Steve - yeah, lots of cool places in the world, and my dad had a great nose for finding paradise. Thing is, it inadvertently set the bar pretty high for me, and probably my chief reason for beginning TM - integrating it all. Certainly not crying into my beer, though. It continues to be an amazing life!!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@...> wrote: > > Hey Doc, > Let me say I really am glad you are back posting here. Along those > lines, I often appreciate your insights. And I would never presume to > know what goes on inside a person's head, i.e. whether you are reacting > or responding. I'll take you at your word that you are just responding, > and that it may rub people the wrong way. Fair enough. And not related > to anything else, I always wanted to tell you that I've found you > childhood to be a fascinating one, growing up in all the different > countries. That alone, I think, would give you a different perspective > on things. > At any rate, thanks for your reply here. I may reread again, when I'm > not engaged with other things. > (48) > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > Hey Steve, > > > > You make me sound like a stick up my ass automaton here -lol. I think > it was Byron Katie who said she had no business knowing what other > people thought of her. It took me a while to recognize that, and to > accept it (for myself, not her - lol). > > > > So I enjoy responding to others here, and in my life, though I am no > longer reactive. In order to be so would mean that I am protecting > myself against what others think of me. > > > > Responding and reacting feel very differently. The first is for > clarification, the second, for protection. And please don't let my > cursing be mistaken for reacting - I just fucking enjoy it! > > > > However, I have been *very* reactive in the past. Insulted people's > professions, and just said some plainly shitty things. Waaaay over the > top - it was fun at the time, as many shortsighted activities are, but > ultimately not who I want myself to be. > > > > And to Curtis, earlier I ridiculed your vocation as a musician and > performer, and lover of The Blues, and I apologize straight up for that. > Shitty thing to do. After the last three years of my life, I *get* the > blues.:-) But this isn't about me. Its about criticizing your love and > dedication for something that is a wonderful gift from you, to many. > > > > Having said that, I really enjoy participating here, with all my > quirks. I adopted the name Doctor Dumbass for two reasons: > > > > 1. 'Doctor', because I far prefer a scalpel, now, to a grenade. > > > > 2. 'Dumbass', because I never stop learning, nor would want to. > > > > and on that basis, let's us all *Carpe Fucking Diem*!! > > > > Thanks, Steve > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" steve.sundur@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey Jim, > > > > > > I take it that your response would not be an example of someone > being > > > "triggered" by something, which would then require the requisite > self > > > reflection, but rather, is an example of a clear eyed knower of > reality > > > "seeing things as they are", with no need to equivicate about it? > > > > > > I mean, I know that this is how you see it, but I'd like to hear you > say > > > it. I am not faulting you for it. I'd just like if you could stake > out > > > your position, (or correct me if I am mistaken). > > > > > > I noticed that you are now giving out "clean bills of health" > > > > > > Care to give me an evaluation? > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Right on, Wolf-Baiter (though in this case your subject, Curtis, > is a > > > pink little poodle baby, with apologies to poodles everywhere.) - > Or, > > > switching scenes, he reminds me of a guy my first wife told me about > > > years ago, who was trying to ask the office babe out for lunch. > > > > > > > > He starts telling her a saucy little joke, but then inadvertently > > > sneezed a rather large, um, booger, onto her desk. He blithely > flicked > > > it away with his finger, and continued with his humor. Lunch never, > ever > > > happened, though the story made the rounds. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater no_reply@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" > > > <maskedzebra@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" > <raunchydog@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: I already responded to Dr Dumb Ass's snipped comments. I > will > > > accept Raunchy's as a writing prompt. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like what you say here, Doc. Just to guild your lily a > > > little, I'd say that irreverence is a performance art of disaffected > > > seekers. They indulge in tipping sacred cows hoping people will > react in > > > horror. > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: Let me stop you there. Can you name a single person who > could > > > be expected to react in horror from a satiric piece on Christianity > > > here? Name one pearl-clutcher, to use you apt image. A single person > > > whose identification with the ideas contained in the myths of > > > Christianity, is so complete that anything I wrote could be expected > to > > > react in the way your are trying to project here. One. > > > > > > > > > > Hey Curtis, just some thoughts on your responses/questions here. > > > Upon reading your post of yesterday I was carried along on that > magic > > > carpet ride only you here at FFL are capable of providing. Words > come > > > out of you as sleek as little seals and they squirm and splash > around > > > beautifully, effortlessly. And I find my eyes gliding along with > these > > > little creatures frolicking away and before I know it you have > > > transported me someplace. That place includes twists and turns and > drops > > > and rolls. But then sometimes the little journey I am on strands me > in a > > > kind of bizarre place, an uncomfortable place. Your 'Christmas' > spiel > > > did just that. Not because I am religious, not because I am > Christian, > > > not because I am conservative or narrow. I think it was because in > > > between all of those really fun little jumps and dives there were > these > > > other things too. > > > > > > > > > > I re-read your piece a few times to try and understand what I > was > > > feeling and why. I am still working it out but I realized, even > though > > > those slick, black agile little seals really performed, I was left > > > feeling bereft. For some reason I didn't feel good after the post. I > > > felt yucky in fact. Now I am not saying you are a yucky guy, just > that > > > the effect your writing in this instance had on me was to leave me > > > feeling sort of besmirched (great word, "besmirched"). Anyway, I > think > > > it was because in what you wrote, what you said was essentially > > > flattened something. Probably not across the board and certainly not > in > > > everyone's experience based on the kudos you received, but for me it > > > annihilated something, momentarily. It was sort of like someone > telling > > > you Santa Claus never is or never was and anyone who believed > > > differently needed to realize this and realize it but good. > > > > > > > > > > You see, there was no redeeming element that allowed for a happy > > > ending, a reprieve, any hope. It was like so many things that I take > joy > > > in were smashed open and what was inside was just stuffing and > sawdust. > > > The wonder inherent in certain subjects you touched (stomped?) upon > > > disappeared. The things you wrote about became, for me, less rich, > less > > > full, meaner. They lost their specialness, things, precious things, > > > became less than ordinary when in fact they are not. > > > > > > > > > > I wish I could have enjoyed it like many others here did > because, > > > man oh man, can you write. You have experienced so much in your 57 > years > > > (or pretty close to that I think?) and there seems to be so much > that > > > wants to be expressed within your intelligence. Maybe I'll just wait > for > > > your next aquatic seal show and see if I like it any better. But boy > > > those little devils can certainly swim. > > > > > > > > > > > > I argue that mine is exactly the opposite motivation than the > one > > > you propose here. I wrote it for people who share my sense of humor, > I > > > am an entertainer. I would never post it on a board of Christians > > > because I do not have the motivation you ascribe to me. And at this > > > point if anyone is offended by my perspective on Maharishi, after > years > > > of full disclosure of my POV, shame on them for reading it. They are > > > going way out of their way for their offended buzz. > > > > > > > > > > > > An example of why I wrote it was Emily's response. That made > me > > > very happy and fulfilled my intentions for posting it. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD: > > > > > > It's rather juvenile but they do it just to show how hip, they > are > > > and how hip you're not because they think you haven't rejected the > > > beliefs that they have. > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: Do you believe that Jesus died for your sins and that > > > maintaining this believe will somehow alter your disposition in the > > > afterlife? Can you name one person who has that belief here that I > could > > > impose my hipness on by making a satire about Christianity? Since we > all > > > dissected Judith's book in detail here I could not reasonably expect > my > > > mention of the reality of Maharishi's hidden life would do more than > > > elicit a ho hum from this jaded crew. You are imagining something to > > > shame me for that doesn't even make sense. Name one belief > concerning > > > the Jesus myth that I have rejected and you have not. The unique > > > divinity of Christ? His role as your personal savior through the > > > mechanism of belief? His role as the fulfillment of the prophesies > of > > > the Old Testament? That he was required by God to suffer for our > sins? > > > You have to dismiss all the details of Christian theology to get to > > > something we might disagree on, perhaps your conjectures about his > state > > > of mind. Maybe you think he was an enlightened guy and I don't. But > we > > > agree on a hundred things about the story to find the one we do not > > > agree on. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even today, Barry thought it would be fun to post > humorously > > > irreverent road signs by MUM to see who smiled and see who didn't > smile. > > > I suspect he's more interested in pissing people off than in > delighting > > > them. I go for the latter. > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: I draw your attention to this post as counter evidence for > > > that claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Funny thing is, after awhile all the TMO, TM and Maharishi > > > bashing, pissing on baby Jesus and exhibitionistic waggling of dicks > > > gets to be so ho-hum that one hardly notices cries for attention > fading > > > into the distance. Sadly, when irreverent performance artists, shock > > > jocks, don't get the negative reaction they hoped, they're just as > happy > > > to get applause for taking a public dump from people who don't know > the > > > difference between art and schlock. > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: I saw a great Curb Your Enthusiasm where Larry David was > being > > > subjected to his wife's family Christmas traditions. Alone in the > > > kitchen Larry passes the time eating a cookie he found in a manger > > > scene. To his chagrin and the horror of his in-laws, it turned out > that > > > he had eaten the baby Jesus cookie in an all cookie manger scene. > > > Opening his mouth only to switch feet, he tried to pacify them all > as > > > they flocked around to shame him by saying "I thought it was a > monkey > > > cookie." They were not pacified. > > > > > > > > > > > > I share my sense of irreverent humor with Larry, and I wonder > if > > > you would project all these negative qualities on his intentions as > you > > > have on mine. A more broad minded perspective might allow that when > it > > > comes to humor, it is a personal thing and not feel the need to > demonize > > > someone making different choices than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Irreverent art is really old school. Back in the day of > the > > > Dadaists: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Marcel Duchamp penciled a mustache and goatee on a print > of > > > Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa and inscribed the work "L.H.O.O.Q." > > > Spelled out in French these letters form a risqué pun: Elle a > chaud > > > au cul, or "She has hot pants."... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Francis Picabia, once tacked a stuffed monkey to a board > and > > > called it a portrait of Cézanne... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Schoenberg's music was atonal, Mal-larmé's poems > scrambled > > > syntax and scattered words across the page and Picasso's Cubism made > a > > > hash of human anatomy... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, for all its zaniness, the Dada movement would prove > to be > > > one of the most influential in modern art, foreshadowing abstract > and > > > conceptual art, performance art, op, pop and installation art." > > > > > > > > http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/dada.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: I appreciated your references and I think you are > supporting a > > > case more for its value. For me I believe it has tremendous > > > philosophical value to examine myths in an original way. I am not > only > > > trying to entertain those who share my sense of humor, I am mapping > out > > > my perspective by sharing a unique approach to these myths. And > finally > > > I am sharing my actual throught process as I contemplate the images > of > > > my own nativity dredged up from my youth. > > > > > > > > > > > > For those who are friendly toward me here, it is sharing who I > am > > > my perspective. For those who feel the need to use this as proof of > a > > > personality or spiritual defect, they are welcome to that but I > can't > > > respect that POV. It seems unnecessarily uncharitable considering > the > > > fact that their own beliefs are not being called into question. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When all is said and done and irreverent spiritual > performance > > > artists have met the "Maker of Us All" that they poopoo, > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: So you are really that sure of yourself about this? I > would > > > like you to make a case to support such a belief, show us what you > are > > > basing it on as I have shared why I reject it. > > > > > > > > > > > > RD: > > > > > > generations of unschooled idiots will pay homage to them by > > > scouring the archives of FFLife for instructions on how to be an > asshole > > > while tipping sacred cows. > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: When I try to conjure up the reasons and motivations for > your > > > writing this insult, I can't come up with a single on that I > respect. > > > > > > > > > > > > Robin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I loved this, raunchy. You have the right credentials--all > the > > > way down. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ME: That strikes me as a bit disappointing to hear you say > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
