--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > Barry has really missed your fluffing services, > > navashok. I'm sure he's very glad to see you. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok <no_reply@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > Basically all what Judy knows, which goes beyond superficial > > > beginner level comes from what has been said by people *here* > > > on one of these forums who were more involved in the past. > > > > Says navashok, *citing what I myself just said* as if > > it were his own analysis. > > Oh, come on, how silly is this? Just because we came to the > same conclusion, as it is simply the TRUTH, doesn't mean I > have copied or even seen your post that was actually just > sent 8 minutes before.
It was in the post you're responding to, you utter nitwit. > Of course it's my own analysis. If I had seen your post > I would have directly referenced it, and commented upon > it, stooopid! You *quote* it below. How STOOOOOOPID can you *get*? > How silly of you to try to score some points > with this. Have you ever heard the term "own goal"? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=own+goal (Definition #1.) > > Except that my knowledge is more than just "superficial > > beginner level," and my understanding is better than > > that of some teachers. > > Then talk about it, and don't always withdraw to the most > official and most common texts from the TM websites. I do and have done so often, as you know. In this case it was appropriate for me to document my points. > > > You can never compare the type of involvement she has and had > > > with that of some more dedicated people, who were involved on > > > the organizational level, for several years, had direct > > > interactions with a teacher (Maharishi), even if this is > > > decades ago, it is more revealing and rich than just plain- > > > vanilla-TM-consumerism and I-know-all-TM-teachings-by-heart. > > > > And I've never claimed my knowledge goes beyond what > > is taught to the rank-and-file and what I've picked > > up from teachers on this and other Web forums. Oh, > > and during my stay at the TM facility in Asbury Park > > back in '95-'96. > > That always makes me laugh when you mention that. Keep > mentioning it in 10 more years. You should only know how it makes *me* laugh when you pretend something is funny but decline to say why. Do you have *any* idea how transparent you are? > You know, even Robin was clear about this: you not having > been a TM teacher, can not really fathom what the TM > movement was then and now. Of course I can't. I've never disputed this (and nobody had to tell me about it either). > Because TM teachers had a > better insight into the movement, they couldn't be as naive as > the 'rank and file', and were therefore more easily disillusioned. I have no doubt. > You just couldn't look at the whole thing the same way, if > you knew more, Not only do you not know how I'm looking at it, you don't even know what my dispute with Curtis was about. and were let into more secrets, and Maharishi > would sometimes let those secrets out, sometimes in the > middle of the night in Noida, when everybody was half asleep. > These self-classification tests were being done, as to being > clear or hazy transcendence, or clear ritam or hazy ritam. > > The problem is not, that you weren't there, or that you > didn't have the opportunity to be on those courses. The > problem is really that you play the movement spokesman > on the basis of those superficial public statements, that > you play out the PR spin. Now that is superficial. Not true on any count. I don't play "movement spokesman," I play a long-time TMer who watches the movement from afar; I rarely cite TMO public statements; my interest isn't in PR but in accuracy; and since none of what you say is even *true*, it can't be said to be superficial. I'll get to your silly sutra post later. > > (snip) > > > If I may say something more esoteric here, for me Judy is > > > still a young soul, despite of the age of her physical > > > body. There will be always a conflict with older souls > > > here, who draw from a wider field of experience and > > > thinking, who have come a longer way, and that manifests > > > usually early on in this life. > > > > Hilarious. Share will love it, though. > > She didn't, but I stick with it. >
