--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltabl...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > I wish I had started at > > > > the start of my senior year in HS instead of a > > > > few months after the end. > > > > > > And I wish I had never started and my friends never > > > started. I wish my friends had never become parusha > > > or siddhas and lived lives sucking resources from > > > others. I wish that they didn't take enemas and weird > > > supplements to cure chronic disease. > > > > > > School is not for spiritual development. Meditate > > > after school. Sit in silence after school. Pray after > > > school. > > > > You sound like maybe you're a candidate for John Knapp's > > counseling services, Ruth. I'm serious; that's not snark. > > You seem genuinely distraught. > > > > He apparently does counseling over the phone, BTW. > > I'm getting a very disingenuous vibe here Judy. None of > the issues Ruth mentioned as concerns have anything to > do with John's practice. > > She mentions she wishes she had never started and doesn't > tell us why. Wishes her friends hadn't become unable to > support themselves and ended up begging money from their > friends causing the conflicted feelings when you care about > someone who is shaking you down instead of working. She > is upset that some of her friends took pseudo scientific > advice for chronic diseases and I'm guessing that this is > because they didn't work. Then she states basically our > society's consensus belief that specific religions not be > taught in schools. > > These are all legitimate reasons to be as you spin it > "distraught" and I would term it, normally pissed off > for good reason. > > The physiological demonetization of people who challenge > this teaching is a bit of a trend with you lately. When > I expressed my experience that Maharishi ignored his > followers, you claimed I have "repressed resentment" > coloring my thinking. Ruth makes a list of things how > the movement involvement has hurt her friendships and > you "kindly" advise her to get a check up from the > neck up. > > Do you really need to resort to this tactic? You have > plenty of legitimate challenges to both of our POVs here. > How about knocking off the sophist's trick of making is > seem as if the person who has issues with the teaching > are caused by a physiological condition instead of > dealing with the issues brought up. > > You have plenty of emotion that you express in your > positions here. Neither of us are summing up your > objections as stemming from a psychological problem > you have. Is it too much to ask for this courtesy > in return?
While, as always, I bow to Curtis' ability to "see the best in people," and speak to them or about them as if they were rational human beings and not pre-programmed automatons, I will respond *as I see it*, to Judy, as one of the premiere examples on this forum of a pre-programmed automaton. Judy's ENTIRE position can be summed up in her own words below: > Trusting your experience is fine. Having an aha > moment in which you know you don't believe is fine. > > What's *not* fine, IMHO, is including in that aha > moment of knowledge about your own lack of belief > the "knowledge" that other people are "feeding off > of each other's hysteria." > > That's just a way to make yourself feel better > about your inability to have good results. There is a phrase to describe this position. It is called "Blame the victim." Ruth's "problem" -- her "failure" -- is that she was "incapable of having good results." Whereas Judy was. And as all of the TBs she so egomaniacally seeks to represent supposedly were capable of having. The issue here is ELITISM, pure and simple. Judy and those who believe as she does are the "elite." They were "evolved" enough to appreciate the great gifts that Maharishi sold them and "capable" of "having good results." Ruth, ignoramus and "incapable" as she is, was not. THAT is the message that Judy is trying to convey. Curtis is being easy on the bitch. I have no such reservations. Judy's ENTIRE position is that anyone who does not agree with her as to 1) what Maharishi "really meant" when he said things, 2) what his "message" really was, 3) what the "benefit" of that message was, and 4) pretty much anything else she has an opinion on is a LOSER. They are somehow LESS than she is, "incapable" of seeing how profound the things she believes are pro- found "really" are. Curtis is being *kind* to Judy here, treating her as if there is still a human being "in there somewhere" that could possibly respond to being treated like one. I see no such human being. I see only an automaton, one who repeats ( almost verbatim, like the uncreative parrot she is ) The Things She's Been Told Are Truth. In Judy's defense, I think she really DOES believe that these things ARE Truth. But that's because she tends to "settle" for the first ( in her mind ) reasonable explanation given to her. The next step, unfortunately, is to attempt to put down anyone who DIDN'T settle for the first explanation given to them as somehow "defective," "incapable" of understanding the Great Truths that Judy has understood ( because she can parrot them verbatim ). Ruth took all the same courses Judy did. Given her posts here, Ruth is *just* as potentially intelli- gent ( and demonstrably a great deal more intelligent ) as Judy. She had the same "certified" teachers. But Judy's position is that Ruth somehow "failed." She was "lacking" in something, something that caused her to "fail" to appreciate the splendoriferousness that Judy sees in the stuff that Ruth sees as bullshit. Judy would have us believe that Ruth's perspective is the result of being "incapable" of seeing the "Truth." Me, I tend to believe that what Judy is "really" trying to say is that Ruth is a "failure" because she doesn't believe what Judy believes. And I think by now we've ALL come to realize *what* a failing Judy failing to agree with her is. Whether it's about Maharishi, or TM, or Hillary. Believe something other than what Judy believes, and there is something WRONG with you. Yeah, right...
