanics of consciousness - just hateful slander and personal attacks, all directed at me. So, I either had to shut up or leave. But look, I've got an ego about as big as Mt. Rushmore so I don't back down without a fight - never have and never will. I am a military brat from Texas and I know everything about everything and I'm living at the center of the universe. So, at some point several of us left the Google Groups and came over to Yahoo Groups. Now it looks like this place going to shit too - there's no moderation, nobody gives a crap, and nobody will stand up for the Maharishi. They aren't even proud of their past. All they want to do is post fluff and drivel - you can read it here every day. It's sometime just pathetic what some people will post to the internet. So, now I've got a 26 inch screen, a screaming quad-core CPU and I can key in test at 100 wpm - that's what I do for a living -make money. It's easy for me to whip out a short post and hit Send. The real challenge is to write cogent, on-topic essays that anyone would want to read. But, let's face it - there's hardly anybody out there interested in TM, TMers or anything to do with discussing the mechanics of consciousness. All some people want to do is wreck the place and sound off. That's cool too. I don't take any of this seriously anymore - I'm here for the entertainment. I've already written a book while they were posting one-liners that end on one line and all begin with RE: But, it's true that I sometimes get caught up in the conversation. Some people really do feel better when they have someone to talk to. It's not personal. It's just like a video game. Some people like World of Warcraft. To each his own. It keeps me at home and out of trouble. I'm on Facebook too. So, I don't have a real formulated viewpoint or a goal - I believe in life; what it does to you and what your do back. I'm already perfectly enlightened - just trying to burn off a little karma before I go into that good night. Sure, I do want to leave a legacy of some sort. These words are forever, or at least until the vandals are
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
Dang Richard, when can you come over for dinner. You and the Rita. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now Google Groups) and so I decided to join. What a disappointment! It was like a bar room brawl - Judy was there and Barry and Lon P. Stacks (RIP) and they were thrashing it out with that Asshole Nick (Andrew Skolnick) the science journalist. Judy did her best to defend her position but for appearances the whole group was just an exercise in futility - it was, and still is, a cess-pool of misinformation. So, I decided to post some of my own messages, not so much to prove anything, but just to improve the look and feel. Anyone surfing there would have thought TMers were all buffoons and gimcracks, for all appearances. So, I started writing up some nifty essays with fancy subject lines, not so much to get attention but to make the place look like a forum with useful and insightful analysis. So, for years I posted my essays to AMT to try and make the forum look good. I must have posted 8,000 essay from 1999 - 2003. I didn't get a response from Judy for close to fours years to any of my cogent postings. And, only two from Barry. Maybe they were JELLOS - I don't know. Then, they started spewing and posting political propaganda, in what I thought was an attempt to make the site look like a pile of crap and they tried to make the place look like a dung heap. One day I disputed Judy's claim that George W. Bush was a liar and so I posted a retort. That's about when it hit the fan! Ever since then she has hated my guts - nothing to do with TM or the mechanics of consciousness - just hateful slander and personal attacks, all directed at me. So, I either had to shut up or leave. But look, I've got an ego about as big as Mt. Rushmore so I don't back down without a fight - never have and never will. I am a military brat from Texas and I know everything about everything and I'm living at the center of the universe. So, at some point several of us left the Google Groups and came over to Yahoo Groups. Now it looks like this place going to shit too - there's no moderation, nobody gives a crap, and nobody will stand up for the Maharishi. They aren't even proud of their past. All they want to do is post fluff and drivel - you can read it here every day. It's sometime just pathetic what some people will post to the internet. So, now I've got a 26 inch screen, a screaming quad-core CPU and I can key in test at 100 wpm - that's what I do for a living -make money. It's easy for me to whip out a short post and hit Send. The real challenge is to write cogent, on-topic essays that anyone would want to read. But, let's face it - there's hardly anybody out there interested in TM, TMers or anything to do with discussing the mechanics of consciousness. All some people want to do is wreck the place and sound off. That's cool too. I don't take any of this seriously anymore - I'm here for the entertainment. I've already written a book while they were posting one-liners that end on one line and all begin with RE: But, it's true that I sometimes get caught up in the conversation. Some people really do feel better when they have someone to talk to. It's not personal. It's just like a video game. Some people like World of Warcraft. To each his own. It keeps me at home and out of trouble. I'm on Facebook too. So, I don't have a real formulated viewpoint or a goal - I believe in life; what it does to you and what your do back. I'm already perfectly enlightened - just trying to burn off a little karma before I go into that good night. Sure, I do want to leave a legacy of
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Dang Richard, when can you come over for dinner. You and the Rita. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you are not in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now Google Groups) and so I decided to join. What a disappointment! It was like a bar room brawl - Judy was there and Barry and Lon P. Stacks (RIP) and they were thrashing it out with that Asshole Nick (Andrew Skolnick) the science journalist. Judy did her best to defend her position but for appearances the whole group was just an exercise in futility - it was, and still is, a cess-pool of misinformation. So, I decided to post some of my own messages, not so much to prove anything, but just to improve the look and feel. Anyone surfing there would have thought TMers were all buffoons and gimcracks, for all appearances. So, I started writing up some nifty essays with fancy subject lines, not so much to get attention but to make the place look like a forum with useful and insightful analysis. So, for years I posted my essays to AMT to try and make the forum look good. I must have posted 8,000 essay from 1999 - 2003. I didn't get a response from Judy for close to fours years to any of my cogent postings. And, only two from Barry. Maybe they were JELLOS - I don't know. Then, they started spewing and posting political propaganda, in what I thought was an attempt to make the site look like a pile of crap and they tried to make the place look like a dung heap. One day I disputed Judy's claim that George W. Bush was a liar and so I posted a retort. That's about when it hit the fan! Ever since then she has hated my guts - nothing to do with TM or the mechanics of consciousness - just hateful slander and personal attacks, all directed at me. So, I either had to shut up or leave. But look, I've got an ego about as big as Mt. Rushmore so I don't back down without a fight - never have and never will. I am a military brat from Texas and I know everything about everything and I'm living at the center of the universe. So, at some point several of us left the Google Groups and came over to Yahoo Groups. Now it looks like this place going to shit too - there's no moderation, nobody gives a crap, and nobody will stand up for the Maharishi. They aren't even proud of their past. All they want to do is post fluff and drivel - you can read it here every day. It's sometime just pathetic what some people will post to the internet. So, now I've got a 26 inch screen, a screaming quad-core CPU and I can key in test at 100 wpm - that's what I do for a living -make money. It's easy for me to whip out a short post and hit Send. The real challenge is to write cogent, on-topic essays that anyone would want to read. But, let's face it - there's hardly anybody out there interested in TM, TMers or anything to do with discussing the mechanics of consciousness. All some people want to do is wreck the place and sound off. That's cool too. I don't take any of this seriously anymore - I'm here for the entertainment. I've already written a book while they were posting one-liners that end on one line and all begin with RE: But, it's true that I sometimes get caught up in the conversation. Some people really do feel better when they have someone to talk to. It's not personal. It's just like a video game. Some people like World of Warcraft. To each his own. It keeps me at home and out of trouble. I'm on Facebook too. So, I don't have a real formulated viewpoint or a goal - I believe in life; what it does to you and what your do back. I'm already perfectly enlightened - just trying to burn off a little karma
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
On 9/3/2014 7:59 PM, danfriedman2002 wrote: Thanks, Dan. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you arenot in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now Google Groups) and so I decided to join. What a disappointment! It was like a bar room brawl - Judy was there and Barry and Lon P. Stacks (RIP) and they were thrashing it out with that Asshole Nick (Andrew Skolnick) the science journalist. Judy did her best to defend her position but for appearances the whole group was just an exercise in futility - it was, and still is, a cess-pool of misinformation. So, I decided to post some of my own messages, not so much to prove anything, but just to improve the look and feel. Anyone surfing there would have thought TMers were all buffoons and gimcracks, for all appearances. So, I started writing up some nifty essays with fancy subject lines, not so much to get attention but to make the place look like a forum with useful and insightful analysis. So, for years I posted my essays to AMT to try and make the forum look good. I must have posted 8,000 essay from 1999 - 2003. I didn't get a response from Judy for close to fours years to any of my cogent postings. And, only two from Barry. Maybe they were JELLOS - I don't know. Then, they started spewing and posting political propaganda, in what I thought was an attempt to make the site look like a pile of crap and they tried to make the place look like a dung heap. One day I disputed Judy's claim that George W. Bush was a liar and so I posted a retort. That's about when it hit the fan! Ever since then she has hated my guts - nothing to do with TM or the mechanics of consciousness - just hateful slander and personal attacks, all directed at me. So, I either had to shut up or leave. But look, I've got an ego about as big as Mt. Rushmore so I don't back down without a fight - never have and never will. I am a military brat from Texas and I know everything about everything and I'm living at the center of the universe. So, at some point several of us left the Google Groups and came over to Yahoo Groups. Now it looks like this place going to shit too - there's no moderation, nobody gives a crap, and nobody will stand up for the Maharishi. They aren't even proud of their past. All they want to do is post fluff and drivel - you can read it here every day. It's sometime just pathetic what some people will post to the internet. So, now I've got a 26 inch screen, a screaming quad-core CPU and I can key in test at 100 wpm - that's what I do for a living -make money. It's easy for me to whip out a short post and hit Send. The real challenge is to write cogent, on-topic essays that anyone would want to read. But, let's face it - there's hardly anybody out there interested in TM, TMers or anything to do with discussing the mechanics of consciousness. All some people want to do is wreck the place and sound off. That's cool too. I don't take any of this seriously anymore - I'm here for the entertainment. I've already written a book while they were posting one-liners that end on one line and all begin with RE: But, it's true that I sometimes get caught up in the conversation. Some people really do feel better when they have someone to talk to. It's not personal. It's just like a video game. Some people like World of Warcraft. To each his own. It keeps me at home and out of trouble. I'm on Facebook too. So, I don't have a real formulated
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann, was For Rick
On 9/3/2014 8:29 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: Dang Richard, when can you come over for dinner. You and the Rita. (-: Thanks. I'll check with Rita. LoL! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 9/3/2014 10:59 AM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: Actually Richard, you arenot in my top four of odious posters here so I can live with you no matter how many times you feel it necessary to post here. I don't get why you do it nor do I have the time or inclination to avalanche this place like you do, but so be it... That's a relief. Seriously, you have been so nice to me since Judy disappeared that I feel that I owe you an explanation. First, a confession. My posts really are for the lurkers. My personal goal in this is to post something, anything, that makes the forum look good to outsiders if they should wander in here for whatever reason. Years ago, when the internet was just getting started (1994) I was surfing around and ran across Usenet - discussion groups. At first I subscribed to a site that discussed ISKCON, because I had been a participant in one of their temples for about a year (3716 Watseka Ave in L.A.) and I was taken with their devotion and depth of knowledge. Some members had started a news group discussion on the internet and I started to read and lurk there for a few weeks. I was very impressed with some of the topics discussed and the responses. Then I discovered alt.meditation.transcendental (now Google Groups) and so I decided to join. What a disappointment! It was like a bar room brawl - Judy was there and Barry and Lon P. Stacks (RIP) and they were thrashing it out with that Asshole Nick (Andrew Skolnick) the science journalist. Judy did her best to defend her position but for appearances the whole group was just an exercise in futility - it was, and still is, a cess-pool of misinformation. So, I decided to post some of my own messages, not so much to prove anything, but just to improve the look and feel. Anyone surfing there would have thought TMers were all buffoons and gimcracks, for all appearances. So, I started writing up some nifty essays with fancy subject lines, not so much to get attention but to make the place look like a forum with useful and insightful analysis. So, for years I posted my essays to AMT to try and make the forum look good. I must have posted 8,000 essay from 1999 - 2003. I didn't get a response from Judy for close to fours years to any of my cogent postings. And, only two from Barry. Maybe they were JELLOS - I don't know. Then, they started spewing and posting political propaganda, in what I thought was an attempt to make the site look like a pile of crap and they tried to make the place look like a dung heap. One day I disputed Judy's claim that George W. Bush was a liar and so I posted a retort. That's about when it hit the fan! Ever since then she has hated my guts - nothing to do with TM or the mechanics of consciousness - just hateful slander and personal attacks, all directed at me. So, I either had to shut up or leave. But look, I've got an ego about as big as Mt. Rushmore so I don't back down without a fight - never have and never will. I am a military brat from Texas and I know everything about everything and I'm living at the center of the universe. So, at some point several of us left the Google Groups and came over to Yahoo Groups. Now it looks like this place going to shit too - there's no moderation, nobody gives a crap, and nobody will stand up for the Maharishi. They aren't even proud of their past. All they want to do is post fluff and drivel - you can read it here every day. It's sometime just pathetic what some people will post to the internet. So, now I've got a 26 inch screen, a screaming quad-core CPU and I can key in test at 100 wpm - that's what I do for a living -make money. It's easy for me to whip out a short post and hit Send. The real challenge is to write cogent, on-topic essays that anyone would want to read. But, let's face it - there's hardly anybody out there interested in TM, TMers or anything to do with discussing the mechanics of consciousness. All some people want to do is wreck the place and sound off. That's cool too. I don't take any of this seriously anymore - I'm here for the entertainment. I've already written a book while they were posting one-liners that end on one line and all begin with RE: But, it's true that I sometimes get caught up in the conversation. Some people really do feel better when they have someone to talk to. It's not personal. It's just like a video game. Some people like World of Warcraft. To each
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Here is a way to see Charleston from your armchair. http://www.thestate.com/2014/06/29/3538720/new-cbs-drama-was-filmed-in-charleston.html http://www.thestate.com/2014/06/29/3538720/new-cbs-drama-was-filmed-in-charleston.html http://www.thestate.com/2014/06/29/3538720/new-cbs-drama-was-filmed-in-charleston.html New CBS drama was filmed in Charleston | SC Celebs Wat... http://www.thestate.com/2014/06/29/3538720/new-cbs-drama-was-filmed-in-charleston.html The biggest star in Reckless might be the city in which its set View on www.thestate.com http://www.thestate.com/2014/06/29/3538720/new-cbs-drama-was-filmed-in-charleston.html Preview by Yahoo Thanks MJ but I'm going to get there in person, you know I'm not a TV watcher and I need to actually smell the magnolias.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Steve, I'm guessing that you all are having the same pulverizing heat that we are, if not worse. That can definitely disrupt sleep. Hoping it will moderate soon... On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 10:18 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Oh, thanks Share. I wrote those comments not having had a particularly good nights sleep, and I sure didn't express myself very clearly. I'm pretty tired now, so I hope the same thing doesn't happen. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Steve, that thus sayeth the Ray made me smile the first time I read it. The second and third times, it had me chuckling. Yay Ray! (-: On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 7:15 AM, steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
yes, the heat has been quite oppressive. sometimes the mental stuff can get in the way of a good nights sleep. not often, but still, occasionally. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Steve, I'm guessing that you all are having the same pulverizing heat that we are, if not worse. That can definitely disrupt sleep. Hoping it will moderate soon... On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 10:18 PM, steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Oh, thanks Share. I wrote those comments not having had a particularly good nights sleep, and I sure didn't express myself very clearly. I'm pretty tired now, so I hope the same thing doesn't happen. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Steve, that thus sayeth the Ray made me smile the first time I read it. The second and third times, it had me chuckling. Yay Ray! (-: On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 7:15 AM, steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Doesn't it seem like that the praising Hitler card gets a lot of play all over the place. I mean, it's like if any public figure ever mentions Hitler, somehow or other it usually surfaces as He praised Hiitler. Do you hear me, the guy praised Hitler. And then when you look into it, it's usually something like, Well even Hitler started off as a decent portrait artist, (or house painter, or whatever it was) But no matter, it ends up turning into, He praised Hitler, I tell ya! The guy actually praised Hitler Go figure. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Steve, that thus sayeth the Ray made me smile the first time I read it. The second and third times, it had me chuckling. Yay Ray! (-: On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 7:15 AM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Some blame the Treaty of Versailles for the birth of Hitler. The desire for the allied powers to punish Germany for WW1, led to near destruction of the country, economically. In such desperate times, a powerful orator, calling for German nationalism, was very hard to resist. He didn't start out talking about extermination of the Jews, mentally and physically handicapped, homosexuals, gypsies and political opponents, either, but that was his brainchild. Really bad combo, and the moustache didn't help at all. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Doesn't it seem like that the praising Hitler card gets a lot of play all over the place. I mean, it's like if any public figure ever mentions Hitler, somehow or other it usually surfaces as He praised Hiitler. Do you hear me, the guy praised Hitler. And then when you look into it, it's usually something like, Well even Hitler started off as a decent portrait artist, (or house painter, or whatever it was) But no matter, it ends up turning into, He praised Hitler, I tell ya! The guy actually praised Hitler Go figure. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
You are a sycophant, a Marshy stooge. If anyone skews the facts tis you. From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:15 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
I saw one of the tapes, actually by a twist of fate. I know what he said. From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Doesn't it seem like that the praising Hitler card gets a lot of play all over the place. I mean, it's like if any public figure ever mentions Hitler, somehow or other it usually surfaces as He praised Hiitler. Do you hear me, the guy praised Hitler. And then when you look into it, it's usually something like, Well even Hitler started off as a decent portrait artist, (or house painter, or whatever it was) But no matter, it ends up turning into, He praised Hitler, I tell ya! The guy actually praised Hitler Go figure. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Fraud, liar, idiot and sycophant - if you ever wondered why generally only the Turq resond to your posts, just take look at how you label others here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : You are a sycophant, a Marshy stooge. If anyone skews the facts tis you. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:15 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
I only offer them the shoe that fits them - and it isn't labeling if it is true and those adjectives apply to you as well you stoned on illusions raving lunatic you. From: nablusoss1008 no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 2:05 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Fraud, liar, idiot and sycophant - if you ever wondered why generally only the Turq resond to your posts, just take look at how you label others here. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : You are a sycophant, a Marshy stooge. If anyone skews the facts tis you. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:15 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Oh, thanks Share. I wrote those comments not having had a particularly good nights sleep, and I sure didn't express myself very clearly. I'm pretty tired now, so I hope the same thing doesn't happen. (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Steve, that thus sayeth the Ray made me smile the first time I read it. The second and third times, it had me chuckling. Yay Ray! (-: On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 7:15 AM, steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Well, why don't you fill us in on it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : I saw one of the tapes, actually by a twist of fate. I know what he said. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Doesn't it seem like that the praising Hitler card gets a lot of play all over the place. I mean, it's like if any public figure ever mentions Hitler, somehow or other it usually surfaces as He praised Hiitler. Do you hear me, the guy praised Hitler. And then when you look into it, it's usually something like, Well even Hitler started off as a decent portrait artist, (or house painter, or whatever it was) But no matter, it ends up turning into, He praised Hitler, I tell ya! The guy actually praised Hitler Go figure. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Pray tell. What facts have I skewed/ I'll wait. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : You are a sycophant, a Marshy stooge. If anyone skews the facts tis you. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:15 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
What fact have I skewed? I'll wait. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : You are a sycophant, a Marshy stooge. If anyone skews the facts tis you. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:15 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Hey Michael, It would be better if you just said,I don't care to address your point in any kind of meaningful way. Instead, I'm going to launch into my usual tirade against TM and MMY Probably you are taking the Hitler comment out of context. I get the feeling that you probably spend a lot of time searching for any positive news about TM and then send a barrage of what you feel are the misrepresentations, whether they are skewed, or not, which is unfortunate since you make many good points, but the fact that you are willing to skew many other aspects and not address inconsistencies in your finds, overall reduces your credibility. Thus saith the Ray. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : he was a liar, a fraud, taking money under false pretexts, a sexual opportunist, and the list goes on and on. If you like his blabber so be it - it just means you are easily entertained. I bet you would have loved some of the tapes of him praising Hitler. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 12:02 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : I don't hate Share, feste. I think she has some big problems she's unwilling to look at that hold her back from the person she could be. Wow, you're all heart. A lot of people would pay a fortune for such a thorough therapy and we get it for free! Most people keep it private though. Doctor/patient confidentiality and all that... And I can tell you exactly what she could say that would appease me in this particular case. Want to hear it? No. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : I don't know why you bother, Share. This woman hates you and will take issue with whatever you say, however you say it. Nothing you could ever say would appease her.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again. As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real motivations for doing this (hatred) than Judy is. On some level, I think Judy may actually be aware of how insanely vindictive she is; I don't think Emily is, or will ever be. She's in complete denial. Jim, the last member of the Mean Girls Club, is just in it for the attention. He'll do *anything* and say *anything* to get attention. We *are*, after all, talking about the guy who pretended to be a woman on this forum for several months, as if the falsely claiming to be enlightened wasn't *enough*. But he also piles on because the persecution routine is a good fit for him because his solipsism is so strongly established that he can't really feel any empathy for the people whose persecution he piles on to. All in all, it's really quite an embarrassing soap opera, played out as it is on this forum day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year. Judy orchestrated it by creating such a poisonous atmosphere that all of this actually feels normal to many people who have had to put up with it for all these years, but it's not. It's pathological, and even more sick in supposed adults than it is in the Jr. High School girls they're emulating.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again. As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real motivations for doing this (hatred) than Judy is. On some level, I think Judy may actually be aware of how insanely vindictive she is; I don't think Emily is, or will ever be. She's in complete denial. Jim, the last member of the Mean Girls Club, is just in it for the attention. He'll do *anything* and say *anything* to get attention. We *are*, after all, talking about the guy who pretended to be a woman on this forum for several months, as if the falsely claiming to be enlightened wasn't *enough*. But he also piles on because the persecution routine is a good fit for him because his solipsism is so strongly established that he can't really feel any empathy for the people whose persecution he piles on to. All in all, it's really quite an embarrassing soap opera, played out as it is on this forum day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year. Judy orchestrated it by creating such a poisonous atmosphere that all of this actually feels normal to many people who have had to put up with it for all these years, but it's not. It's pathological, and even more sick in supposed adults than it is in the Jr. High School girls they're emulating. I suppose we should be happy for so much free entertainment. I remember enjoying the Mean Girls
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again. As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real motivations for doing this (hatred) than Judy is. On some level, I think Judy may actually be aware of how insanely vindictive she is; I don't think Emily is, or will ever be. She's in complete denial. Jim, the last member of the Mean Girls Club, is just in it for the attention. He'll do *anything* and say *anything* to get attention. We *are*, after all, talking about the guy who pretended to be a woman on this forum for several months, as if the falsely claiming to be enlightened wasn't *enough*. But he also piles on because the persecution routine is a good fit for him because his solipsism is so strongly established that he can't really feel any empathy for the people whose persecution he piles on to. All in all, it's really quite an embarrassing soap opera, played out as it is on this forum day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year. Judy orchestrated it by creating such a poisonous atmosphere that all of this actually feels normal to many people who have had to put up with it for all these years, but it's not. It's pathological, and even more sick in supposed adults than it is in the Jr. High School girls they're emulating. I suppose we should be happy for so much free entertainment. I remember enjoying the Mean Girls movie though, maybe because it didn't go on and
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
turq, WRT Emily, I actually was ignoring her and she kept making inaccurate psychological comments to other people about my ignoring her, etc. So yeah, I took the bait to set the record straight, and partially to be minimally courteous. More about Emily since she's back on mission after her break! IMO she used to post interesting stuff here sometimes. Now, like you said, she mainly posts to analyze me. For what ultimate purpose?! And why is she so obsessed with me?! It's totally weird imho! Of course it all started over the RWC kafufel. Really, go figure! Judy is another story, being way harsher and self righteous. What compels a person to participate in such a manner so unrelentingly? And for decades! I admit it totally baffles me. Well, not totally. I have my theories.Which I'm sure you guys would LOVE to hear LOL! On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 5:06 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again. As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real motivations for doing this (hatred) than Judy is. On some level, I think Judy may actually be aware of how insanely vindictive she is; I don't think Emily is, or will ever be. She's in complete denial. Jim, the last member of the Mean Girls Club, is just in it for the attention. He'll do *anything* and say *anything* to get attention. We *are*, after
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Emily has your number, cold, Share. Nuthin' inaccurate about it. If she says something, about either you, or Barry, it is a good idea, and a huge time saver, to listen up. I know this falls on deaf ears, too, but that is yours and Barry's issue, not mine. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : turq, WRT Emily, I actually was ignoring her and she kept making inaccurate psychological comments to other people about my ignoring her, etc. So yeah, I took the bait to set the record straight, and partially to be minimally courteous. More about Emily since she's back on mission after her break! IMO she used to post interesting stuff here sometimes. Now, like you said, she mainly posts to analyze me. For what ultimate purpose?! And why is she so obsessed with me?! It's totally weird imho! Of course it all started over the RWC kafufel. Really, go figure! Judy is another story, being way harsher and self righteous. What compels a person to participate in such a manner so unrelentingly? And for decades! I admit it totally baffles me. Well, not totally. I have my theories. Which I'm sure you guys would LOVE to hear LOL! On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 5:06 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again. As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Ho-hum, another delusional psychotic rant from Barry. Does he enjoy living in this ugly fantasy world he's created? I suspect the key to it is that it enables him to project all his own flaws onto the people he hates. The most extreme example comes at the end of this post, where he attributes the orchestration of the poisonous atmosphere on FFL to me. In fact, you can trace the genesis of this atmosphere right back to his earliest FFL posts, when he started attacking me a week or so before I even got here, as I discovered as I was reading the past traffic for background. Couple more comments below... As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. Barry to Share, August of last year: We get it that you don't care how unintelligent you come across, and that you're trying to single-handedly prove the contention of anti-TM critics that TMers are blissninnies without a brain cell in their thick skulls who will believe anything if they're told its Woo Woo enough. But do you have to be such a codependent, attention-seeking masochist about it? Not only have you been making yourself the object of pursuit of your Jr. High School-mentality tormentors, you've been doing it *purposefully*. For fuck's sake, STOP. You're even more boring than they areyou're an embarrassment to the notion of humans having intelligence. You're doing it because you're not terribly smart, or interesting, and you crave attention anyway. And you don't fucking care whether you drag a whole forum down to your level of idiocy to get it. Given the above, the inadvertent irony in what follows is spectacular: That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. I suspect what Barry describes above is how he feels when I correct him about something. Because it's certainly not characteristic of my corrections generally. The rest is just more hallucinatory raving. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real motivations for doing this (hatred) than Judy is. On some level, I think Judy may actually be aware of how insanely vindictive she is; I don't think Emily is, or will ever be. She's in complete denial. Jim, the last member of the Mean Girls Club, is just in it for the attention. He'll do *anything* and say *anything* to get attention. We *are*, after all, talking about the guy who pretended to be a woman on this forum for several months, as if the falsely claiming to be enlightened wasn't *enough*. But he also piles on because the persecution routine is a good fit for him because his solipsism is so strongly established that he can't really feel any empathy for the people whose persecution he piles on to. All in all, it's really quite an embarrassing soap opera, played out as it is
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off. Actually, I'm surprised Share hasn't told you lot to fuck off and just ignore all the attempts to correct her non-approved behaviour. Or is it that she must be assimilated or driven off the forum? Who knows, without this tedious correcting and fake concern that clogs the list this place might get to be worth reading again. That would be great. I am all for the clogs to clear. And, frankly, a veritable mountain is being made of a meagre mole hill.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : Ho-hum, another delusional psychotic rant from Barry. Does he enjoy living in this ugly fantasy world he's created? Even more funny is that bawee admits he is the guy planted here at FFL by lurking reporters to purposefully stir up the pot so that he can generate reactions from all of the unsuspecting shmucks who post here so that the lurking, investigative reporters can see living examples of cultists and other psychological aberrational behaviour. Who is the twisted one now? Who is the one who gets pleasure and some sort of reward, either through monetary means (do they pay him in Euro or are these reporters American?) or pats on the back by his mentors the lurking reporters, or just simply gets his rocks off by baiting everyone here. Woo- you couldn't write this kind of stuff for some soap opera and and have it get any better than this. I suspect the key to it is that it enables him to project all his own flaws onto the people he hates. The most extreme example comes at the end of this post, where he attributes the orchestration of the poisonous atmosphere on FFL to me. In fact, you can trace the genesis of this atmosphere right back to his earliest FFL posts, when he started attacking me a week or so before I even got here, as I discovered as I was reading the past traffic for background. Couple more comments below... As I've said before, IMO Share has an ego-investment in all of this persecution herself, otherwise she wouldn't (as she often does) start up one of the harassment campaigns again after it's died down, just to get in the last word. That's her part in all of this. Barry to Share, August of last year: We get it that you don't care how unintelligent you come across, and that you're trying to single-handedly prove the contention of anti-TM critics that TMers are blissninnies without a brain cell in their thick skulls who will believe anything if they're told its Woo Woo enough. But do you have to be such a codependent, attention-seeking masochist about it? Not only have you been making yourself the object of pursuit of your Jr. High School-mentality tormentors, you've been doing it *purposefully*. For fuck's sake, STOP. You're even more boring than they areyou're an embarrassment to the notion of humans having intelligence. You're doing it because you're not terribly smart, or interesting, and you crave attention anyway. And you don't fucking care whether you drag a whole forum down to your level of idiocy to get it. Given the above, the inadvertent irony in what follows is spectacular: That said, it's pretty amazing that the perpetrators of this harassment really don't *get* how accurate my comparisons of it to a Jr. High School Mean Girls Club really are. Whenever their lives get boring (which seems to be often), they liven them up by pouncing on someone they perceive to be weaker, and attacking her. Judy is the worst. For her it's a lifestyle. My bet is that if you went back and really analyzed the traffic on Fairfield Life, you would be unable to find *a single week* in which she has *not* found the need to correct someone. Which, in her case, means belittle them and put them down as stupid so I can appear to be smart. I suspect what Barry describes above is how he feels when I correct him about something. Because it's certainly not characteristic of my corrections generally. The rest is just more hallucinatory raving. This is just what she DOES. We can all speculate about what *caused* this behavior in her, but there is simply no question that the behavior is present. It was present when she first showed up on a.m.t. nearly twenty years ago, it has been present pretty much every week she was posting since then, and it is present now. For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it. Ann is just a follower, primarily in it for the pats on the head and the dog biscuits she gets from Yet Another Abuser She's Chosen To Follow. She did it with Robin, not just tolerating but *applauding* his abuse of others, and now she's doing it with Judy. Her version of Descartes' statement is I'm terrified that I'm not really *anything* unless I'm trying to put down the person I've been told to put down, and in that assessment she would actually be correct. She's nothing. Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : ...For Judy, Descartes' I think, therefore I am had been reduced to I correct and put down and try to intimidate, therefore I am. She really, really, really can't live without it... Typed below seems to be the first work where Descartes comes up with I think, therefore I am. This is really a perfect description of nature of ego, which is the nature of one's identity based on thought. As I believe I mentioned before some time ago, I know someone who prior to learning TM was fearful that if he/she had no thoughts, he/she would cease to exist. Most people's identity and sense of existing seems to be based on this sort of experience. This hardly seems to be the basis on which to found a philosophy grounded on the concept of 'truth'. I am interested in what Judy thinks of this little dictum of Descartes, divorced from this particular broadside. René Descartes - Le Discours de la Méthode (1637) [English translation below the original French] QUATRIÈME PARTIE. Je ne sais si je dois vous entretenir des premières méditations que j'y ai faites; car elles sont si métaphysiques et si peu communes, qu'elles ne seront peut-être pas au goût de tout le monde: et toutefois, afin qu'on puisse juger si les fondements que j'ai pris sont assez fermes, je me trouve en quelque façon contraint d'en parler. J'avois dès long-temps remarqué que pour les moeurs il est besoin quelquefois de suivre des opinions qu'on sait être fort incertaines, tout de même que si elles étoient indubitables, ainsi qu'il a été dit ci-dessus: mais pource qu'alors je désirois vaquer seulement à la recherche de la vérité, je pensai qu'il falloit que je fisse tout le contraire, et que je rejetasse comme absolument faux tout ce en quoi je pourrois imaginer le moindre doute, afin de voir s'il ne resteroit point après cela quelque chose en ma créance qui fût entièrement indubitable. Ainsi, à cause que nos sens nous trompent quelquefois, je voulus supposer qu'il n'y avoit aucune chose qui fût telle qu'ils nous la font imaginer; et parce qu'il y a des hommes qui se méprennent en raisonnant, même touchant les plus simples matières de géométrie, et y font des paralogismes, jugeant que j'étois sujet à faillir autant qu'aucun autre, je rejetai comme fausses toutes les raisons que j'avois prises auparavant pour démonstrations; et enfin, considérant que toutes les mêmes pensées que nous avons étant éveillés nous peuvent aussi venir quand nous dormons, sans qu'il y en ait aucune pour lors qui soit vraie, je me résolus de feindre que toutes les choses qui m'étoient jamais entrées en l'esprit n'étoient non plus vraies que les illusions de mes songes. Mais aussitôt après je pris garde que, pendant que je voulois ainsi penser que tout étoit faux, il falloit nécessairement que moi qui le pensois fusse quelque chose; et remarquant que cette vérité, je pense, donc je suis, étoit si ferme et si assurée, que toutes les plus extravagantes suppositions des sceptiques n'étoient pas capables de l'ébranler, je jugeai que je pouvois la recevoir sans scrupule pour le premier principe de la philosophie que je cherchois. FOURTH PART I am in doubt as to the propriety of making my first meditations in the place above mentioned matter of discourse; for these are so metaphysical, and so uncommon, as not, perhaps, to be acceptable to every one. And yet, that it may be determined whether the foundations that I have laid are sufficiently secure, I find myself in a measure constrained to advert to them. I had long before remarked that, in relation to practice, it is sometimes necessary to adopt, as if above doubt, opinions which we discern to be highly uncertain, as has been already said; but as I then desired to give my attention solely to the search after truth, I thought that a procedure exactly the opposite was called for, and that I ought to reject as absolutely false all opinions in regard to which I could suppose the least ground for doubt, in order to ascertain whether after that there remained aught in my belief that was wholly indubitable. Thus, because our senses sometimes deceive us, I wanted to assume that there was anything that was such that we have imagined; and because there are men who are mistaken in reasoning, affecting even the simplest material of geometry, falling into paralogisms [a piece of illogical or fallacious reasoning, especially one that appears superficially logical or that the reasoner believes to be logical], thinking that I was about to fail as all the others, I rejected as false all reasons I had already taken for demonstrations; and finally, whereas all the same thoughts as we are awake we can also come when we sleep when then none of them are true, I resolved to pretend that all the things that which entered into my mind [l'esprit], were not more true than the illusions of my dreams. But immediately after I took care
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Oh, don't be silly, feste. Of course you're protecting her, along with the rest of the White Knights. But nobody else on FFL, as far as I can see, seems to need such protection, even when they're being harassed (by Barry, for example) in the most unpleasant and obsessive ways. You have double standards and a huge blind spot where Share is concerned, feste. You've bought into the fake Goody Two-Shoes image she works so hard to project, but you never notice when the phony mask slips and reveals the real Share underneath. The rest of us here are pretty much WYSIWYG, thank goodness. But that isn't the case with Share, and it grates on those of us who value authenticity and honesty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : But you obviously feel Share needs protection. Anybody else on FFL need to be protected, or is it just Share, do you think? Also, people here constantly talk about others' problems (real or imagined), and I don't recall your ever speaking up about it before. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : I don't think people here need other people to diagnose some big problem that they supposedly have. People have different approaches to life, that's all. I don't think you are in a position to know what Share's problems are, or even if she has any. She is under no obligation to engage with anybody here or answer questions on demand, especially from those who do not wish her well. I think she is remarkably polite to you, given your relentless hostility and patronizing manner toward her. You noted a few days ago that posting to FFL was a hobby of yours. Well, it is Share's hobby too, so I think you should leave her alone to enjoy it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : I don't hate Share, feste. I think she has some big problems she's unwilling to look at that hold her back from the person she could be. And I can tell you exactly what she could say that would appease me in this particular case. Want to hear it? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : I don't know why you bother, Share. This woman hates you and will take issue with whatever you say, however you say it. Nothing you could ever say would appease her.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
For decades?? Share, you've known me for less than a single decade. What on earth would lead you to think you knew what I've been doing for decades? It couldn't be that you're taking Barry's word as gospel, could it? I've certainly been hammering Barry for decades (or almost two), but as you've been told several times now, he's been hammering me at least as relentlessly, and far more nastily, for the same length of time. As I noted, he was attacking me shortly after his arrival on FFL, well before I ever got here. I'm afraid your theories will need to be revised to take facts into account. Judy is another story, being way harsher and self righteous. What compels a person to participate in such a manner so unrelentingly? And for decades! I admit it totally baffles me. Well, not totally. I have my theories. Which I'm sure you guys would LOVE to hear LOL!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Barry! Re: Emily's more of a puzzle, in that she seems to have really, really, really developed her own personal vendetta against Share. It may have *started* with her just following the girls in the Mean Girls Club, but now the opportunity to dump on Share is pretty much the only thing that draws her back to FFL. She's addicted to Judy's playbook, having found it a good fit for herself. And interestingly, she's even more in denial about her real motivations for doing this (hatred) than Judy is. On some level, I think Judy may actually be aware of how insanely vindictive she is; I don't think Emily is, or will ever be. She's in complete denial. SHARE, CHECK OUT THESE LYRICS! HEY, JUST IN CASE YOU ARE CURIOUS, THE KEY TO GETTING OVER RESENTMENT IS MEDITATING ON A WORD THAT STARTS WITH F; KNOW WHAT IT IS? HAVE A GREAT DAY SHARE. LOVE, EM Say What You Need To Say John Mayer Lyrics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfWcPu7g2k8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfWcPu7g2k8 Say What You Need To Say John Mayer Lyrics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfWcPu7g2k8 this time i am going to do the karate kid 2010 View on www.youtube.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfWcPu7g2k8 Preview by Yahoo Barry! Ah ha ha ha. This is so funny! [Note to self: Do try and figure out why you laugh so hard on this forum; there must be something terribly wrong with you, considering the way you seem to offend certain others with your sense of humor. Try and develop a softer edge; you can do it. You and your ego have the ability to effect change within you! If that doesn't work, try tapping it out! Or, take note of what is written on the website for the Sedona Method (see below) - letting go of feelings is easy for Share! It's working for Share, it might work for you too. She is *not* holding onto fear of you and the assumption you are *mean* based on her own inability to be accountable for her own behavior stemming back to the RWC kerfuffle. She did *not* etch out, on a stone tablet, to be forever referred to as *proof*, her judgment of you (that she apparently took from Barry's playbook) that she *knows* to be *true*, because she thinks it is!] It is not that feelings don’t occasionally appear to be justified. It’s just that feelings are only feelings; feelings are not who we are—and we can easily let them go http://www.sedona.com/sample-of-process.asp. Choosing to let them go frees us to perceive what is actually here, and to act, or refrain from acting, accordingly. This translates into an ability to handle life: to make stronger, clearer choices. It allows you and me to act in ways that support us in achieving our goals and aspirations, as opposed to sabotaging them. I have seen the process of letting go of the emotions grow into an ability to have more money http://www.sedona.com/financial-abundance.asp, better relationships http://www.sedona.com/relationships.asp, more radiant health and physical well-being http://www.sedona.com/health-and-wellness.asp, and an ability to be happy, calm, and focused, no matter what is going on around us. If you've tried mental techniques, you know that it is very difficult to create a change. It requires massive energy and focus. It's a hard thing to do! But releasing operates on the feeling level. It's easy. You can let go of years of mental programs and accumulated feelings in just seconds using the Sedona Method's unique techniques http://www.sedona.com/how-the-sedona-method-is-unique.asp. There are no complicated processes or reprogramming or affirmations to plaster all over your computer-screen.
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
And it's also kind of funny. One day you'll get a bunch of posts here about how he wasn't qualified to be a teacher of meditation because of this reason or that reason, or that he didn't follow the traditional Indian protocols, and then the next day you'll get an equal number of posts describing what a traditional Hindu he was, trying to foist that agenda on his organization. I will say that there was an emphasis put on the Hindu side of things. Hindu holy days etc. I never had a problem with it, but it isn't of much interest to me now. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, steve.sundur@... wrote : Hey Michael, how you doin'? Now, that is sort of funny. That wasn't the question I asked, but you have knack of tying anything to your usual theme. Yes, no doubt there was a lot of repetition in MMY's message. Yes, it could get rather dull. But for me, well, I found many gems. I gained insight into Vedic knowledge and Hindu scriptures. You hear the criticism that M was no student of Hinduism or the Vedas. And it seems that most of that criticism centers on the mantras, or whether he was qualified to have the role of a teacher, or one of so many other technical points. Like any of that mattered to me. Not! I found his knowledge of the Vedas to be profound. I think his commentary of the Gita was profound. Please, show me otherwise, other than some technical point that because he wasn't a Brahman, he wasn't authorized to have the role he assumed. I'm not saying that things didn't get a little topsy turvy in the last 15 years ago, because I think they did, but I'm still riding the wave of what I got. And yes, I got my money's worth. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : When did Marshy ever change? He told the same old story for decades and lied every time he told them. From: steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:02 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Here's what I find kind of interesting, if I've got it right. When a person returns to posting after being away for a while, you expect a fresh perspective, like we got from RD, with that beautiful poem, and also noticing that she refrains from participating in negativity. (okay, 2016 campaign hasn't started (-; But then Edg comes back, full of all that old anger towards Richard, as though the disagreements were yesterday. Like I say, I'm not sure if Richard said something that triggered Edg on this last round, but it seemed to come out of nowhere. And really, that's kind of scary to think that a person hasn't changed in so many months. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog@... wrote : A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory. Wikipedia. Warning: Opinions, assumptions and theories offered on FFLife will be challenged if based on fantasy or lies.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote:I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. OK, but in what wyy are they useful to you Share? This is what I was curious about. But at the risk of being accused of abusing you by asking you such an impertinent and inappropriate question let's consider it a redundant one. Only you will ever know hoo it is useful beyond the mere fact that you assert it is. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Ann, posting for the FOURTH time, my answer to this question of yours! Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Monday, June 16, 2014 8:49 AM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. OK, but in what wyy are they useful to you Share? This is what I was curious about. But at the risk of being accused of abusing you by asking you such an impertinent and inappropriate question let's consider it a redundant one. Only you will ever know hoo it is useful beyond the mere fact that you assert it is. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote:I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Judy, emptybill posted two phrases which I had never encountered before and that is the knowledge I was and am referring to. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:44 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote:I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Phrases are not knowledge, Share. Any knowledge about Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava, you obtained on your own--except for the knowledge emptybill provided, which, as you keep avoiding, was that they are are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, emptybill posted two phrases which I had never encountered before and that is the knowledge I was and am referring to. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:44 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Judy, we disagree about this. Since I had never encountered them before, it was knowledge to find out that those phrases exist. I googled on them immediately after skimming the rest of empty's post and only in a later post of his did I read the additional info about using anger as a path to God. On Monday, June 16, 2014 9:39 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Phrases are not knowledge, Share. Any knowledge about Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava, you obtained on your own--except for the knowledge emptybill provided, which, as you keep avoiding, was that they are are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, emptybill posted two phrases which I had never encountered before and that is the knowledge I was and am referring to. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:44 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote:I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Judykins, also FYI, one of the reasons you have zero credibility with the journalists taking notes on this forum is that you are completely incapable of letting your attempted demonization of one of your victims drop. You and Ann are STILL harassing Share, trying to get her to explain things she adequately (and, contrary to you, nicely) explained right at the beginning of all this. This is the same behavior that causes them to write Jim Flanegin off as a nutcase. No one who gets their buttons pushed as much as he does and who reacts to them having *been* pushed by lashing out the way he does is in their minds a candidate for enlightenment. More of a candidate for a loony bin. As for you, as you say it's all in the archives. The reporters you're attempting to preach to have read your interactions with people on FFL, they've read Andrew's Defender Of The Faith website, and they've seen your hypocrisy on a daily basis on FFL for some time now. As a result, when you declare things true, as if you really know what that is, they laugh at you as much as I do. But please don't stop. The more active examples of the benefits of TM like you and Nablus are on the forum, the more meat these journalists have for the articles or books they're researching. Carry on... :-) From: authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Phrases are not knowledge, Share. Any knowledge about Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava, you obtained on your own--except for the knowledge emptybill provided, which, as you keep avoiding, was that they are are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, emptybill posted two phrases which I had never encountered before and that is the knowledge I was and am referring to. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:44 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Stop digging, Share. You're getting yourself into an increasingly deep hole. Below, I quoted the entirety of emptybill's post--three sentences, the second of which was the one that mentioned Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava in the context of using anger as a path to God. There was almost nothing for you to skim. What you're calling additional knowledge in a later post wasn't additional, it was in the very post you thanked him for and said was useful to you. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, we disagree about this. Since I had never encountered them before, it was knowledge to find out that those phrases exist. I googled on them immediately after skimming the rest of empty's post and only in a later post of his did I read the additional info about using anger as a path to God. On Monday, June 16, 2014 9:39 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Phrases are not knowledge, Share. Any knowledge about Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava, you obtained on your own--except for the knowledge emptybill provided, which, as you keep avoiding, was that they are are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, emptybill posted two phrases which I had never encountered before and that is the knowledge I was and am referring to. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:44 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Judy, I skimmed because my attention was focused on the two unfamiliar phrases. And here's the additional knowledge which empty posted later, June 9 at 2:06 pm: The point was the assertion that there is an alternate path to godhead http://swamitripurari.com/2011/09/liberating-the-demons/ September 8th, 2011 by Swami T. P. Tripurari Q. Are the demons that Krishna fights with in his earthly play (prakata-lila) his eternal associates? It appears not, as in the spiritual world there are no demons or nondevotees. However, it is said that Putana, the female demon who was killed by baby Krishna, attained a position in the spiritual world as his nurse, so she must have been fully purified of contamination due to contact with him. Since Krishna’s lilas are eternal what happens to those who play the parts of demons in his prakata-lilas? A. Sri Jiva Goswami says that one of the distinguishing features of Sri Krishna is that when he kills demons they attain spiritual liberation (mukti), which is a characteristic that is unique among all appearances of the Godhead. Five types of mukti are mentioned in the scriptures. They are salokya (being promoted to the realm of God), samipya (becoming an associate of God), sarupya (attaining a form like that of God), sarsti (attaining opulences like those of God), and sayujya (merging into the effulgence of God). Of the five types of mukti, Gaudiya Vaishnavas reject sayujya because it is devoid of an intimate personal relationship with Sri Krishna. Actually, devotees of Krishna are not interested in attaining any kind of mukti. In Srimad-Bhagavatam Krishna says, salokya-sarsti-samipya-sarupyaikatvam apy uta diyamanam na grhnanti vina mat-sevanam janah: “My devotees do not accept salokya, sarsti, sarupya, samipya, or oneness with me (sayujya)—even if I offer these liberations—in preference to serving me.” (SB 3.29.13) As for the demons killed by Krishna, most attained sayujya-mukti. Some, such as Aghasura and Paundraka, attained sarupya-mukti, and others attained the status that they had previous to appearing as demons and from there progressed on to attain prema (divine love). Of these, only the demoness Putana directly attained prema. This is because in a motherly manner she offered baby Krishna her breast milk. Although she was attempting to kill him, Krishna mercifully accepted her in this way—as his nurse, whereby she attained his eternal abode. Thus it is clear that the demons appearing in the prakata-lila other than the appearances of Jaya and Vijaya are not Krishna’s eternal associates but rather materially conditioned souls who for various reasons appear as demons during his manifest lila. Many of these reasons are explained in Sri Garga-samhita, wherein the previous lives of many demons are revealed. A Bengali translation from the original Sanskrit by Pujyapada Sridhara Deva Goswami is in print. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura points out that Krishna’s apparent punishment of the demons or unrighteous is in fact an act of mercy because the final result of this punishment is liberation. Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana in his Govinda Bhasya commentary on Vedanta-sutra says that the demons killed by Krishna experience not only the death of their gross material body but the demise of their subtle body as well. The subtle body carries the soul from one gross body to another. The subtle body consisting of a state of mind is the basis of the gross body that one acquires in the next life. When the subtle body of the unrighteous person is destroyed by Krishna, the person’s attitude toward him immediately changes, for his opposition to Krishna was a product of his subtle body—his unrighteous disposition. On the demise of the subtle body, his hostility toward Krishna is transformed into love for Krishna. Thus at the moment of death he sees Krishna as the greatest object of affection. His liberation is not directly a result of being killed by Krishna but rather the result of his newfound love for him. Jaya and Vijaya, the devotees of Vishnu who came to the material world and played the role of demons, are of course exceptions. Sri Jiva Goswami writes in Krsna-sandarbha that these two gatekeepers of Vaikuntha do not appear every time the lila is manifest, but rather materially conditioned souls come to play the roles these devotees had played in the lila in accordance with the will of Bhagavan. In his Laghu Bhagavatamrta, Sri Rupa Goswami cites Visnu Purana’s conversation between Maitreya and Parasarama concerning Jaya and Vijaya. Srila Prabhupada comments on this section of the Purana and Sri Rupa Goswami’s insight as follows: “This discussion between Maitreya Muni and Parasara Muni centered on whether devotees come down into the material world in every millennium like Jaya and Vijaya, who were cursed by the Kumaras to that effect. In the course of these instructions to Maitreya about Hiranyakasipu,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Actually, Share did not explain things adequately, but that's a red herring with regard to your own misrepresentations. The lurking reporters have not seen any hypocrisy from me, nor have they seen me say anything that was untruthful. Your claims about Robin in your recent post were factually false, and the FFL archives bear that out, regardless of any declarations I might make. (BTW, if I'm a cult apologist, why am I going after Share, one of the most committed TMers on the forum, and calling her credibility in question? OPSIE.) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Judykins, also FYI, one of the reasons you have zero credibility with the journalists taking notes on this forum is that you are completely incapable of letting your attempted demonization of one of your victims drop. You and Ann are STILL harassing Share, trying to get her to explain things she adequately (and, contrary to you, nicely) explained right at the beginning of all this. This is the same behavior that causes them to write Jim Flanegin off as a nutcase. No one who gets their buttons pushed as much as he does and who reacts to them having *been* pushed by lashing out the way he does is in their minds a candidate for enlightenment. More of a candidate for a loony bin. As for you, as you say it's all in the archives. The reporters you're attempting to preach to have read your interactions with people on FFL, they've read Andrew's Defender Of The Faith website, and they've seen your hypocrisy on a daily basis on FFL for some time now. As a result, when you declare things true, as if you really know what that is, they laugh at you as much as I do. But please don't stop. The more active examples of the benefits of TM like you and Nablus are on the forum, the more meat these journalists have for the articles or books they're researching. Carry on... :-) From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann Phrases are not knowledge, Share. Any knowledge about Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava, you obtained on your own--except for the knowledge emptybill provided, which, as you keep avoiding, was that they are are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, emptybill posted two phrases which I had never encountered before and that is the knowledge I was and am referring to. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:44 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nope. Here's what you said: Thank you so much emptybill. this knowledge about rasas and bhavas is extremely useful. However, the only knowledge emptybill conveyed about rasas and bhavas is that they are said to be instrumental in bringing about God-realization through anger: You talk transcend but cannot transcend your habitual identification with Christian mythology . Apparently you are unaware of the paths to god through Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava. Although not recommended, they are considered the swiftest means of god realization. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/386362 IOW, you are continuing to try to mislead us. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, I think what I said to emptybill, is that I had never encountered those phrases before and I like learning new things. To me that means they were useful, as was the info I found when I googled on them. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 8:34 PM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Judykins, also FYI, one of the reasons you have zero credibility with the journalists taking notes on this forum is that you are completely incapable of letting your attempted demonization of one of your victims drop. You and Ann are STILL harassing Share, trying to get her to explain things she adequately (and, contrary to you, nicely) explained right at the beginning of all this. This is the same behavior that causes them to write Jim Flanegin off as a nutcase. No one who gets their buttons pushed as much as he does and who reacts to them having *been* pushed by lashing out the way he does is in their minds a candidate for enlightenment. More of a candidate for a loony bin. As for you, as you say it's all in the archives. The reporters you're attempting to preach to have read your interactions with people on FFL, they've read Andrew's Defender Of The Faith website, and they've seen your hypocrisy on a daily basis on FFL for some time now. As a result, when you declare things true, as if you really know what that is, they laugh at you as much as I do. But please don't stop. The more active examples of the benefits of TM like you and Nablus are on the forum, the more meat these journalists have for the articles or books they're researching. Carry on... :-) God bawee, you're killin' me here. Oh Christ, you do take yourself and your reporters so daaarn seriously. Fuck, you're hilarious. Hey reporters! What's your analysis of your stooge bawee? Oh hey, gotta go, just got a private email from one of them, I'll report back.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Share, Knowledge is presumably what we directly experience and interpret accurately. We can at times mistakenly interpret what we experience. Further we can have delusions about our experience which is a mistake that is persistent. We can also remember experiences incorrectly, memories shift over time. Belief is an acceptance that something exists or that a statement is true, but a belief always has the element of the hypothetical about it because it is not direct - there is always an uncertainty about it. Faith is belief without evidence, or the pretence that you know something you don't actually know. Opinions can be informed (connected to knowledge somehow or informed belief, such as the result of a well done scientific experiment) or uninformed (mere belief, or faith). Just about everything we say here on FFL is the second sort. Most of what we think, perhaps all of it, is uncertain to various degrees, and so does not constitute knowledge. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, we have disagreed about what constitutes knowledge. That is a matter of opinion not fact. imo the 2 phrases constituted knowledge for me. Also, I disagree with your assessment of my inner thoughts and emotions because I know what they were and that you have interpreted them inaccurately. This is not avoidance or denial by one person. It is a disagreement between two people.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Thanks, Xeno, this is a wonderful summary of epitomolgy imo. In this context, as soon as I read empty's 2 phrases, Raudra Rasa and Krodha Bhava, I had knowledge of their existence. Which I did not have before. I did interpret that what he wrote was truly a concept in Hindu philosophy. This interpretation was based on my experience with what he's written here before. And when I googled, I verified the accuracy both of what he wrote and my interpretation. On Monday, June 16, 2014 1:38 PM, anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, Knowledge is presumably what we directly experience and interpret accurately. We can at times mistakenly interpret what we experience. Further we can have delusions about our experience which is a mistake that is persistent. We can also remember experiences incorrectly, memories shift over time. Belief is an acceptance that something exists or that a statement is true, but a belief always has the element of the hypothetical about it because it is not direct - there is always an uncertainty about it. Faith is belief without evidence, or the pretence that you know something you don't actually know. Opinions can be informed (connected to knowledge somehow or informed belief, such as the result of a well done scientific experiment) or uninformed (mere belief, or faith). Just about everything we say here on FFL is the second sort. Most of what we think, perhaps all of it, is uncertain to various degrees, and so does not constitute knowledge. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, we have disagreed about what constitutes knowledge. That is a matter of opinion not fact. imo the 2 phrases constituted knowledge for me. Also, I disagree with your assessment of my inner thoughts and emotions because I know what they were and that you have interpreted them inaccurately. This is not avoidance or denial by one person. It is a disagreement between two people.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : The mere idea of the person with the least ability to self-assess I've ever encountered on this planet using the phrase You have no idea how transparent you are in a sentence is a real hoot. I thank you for the belly laugh. :-) You've been providing all the belly laughs today, Mr Provocateur, now it's someone else's turn to try. However, I laughed harder at you today so you win. Come to think of it, this post of yours, is it inadvertently ironic or were you trying for the effect of hilarity?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, punditster@... wrote : On 6/16/2014 8:26 PM, feste37 wrote: It's not a matter of protection. It's simply that your harassment of Share is so persistent, so unpleasant, so obsessive, that it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. No one deserves to be pursued by a harridan like you, least of all Share, who knows how to preserve civil discourse even if you don't. Oh for God's sake and mine just leave it alone. If I were Share I would tell you to back off, mind your own business and assume I can look after myself. You treat her like an invalid. You're all so cloying and claustrophobic. Anyone with an iota of self respect would be insulted by all of your concern and it's about time Share showed a bit of independence and told you all to fuck off.
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Why do any of us care what any of us has to say? Why are we here, anyway? Dumb questions, empty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
People participate for a variety of reasons and those reasons can change even during one day. Some posts I answer just for fun and many to learn and some to express gratitude and some to give info I think might be helpful. And then there are my unstressing posts, which I think we all have from time to time. On Sunday, June 15, 2014 7:08 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why do any of us care what any of us has to say? Why are we here, anyway? Dumb questions, empty. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ...the outrage! Got harp?
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Why do any of us care what any of us has to say? Why are we here, anyway? Dumb questions, empty. 'Cause we are such caring people ... the compassionate TM'ers, scions of an ancient enlightenment in this New Golden Age. Can't you tell?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
From: emptyb...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ...the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Has anyone noticed that Judy seems to have as faulty an assessment of the number of people who believe her when she declares Truth as Jimbo does when he declares his enlightenment? :-) From: authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:29 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ...the outrage! Got harp?
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp? Got a brain? Are you implying Share has nothing worthwhile or interesting to say? I don't agree. I am interested because this is not, bawee and you take note, just a place to spew your shit without a drop of interest in knowing what others have to say or think on a matter. I am participating in this forum to learn what others know and think and feel about various subjects. I already know what I feel about stuff so don't need to read what I post here nor do I simply drop in to throw out some rant. I interact. You appear to operate differently. You simply like to insult, as if this place and the people matter to you or that they ruffled your dusty old feathers in some way. Why do you bother when there are so many good books to read on subjects you apparently don't practice in your own life? Or wait, maybe you are perfecting your path through anger to get to God, only you're doing it through all of us.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yes and due to her thinking for herself and her pleasant conversations you write her probably the meanest, crushingest post of anyone telling her how stupid and dumb and bliss-ninnyish she acts and is as a human being. Warning her to shut the fuck up because you can't stand her bringing this stupidity and vapidity to this shrine and home you know as FFL. Bawee, have you ever once considered your hypocrisy? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
The question is whether Barry believes his own paranoid fantasies are Truth. Nobody else does. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Has anyone noticed that Judy seems to have as faulty an assessment of the number of people who believe her when she declares Truth as Jimbo does when he declares his enlightenment? :-) From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:29 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
You live in a strange world, Barry. Absolute statements, and reactions to them, are the only components of discussion you appear to be familiar with. Reminds me of someone who has been so overloaded with stimulus that he only now knows two values, ON, or OFF, BLACK, or WHITE. Once again, your issue, that you try to smear everyone else with. Have A DISCUSSION once in awhile, about something real. The rest of us do. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Has anyone noticed that Judy seems to have as faulty an assessment of the number of people who believe her when she declares Truth as Jimbo does when he declares his enlightenment? :-) From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:29 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
applause ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emptybill@... wrote : Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp? Got a brain? Are you implying Share has nothing worthwhile or interesting to say? I don't agree. I am interested because this is not, bawee and you take note, just a place to spew your shit without a drop of interest in knowing what others have to say or think on a matter. I am participating in this forum to learn what others know and think and feel about various subjects. I already know what I feel about stuff so don't need to read what I post here nor do I simply drop in to throw out some rant. I interact. You appear to operate differently. You simply like to insult, as if this place and the people matter to you or that they ruffled your dusty old feathers in some way. Why do you bother when there are so many good books to read on subjects you apparently don't practice in your own life? Or wait, maybe you are perfecting your path through anger to get to God, only you're doing it through all of us.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
can you say the stench of desperation? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The question is whether Barry believes his own paranoid fantasies are Truth. Nobody else does. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Has anyone noticed that Judy seems to have as faulty an assessment of the number of people who believe her when she declares Truth as Jimbo does when he declares his enlightenment? :-) From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:29 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
He's losing influence here, and he knows it. Instead of trying to recoup by coming up with at least more plausible fantasies, he's doubled down on the crazy ones. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : can you say the stench of desperation? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The question is whether Barry believes his own paranoid fantasies are Truth. Nobody else does. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Has anyone noticed that Judy seems to have as faulty an assessment of the number of people who believe her when she declares Truth as Jimbo does when he declares his enlightenment? :-) From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:29 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Even worse, the *stale*, crazy ones. I can do crazy, but old, cob-webby, was clever in the last millenium, rehashed a hundred times on FFL, crazy - nope. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : He's losing influence here, and he knows it. Instead of trying to recoup by coming up with at least more plausible fantasies, he's doubled down on the crazy ones. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fleetwood_macncheese@... wrote : can you say the stench of desperation? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : The question is whether Barry believes his own paranoid fantasies are Truth. Nobody else does. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Has anyone noticed that Judy seems to have as faulty an assessment of the number of people who believe her when she declares Truth as Jimbo does when he declares his enlightenment? :-) From: authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 2:29 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann None of what Barry says is true. Big surprise. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: emptybill@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Well I'm so shocked. No one answered MY question. Why do any of you care what Share thinks or has to say? What does it matter to anyone here? Why should it matter? Share committed the Unpardonable Sin. Early in her tenure here, the MGC thought that she had been recruited as a full-fledged member. But then she started (gasp) thinking for herself, and then (horrors!) started having pleasant conversations with people she was supposed to hate. And then she took it even further, and refused to submit to the Holy Scourging of Saint Robin, thus moving from rebellious to heretic. They've been on her ass ever since. Hell hath no fury like a Mean Girl scorned. Just ask John in Brazil. He was a Judy suck-up for a while, but then he caught a clue, realized who and what she was, and said so. She stalked him for years afterwards, too. Yuh just wanna see ships crash on the rocks and sink! Ah the outrage ... the outrage! Got harp?
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
[FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?! I never saw that you answered the question with how it is useful to you personally, that is all. For me to write what I did about enemas and washing machines was meant as a light attempt at humour - it says more about the value I place in all the book learning and wordy tomes that some spend their lives studying all the while missing out on the life that is actually happening all around them. For me, the idea of getting to know God through anger is not useful so I was merely asking how you found it useful. But, on another note, you have to understand the dynamics around here, Share. Richard took our interaction and created a problem. He does this all the time. He is the mischevious elf, the trickster, the lurker, the guy who is posting out of control at almost 300 posts per week and most of it is simply using a stick to poke and prod in order to keep this place at some dumbed down level of superficiality and spite. That is why I told him, twice, to stop this week. If you read his couple of posts carefully, the ones I responded to about knocking it off with fucking around with you you might recognize what I am talking about. You are his tool to get things going here that resulted in this latest brouhaha. He doesn't care who he uses to do this, sometimes it is you, sometimes it is me, sometimes it is MJ or bawee or Judy - no one is exempt. If you want to see him as some benevolent uncle type, go ahead, but he has his own agenda and is all for his own amusement.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote:I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Ann
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote : You said nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of emptybill's information, which was that anger is said to be the fastest route to God-realization. That's what you thanked him for and said was useful to you, and what Ann was asking about. Now we will be accused, by the White Knights, of berating, abusing and slamming Share. I mean, what is this? You ask someone what they mean by something they have said, they dance around and all of a sudden the asker becomes some sort of harpie, unreasonable tyrant? C'mon you people, get a fucking grip. Hey, I know, let's ask one of the supposed lurker reporters, investigators or other individuals studying us lab rats and see what they have to say. Anyone? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Judy, you are wrong. Here is the post wherein I answered Ann's question: Rasas and bhavas are all about emotions, which in another thread you said you have (-: I don't think we have 100% control over our emotions. And now that I think of it, I wouldn't want to. OTOH, I also think that the so called negative emotions release damaging chemicals into the body. If these emotions are continually experienced, quite a lot of damage can occur. Conversely, I think certain behaviors can facilitate having positive emotions more of the time. For example, getting a good night's sleep and eating healthy food. I also think a key factor is taking responsibility for our emotional experiences. I don't think anyone can help the thoughts and emotions that come and go all the time. But I think most people can at the very least, be committed to an intention to focus on the positive and attend to what's negative only for as long as it takes to deal with it. I don't think we're responsible for the thoughts and feelings that come and go. But we are responsible for the thoughts and feelings we entertain and feed. This is what rasa and bhava is about. On Saturday, June 14, 2014 10:32 AM, authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Share, no, you didn't answer Ann's question. The post you cited as having done so wasn't about how the information was useful to you. It was just a rundown of the information itself. But even so you left out emptybill's point, which was about anger being a means to God-realization. I wondered myself how that could possibly be useful to you, since it seems so contrary to your personal philosophy. You didn't say a word about that. And there was not a thing wrong with the tone of Ann's post. WTF! indeed. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote : Ann, you initially wrote: I can't imagine in what way this information could possibly be useful. Information on how to operate your washing machine or directions on self administering an anema are useful. Please enlighten me. Given the tone of your post, I think I did pretty good responding civilly to you, several times. And I even answered your question! As the FFL guys might say: WTF?!
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann, Judy, Ravi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius
anartaxius@... wrote:
Ann, Judy, Ravi -
Alas, I am an unregenerate generalist. Platitudinous, gelatinous and vague,
abstract universal constructs are kind of the way I see the world now. I am
not normally concerned with people's thoughts about motivations. Based on my
own experience, I assume others have some kind of internal process going on
out of which their speech, writing and behaviour flow. But I think of that as
a process, a physical process that follows along the lines of the laws of
physics. I really do see the universe as being rather mechanical. It flows
along mysteriously but seems to have some kind of definable processes and
structure, whose ultimate details will elude me.
The mind that I experience is part of that process. It goes on by itself. The
things 'I' see are part of that process. This thing about motivation and
blame just is not real to me unless one of those buttons, hidden away in the
process gets pushed, and the mind contracts. That is a mechanical stimulus
response. What I see of others is what they say and do, not how they see the
world, but what they do in the world. My response to that is pretty much a
foregone conclusion even if I am unaware of the specific processes that lead
to that response. Ravi is entirely correct in the way I would respond, that
is 'my' nature. I live that nature, it is not necessary to make up
explanations for my motivation. They *feel* like motivations at times, but
since they happen whether 'I' want them to or not, it is not germane to make
up specific explanations that seem to explain them in terms of empathic
concepts, in terms of good and evil concepts. That is a fantasy to me. That
each of you do what you do, and that Barry does what he does is part of the
process of life as I see it, like ripples in the river as it flows by.
In another post I composited an image from Google Earth's roving camera car
output showing the scene Barry was describing, though at a different time of
day. That gave me a way to visualise the scene he was describing, for I have
never been to France. Very urban. I am in New York City sometimes. I really
do not like urban settings that well. I tend to like the countryside where it
is quiet. Barry is very cosmopolitan. That is what he seems to like. That is
fine with me. This constant concern with motivations is a bore to me, like
watching a soap opera like Days of Our Lives: 'Like sands through the
hourglass, so are the days of our lives', NBC TV show. These dramas have no
substantial arch plot; they are all interpersonal interaction on the
conceptual level of motivation and blame and guilt. Button pushing in the
extreme disguised as human life. Everyone wanders about in these dramas as if
they are living in a comatose, low-grade emergency situation. You watch these
things and you become comatose (my sister watches these things). If this is
how you live your life, you are comatose ('If' is propositional, an
hypothesis, and thus it is not a statement of how you live your live from my
perspective).
Barry at least seems to be having the time of his life.
Seems is the word. It is of overwhelming importance to
Barry that we all *think* he's having the time of his life.
Some of us suspect the tone and content of most of his posts
is evidence to the contrary.
I think that is fine. You need something more anthemic in
your lives than these picky disputes. Anthemic: refers to
music that has a presence, an atmospheric feel that lifts
one out of the ordinary into something more glorious and
magnificent. Now maybe you have some of this grandeur in
your lives, but it does not show through in what you write
very much.
How can you tell, given all the disclaimers in the first
paragraphs of your post?
You try to play both ends against the middle, Xeno, and it
really is not terribly successful.
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann, Judy, Ravi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: Ann, Judy, Ravi - Alas, I am an unregenerate generalist. Platitudinous, gelatinous and vague, abstract universal constructs are kind of the way I see the world now. I am not normally concerned with people's thoughts about motivations. Based on my own experience, I assume others have some kind of internal process going on out of which their speech, writing and behaviour flow. But I think of that as a process, a physical process that follows along the lines of the laws of physics. I really do see the universe as being rather mechanical. It flows along mysteriously but seems to have some kind of definable processes and structure, whose ultimate details will elude me. dRshyam: kRtaarthaM prati *naSTam*! :D
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann, Judy, Ravi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius
anartaxius@... wrote:
Ann, Judy, Ravi -
Alas, I am an unregenerate generalist. Platitudinous, gelatinous and vague,
abstract universal constructs are kind of the way I see the world now. I am
not normally concerned with people's thoughts about motivations. Based on my
own experience, I assume others have some kind of internal process going on
out of which their speech, writing and behaviour flow.
Of course they do.
But I think of that as a process, a physical process that follows along the
lines of the laws of physics. I really do see the universe as being rather
mechanical. It flows along mysteriously but seems to have some kind of
definable processes and structure, whose ultimate details will elude me.
They certainly not only seem to elude you but you don't appear to care to
understand them. This is fine but it sets you up for a double standard when you
'applaud' the actions of one person whose manipulations are calculated to
mislead. Then when others object to falsehoods being spouted and they are
pointed at as if they are silly for objecting you would have to be just a teeny
bit curious about what motivates the liar/ridiculer for acting as they do,
wouldn't you? I mean as a normally functioning human being you'd have to but
you apparently aren't. You simply seem to accept the offensive maneuvers of the
one party and reject/judge the defensive actions of the second party. There is
a degree of favoritism and lack of objectivity here, Spock.
The mind that I experience is part of that process. It goes on by itself. The
things 'I' see are part of that process. This thing about motivation and
blame just is not real to me unless one of those buttons, hidden away in the
process gets pushed, and the mind contracts. That is a mechanical stimulus
response. What I see of others is what they say and do, not how they see the
world, but what they do in the world. My response to that is pretty much a
foregone conclusion even if I am unaware of the specific processes that lead
to that response. Ravi is entirely correct in the way I would respond, that
is 'my' nature. I live that nature, it is not necessary to make up
explanations for my motivation. They *feel* like motivations at times, but
since they happen whether 'I' want them to or not, it is not germane to make
up specific explanations that seem to explain them in terms of empathic
concepts, in terms of good and evil concepts. That is a fantasy to me. That
each of you do what you do, and that Barry does what he does is part of the
process of life as I see it, like ripples in the river as it flows by.
Xeno, what are you talking about that in any way relates to the
subject/questions I asked you? Baffledy gobbledy gook.
In another post I composited an image from Google Earth's roving camera car
output showing the scene Barry was describing, though at a different time of
day. That gave me a way to visualise the scene he was describing, for I have
never been to France. Very urban. I am in New York City sometimes. I really
do not like urban settings that well. I tend to like the countryside where it
is quiet. Barry is very cosmopolitan. That is what he seems to like. That is
fine with me. This constant concern with motivations is a bore to me, like
watching a soap opera like Days of Our Lives: 'Like sands through the
hourglass, so are the days of our lives', NBC TV show. These dramas have no
substantial arch plot; they are all interpersonal interaction on the
conceptual level of motivation and blame and guilt. Button pushing in the
extreme disguised as human life. Everyone wanders about in these dramas as if
they are living in a comatose, low-grade emergency situation. You watch these
things and you become comatose (my sister watches these things). If this is
how you live your life, you are comatose ('If' is propositional, an
hypothesis, and thus it is not a statement of how you live your live from my
perspective).
What are you actually saying? That life resembles a soap opera if you question
motivation?
Barry at least seems to be having the time of his life.
This is irrelevant to the subject of motivation. Barry could have won the 50
million dollar lottery, have a woman on each arm, be eating caviar riding
around in a Rolls for all I care. No one is saying Barry shouldn't be living it
up and enjoying every minute of it. I am merely asking what keeps compelling
him to, in his great happiness, fulfillment and full-of-French-baguetteness, be
so outwardly prickly and distasteful? When I'm happy I don't try and push
people's buttons or start fights or make it my life's mission to cause others
to post out and then stroke myself with satisfaction like Barry does. Get it?
I think that is fine. You need something more anthemic in your lives than
these picky disputes. Anthemic: refers to music
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman
Thanks Ann. I didn't think you were ignoring me. I thought maybe the post had just gotten buried without being seen. :) Sweet regarding your friend that trained with Brannaman. I had never heard of him until last year, when someone recommended the documentary to me. We have an independent theater in town that was running the film at the time and I was able to catch it. Usually I'm not much of a movie goer. After seeing Buck and comparing the little I observed and read about Brannaman, I got the impression he was a bit more genuine/honest than Monty. But again, that was just my armchair impression. FFL Buck's feedback seemed to corroborate my impression. But it's still only my impression; no experience to back it up. You stated: In the end it does come down to gaining the horse's trust and also establishing yourself as the boss, but a benevolent boss. So true. I've found similar with dogs. (I currently own a pet-sitting/dog-walking service. Interestingly, I've found greyhounds to be close to a horse's temperament; at least the few greyhounds I work with.) I helped break in a few ponies in my younger days. All I recall is first I would spend time with them on a lead and grooming. We got to know each other. Then I'd get them familiar with a blanket on their back. Then familiar with the saddle on their back. Then familiar with me on their back. I have no idea if it was a correct way to break in a horse or not; it's just what we did on the farm...and it worked. When I was growing up, the neighborhood ponies horses lived in a large, large pasture which graced my back yard. My neighbor, Mr. Abernathy, oversaw the pasture and horses. We paid him a small amount of rent each month. He had a not-too-large stable and tack room. The girls in the neighborhood rode horses; the guys rode mini-bikes. (This was in the 1960s and early 70s.) We rode on trails in the neighborhood and in wide open pastures that were also in the hood. We could go at a full gallops in those wide open fields. We road all around the small city where I grew up (Hickory, North Carolina). That could not be done now due to the city's growth and rules and regulations. Plus, most of the wide open pastures and all the trails are gone...now developed with expensive homes. I only rode saddle seat a few times. I did learn to post, but that was my extent of my English riding. I did a little bit of jumping, but not very high. I rode mostly Western and bareback. As a child, I'd often pretend I was an American Indian. My pony and I were on grand adventures of survival. Other times I had saddle bags and would be a Western cowgirl. Ha. ;) I can tell that you have a great love for these majestic beings. They truly are majestic. And I'm glad to read of your success in training them. Your following paragraph should be published somewhere for horsemen/women. Ann stated: In my experience a true horseman is a true horseman irrespective of the discipline (western, english, saddle seat, endurance) they originate from. In the end it is all about the horse and establishing the conditions whereby the creature can have a safe and good life. If you ruin its confidence, its body or its trust you condemn it to a terrible and often short existence. Most people who ride are amateurs and they require safe and trained horses. If an animal 'falls between the cracks' and becomes useful to no one then it will be put down or languish in conditions characterized by neglect. No one wants to feed, house, shoe or otherwise put a lot of money into a big animal that has no practical purpose. So, as a horse trainer I always felt I had a huge responsibility to 'make' a horse that would be 'user friendly' (ie rideable by as many people as possible) so that they would always be sure to be worth feeding and loving. Thanks again Ann! I'd enjoy reading about your (or anyone's) horse adventures. *** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann wrote: Hi Carol, I'm not ignoring you and I'm not in London yet, I just wanted to give this enough time for me to be able to answer you properly. I am no expert on Western or Horse Whisperer type approaches to training. I too read Robert's book (or two) and saw the movie with Redford and when it all came out I was intrigued because this man seemed to be able to go beyond regular training methods and approach the horse the way a horse approaches another of its kind. Brannaman is only someone I am slightly familiar with through another English horse trainer I know in Victoria who I respect very much. She comes from a hunter/jumper background and ran a barn in California for a long time but she is Canadian and returned to the Island (Vancouver Island) about 6 years ago. Anyway, she is a BIG fan of Buck's and trained with him for years. She showed me a tape of his breaking a horse over a few days and it was impressive. He is probably one of the best but, again,
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman
Hey Ann... I'm bumping this subject again in case you missed my opening post. In process of searching to see if you had responded to the OP, I came across where you mention Monty Roberts in another discussion. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325048 I too enjoyed Monty's book, but I wonder now regarding some of the content and his accusation toward his family. But the joining up approach intrigued me. I never had *official* training with horses. They kind of just grew under me...I was sitting on a horse's back by the time I was at least 3 years old. Ponies and horses were my friends as a child. I have very fond memories of that time...it was magical in its own way and I am fortunate to have had such wonderful childhood friends. :) *** Most of my OP (with a clarification regarding Buck): Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw [the film] Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Dang it...Had typed a post and it went the way of the black hole. So now comes a much shorter post. Ha. Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman
Just fyi, Ann is heading to London this month - not sure when she's leaving. From: Carol jchwe...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 9:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman Hey Ann... I'm bumping this subject again in case you missed my opening post. In process of searching to see if you had responded to the OP, I came across where you mention Monty Roberts in another discussion. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325048 I too enjoyed Monty's book, but I wonder now regarding some of the content and his accusation toward his family. But the joining up approach intrigued me. I never had *official* training with horses. They kind of just grew under me...I was sitting on a horse's back by the time I was at least 3 years old. Ponies and horses were my friends as a child. I have very fond memories of that time...it was magical in its own way and I am fortunate to have had such wonderful childhood friends. :) *** Most of my OP (with a clarification regarding Buck): Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw [the film] Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Dang it...Had typed a post and it went the way of the black hole. So now comes a much shorter post. Ha. Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks!
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman
Thanks Emily! *** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn wrote: Just fyi, Ann is heading to London this month - not sure when she's leaving.  From: Carol To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 9:50 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman  Hey Ann... I'm bumping this subject again in case you missed my opening post. In process of searching to see if you had responded to the OP, I came across where you mention Monty Roberts in another discussion. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325048 I too enjoyed Monty's book, but I wonder now regarding some of the content and his accusation toward his family. But the joining up approach intrigued me. I never had *official* training with horses. They kind of just grew under me...I was sitting on a horse's back by the time I was at least 3 years old. Ponies and horses were my friends as a child. I have very fond memories of that time...it was magical in its own way and I am fortunate to have had such wonderful childhood friends. :) *** Most of my OP (with a clarification regarding Buck): Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw [the film] Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Dang it...Had typed a post and it went the way of the black hole. So now comes a much shorter post. Ha. Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks!
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman
This is incredibly off-topic. Forgive me but you persist. Monty was good at what he did, particularly self-promotion. I been with both them. Buck Brannaman is real incredible at what he does as a horseman and humble. He is really a great teacher too. By Brannaman's contrast BuckB makes fun of these other need-to-be-famous horsemen in the business. Monty, like some other self-promoters in horses, liked to hear himself talk. Brannaman is interested in helping people with their horses and more simply shares that way straight away. The best parts of being with Buck Brannaman are seeing the little moments when he goes off and rides his horses and does amazing things as he is helping people with their own horses. Those moments are worth a thousand words when you see them. I've ridden with a lot of really good horsemen but he is the most comprehensive and best. -Little Buck in the Dome --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Hey Ann... I'm bumping this subject again in case you missed my opening post. In process of searching to see if you had responded to the OP, I came across where you mention Monty Roberts in another discussion. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325048 I too enjoyed Monty's book, but I wonder now regarding some of the content and his accusation toward his family. But the joining up approach intrigued me. I never had *official* training with horses. They kind of just grew under me...I was sitting on a horse's back by the time I was at least 3 years old. Ponies and horses were my friends as a child. I have very fond memories of that time...it was magical in its own way and I am fortunate to have had such wonderful childhood friends. :) *** Most of my OP (with a clarification regarding Buck): Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw [the film] Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Dang it...Had typed a post and it went the way of the black hole. So now comes a much shorter post. Ha. Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks!
[FairfieldLife] Re: To Ann...horses, Monty Roberts, Buck Brannaman
Actually considering these two horsemen is not so far off the spiritual topic here as much as you would like it to be. Being with the two horse gurus is like experiencing the culture shock of being with a saint who is in the business of acquiring money and another saintly who is not. There have been both come to town. Coming from a group culture where the long modus operandi of 'meetings' is always to raise funds, coming to a sadhu or guru who does not take money and actually gives gifts to people coming in was a culture shock when it first showed up on Fairfield and presented itself to TM virgins. Example this saint as a very elder man was brought to town once by some Fairfielders on a visit a few years ago. It was confusing and an awakening of sorts to some Fairfield meditators then who met with him where he and his people took no money even when offered. Money got you no where with him and his people. How exotic and novel! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpYriW8dwPo --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck wrote: This is incredibly off-topic. Forgive me but you persist. Monty was good at what he did, particularly self-promotion. I been with both them. Buck Brannaman is real incredible at what he does as a horseman and humble. He is really a great teacher too. By Brannaman's contrast BuckB makes fun of these other need-to-be-famous horsemen in the business. Monty, like some other self-promoters in horses, liked to hear himself talk. Brannaman is interested in helping people with their horses and more simply shares that way straight away. The best parts of being with Buck Brannaman are seeing the little moments when he goes off and rides his horses and does amazing things as he is helping people with their own horses. Those moments are worth a thousand words when you see them. I've ridden with a lot of really good horsemen but he is the most comprehensive and best. -Little Buck in the Dome --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Hey Ann... I'm bumping this subject again in case you missed my opening post. In process of searching to see if you had responded to the OP, I came across where you mention Monty Roberts in another discussion. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325048 I too enjoyed Monty's book, but I wonder now regarding some of the content and his accusation toward his family. But the joining up approach intrigued me. I never had *official* training with horses. They kind of just grew under me...I was sitting on a horse's back by the time I was at least 3 years old. Ponies and horses were my friends as a child. I have very fond memories of that time...it was magical in its own way and I am fortunate to have had such wonderful childhood friends. :) *** Most of my OP (with a clarification regarding Buck): Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw [the film] Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and adapted it and capitalized on it. Are you familiar with/have knowledge about these two horseman? If so, what are you thoughts ... if you have time and want to share any? Thanks! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Carol wrote: Dang it...Had typed a post and it went the way of the black hole. So now comes a much shorter post. Ha. Ann, I read in some other posts that you are a horse lover. I grew up with horses from as far back as I can remember until I was 12 years old when I got interested in guys. Should have stuck with horses. Some years back I read Monty Roberts autobiographical book The Man Who Listens to Horses. I saw a documentary of him demonstrating joining up. I later read that his family took issue (a big issue) with Roberts' claim of alleged abuse by his father. The family also stated that Roberts had lied about other claims. (I can't recall it all now.) Last year I saw Buck and learned for the first time about Buck Brannaman. He apparently was abused by his father; the community knew about it at the time. It made me wonder if Roberts had taken part of Brannaman's story and
