Okay.  Didn't sleep too well last night, so ran out of "steam" on the
second big post.  But certainly I enjoy your posting.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
<anartaxius@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> > I imagine you feel better having got that off your chest.
>
> I don't really know, it just kind of came out. I think I write to
explain things to myself first, and if others find it useful, that could
be a plus. To finish something more or less coherently feels nice. All
activities have a limit that one can sustain, and one either finishes
them, or must abandon them. It is harder sometimes to abandon something,
which indicates that there is some kind of hidden attachment to success,
that is, there is a hidden fear of failure that one is attempting to
avoid. Overcoming fear of failure is a principal value in the experience
of freedom.
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> > <anartaxius@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ravi, I was just questioning how deeply we can know someone's
internal
> > state by external cues. I do not know what Barry's internal state
is. I
> > for one cannot figure him out, but I am not convinced that
projecting my
> > hypotheses as an explanation of his behaviour is really to any
point.
> > >
> > > Judy has a very keen intellect, but I do think she also projects
her
> > own emotional states onto others. I *think* that, but it is an
> > hypothesis, because I do not *know* that. I also *think* she does
not
> > think that she projects her internal states onto the world. But that
> > thought might not have any substance to it. There is always
ambiguity
> > because what people feel and think is not necessarily what they say,
nor
> > does their behaviour always indicate what is really going on in
there.
> > >
> > > Because the mind fabricates stories to explain things, it is
almost
> > impossible to interact with the world in a way in which we do not
> > project our internal states onto situations, people, things. For
example
> > you said 'I take offence'. What does that mean? To me, if that
happens
> > to me, that means that someone said, did something which in some
measure
> > creates an experience of upset, or displeasure, or something like
that,
> > which I feel 'inside'. But why did that happen?
> > >
> > > What would it be inside that results in that reaction? Normally I
do
> > not 'take offence' at what people say and do. Things happen. That is
> > what happens. My internal reactions, if they are unpleasant, have to
be
> > dealt with, but 'taking offence' is just a posturing of the ego, it
is a
> > blind and unconscious reaction to something that happens in the
world
> > that does not fit in with the story our mind has created about the
> > world. I know people that take offence at practically everything
that
> > goes on in the world. It is a peculiar reaction.
> > >
> > > Culture may have a lot to do with this internal programmed
response,
> > as some cultures seem to have numerous behaviour patterns that
defend
> > the ego, such as 'saving face' in Japan. Perhaps this has evolved as
a
> > way to socially still anger, which seems to be the ego's last
defence
> > when it gets attacked by the world. Perhaps all of us have some kind
of
> > emotional damage that we are unconsciously suppressing or
protecting.
> > >
> > > As for Turq, Barry, I can hypothesise he has some emotional
issues,
> > but really I am just making that up. If he has such issues, it is
not up
> > to me to fix them, that is his journey. This is why we are all
pursuing
> > enlightenment, to 'fix' these issues that drag our lives down. And
if
> > there are those here who have experienced awakening, particularly
not
> > quite complete awakening, they clearly know what they are faced
with.
> > >
> > > Rather than try to analyse Barry, I tend to take what he says as a
> > lesson. The wide world at large is the master. It does what it does.
It
> > provides situations we can take as lessons, or take them as attacks
on
> > our individual level of being. Barry is a part of the world as
perceived
> > from my point of view, so I can take what he says as a lesson or,
> > depending on the content and stance of it, I can take it as
something
> > that strokes or attacks the ego, something that puffs up or cuts
down
> > the ego, which is a more unconscious reaction. But if I do not go
down
> > the lesson route, there will be no growth or deepening of
experience; I
> > will simply be basking in self-importance or reacting to an affront
to
> > my little, little self.
> > >
> > > So from my perspective, I can take Barry as an aspect of guru, of
a
> > teacher. He is an aspect of reality. My task for myself is to deepen
> > enlightenment and understanding. The enlightenment game is a
peculiar
> > kind of understanding because really there is nothing to understand,
but
> > the game goes on nonetheless. So if I have a choice, I can assign to
> > Barry, or to you, or to Judy, or anyone, the aspect of guru and
learn
> > from the interaction. If I do not have a choice, it means I am
blocked
> > somehow, and that is something that needs looking into.
> > >
> > > I have had some pleasant, short interactions with Barry, and some
> > rather rough ones. I have had similar encounters with Judy. The
goal, if
> > I wish to imagine one, is that all these interactions are like a
line
> > drawn in empty space. One enjoys but does not react due to internal
> > disharmony in one's own life and being.
> > >
> > > One thing is clear, we do not win by always being right or being
in
> > the right.
> > >
> > > We two, for example, disagree on the value of astrology. That may
be
> > because I grew up with a rather intense interest in astronomy and
> > science, and to me astrology makes no sense at all. For others it
seems
> > it is something considered very valuable, though I suspect I will
always
> > think it is an empty discipline, and thus would always argue against
it
> > unless to very specific evidence of its efficacy is demonstrated.
But
> > you have said some marvellous things to others in some posts, and in
> > this field of spiritual development I feel you have some important
> > things to say.
> > >
> > > I am not sure I really have laudable intentions concerning my post
> > that this discussion is about. Barry was not really the subject of
the
> > post, I was thinking in more generic terms, of which Barry was
simply
> > the given example. How much do we really know about someone else
based
> > on our projections of what we think is reality?
> > >
> > > For me, everything I think about is a story, a projection. 'Out
> > there', the world without that projection is there, but it is
silent,
> > mysterious, it changes, it moves, but it is all the same thing. That
> > some aspect of that is a 'person' is a thought, a projection my mind
has
> > made. My mind can write a novel about that moving shape, give it a
name,
> > a history, a personality. But without the thoughts, there is no
person,
> > just a blip in an infinite turning that goes on and on.
> > >
> > > One of the reasons I came on this forum was discussion of
> > enlightenment with many who are around in my life seemed to kind of
dead
> > end. The forum provides a much vaster platform with a wider range of
> > experiences people have had than in my limited circle. One of the
> > questions that seems to be resolving in my mind is did I come on
here to
> > say something, or did I come on here to learn something? It seems to
> > have turned out to be both. I think part of the process was
discovering
> > that I had to run out of things 'I had to say' before I could
actually
> > learn anything, or say anything really useful.
> > >
> > > The forum is most useful if our unrealities get attacked in a way
that
> > allows us to see them as such. It is easier to notice them if
someone
> > says something that scores a direct hit on one of our fantasies
rather
> > than just brushing by. In this I think Barry, and Judy are of great
> > service, each in their own style of argumentation. Judy engages,
Barry
> > is remote. In these two, one has the extremes, and the widest range
of
> > potential. The rest of us are strewn about in between. Or so the
story I
> > made up tells.
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" raviyogi@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I had the same thing to say. Xeno what you have to say clearly
> > reflects your personality and I take offense that you would project
your
> > laudable intentions on someone as emotionally damaged as Barry.
> > > >
> > > > Judy is spot on. I was under the naive impression like you that
may
> > be Barry can self-reflect, I got deceived by some of his "nice"
posts as
> > well. The pattern she describes is spot on. You are seriously
> > underestimating Judy's skills.
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > So how do we know that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Turq was stung by recent posts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. That he was in fact, 'badly' stung, rather than just
merely
> > stung to a lesser degree?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. That he has changed his behaviour as a result?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. That he is just playing nice?
> > > > >
> > > > > Its a pattern. Judy has been on forums with this guy for a
long,
> > long time, and this is what he does. I don't see Judy closing the
door
> > on Barry's future behavior, though she is mocking his consistency
re:
> > returning to bastardhood. It is rhythmic,
> >
bastard-bastard-bastard-nice-bastard-bastard-bastard-nice-bastard-bastar\
\
> > d-bastard-nice. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros
Anartaxius"
> > <anartaxius@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Having indulged, without much success, in attempting to
> > characterise peoples' inner life and experience by observation of
their
> > outer character, and on FFL, primarily by what and when they write,
I
> > find it difficult how one can generate so much information by this
> > process, which would seem fraught with potential error.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Supposedly, on a spiritual forum, we are all 'evolving'
somehow,
> > leaving the past behind. Human memory is very fallible, and
neuroscience
> > has been demonstrating recently that each time we remember
something, we
> > are basically rewriting the memory, and that those memories modify
each
> > time they are re-written - shift and change as a result of current
> > circumstances, so that in time the memory is often different from
what
> > actually transpired (as perhaps could be recorded by video). So we
end
> > up with a distorted rut in our mind about those past occurrences.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So how do we know that
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Turq was stung by recent posts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. That he was in fact, 'badly' stung, rather than just
merely
> > stung to a lesser degree?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. That he has changed his behaviour as a result?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. That he is just playing nice? (even total bastards
sometimes
> > can be naturally nice). Maybe he is just pretending to be nice;
maybe he
> > is having a really good day. I do not know Turq, but I can imagine
him
> > being nice, but I can't know if that or its opposite is true based
on
> > his posts here. Posts here often play off of what someone else has
> > written before, and the character of that previous post might
determine
> > the response one might dream up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Correlation is not causation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If Turq writes, as he says, just for the fun of it, I can
> > consider this as very possibly a 'true' statement, then coming to
> > conclusions about what he is feeling on that basis would seem to be
> > hypothesising to the nth degree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If Turq has even a reasonable degree of spiritual progress
in
> > his life, even if it is stalled now for some unknown reason, the
> > likely-hood he would be even upset by what people say here would be
> > remote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Turq is quite good a provocation. I did an experiment. I
took
> > one of his posts and removed all the asterisks and quotation marks,
and
> > it read kind of academically compared to the original version. I
call
> > these emphasises he puts in emotibombs, because they seem designed
to
> > incite an emotional response.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As such he is providing a means for us to notice how we
react
> > mechanically to a given scenario, how our intellectual constructs
are
> > tied to our emotional quirks; whether they serve us or undermine us.
> > Emotion, and the consequent lack of rationality that often pertains
to
> > emotional states are subtly tied to our intellectual life.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For example, persons with certain types of brain damage that
> > eliminates emotional responses to situations have a terrible time
making
> > decisions. The connexion between our supposed rational thought and
> > emotion is often not noticed, and when we think we are being fully
> > rational, the opposite can clearly be the case.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One might note that Turq's posts, for all their provocative
> > qualities, are actually rather emotionally cool, pretty much like a
> > crowbar mechanically being used to lift up a rock to see what is
> > festering under it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One only need read the opinions section of newspapers to
> > appreciate this where one's like or dislike is expressed concerning
a
> > specific situation. Turq's post generally are not like this. (Of
course
> > here, I may be making the mistake of inferring a person's internal
state
> > from what they write. So to create some balance, one has to read
> > opinions pro and con, and that often results in no resolution of the
> > situation either.) There are many surmises as to Turq's inner state,
> > some of which I have imagined myself, but are there any
incontrovertible
> > facts? Especially current facts, not things that happened months
ago, or
> > years ago?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All the posts here can have this effect of stirring our
hidden
> > agendas, if such agendas exist, but particularly if they contain
attacks
> > on what we think is true, or contain personal attacks. Besides
having
> > the various spiritual illusions represented by this group, there are
> > also politically conservative and politically liberal persons here
as
> > well. I find it interesting that spiritual growth does not seem to
have
> > much effect on political polarisations, even though spiritual growth
> > supposedly gets us closer to truth.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As for Turq returning to 'normal': Why should we imagine him
to
> > have beliefs and a personality that must remain in a
straight-jacket,
> > forever stuck in a certain mindset. It is a convenience, but lazy
> > intellectually to characterise people in a certain way, but perhaps
that
> > invites the question of why we would want someone to not have an
> > opportunity to change, to either grow or deteriorate, as the case
may
> > be, and gradually or even suddenly become someone we might never had
> > suspected before? And I mean that for everyone here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"
> > <whynotnow7@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nice troll post, Turq. Seriously, both well-crafted to
> > offend
> > > > > > > > almost everyone, and well written in a conversational
tone
> > to
> > > > > > > > draw the suckers in. Good job, lil' guy!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You can always tell when Barry has been badly stung by
> > > > > > > a criticism: he ostentatiously makes a bunch of posts
> > > > > > > that attempt to exhibit the opposite of what he's just
> > > > > > > been criticized for.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Having been pegged as a well-poisoner, his next three
> > > > > > > posts after the ritual troll post were upbeat and
> > > > > > > complimentary, one currying favor with Bob, one
> > > > > > > exclaiming about the new photo of Saturn, and one to
> > > > > > > Yifu saying how much he always enjoys Yifu's links to
> > > > > > > old photos and artwork, for the first and only time in
> > > > > > > the many months Yifu has been posting them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Let's see how quickly he returns to normal. ;-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to