--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" <steve.sun...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" > steve.sundur@ wrote: > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, how would you suggest he respond? > > > > Respond to WHAT? He knocked off some nookie. > > So what? Are you suggesting he *owes* someone > > something? > > I'm just asking how you feel he should respond. You seem > to be saying that he does not need to respond, no explanation > owed. That is fine. I guess he devotees will accept or defect > depending on how they feel about the situation.
I am saying that I don't give a shit about this guy, and give even less of one about his "devotees." I think anyone stupid enough to become a "devotee" deserves all the disappointment he or she deserves. Look, this is a situation that just does not even register on my Give-A-Fuck-O-Meter. It could never happen to me 1) because I would never be stupid enough to set myself up as a spiritual teacher, and 2) if I ever took leave of my senses and did, I would never be or claim to be celibate. If he did, well he gets to live with that and see how things work out. If his "devotees" believed that he was enlightened before sporting the wood and carrying the nookie, why wouldn't he be after sporting the wood and carrying the nookie? Anyone stupid enough to equate enlightenment with celibacy or a lack of enlightenment with a lack of celibacy should be forced to deal with the karma of that stupidity. It appears that some of his "devotees" will get to do just that. BFD. Not my concern. If he didn't, and his "devotees" just *assumed* that he was celibate, well even worse on them. I don't see that he owes his "devotees" shit. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "lurkernomore20002000" > <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > BTW, for those that may be interested, here is a link to Swami > > > > > Nithyananda's first response to his sex scandal. I couldn't > > > > > see where he was going to have a lot of wiggle room, and there's > > > > > not much for him to say, except that what he did was not > illegal. > > > > > > > > Nor is there anything to apologize for. > > > > > > > > > I've read some of the reports coming out of India, that they > > > > > are going to try to charge him with "cheating" > > > > > > > > On whom? Are they going to call Lakshmi > > > > or Parvati into court to say, "He done me > > > > wrong?" Or, even more interesting, do the > > > > same with Shiva? I can just see the big > > > > blue guy standing up in court and saying, > > > > "Yeah, he was promised to *me*, and here > > > > I find him in bed with some hussy!" :-) > > > > > > > > > >
