Mr Tea, You know, there are moments when I wish we could just have a regular chat. You have posted back to me with reasonable and sensitive replies so I know you have it in there, probably in spades. I know your realize that lots of this is just a game. Positioning ourselves here and there. Aligning ourselves with certain others to create a dynamic, to spur on some type of jousting. But I don't actually sense you are a "bad guy". I know you don't think of yourself as one either. Sometimes your alliances seem forced, not really representing who you are or know yourself to be. Getting too analytical? I don't want that.
Anyway, just thought I would extend a tentative hand in your direction in case you want to play sometime, but not by throwing sand in each others faces. I have a pretty neat tea set and could make some cookies. Wanna come over? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> wrote: > > > > Geeez, this is so so funny. Â I am laughing so hard. Â Off to the beach - > > I'll look for a job in September. Â > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Robin Carlsen <maskedzebra@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 3:58 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dear Diary > > > > > > Â > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Iranitea1: Barry, excellent writing! Good parody, and spot on, it gave me > > the > > first laugh of the day... > > > > Robin1: And tell Buck too, iranitea, since you have made explicit your > > sympathy and support him in all that he is doing, that he should not be > > discouraged in his laudable moral crusade here on FFL. > > > > Your "first laugh of the day"? M-m-m: for me, laughter is an opinion-free > > zone. You should have had some laughs before this, iranitea. If you become > > pre-selective in your laughter (which jokes are said by the right person > > with > > the right party affiliation) I assure you, your soul will start to rust. > > > > This response to Barry was first-aid, comfort, compensation. It lacked the > > confidence of a response driven by pure appreciation. > > > > And therefore it is an insult to the writer. > > > > Iranitea2: Nope. It was totally genuine, innocent. You are just > > constructing all this. Btw. > > I live in a different time zone, and my laugh was in the morning, when I > > checked > > it on my phone. I laugh also about you, but you said I shouldn't pick fights > > with you. And, you demonstrate once more, that you don't really know me at > > all, > > your psychic powers are just bluff. > > > > Robin2: I ain't got none of dem dere "psychic powers"â"me stay away from > > all dat. > > > > On the other hand I talk to the Personal God about how to tune into his > > omnisubjectivityâ"and you won't believe this, iranitea, but when I > > consulted him about this attribute, he said:" STFU, Robin! There ain't no > > first-person ontologyâ"*I, myself*, have trying to get enlightenedâ"I > > want that Impersonal God in me to manifest. So I don't have to be eternal > > and the source of everyone's existence from the point of view of a > > Subjectivity which is the enemy of the Unified Fieldâ"although I did plant > > some nice roses thereâ"No one noticed them, however; they just kinda saw a > > creative nothingness." > > > > I saidâ"you still there, iranitea?â"to God (now somewhat nonplussed by > > the fact that even *he* is following the gods of Fairfieldâ"I am sure it > > was Share who seduced him away from being just the Holy Trinityâ"it was so > > much simpler then): "I am sorry to hear this, Big Guy: Here I was defending > > you and you are joining the enemy camp". > > > > I then continued (making sure he couldn't speak before I got my next > > question out): "What about iranitea's latest post to me? Is he right that I > > never look seriously at all the metaphysical systems that I seem to > > represent, that I don't understand what I read, that I need to pontificate, > > that I want to be the centre of attention all the time?" > > > > And God looked at me very severely (lots of darshan coming at me) and > > declared: "He's dead right, Robbie Boy. And I ain't going to say another > > word to youâ"because you will turn it into one of your 'extraordinary > > experiences' [SL]â"You know: you talked to the Personal God and all that, > > and you are going to make a big deal of this at FFL. I just tell you, > > Robin, once again: You are headed for a greater fall than even when you > > found out you didn't like Unity Consciousness. Get it, Rob Baby? Now you > > apologize to iranitea, and I'll see you in the Dome." > > > > Robin to God: "In the DOME? WTF, God? Oh, I see, you mean that > > metaphorically. OK, then. I will endeavour in the rest of this post to do > > what I can to win over iranitea and at the same time begin to be coherent, > > sincere, and consistent in all that I do and say and write from here on in. > > Thanks for the counselling session, Godâ"It's just that I thought that > > omnisubjectivity, that that was something you were really into. Well, I > > guess I don't know anything about this first-person ontological stuff after > > all. F***me: I guess iranitea was right about *that* too. OK, then. By the > > way, Sir: good luck with the Atman trip." > > > > There was a silence, and then I couldn't help but blurt out: "What if you > > don't like it, God? Will you be willing to return to your First Person > > Ontology?" > > > > God to Robin: "Look, Robbie Bobbie: I have read your goddamn posts at > > FFLâ"I am not going to get sucked into your game, OK?" > > > > And that was it. I pretended to leave God's presenceâ"and He acted as if > > he was not still infinitely intimate to me as the level of my > > existenceâ"He being his own existence. > > > > Back to your post, iranitea: > > > > Robin1: Your only concern was Barry's self-esteem. Methinks the lady doth > > protest too > > much. > > > > This isn't the Special Olympics, iranitea. Watch it. We are all big > > boysâ"and > > Barry can look after himself just fine without your mealy-mouthed > > blandishments. > > > > If your real experience of Barry's post had resembled what you say here, you > > would have joined in, and made us feel your participation in the reality he > > created by his post. > > > > Come into my sandbox, iranitea, I have a big dump-truck you can play with. > > > > You are going to get back to me, right? > > > > Iranitea2: Nope, you are not making any sense. > > > > Robin2: I get it now, iranitea. Nope, I'm not. > > > > Iranitea2: I tell you what I really like about Barry, do you want to know? > > He doesn't have > > a need to be liked or adored by anyone. He doesn't try to pull you to his > > side. > > He does his thing, and that's it. > > > > Robin2: A most ridiculous justification and rationalization for your party > > affiliation. Barry feels nothing for you but gratitude that you are a > > goddamn Marxistâ"if you get what I mean. Is this the criterion you used > > for love too? She "just does her thing". Romantic, that. What takes the > > place of intimacy, then? Have any friends who don't exhibit this virtue > > that characterizes Barry? I like those stepsisters of Cinderella tooâ"They > > were never sentimental with herâ"not like her fairy godmother. And they > > made her realize the value of hard work. I think I am getting it now, > > iranitea. Your defence of Barry here in a psychological absurdity. > > > > On the other hand, God probably agrees with you, so I reserve final > > judgment here. Yeah, I think this is a beautiful quality in Barryâ"and I > > just began to love him for it. > > > > Thanks, iranitea. (Robin only motivated to avoid the wrath of god,) > > > > Iranitea2: You are somewhere in your own constructed metaphysical > > smorgasbord, you are all about words and words and words, you are trying to > > pull, manipulate, partonize, > > living in your fantasy world, where your metaphysical system changes on the > > fly, > > according to your spiritual moods. > > > > Robin2: How about now? I am confused, OK? I am striking out like a blind > > man. Just improvising out of my memory of being in Unity. If you could > > advise me which "metaphysical system" I should stick with, and just be an > > obedient exponent of that system, I would like that. Please select one of > > these dishes from the "metaphysical smorgasbord". And those "spiritual > > moods"â"something chameleon there. Have a prescription for that by any > > chance? It's hard controlling, battening down those moods, iranitea. Like > > what mood am I in right now? Not sure, but at least I have had my > > comeuppance from the *necessary* being, who "contains the reason for His > > own existence", "whose existence is logically impossible"â"not, then, > > iranitea, contingent, like you and me. > > > > His vibe, let me tell you, Maharishi had nothing on him. It was a very big > > deal to get a dressing down from Him! And I'll never forget it, iranitea. > > More than this: *he actually took your side*. I wasn't expecting *that*. > > Meanwhile I am turned towards a fresh form of self-rehabilitationâ"mainly > > because of this post of yours, iraniteaâ"I felt immediately after reading > > it how you had attempted to take the measure of me based upon all of my > > postsâ"not just those where I controverted with you and your friends. And > > I think that was important: that your assessment contained in its > > articulation the entirety of my output on FFL. That, by the way, is the > > right approach to doing something like you attempted here, iranitea. Look > > for the strongest point in your opponent's position and then get inspired > > by the tension created by engagement with that most challenging aspect of > > his or her point of view. > > > > I wonder what happened. I was doing so well thereâ"at least I thought I > > was.â"I mean until you and God took me to the proverbial woodshed. > > > > Iranitea1: You are never able to look into this seriously. Why this > > constant need to be in > > the center of everything? Why this constant need to pontificate your absurd > > theories you picked up in some book, not even understanding what they say. > > (You > > are using 1st person ontology in a completely wrong way) > > > > Robin2: Look, I don't care what God has told me, iranitea; I am dying to > > understand the meaning of my "not even understanding what they [the books I > > have read] say"â""You are using 1st person ontology in a completely wrong > > way"â"Now THAT gets my attention, iranitea. That would be like telling > > Missy Franklin she actually comes off as a regular sourpuss. Deliver me > > from my ignorance, iraniteaâ"I sure have studied this issue of > > first-person ontologyâ"and from the guy who's best at talking about it: > > David Chalmers. And then doing a lot of field work! It's the only thing I > > feel I am as knowledgeable about as anyoneâ"certainly anyone here at FFL. > > But you must understand, iranitea, I look at it from an empirical *and* a > > theoretical perspective. I know what first-personl ontology is. You don't. > > > > Ok, Ok, Ok, God! [He just jolted me, iranitea]. Nah, I intuitively > > recognize you are right in this judgment of me, iranitea. I humbly ask you > > to educate me in this area of philosophy and theology and psychology. I > > don't know nothing. God [Hi], it feels good to unburden myself like this > > before you, iranitea. > > > > Iranitea2: Emptybill is totally spot on, you are playing on the stage > > again, can't let go > > of this. And what do you care about how I relate to Buck or Barry? I know > > exactly how I relate to them, and so do they. > > > > Robin2: I sense nothing real, deep, or believable in your friendship with > > Barry. He could care a less about you. He likes Curtis and Marek on the > > other hand; but you, you are just a tool for him. Ask him. With Curtis it > > is something realâ"the only person I have ever sensed that Barry is moved > > byâ"but poor Curtis isn't interested in making Barry wise-up. And I should > > shut up about Curtisâ"still the guy who provided me with the most fun and > > satisfaction and exhilaration posting on FFL. > > > > I don't know about Buck, but I hope you saved him from that last video I > > posted in response to the one Barry posted (sent to him by his friendâ"I > > have a hunch I might know who that might beâ"but I will resist the > > temptation to give a shout-out here). > > > > Iranitea1: Robin, do what you want, but don't have any illusions about some > > people here, > > that you could somehow suck them into your game. > > > > Robin2: You know, by the time I get here in answering your post, I figure > > *God was wrong about you, iranitea*. For what you say here to be true must > > mean that you have exercised a power of discrimination and judgment > > superior to those persons who have been unable to remain objective about > > meâ"this would include (along with yourself) Barry, Vaj, Emptybill, and > > maybe a few others. But what you say here is a kind of atrocity, since I > > have no interest in trying to "suck" anyone "into [my] game". Nope. That's > > where you give yourself away, iranitea: I am a sincere, conscientious, > > honest personâ"and I have remained true to my integrity in every post on > > FFL. Trying to suck persons into my gameâ"Is that what I did when I wrote > > to Emily, iranitea. You are a liar if you say so. I felt a deep caring and > > respect for her, and I expressed this in two posts. Was I trying to "suck > > her into my game"? > > Yes, also, but it doesn't mean you couldn't be caring as well. Unlike you, I > am not commenting on your relationship with others. > > > > > No, I have to play with guys like you, > > No you don't. > > > because you have fixed and inflexible agendas, > > In your eyes that is. I haven't known anything about you until last December. > When I first saw people referring to you as Robin, I didn't know you where > Robin Carlson. And I didn't know who that was, and what he did. My first > reaction to you was then through the posts I read, and it is the same I am > having now. So I guess that couldn't be called agenda. > > > and are unable to manoeuvre yourself sufficiently in the act of debate such > > to adjudicate, moment to moment, your own performance. > > If I would want to learn from you about debate, I would ask you. Since I > don't ask you, I am not interested to learn from you about debate. > > > Maharishi taught me many things; but one thing that stands out in my memory > > of him: He never set himself up to look stupidâ"he was keen on staying > > deep enough in every second so that none of the irony of life could turn > > him into a victim. I observed this, and made a vow I would do the same. > > But that didn't really help you. Your tactics towards me and others here whom > you regard as enimies is always the same, it is always the same style of > seeming and played self irony, but then towards the end you are the same > stern and judgemental partonizing. While it may be amusing, it just doesn't > bring anything. You are just in love with your own talk. You are too much > just about yourself. I me mine. > > > Sorry, God. >
