According to the Parasara Hora Shastras, size does matter. "My lingam is bigger than yours." : )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> wrote: > > > > When you first started posting, I thought what the hell is this!? > > > > Then, a while ago I began reading every word of yours, the context you > > create, the reality coming through, the innocence, and the world of Robin > > became known, with immediacy, not compared to anything else, just you. > > Others write about movies (sorry, couldn't resist) and stuff, yet you > > delve into awareness in a comprehensible way, weave a succinct explanation > > with no loose threads. Very skillful Robin. > > > > Which is not to say I am in agreement with everything you address, but > > neither do I feel I have to be, to get the genuineness of what you post. in > > fact, it makes you more real as a person, the ways in which you may cite > > your reality in some ways very different from the way I see reality, or > > perhaps just areas that need some filling in over time. > > > > Nonetheless, there is time, and I always have the sense from you that you > > will always attempt to give more of your self than you receive in return. > > > > Maybe its a Canadian thing, eh? :-) > > Dear whynotnow: > > No one that I know is above feeling some happiness in being praised. What > makes your overall review of my posts, though, so gratifying to me, is the > sense that you have really caught my own intention and, if I may say it, even > my own experience in writing at FFL. > > "Then, a while ago I began reading every word of yours, the context you > create, the reality coming through, the innocence, and the world of Robin > became known, with immediacy, not compared to anything else, just you". > > This may befrom my own first person ontological perspectivethe most > accurate and perspicacious description I have ever read about what is going > on when I write. And I am led on to the conclusion that your own way of > apprehending reality partakes of a certain grace and elegance that affords > you the inner confidence that you have 'seen what is really there'. I think > this quite an exceptional virtue: to catch at what is most real and > individuated, ignoring what would be merelyinadvertently of coursea > derivative and conditioned response. > > You see, whynotnow: you are meeting my own innocence [if I may use that term > since you have generously applied it to me] with your own innocence. This > creates some agreement in reality. It is not merely someone saying something > nice or flattering about someone else. For me at least you have in this post > received and then articulated almost perfectly the context within which I > express myself. And I have to admit it: I was a little floored by this. So, > then, whynotnow, it was not so much the fact that you came out so positively > in your review, it was the fact that in all that you said, you identified the > minute particulars of what I attemptpersonallyto do when I post at FFL. > > And you also recognized the sense of how much I seek to make a completion > when I write; that is, the way I "delve into awareness in a comprehensible > way, weave a succinct explanation with no loose threads". Again, whynotnow, > it is not the favourability or positivity of what you have said about me; no, > it is something much more satisfying to me: viz. the identification of > seemingly every element in my original ambition; I would have thought at best > certain persons would get the *effect* of all this; but I had not anticipated > someone who would anatomize my intention and my method with this kind of > delicate and acute sensitivity. > > I won't quote the rest of your post, since it illustrates the same almost > perfect grasp of my intention and my experience. The "genuineness", the sense > of the "real": these are what constitute what is essential for me. I must > stop here, whynotnow: please know you haveif I may say it*objectively* > understood what I am all about. And I never dreamed of someone understanding > me in the way that I understand myself. > > I hope that this, what I have written here, does not come off as some > opportunity to indulge in self-centered gratification or ego massaging, > because that is not why I have written back to you. I have written this > response out of my wonder and appreciation that someone has so intelligently > delineated what I am all about [at least according to my own lights]. > > I knew there would be others who would disagree with you, and I was not > disappointed in this (e.g. emptybill). But within how I have understood what > you have said about me, I believe emptybill has provided evidence of a > misunderstanding of me. But there will be no proof of his failure of > sensitivity versus your precision of sensitivity. So I must leave it there. > > With much thanks for this discerning post, and risking the brickbats of my > critics for being narcissistic and drama queenly, I am > > The Canadian Zebra unmasked > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > Judy: Robin, I'm snipping all the Vaj is-he-or-is-he-not stuff. > > > I think most everything that needs to be said on that > > > score this time around (it's come up on a regular basis > > > for many years) has been said, at least to my satisfaction. > > > Maybe something new and different will crop up next time, > > > and we'll take it for another spin... > > > > > > Robin2: Agreed. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > Robin: I was a little concerned about learning that I am a > > > > "perplexing critter" and that "it is not surprising that > > > > you throw people for a loop sometimes". I would hope that > > > > if this is so, it does not occur when I am obviously > > > > attempting to be the opposite of this. That would be my > > > > fault clear and simple. > > > > > > Judy: Cheese, Robin, that wasn't intended as a criticism. You're > > > a very unusual, complicated dude with a very unusual, > > > complicated history. And from what you've said, you haven't > > > been in communication with the TMer/former-TMer community > > > for many years while you were putting yourself back > > > together. > > > > > > Robin2: I understand perfectly now the context within which you were > > > addressing my Perplexing Critterness. And I admit to having a high level > > > of PC. > > > > > > Judy: You're not like anybody we've had on this group, at least > > > since I joined it in 2005. TM apostates are a dime a dozen > > > around here, but former cult leaders who used to be in > > > Unity Consciousness just don't tend to drop by FFL too > > > often, you know? Many of us have never encountered anybody > > > with anything like your resume, so to speak, in our lives. > > > > > > Robin2: I am glad, Judy, you have taken notice of my very impressive > > > resume :-) > > > > > > You should see me in person. I am even more fascinating than my resume. > > > But as Mrs Bob Price says [about her husband]: a little long in the tooth. > > > > > > Judy: No matter how much effort you put into making yourself > > > transparently clear, at times it's going to go over/under/ > > > to one side of some folks' heads. I've followed your posts > > > as closely as, if not more closely than, anyone here, and > > > *I'm* not always sure where you're at. (I've been wildly > > > curious about you ever since I first saw you discussed > > > on alt.meditation.transcendental back in the late '90s, so > > > I was tickled when you showed up on FFL.) > > > > > > Robin2: Don't worry: I know the close-reading you give to all my posts. > > > And I appreciate this. Knowing there is an intelligence such as yours at > > > FFL is something I compute each time I post there. As in: Judy is going > > > to read this, Robin: is it up to snuff? > > > > > > I also realize that I am not from time to time understood quite the way I > > > would wish to be understood. And certainly if you want to really get at > > > what I am saying you have to go through (sometimes) a rather dense, > > > convoluted and labyrinthine processbut it's worth it when you put the > > > effort in, right! :-) > > > > > > I have a certain experience while I am articulating my own thoughts about > > > something; that experience is the context within which I make my > > > arguments or narrate my story. And for me, Judy, that experience means > > > staying as near to reality as I can at all times, never losing this > > > contact point with what is most real for me. Never separating myself out > > > from reality such that what I am saying is mere opinion (or at least felt > > > by *me* to be just opining). I may be wrong; but for me posting at FFL > > > does carry with it this responsibility to be always alert to the > > > ontological context within which I believe I exist. > > > > > > In this sense you could say that all my posts at FFL are 100% > > > existential. > > > > > > Interesting that I got your attention even before I came onto FFL. I will > > > try my best not to disappoint your original experience of being "wildly > > > curious"although I don't think those who know me in person necessarily > > > believe I live up to the hypethe hype based on those turbulent, > > > terrible, violent, beautiful, extraordinary, and in the > > > endindefensibleten years when I was in Unity Consciousness. > > > > > > Judy: There are some big gaps in your story as you've recounted > > > it as well, which you may or may not end up filling in (some > > > of them came up in your earlier discussions with Curtis, and > > > you said then you'd try to get around to them, hint hint). > > > > > > Robin2: Sure enough. I expect that if I continue to post at FFL I will > > > get to filling in some of those "big gaps in [my] story". But I never > > > want to just write for the sake of presenting information [about myself > > > and my philosophy] without there being the kind of tension and focus that > > > precipitates and therefore in some sense justifies such disclosures: I > > > like, Judy, to write into a *context*; not arbitrarily. And I certainly > > > try as best I can to answer whatever specific questions are addressed to > > > me at FFL. But, as I say, there has to be some dynamic [overused word, I > > > realizepsychology has sucked the life out of it) which makes revealing > > > more about my philosophy and my past [for those not living in Amsterdam > > > and who are genuinely interested in hearing something more from me] a > > > kind of natural autobiographical or expository event. > > > > > > Judy: In this instance, I had in mind zarzari's perplexity > > > concerning what he considers contradictions between what > > > he sees as your "TB" view of Maharishi and your conviction > > > that it was all a cosmic deception. We all know about the > > > TB view, but the cosmic deception part is pretty much a > > > WTF?? for most of us, TMers and TM critics alike. (I don't > > > really get that part either, but it doesn't seem to me to > > > be a contradiction.) You might want to take a gander at > > > zarzari's response to me, and my reply, and see if there's > > > anything you want to try to clear up. > > > > > > Robin2: This reflection of yours prompted me to write a post to zarzar; > > > to which he responded surprisingly graciously. So, you can take credit > > > for me having addressed the paradox of Romance and Deceit in the context > > > of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. > > > > > > Judy: Anyway, that's what I meant about throwing people for a > > > loop. It may be distressing to you not to be perfectly > > > understood, but it comes with the territory; you really > > > can't expect it 100 percent, even from those with the best > > > will in the world toward you. You're doing well if you > > > can convey glimpses here and there. Maybe with enough > > > glimpses, it'll begin to come together as a whole. > > > > > > Robin2: I am aware that some of my posts are provocative, ironic, and > > > even in a certain sense abstruse: so I am bound to lose a fewmaybe more > > > than a fewreaders. After all, there are the Alexes as well as the Barrys > > > of this world; and with Alex I am an acquired taste that he knows he will > > > never have. With Barry, well, you know in what consists his aversion to > > > my posts. There is a difference. What concerns me in posting at FFL, > > > Judy, is to meet every challenge head-on; and to test out my philosophy, > > > my understanding, my experience as I go to express myself. I am here for > > > self-metatherapeutic reasons. I am not here to make FFL readers believe > > > in what I believe in. Of course you know this. But the way I write is a > > > kind of performance, and I am going to confuse, lose, alienate, and even > > > repulse certain readers. But there will be those readers and posters such > > > as yourself who will give me the very fairest of opportunities to make my > > > case, and for this I find myself satisfied in general with the response I > > > expect I am getting at FFL. > > > > > > I do envisage a time (again: assuming that I continue to post at FFL: > > > something could happen which would persuade me to stop posting, given the > > > volatility and biasses and hostility that is rife at FFL) when "maybe > > > with enough glimpses, it'll begin to come together as a whole". It > > > certainly is lived out these days as a whole, even though of course the > > > process of understanding myself and becoming more intelligent about > > > myself continues, and will continue into my death. > > > > > > Judy: Who really understands any other person anyway? Ain't > > > nobody here omnisubjective! > > > > > > Robin: True enough. Although just knowing there must be a consciousness > > > somewhere outside of the universe which is omnisubjective means that the > > > first person ontology of every human being, living or dead, is a matter > > > of perfect and objectified knowledge; therefore in some theoretical sense > > > the subjectivity of a given individual can at least be meaningfully > > > probed. > > > > > > But your general point is of course indisputable. > > > > > > Robin: But if in the course of attempting to meet the challenge of > > > > one of my critics, I resort to irony, well that just might > > > > cause disorientationbut in this case, this would be my > > > > intention. There are no Queensberry Rules for the boxing > > > > that goes on here at FFL. > > > > > > Judy: Right, I wasn't referring to your use of irony, although > > > that *does* confuse some people (most of whom had it > > > coming, as you suggest). It can be quite delicious for > > > those of us who tune in to it, so don't hold back. > > > > > > Robin2: I understand, Judy: you meant that, just in the normal course of > > > the way I write, I am not understood by a number of FFL readers. I get > > > this. > > > > > > I appreciate your awareness of my irony, and I know you are the one > > > person at FFL who never misses it. That can be quite a consolation for > > > me, as you must realize. I won't go into one of my: Irony Is The New and > > > Necessary Religion discourses here; but certainly in the 21st Century, > > > anyone who does not exercise their irony muscles will miss out on > > > probably the sharpest and most piercing forms of communication between > > > persons. Or at least irony must be part of the armamentarium of every > > > civilized, educated, intelligent adult in the world. > > > > > > I think of what level of irony I possessed when I was in, say, grade 10. > > > It is my observation that children at 6 years old are much more > > > irony-savy than I was at 16. So, then, if you are as mature > > > chronologically as you and I are, it behoves us to be acutely aware of > > > all the forms of irony (think of commercials nowadays) that exist to make > > > things lively in the absence of any consensus about ultimate truth. > > > > > > And, don't worry: I won't hold back. I can't. I have no choice if I am > > > going to say anything of moment. Think of how irony-challenged some > > > expatriate Americans are. > > > > > > Jesus wept. > > > > > > Robin: Look at what has happened today: Bob Price writes a review > > > > which is major league; Barry writes a review subsequent to > > > > the Price review which, in comparison to the Price one, is > > > > very much minor league. And yet Barry would have us believe > > > > he has been brought up to The Show. Bob hits at about a 400 > > > > average [in that review]; Barry, about 240. This difference > > > > is noticeable to menot so much to Steve, though. He would > > > > have Barry and Bob hit for the same average. Probably 280. > > > > > > Judy: Haven't seen any of the films or read any of the books, so > > > I can't judge the quality. Bob's was certainly more > > > intriguing, though. (I tried reading Spy Who Came In from > > > the Cold many years ago and found it boring; saw the film > > > and found it depressing. I should try tackling the Karla > > > trilogy, perhaps, now that I'm older and presumably > > > wiser.) > > > > > > Robin2: Of course this makes perfect sense to me. > > > > > > Robin: I will leave it there, Judyperhaps Steve would say the > > > > percussion section. I hate to say this, but I think he needs > > > > that 8th degree sometimes :-) > > > > > > Judy: We could all use another degree or three, I suspect. > > > > > > Robin2: You are aware of course that I am referring (8th degree) to a > > > particular comment Steve made to Bob Price: viz, that if Bob thought he > > > had been subjected to criticism by you, he didn't know nothing compared > > > to what heStevenhad been subjected to. 2 our of 9 I think was the > > > calibration of takedown intensity that Steve assigned to Bob versus > > > himself. > > > > > > Robin: Honesty, sincerity and intelligence: it's nice when they > > > > all go together. This is my impression of your posts, Judy, > > > > and they are a kind of necessary countervailing force at FFL. > > > > > > Judy: Gee, maybe Curtis was right. Maybe you and I *should* get > > > a room. ;-) > > > > > > Robin2: No more romances for me! > > > :-) > > > > > >
