Au contraire! Blowing a bit of "Holy Smoke" at ya!
With your uncanny gabfest ability... I still think you are also Ravi. When Ravi disappeared your posts went on reading about what type of cell phone is the better, etc..... Pulled your hand from the cookie jar, but still got caught? ________________________________ From: TurquoiseB <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, 22 May, 2010 2:10:33 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ravi Guru's mad delusional behavior revealed. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ditzyklanmail <carc...@...> wrote: > > After reading quite a few posts here at Fairfield, I have > to admit, the Turquoise jewel does make some sense and even > with the sometimes rude awakening, he seems like a "nice > person." Anyways, was the Ravi poster, actually Turquoise > in disguise? Just wondering as I whistle. Now you've done it...the TurquoiseB haters will be on *your* ass now. :-) For the record, Ravi wasn't me. Unlike, say, many of the participants in the BATGAP forum, I don't need to surround myself with clones of myself to serve as foils or "Yes men" to what I say. Count yerself lucky...what would this forum be like if there were more than one of me here? :-) > ________________________________ > From: TurquoiseB <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Fri, 21 May, 2010 1:09:54 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ravi Guru's mad delusional behavior revealed. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <yifuxero@> wrote: > > > > thx, excellent points! I don't have time to go into this topic > > at length; but basically in answer to question posed in the Bible > > "Who is your Brother's Keeper";...if "Brother/Sister" ends only > > two doors down, I take issue with that. > > A certain Buddhist perspective (which I groked from various > > Teachers) is that I am responsible for everything and everybody > > in the universe. Therefore I personally am responsible for Ravi. > > otoh, if you prefer not to take such responsibility, that's ok > > with me. > > ... > > then the questions you posed: first, praying (I usually pray/ > > chant in conjunction with various Deities/Yidams such as Kali, > > Kwan Yin, > > etc)...IS DOING something. The enery circulates in the inner > > planes. The energy of pujas, Yagyas, prayers, etc; eventually > > manifests physically. > > By "doing" something I assume you mean on the physical plane of > > existence. > > That's a very limited pov. > > My point is that among many long-term spiritual > seekers, it's the POV they consider last, or never > consider at all. They've been told for so many > decades that their mere Woo Woo is *enough* to > resolve situations they find unpleasant, so that > is the only "solution" they think of, or try. > > In this particular case, *Ravi's* fantasies all > revolve around how "powerful" he is, how much he > is "affecting" those who interact with him, how > just *by* interacting with them these people *who > are criticizing him and/or laughing at him* have > become his "disciples," his "students," and how > he is "in charge," "controlling the situation," > "always winning." In other words, he is essentially > the *end product* of this belief system. > > Have we not seen the *same* belief system around > here before? True, not expressed in such a socio- > pathic manner, but I'm thinkin' Déja Mu. > > I *understand* the points Bhairitu made about > Ravi just being Indian, and to some extent they > are valid, and IMO have exacerbated the situation. > Anyone who believes that having been born "Brahmin" > makes him better or more evolved than anyone else > is IMO already several miles down the road to > madness, even before you throw a little runaway > shakti into the mix. Someone with the kinds of > 'tudes about *women* that he has expressed here > *grew up with them*; they didn't happen overnight > as the result of an "awakening" of any kind. > > But still, the overall *act* strikes me as familiar, > and a little disturbingly so. Part of the TM dogma, > ferchissakes, has always been the low-vibeness of > having to act on the level of action to resolve a > situation. We're talking about an organization that > charges its followers *money* to pray for them to > gods and goddesses so that they won't *have* to act > themselves (TM Yagyas). And we're talking about an > organization in which this 'tude (reluctance to > "get involved" and act physically) has led to at > least one murder (Levi Butler). I don't think it's > out of line to point out stuff like this. > > I was *not* trying to slam you personally for your > suggestion. I was merely rapping about parallels > I see in the suggestion to points of dogma I see as > less than completely healthy. Relying on prayer or > meditation to invoke the good graces of the gods, or > to add a little more collective "energy" or Woo Woo > into the mix strikes me as something one does when > in a drought and hoping for rain or when hoping for > something tenuous and theoretical like "world peace." > I find it less impressive and practical when the wolf > is at the door, or when someone's family might really > need protecting. That's all. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <yifuxero@> wrote: > > > > > > > > pray for him in the traditional sense. The combined Shakti > > > > and good-will may steer him in the right direction, whatever > > > > that may be. > > > > > > Why does this strike me as exactly the same kind of > > > advice that got Ravi *into* this situation? > > > > > > Why does it strike me as the kind of belief that got > > > Levi Butler killed? "I know I'm supposed to be watch- > > > ing this guy, but I've got to go meditate right now. > > > Nothing bad can possibly happen if I do that." > > > > > > Where's the point at which people stop praying and > > > DO SOMETHING? > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > RICK, she's right. This is potentially as serious as it *gets*. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 20, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Rick Archer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of tartbrain > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 11:14 AM > > > > > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ravi Guru's mad delusional > > > > > > > > behavior revealed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF RICK CAN RESPOND AS TO WHAT HE IS DOING, > > > > > > > > IF ANYTHING, SO EFFORTS ARE NOT OVERLAPPING OR COUNTER > > > > > > > > PRODUCTIVE TO EACH OTHER. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I emailed him privately. I'll keep you posted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me get this straight, Rick. A guy makes > > > > > > > numerous posts that could be interpreted > > > > > > > as violently threatening and indicating that > > > > > > > he could very possibly be in the throes of a > > > > > > > psychotic breakdown--and you email that same > > > > > > > person to ask...what? If he's "OK"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm no psychologist, but one could draw from > > > > > > > this the fact that you are trying to avoid dealing > > > > > > > with any form of unpleasantness from a person > > > > > > > you previously touted as "awakened." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By all means don't do anything if you don't > > > > > > > feel like it---it's not like you're responsible for > > > > > > > him. I just hope what you did do isn't used > > > > > > > by him as evidence that he really is OK. Because by > > > > > > > all appearances, he's on the verge of some > > > > > > > serious doo-doo here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why is this all being made into being Rick's responsibility? What > > > > > really can Rick do that anyone else here can't do? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
