--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > I don't believe that. It is still hypocritical > > > considering... let's call it a more neutral "outside > > > the box, male bonding." Maharishi was very clear that > > > he wanted a personal relationship with Guru Dev and > > > contrived a scheme to make it happen. He was not > > > looking for a way to sneak into his Vedic study class. > > > You are drawing different conclusions than I am from > > > the few facts we do know about the guy. > > > > That's a pretty standard form of sadhana in India. It's > > called Guru-Bhakti Yoga. In that context, it's not at > > all out-of-the-box. Google it; there's over 15,000 hits. > > And the way he described how he went about it in that > > one tape that's been transcribed and posted a number of > > times is in very close accord with the traditional > > formulations. > > What Judy is trying to obscure is that > Curtis and I are CHALLENGING that "trad- > itional formulation." We think it's a > "cover" for something more mundane, the > love of one man for another man.
No, Barry, I'm not trying to "obscure" anything, sorry. It would never have occurred to me that either of you were suggesting the *whole tradition* was a cover for homosexuality. If I had realized that, I'd have *highlighted* it. So I'm delighted you've laid it out so clearly. However, I could be wrong, but I don't think this is what Curtis had in mind. The way he describes what MMY did in the quote above, it appears that he wasn't aware of the tradition and thought it was MMY's own unique idea. <snip> > Judy is ideaphobic in the same way that some > men are homophobic. No, Barry, I'm *dumb*-ideaphobic. This is a dumb idea. It makes no sense. It does not compute. It's a fantasy you've dreamed up because you don't like the idea of devotion to the guru. It's *OK* for you not to like it. You don't have to invent a nitwit fantasy to justify your dislike of it. But the fact that you've done so is more revealing about your state of mind than you realize. That's why I'm happy you've presented that fantasy. >From another of your posts: > Add to that Willytex and Judy melting down > and going purple-faced apoplectic in response > to someone talking about their "more than > human" teacher AS IF HE WERE HUMAN, and > I'm sorry, but I don't think it's lookin' > as Curtis and I are the 'gay' ones here. Barry. I'm not the one who's been screaming in capital letters all over my last batch of posts. Look in the mirror. See what color your face is and check your blood pressure. I don't think MMY was "more than human," and my posts reflect that. This is another of your very silly ideas. You're making yourself look like a raving paranoid lunatic. Calm down before you bust an artery.
