>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new_morning_blank_slate
> <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > Since last night 11pm or so PST, there have been 25 posts. 15 of
> them
> > stem from Shemp deciding now was a good time to revisit hiskeep it
views of
> > what Judy posted in January.
> >
> > If that one post were kept at the poster's thought level, the
> > ensuing low value (IMO) 14 posts would have not been posted.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "kept at the poster's
> thought level." Would you be willing to elaborate?
I simply meant to keep the thought to themselves. Just because someone
has a thought does not make it "golden". Just "having it" does not
necessarily make the thought valid, useful, humorous, insightful or of
broad value. It does not make it worth posting.
For example, upon reading some posts, a very funny (to me) reply /
retort / observation / smirk sometimes occurs. I used to often post
these "thoughts" because they clearly were funny or witty or
insightful or playful (to me). But both based on experience and
reflection, I realized some such comments will rub some the wrong way
and lead to a chain of odd exchanges.
So now I often chuckle and say "thats FUNNY" to my inner thoughts, but
don't share them if I feel some will feel ego hurts from them,
misinterpret them, or trigger them to respond to a myraid of built up
inner issues from long the past.
> For the record, I responded because the post was
> factually inaccurate--i.e., not just a matter of an
> opinion with which I disagreed.
I understand. I am not saying that every statement in all 14
responses, in the chain created by the original post, was, in-itself,
incorrect . I am just observing that from a larger view, any such
comments are part of a chain of posts which, as a whole, is of low
value. Each post is fuel on the fire of venom, retribution and
recycling of past issues -- even if the individual post, in-itself, on
the level of an individual point, might be true. Simply being true
does not make a post useful.
The chain is sort of a virtual fluctuation in the universal "ego hurt"
"bondage to the past" state.
:)
>
> If the 14
> > subsequent chain of replies were kept at the poster's thought level,
> > then the abundant fuel (apparently of venom) would not be added to
> the
> > spark of one posters momentary (hopefully) lapse of judgement and
> taste.
> >
> > This perhaps requires posters to realize just because they thought
> the
> > thought, that does not necessarily make the thought valid, useful,
> > humorous, insightful or of broad value -- that is, it may not be
> > worth posting.
> >
> > If posters were less possessed / driven by the past events and
> > percieved ego hurts, and less prone to listening to inner deep
> layers
> > of preconceptions, prejudgements of posters -- and simply read each
> > post for what is in the post itself (not myriads of past posts
> > rattling in their brains), then discussion on FFL would be far more
> > interesting IMO -- and not a reincarnation of a 60's type encounter
> group.
> >
> > Is being driven by and apparently obsessed with the past a sign of
> > deeply embedded spirituality? Makes one wonder about the
> effectiveness
> > of all these techniques people have been practicing for years.
> >
>
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
