[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price  wrote:
> >
> > whynotnow7, please consider this my apology for thinking 
> > of you as a dudette...
> 
> Hey Bob, would you happen to have any spare clear nail 
> polish? I've got a run in my stocking...

Jim, I'm surprised that you don't have nail polish
left over from the period of several months when 
you posed as a female on this forum.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[whynotnow7]

What?! Surprised after you borrowed it from me, used it all up *and* still owe 
me a lipstick? Pig.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price  wrote:
> > >
> > > whynotnow7, please consider this my apology for thinking 
> > > of you as a dudette...
> > 
> > Hey Bob, would you happen to have any spare clear nail 
> > polish? I've got a run in my stocking...
> 
> Jim, I'm surprised that you don't have nail polish
> left over from the period of several months when 
> you posed as a female on this forum.  :-)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[whynotnow7]

Yep, Barry eats it up with a spoon, if you will excuse the disgusting imagery.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Jim, agreed - Nabby should have been more clearer, though Vaj and Barry have 
> never quite managed to come out of the closet on their Buddhist beliefs they 
> have clearly proved they are assholes. Barry for one is even proud of it and 
> I'm sure he's glad you corrected Nabby.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > I agree Rick. Nabby should have said instead, "Is it one of the two 
> > assholes here?" Everyone would know who he meant.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > On Behalf Of nablusoss1008
> > > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 5:28 PM
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > >  , "danfriedman2002"
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Quite understandable. A member of FFL got a hold of my spouse´s email
> > > address and sent a distastful email to her. I believe that spouses and
> > > children are offbounds.
> > > 
> > > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> > > 
> > > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists? What if you were 
> > > to
> > > ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example

[whynotnow7]

HA HA - and yet by your recent analogy of supposedly being a "writer" shitting 
a book, you think you can stink up the joint regularly without a complaint? The 
very LEAST you could do is hand out some clothespins for our noses. I submit 
you wouldn't know an "afflictive emotion" if IT OWNED YOU.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> To differentiate between just having a passing flash of anger or envy or
> momentary feelings of spite and what I mean by "indulging in" such
> emotions, a example would help.
> 
> I once moved into a house in a small mini-neighborhood, and one of the
> first neighbors I met was a lady I'll call M. M was an old woman,
> nearing 70. She saw me in my yard one day, realized I was a new
> neighbor, and walked over. Rather than saying hello, her opening line
> was "You must let me warn you about Mr. J, who lives in the house next
> to mine. He lets his dog shit in my garden."
> 
> I thought to myself, "Uh huh," and made my excuses, claiming to have an
> important task I needed to get to, like darning my socks. This scene
> repeated itself with frightening regularity over the coming weeks. M
> would corner not just me but everyone who entered the neighborhood and
> "warn" them about Mr. J and his terrible dog, who shat in her garden. I
> was chatting with some other neighbors one day and she came up and did
> her number on all of us again, and one of the other neighbors said
> gently, "M, don't you think it's time you got over this? The dog shit in
> your garden *two years ago*. When it happened, and you complained about
> it to Mr. J, he built a fence. It hasn't happened since. Why do you keep
> going on and on about it?"
> 
> M stepped back like this man had slapped her in the face. She went all
> purple-faced and started screaming over and over, "THE DOG SHIT IN MY
> GARDEN. THE DOG SHIT IN MY GARDEN. THE DOG SHIT IN MY GARDEN." My
> neighbors finally had to call her son to come over and quiet her down. I
> was told that this was sadly a fairly frequent occurrence.
> 
> THAT is indulging in one of the afflictive emotions.
> 
> If the emotion just "passes through" and then is gone, that's one thing.
> When the person actually *holds on* to the emotion -- be it anger or
> envy or hatred or spite or a desire for revenge -- for days, weeks,
> months, or even more shockingly like poor M, years, it's quite another.
> 
> If the Buddhist theory of each of these afflictive emotions being a kind
> of operating system that imposes a corresponding state of attention on
> the person indulging in that emotion is true, imagine the effects of
> indulging in anger and spite like this woman did for years. Try to
> imagine what it DID to her, and how it forced her to see the world.
> After a certain point the only thing she *could* see was this dog
> shitting in her garden two years ago, and her need to exact revenge for
> it. Sad.
> 
> My suggestion is that I think we have a couple of people on this forum
> who are in the same ballpark with regard to indulging in the past, and
> in their attachment to afflictive emotions that came up for them in that
> past. And I think it colors their perceptions as much as M's were
> colored by one tiny dog taking one tiny dump in one tiny garden. The
> original *incident* wasn't worth getting all bent out of shape over. But
> to allow it to warp her for YEARS? This is the danger that Buddhists see
> in indulging in the afflictive emotions.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[whynotnow7]

Maybe we should create a new FFL acronym just for Barry; PSIB, Poor Self 
Important Bastard. What it lacks in catchiness it makes up in accuracy.   

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Like I said, I got dragged into this on false pretenses.  I 
> > > don't share your fascination about the rest of what happened.
> > 
> > Thanks for not automatically assuming that the 
> > version of the tale told by the Spite OS addicts
> > here was accurate.
> > 
> > You DO realize that all of this is a reaction to
> > my post about Afflictive Emotions yesterday, right?
> 
> ROTFL. Poor Barry.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[whynotnow7]

Excuse this duplicate - Yahoo appears to be eating posts again.

I am laughing so hard at you when posting about you Barry, that as a Buddhist 
you should consider that A GOOD THANG! No anger here, just another asshole like 
yourself. Enjoy it while it lasts! Oneness!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Did anyone notice that the bash-Barry fest last night
> was all ABOUT afflictive emotions?
> 
> One drama queen, still smarting from a largely imagined
> offense months ago, misrepresents what happened, *in order
> to get some kind of 'payback' to the person who he still
> has a grudge against*.
> 
> The next person, bearing even more of a grudge, piles on
> and tries to expand this fit of dwelling in the past and
> drama queen hysterics, and tries her best to get as many
> other people involved in it as possible. She goes on and
> on for several posts trying to do this, almost as if it
> were some kind of (dare I say it?) obsession for her.
> 
> Meanwhile I was asleep, not a party to any of this at all.
> Since waking up and noticing it, I've tried merely to 
> point out what should have been obvious from the start. 
> 
> This was all about afflictive emotions. Two people with
> a *grudge they cannot get over* leapt upon the first 
> excuse presented to them to act out about it again. 
> Addicted to the Spite OS, they just couldn't wait to
> indulge in it again. 
> 
> You may see this whole thing differently, but that's how
> I see it. It's about indulging in the afflictive emotions,
> and the residual obsessions that form in those who *do*
> indulge in them when they do it for many years.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Across The Universe - Maharishi, The Beatles, Mike Love, Donovan in Rishikesh

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "stevelf"  wrote:
>
> thanks. and I enjoyed your online book. 

Glad you enjoyed it. I hope that you laughed occasionally,
because that was kinda the point of writing it the way I
did. The world is full of oh-so-serious books about the
oh-so-serious teachers that oh-so-serious spiritual seekers
studied with. I figured it didn't need one more.  

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "stevelf"  wrote:
> > >
> > > the good-old-days can really be refreshing.
> > 
> > Nothing to say in response to your post, but I
> > wanted to reply because I like your email name.
> > Nyuck nyuck.  :-)
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example

[Ravi Yogi]

Barry wow this is really cutting edge, oops was cutting a wrong word to use - 
considering the Buddhist origin of this research? 

You seem to have quite a talent in recognizing the type of OS everyone's 
running purely on the basis of email communications unlike the poor lady below? 
( Did you even bother to check if the poor lady below had any medical 
problems?)  

Is this the occult energy thing that you referred to in the past that gives you 
this ability?

Are these occult energy readings of yours free? Can I have one too please - So 
what's your prognosis for me - Spite OS, Envy OS or just the dual OS that you 
run - The Bully Victim OS? 

My diagnosis of you - all this crap about various OS's is yet another clever 
way of spreading your malware on FFL.

The anti-virus experts here are too well tested to be fooled by your strategy 
of trying to project them as SpiteOS, EnvyOS.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> To differentiate between just having a passing flash of anger or envy or
> momentary feelings of spite and what I mean by "indulging in" such
> emotions, a example would help.
> 
> I once moved into a house in a small mini-neighborhood, and one of the
> first neighbors I met was a lady I'll call M. M was an old woman,
> nearing 70. She saw me in my yard one day, realized I was a new
> neighbor, and walked over. Rather than saying hello, her opening line
> was "You must let me warn you about Mr. J, who lives in the house next
> to mine. He lets his dog shit in my garden."
> 
> I thought to myself, "Uh huh," and made my excuses, claiming to have an
> important task I needed to get to, like darning my socks. This scene
> repeated itself with frightening regularity over the coming weeks. M
> would corner not just me but everyone who entered the neighborhood and
> "warn" them about Mr. J and his terrible dog, who shat in her garden. I
> was chatting with some other neighbors one day and she came up and did
> her number on all of us again, and one of the other neighbors said
> gently, "M, don't you think it's time you got over this? The dog shit in
> your garden *two years ago*. When it happened, and you complained about
> it to Mr. J, he built a fence. It hasn't happened since. Why do you keep
> going on and on about it?"
> 
> M stepped back like this man had slapped her in the face. She went all
> purple-faced and started screaming over and over, "THE DOG SHIT IN MY
> GARDEN. THE DOG SHIT IN MY GARDEN. THE DOG SHIT IN MY GARDEN." My
> neighbors finally had to call her son to come over and quiet her down. I
> was told that this was sadly a fairly frequent occurrence.
> 
> THAT is indulging in one of the afflictive emotions.
> 
> If the emotion just "passes through" and then is gone, that's one thing.
> When the person actually *holds on* to the emotion -- be it anger or
> envy or hatred or spite or a desire for revenge -- for days, weeks,
> months, or even more shockingly like poor M, years, it's quite another.
> 
> If the Buddhist theory of each of these afflictive emotions being a kind
> of operating system that imposes a corresponding state of attention on
> the person indulging in that emotion is true, imagine the effects of
> indulging in anger and spite like this woman did for years. Try to
> imagine what it DID to her, and how it forced her to see the world.
> After a certain point the only thing she *could* see was this dog
> shitting in her garden two years ago, and her need to exact revenge for
> it. Sad.
> 
> My suggestion is that I think we have a couple of people on this forum
> who are in the same ballpark with regard to indulging in the past, and
> in their attachment to afflictive emotions that came up for them in that
> past. And I think it colors their perceptions as much as M's were
> colored by one tiny dog taking one tiny dump in one tiny garden. The
> original *incident* wasn't worth getting all bent out of shape over. But
> to allow it to warp her for YEARS? This is the danger that Buddhists see
> in indulging in the afflictive emotions.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: nablusoss1008
> > 
> > "danfriedman2002"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Quite understandable. A member of FFL got a hold of 
> > > my spouse´s email address and sent a distastful email 
> > > to her. I believe that spouses and children are offbounds.
> > 
> > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> 
> Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists? 
> What if you were to
> ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"

Thanks for the thought, Rick, but it's really not
necessary. As I've explained many times, I'm not
even a Buddhist. Rama was not a member of any real
Buddhist sangha, and I've never become a member of
one at any point in my life. I never will, because
I just don't "do" groups any more. Besides, I dis-
agree with many of the primary tenets of Buddhism.
As in the FFL credo on its home page, I take what
I need from Buddhist thought and leave the rest.
These days I find a great deal more inspiration 
in Taoist thought.

As you suggested in a followup post, I think we all
know that Nabby is merely acting out his hatred of
Buddhists, something he learned from Maharishi. (And
which MMY learned in kind from Shankara and his whole
tradition.) Did Maharishi ever dump on Taoism? If so, 
Nabby could switch over to calling me a Taoist. :-)

Others who throw around the word "Buddhist" as an
epithet are trying to find some word that they can
use to 1) bag me and Vaj, 2) try to get under our
skin by poking at things they think we believe in
because they think it'll push our buttons the way
that the things we write push theirs, and 3) they
like referring to people they don't like with nick-
names they consider insulting. You know, like "dork"
for do.rflex, or calling another poster Stupid Sal,
or referring to Vaj as Vag or Curtis a "hillbilly."

I don't take any of this very seriously because I 
don't take any of the people doing it very seriously.
I doubt Vaj does, either. Truth be told, that's prob-
ably the main reason they continue to obsess on us. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
>
> Did you even bother to check if the poor lady below [in 
> the story I told about "M"] had any medical problems? 

Ravi, if you are suggesting that someone who obsesses
on one person for years and goes out of her way to not
only badmouth that person every time she sees an oppor-
tunity to do so but actively tries to get others to do 
the same thing just might have some medical or sanity 
issues, I completely agree with you.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> I agree Rick. Nabby should have said instead, "Is it one of the two assholes 
> here?" Everyone would know who he meant.



Or I could simply have asked; "Could the culprit be the biggest asshole we know 
on FFL" ? Everyone would know who I meant. :-)




> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
>> > 
> > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists? What if you were to
> > ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of authfriend
> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 6:58 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> 
> [Nabby wrote:]
> > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> > 
> > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists?
> > What if you were to ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> 
> False equivalence. You know better than that, Rick.
> 
> I don't agree. Nabby constantly uses "Buddhist" as a pejorative. If he
> constantly referred to Jews with the same tone, I think you would be
> offended. He also often refers to the "Dolly" Lama, not only in an attempt
> to rankle anyone (especially Vaj and Barry) who might respect him, but to
> belittle the man, because Maharishi belittled him, referring to him as
> merely a politician, as Nabby often reminds us. Of course he doesn't
> accomplish this, except in his own cultish little mind. He only makes
> himself look like a bigot.
> 
> This reminds me of an encounter I had in a local store with an old friend.
> For some reason I mentioned democracy. He said he didn't like democracy. I
> said that was because Maharishi had repeatedly damned it, and that if
> Maharishi had praised it, he would be praising it. In other words, he wasn't
> thinking independently.



Again you oversimplify. Has it not occurred to you that the Dalai Lama strikes 
more that one person (Maharishi) to be just a politician ?
And has it never occurred to you that many on this planet, independent of 
Maharishi, do not hold the current "democracy" to be either very democratic nor 
just ? 

But I suppose that if you find a fault in Maharishi or in any of his followers 
you are happy and have no need for further analysis.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[obbajeeba]

Was I short about 50?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> Well, I'm glad you have a sense of humor.  But I still think  you should
> write a 500 work essay on, "Why I Like Fairfieldlife" and send it Yahoo.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
> >
> > This thread deserves this too... LOL. Oh dollops!
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZgwNutwK0Y
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba no_reply@ wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLDVIViWW74
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I didn't follow this thread. So, what did Bevan say that they
> wanted removed? -Buck
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" 
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> > > > > > On Behalf Of Ravi Yogi
> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 10:04 PM
> > > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I met gulliblefool here in Boston at Amma's program and he
> mentioned he is
> > > > > > one of the moderators here. So I'm shocked that he is not
> being mentioned in
> > > > > > any of these discussions here - contrary to the impression I
> had based on
> > > > > > his Yahoo ID he seemed quite shrewd and calculating - in fact
> I lost my
> > > > > > darshan token, I suspect he is involved somehow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So his omission here is pretty surprising and I'm hoping for
> some kind of
> > > > > > apology and request he be acknowledged in all discussions of
> this nature.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know he's a moderator. He just doesn't do much moderating.
> Alex puts in
> > > > > > more time than anyone. I do what I can. We hear from Gullible
> Fool once in a
> > > > > > while.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Well I got a different impression. What better way to
> acknowledge gulliblefool's contribution than by giving the entire FFL
> migration task to him and letting him prove himself.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's only a matter of time before Tom Pall creates a couple of
> well disguised profiles which get approved and he starts posting TM
> copyrighted materials to take FFL down.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] VERY SERIOUS Barry [was Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example]

[whynotnow7]

Funny how Barry loses his jokesy folksy persona the minute he is the one on the 
receiving end of his own actions. Prior to this its all smiley faces and 
jocularity at others' expense. 

I once described FFL as "a self-correcting dharma sphere". He still doesn't get 
it, leading me to revise someone's recent assessment of Barry's "voice" as a 
precocious eight year old down to about two or three years old; the age where 
cause and effect are not apparent.

This baby thinking also manifests itself in his non-stop proclamation that he 
doesn't read my posts, similar to a toddler insisting he isn't looking when we 
see him peering through splayed fingers. How do you get to be almost seventy 
and remain so clueless?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
> >
> > Did you even bother to check if the poor lady below [in 
> > the story I told about "M"] had any medical problems? 
> 
> Ravi, if you are suggesting that someone who obsesses
> on one person for years and goes out of her way to not
> only badmouth that person every time she sees an oppor-
> tunity to do so but actively tries to get others to do 
> the same thing just might have some medical or sanity 
> issues, I completely agree with you.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Queen Marie Antoinette of France

[seventhray1]

Well, at least now we know what Helena Bonham Carter looked like in a
previous life.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> 1769, by Joseph Ducreaux
> http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/5/49430.jpg
>

[FairfieldLife] The Trouble With Normal

[turquoiseb]

Thirty years ago my favorite singer-songwriter released a song with the
same title as this post. Bruce Cockburn was accurate in his description
of the vibe of his time, but also IMO *our* time as well. He traveled
the world, sat in cafes and looked around as he traveled, and tried to
extract the *trends* he saw going down in the different places. Then,
being a deeply spiritual person, he tried to extrapolate from these
trends what they might mean about our collective future as humans
sharing this blue-green ball in black space. As usual, he was prescient.

http://www.uulyrics.com/music/bruce-cockburn/song-the-trouble-with-norma\
l/


Bruce IMO was brilliant at capturing what he saw as "normal" in the
places he traveled to and the people he observed. And I think he did an
admirable job of it in this song. But the real "take away" of the song
for me is the phrase that follows the Subject title of this post in the
chorus:

   The trouble with normal
   Is it always get worse.

Lately, taking advantage of my summer vacation, I've had occasion to
cruise a few more of the spiritual drive-ins on the Internet than usual.
Some of the trends I've seen there among the participants uplift me and
make me feel all warm and fuzzy again about the spiritual path, and
where it might lead. Other trends...uh...not so much. What I'm pondering
over this glass of beer in this cafe is the latter trend's
representation of what constitutes normal. And, if Bruce's insight is
correct, what will these forums -- and these people -- be like in a few
years when their idea of normal actually gets worse.

For some posters -- sad to say, on any of the forums, the rare ones --
normal is writing about high, shiny shit, and conveying to others their
continuing joy at watching it hit the cosmic fan. For others -- sad to
say, often the majority -- the normal of a "spiritual" Internet forum
seems to be all about taking that same shit and re-flinging it at others
through their writing.

For the latter, a joke becomes a deadly insult, one that "has to" be
responded to not just with one rejoinder, but many. Some turn the
tiniest, most petty affronts into multi-year vendettas. Others just get
their buttons pushed about some criticism of or witticism about their
teacher, their path, or them personally, and feel the need to lash out
at the heretics. I wish that I could say that this tendency was limited
to TM and FFL, but sadly I cannot. I have seen this same over-reactive
behavior on dozens of Internet forums over the years, and on five of the
six I haunt lately. They are pretty much like all other Internet forums
in terms of the "flame quotient" and the chronic over-reaction. Reading
them, I question sometimes why these forums are designated "spiritual."
Fortunately -- so far -- the sixth has remained the sole exception. This
gives me hope, and the impetus to write this rap.

The sixth forum seems to consist primarily of long-term spiritual
seekers who have decided to try to walk on the Internet the talk of
their philosophy. They have decided to go for a (in their view) higher
definition of normal. I find that reassuring, especially because the
forum is unmoderated.

Because otherwise, I mean...WTF? Did we all start meditating and climb
aboard the spiritual Magic Bus all those years ago just to settle for
everybody else's idea of what constitutes normal?

I know I started walking the spiritual path because I was looking for a
better version of normal than I was experiencing everywhere else. I
think a lot of us who signed on back in the late 60s or early 70s felt
the same way. Why then do so many people *who* started walking the
spiritual path all those years ago feel that there is nothing the
slightest bit "off" with a definition of normal that involves going
postal when someone posts a belief or opinion that runs counter to their
own?

WTF? Did they *forget* why they started walking the spiritual path? Did
they give up on the view of "enhanced normal" or "more normal" that path
and its dogma presented to them? Are they, after all these years
questing for a better definition of normal, willing to settle for the
Internet's version of normal? WTF happened?

I have no answers. I'm just pondering the topic in this cafe today over
a beer. If you have answers to what constitutes normal for 20-to-45-year
spiritual seekers -- or should -- you guys can work it out.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Trouble With Normal

[whynotnow7]

Do you still subscribe to Tiger Beat?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Thirty years ago my favorite singer-songwriter released a song with the
> same title as this post. Bruce Cockburn was accurate in his description
> of the vibe of his time, but also IMO *our* time as well. He traveled
> the world, sat in cafes and looked around as he traveled, and tried to
> extract the *trends* he saw going down in the different places. Then,
> being a deeply spiritual person, he tried to extrapolate from these
> trends what they might mean about our collective future as humans
> sharing this blue-green ball in black space. As usual, he was prescient.
> 
> http://www.uulyrics.com/music/bruce-cockburn/song-the-trouble-with-norma\
> l/
>  al/>
> 
> Bruce IMO was brilliant at capturing what he saw as "normal" in the
> places he traveled to and the people he observed. And I think he did an
> admirable job of it in this song. But the real "take away" of the song
> for me is the phrase that follows the Subject title of this post in the
> chorus:
> 
>The trouble with normal
>Is it always get worse.
> 
> Lately, taking advantage of my summer vacation, I've had occasion to
> cruise a few more of the spiritual drive-ins on the Internet than usual.
> Some of the trends I've seen there among the participants uplift me and
> make me feel all warm and fuzzy again about the spiritual path, and
> where it might lead. Other trends...uh...not so much. What I'm pondering
> over this glass of beer in this cafe is the latter trend's
> representation of what constitutes normal. And, if Bruce's insight is
> correct, what will these forums -- and these people -- be like in a few
> years when their idea of normal actually gets worse.
> 
> For some posters -- sad to say, on any of the forums, the rare ones --
> normal is writing about high, shiny shit, and conveying to others their
> continuing joy at watching it hit the cosmic fan. For others -- sad to
> say, often the majority -- the normal of a "spiritual" Internet forum
> seems to be all about taking that same shit and re-flinging it at others
> through their writing.
> 
> For the latter, a joke becomes a deadly insult, one that "has to" be
> responded to not just with one rejoinder, but many. Some turn the
> tiniest, most petty affronts into multi-year vendettas. Others just get
> their buttons pushed about some criticism of or witticism about their
> teacher, their path, or them personally, and feel the need to lash out
> at the heretics. I wish that I could say that this tendency was limited
> to TM and FFL, but sadly I cannot. I have seen this same over-reactive
> behavior on dozens of Internet forums over the years, and on five of the
> six I haunt lately. They are pretty much like all other Internet forums
> in terms of the "flame quotient" and the chronic over-reaction. Reading
> them, I question sometimes why these forums are designated "spiritual."
> Fortunately -- so far -- the sixth has remained the sole exception. This
> gives me hope, and the impetus to write this rap.
> 
> The sixth forum seems to consist primarily of long-term spiritual
> seekers who have decided to try to walk on the Internet the talk of
> their philosophy. They have decided to go for a (in their view) higher
> definition of normal. I find that reassuring, especially because the
> forum is unmoderated.
> 
> Because otherwise, I mean...WTF? Did we all start meditating and climb
> aboard the spiritual Magic Bus all those years ago just to settle for
> everybody else's idea of what constitutes normal?
> 
> I know I started walking the spiritual path because I was looking for a
> better version of normal than I was experiencing everywhere else. I
> think a lot of us who signed on back in the late 60s or early 70s felt
> the same way. Why then do so many people *who* started walking the
> spiritual path all those years ago feel that there is nothing the
> slightest bit "off" with a definition of normal that involves going
> postal when someone posts a belief or opinion that runs counter to their
> own?
> 
> WTF? Did they *forget* why they started walking the spiritual path? Did
> they give up on the view of "enhanced normal" or "more normal" that path
> and its dogma presented to them? Are they, after all these years
> questing for a better definition of normal, willing to settle for the
> Internet's version of normal? WTF happened?
> 
> I have no answers. I'm just pondering the topic in this cafe today over
> a beer. If you have answers to what constitutes normal for 20-to-45-year
> spiritual seekers -- or should -- you guys can work it out.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Out there, In here [was; another question for MZ,..]

[danfriedman2002]

Rory,

I´m just cleaning the dust off my mirror. (an old analogy from MMY, where the 
mirror represents the nervous system, and the dust represents the ¨stresses¨.)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> Hmm! If it's OK with you, Dan, I really wouldn't want to label either mirror; 
> that's the beautiful thing about a mirror (and the reality it symbolizes) -- 
> it simply says Yes to whatever we place in front of it, and it reflects it 
> beautifully, but that's not what it IS. 
> 
> I cannot say I even believe there really are such things as "Absolute" and 
> "Relative" -- there only is That-which-IS, or only is US, and the ideas we 
> superimpose on That US. 
> 
> On the other hand, if you enjoy making a (different) distinction, who am I to 
> interfere? :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > I think your mirrir is named Absolute and mine Relative. This takes us back 
> > to my initial comment: ¨We are all One but Different¨. My experiences 
> > (outside Transcendence) are filtered through those differences.
> > 
> > We´ll meet someday.
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now I believe that you´ve got it TWICE!
> > > 
> > > Ha! I appreciate your appreciation, Dan -- perhaps "it takes one to know 
> > > one" TWICE! 
> > > 
> > > And hey, why stop there? Two mirrors placed opposite each other will 
> > > multiply the reflection into infinity! :-)
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Help a Saint -Lose Your BadgeNO SIGN EVER inDOMES

[danfriedman2002]

Steve,

The elegance of the contest, as proposed, is that there are no rules, only 
winners. Enjoy the read!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> Well, I guess it depends if  you read it start to finish.  I don't even
> know if that is possible.  And if not, it would be difficult to
> determine if you are reading virgin material, or something you've
> already read.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002"
>  wrote:
> >
> > I propose a contest for us with 2 First Prizes: 1st to Finish and 2nd
> to Finish. I expect that we´ll need to wait many years to complete
> The Competition. But, then again, patience is it´s own reward.
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been at it for about two decades now. Works it way down to the
> > > bottom of my "occassional" pile, then finds it way back on top when
> I
> > > want to check something out.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002"
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the supporting encouragement, I guess I´ll continue
> to
> > > take my time with it. What´s the rush, anyway? Right?
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002"
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I too am reading Thinking and Destiny by Harold Percival, but
> very
> > > > > slowly. I was given this copy in the late eighties, by someone
> > > close.
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"
> steve.sundur@
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Right, I was given it by someone around the same time. I don't
> think
> > > > > there is anyway to read it but slowly. But it offers insight
> into
> > > many
> > > > > of the issues people wonder about-birth, death, rebirth,
> religion.
> > > Just
> > > > > about everything. Much of it rings true for me. But much of it
> is so
> > > > > detailed and obscure that it is difficult to comprehend.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I can unreservedly pass along wayback's recommendation
> > > > > > > > for Dan Eagleman's "SUM: Forty Tales from the Afterlife."
> > > > > > > > It's just what the title implies, and brilliant. And the
> > > > > > > > stories are short, so it's perfect bedtime reading. You
> > > > > > > > can drop off to sleep after any story without feeling
> > > > > > > > that you still need to read more.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks, I just wrote it down along with Rick's
> recommendation. I
> > > > > > > realize I have a predjudice against Eastern or Indian type
> > > books. So
> > > > > > > although I plan to check out Rick's recommendation, I've
> been
> > > > > avoiding
> > > > > > > that genre. Of course my standby is Thinking and Destiny by
> > > Harold
> > > > > > > Percival. That books is so thick that you can always find
> > > something
> > > > > > > new.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am so narrow minded that I can't bring myself to
> read
> > > > > > > > > > fiction and usually stick with something "spiritua"l
> in
> > > > > > > > > > nature.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In comparison, I read primarily fiction and avoid anything
> > > > > > > > "spiritua"l like it had a big herpes sore on its lip. :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I understand. BTW, you spelled "spirtiua"l wrong (-:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > But most of the modern new agey type books seem dull
> > > > > > > > > > and full of platitudes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > More than "seem," I'm afraid.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Lately I've been reading some of the lesser known
> early
> > > > > > > > > > theosophists. Even that has been somewhat dull.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Right. Steiner, Leadbetter, Percival, Crowley. They were all
> > > around
> > > > > > > the beginning of a new spiritual chapter. I know Madame
> > > Blavatsky
> > > > > gets
> > > > > > > a lot of flak here (and elsewhere), (I'm thinking Curtis
> > > especially
> > > > > > > doesn't have a high opinion of her), but I haven't really
> gone
> > > into
> > > > > her
> > > > > > > writings. But the others seems to have some unique insights
> into
> > > the
> > > > > so
> > > > > > > called "occul"t. Their books or essays were written in a
> > > different
> > > > > > > time in a different style, and different language that I
> find
> > > > > > > interesting.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Herpes city for me. I'm re-reading a book now because I
> > > > > > > > need to analyze the author's writing style. He used a
> > > > > > > > mechanism in this book that I need to use in something
> > > > > > > > I am writing. The book is by Orhan Pahmuk, and is called
> > > > > > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[danfriedman2002]

Turq,

Your promise to stop mentioning me in your posts means nothing to you. I 
continue to find your posts offensive and intentionally provacative.

Now, that is all of the constuctive criticism that you merit.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > > Dan's description above oversimplifies it>
> > 
> > From what I've read I think the correct word is misrepresented, 
> > not simplified.  Barry didn't "get a hold of his wife's email" 
> > and go after her.
> > 
> > I call bullshit.
> 
> And "piled onto" bullshit. Dan misrepresented, and
> so did Judy. Par for the course.
> 
> Dan was screaming about people being able to post
> anonymously here. He didn't like this much, and HE
> wanted to "out" them. Everybody pretty much told 
> him to stick a sock in it, and pointed out the 
> legitimate reasons for allowing anonymous posting.
> Then, at the height of all of this tempest in a 
> pisspot, Dan posted to FFL using a different ID.
> I pointed this out, and wondered aloud whether
> Mr. No-one-should-be-able-to-post-under-a-false-ID
> might in fact be doing so himself. I sent a copy
> of my post to the email address.
> 
> It turned out that Dan was too stupid to notice that
> he was posting under his wife's ID and not his own.
> That's all.
> 
> Drama queen.
> 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002" 
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Quite understandable. A member of FFL got a hold of my
> > > > > spouse´s email address and sent a distastful email to
> > > > > her. I believe that spouses and children are offbounds.
> > > > 
> > > > Did this really happen Dan? If so I vote for a group stoning.
> > > > There must be an app for that.  Seriously, out the bastard.
> > > > That is totally uncool.
> > > 
> > > It was Barry, back in January, and it's all on the record in
> > > the FFL archives, starting with post #267583, the thread
> > > titled (by Barry) "Latest hilarious update on the "danfriedman" debacle."
> > > 
> > > Dan's description above oversimplifies it, but it was one
> > > of the uglier episodes here for which Barry was responsible.
> > > Dan made a minor mistake, Barry blew it *way* out of proportion
> > > based on several much bigger mistakes *he* made. He was finally forced to 
> > > acknowledge his errors, but he never apologized to
> > > Dan (or his wife).
> > > 
> > > Par for the course with Barry.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[danfriedman2002]

authfriend,

Thank you for continuing to provide the record of actual exchanges. I prefer to 
stay as far away from Turq, as he had origionally agreed, as possible.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Dan's description above oversimplifies it>
> > > 
> > > From what I've read I think the correct word is misrepresented, 
> > > not simplified.  Barry didn't "get a hold of his wife's email" 
> > > and go after her.
> > > 
> > > I call bullshit.
> > 
> > And "piled onto" bullshit. Dan misrepresented, and
> > so did Judy. Par for the course.
> 
> Neither of us misrepresented anything. Barry has,
> though.
> 
> > Dan was screaming about people being able to post
> > anonymously here. He didn't like this much, and HE
> > wanted to "out" them. Everybody pretty much told 
> > him to stick a sock in it, and pointed out the 
> > legitimate reasons for allowing anonymous posting.
> > Then, at the height of all of this tempest in a 
> > pisspot, Dan posted to FFL using a different ID.
> 
> No, he didn't. He addressed a post to FFL, but it went
> to Barry as a private email because Dan used his wife's
> account, and she wasn't logged into Yahoo. What Dan
> wrote never appeared on FFL.
> 
> > I pointed this out, and wondered aloud whether
> > Mr. No-one-should-be-able-to-post-under-a-false-ID
> > might in fact be doing so himself. I sent a copy
> > of my post to the email address.
> 
> No, first Barry emailed "myra k." Then he posted a
> copy of what he had sent her to FFL (see my previous
> post).
> 
> > It turned out that Dan was too stupid to notice that
> > he was posting under his wife's ID and not his own.
> 
> No, he knew he was using his wife's account, but he
> assumed if he addressed the post to FFL, it would
> appear there. Barry stupidly accused him of lying but
> was quickly corrected by Alex and blusc0ut.
> 
> Barry won't tell you what really happened, but it's easy
> enough to find out. Go here and just read the posts in
> the thread:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/msearch?ST=Latest+hilarious+update+o\
> n+the+%22danfriedman%22+debacle&SM=contains&pos=0&cnt=10
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/barryanddan
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[richardjwilliamstexas]

> Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> 
Rick Archer:
> Does it have anything to do with their being 
> Buddhists? What if you were to ask, "Could it 
> be one of the Jews here?"
>
Could it be one of the 'TMers' here, or maybe a
guy from Texas? Does it have anything to do with 
anything, Rick? From what I've read here, almost
everyone is prejudiced to a certain degree, even 
if they are 'Buddhists' or not, you included.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Did anyone notice that the bash-Barry fest last night
> was all ABOUT afflictive emotions?
> 
> One drama queen, still smarting from a largely imagined
> offense months ago, misrepresents what happened, *in order
> to get some kind of 'payback' to the person who he still
> has a grudge against*.

Has anyone noticed that Barry is LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH?
Dan DID NOT MENTION BARRY'S NAME. He used the phrase "a
member of FFL."

The only reason Barry was identified as the guilty party
was that Curtis was outraged and demanded to know who it
was, and I went back and looked it up. (And of course
when Curtis found out it was Barry, he backed off fast.)

Three more lies in that single sentence: (1) Dan did not
misrepresent what happened. (2) The offense was by no
means "largely imagined"; it was fully and openly
intentional. Barry *boasted* about it and posted the email
he sent Dan's wife. (3) If Dan holds a grudge against
Barry, it's because Barry has repeatedly attacked and
insulted him.

I submit that one of the most telling signs of a person
indulging in "afflictive emotions" is lying.

And the lying doesn't stop with the above:

> The next person, bearing even more of a grudge, piles on
> and tries to expand this fit of dwelling in the past and
> drama queen hysterics, and tries her best to get as many
> other people involved in it as possible.

Only two others got themselves involved, Curtis and Bob
Price, neither of them at my instigation. Nor did I make
any attempt to get anyone else involved.


> This was all about afflictive emotions. Two people with
> a *grudge they cannot get over* leapt upon the first 
> excuse presented to them to act out about it again. 
> Addicted to the Spite OS, they just couldn't wait to
> indulge in it again.

Both Dan and I are constantly subjected to spiteful 
attacks by Barry. One doesn't "get over" a grudge when
the offenses are ongoing.

And again, Dan did not mention Barry's name. If Curtis
hadn't decided that the perpetrator should be exposed,
Dan's brief reference to an anonymous member of FFL
would have been the end of it.

> You may see this whole thing differently, but that's how
> I see it. It's about indulging in the afflictive emotions,
> and the residual obsessions that form in those who *do*
> indulge in them when they do it for many years.

The truly amazing part of all this is that despite all
his preaching about "afflictive emotions," Barry is
incapable of recognizing that he indulges in them himself
*all the time*, as he does in this post.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> To differentiate between just having a passing flash of anger
> or envy or momentary feelings of spite and what I mean 
> by "indulging in" such emotions, a example would help.

In theory only, not with reference to FFL.


> My suggestion is that I think we have a couple of people on
> this forum who are in the same ballpark with regard to
> indulging in the past, and in their attachment to afflictive 
> emotions that came up for them in that past. And I think it
> colors their perceptions as much as M's were colored by one
> tiny dog taking one tiny dump in one tiny garden. The original 
> *incident* wasn't worth getting all bent out of shape over.
> But to allow it to warp her for YEARS? This is the danger
> that Buddhists see in indulging in the afflictive emotions.

Again, no parallel whatsoever to FFL. In my case, Barry
started shitting in my garden *before I ever even got
here*--just as he'd done on alt.m.t since 1994--and has
continued to do so at every opportunity. And by no means
have they been "tiny dumps." They've been huge festering,
smelly heaps.

Dan has also been subjected to continual big dumps by
Barry, not just one little dump in the distant past.
Unlike me, Dan has refrained from dumping back, to his
credit. That doesn't stop Barry, unfortunately.

Barry is *possessed* by afflictive emotions; most of
his posts involve dumping in somebody's garden. Barry
is far more endangered by his afflictive emotions than
anybody else on this forum, because *he doesn't
recognize them in himself*.

[FairfieldLife] Warehouse 13 and Alphas

[turquoiseb]

Saw both of these, was underwhelmed. Mediocre scfi,
but pretty women, so I watched all the way through.
At least W13 was funny. David Strathairn is wasted
on Alphas.

It's difficult finding TV I can enjoy right now,
having seen The Shadow Line recently, twice. Paligap 
was *so* right about it being better than Luther. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:

> that the things we write push theirs, and 3) they
> like referring to people they don't like with nick-
> names they consider insulting. You know, like "dork"
> for do.rflex, or calling another poster Stupid Sal,
> or referring to Vaj as Vag or Curtis a "hillbilly."

Gee, if you didn't know any better, you might almost
think Barry never uses insulting nicknames for the
folks he doesn't like.

Barry's really been on quite a hypocrisy trip these
last couple of weeks.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > Did anyone notice that the bash-Barry fest last night
> > was all ABOUT afflictive emotions?
> > 
> > One drama queen, still smarting from a largely imagined
> > offense months ago, misrepresents what happened, *in order
> > to get some kind of 'payback' to the person who he still
> > has a grudge against*.
> 
> Has anyone noticed that Barry is LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH?
> Dan DID NOT MENTION BARRY'S NAME. He used the phrase "a
> member of FFL."
> 
> The only reason Barry was identified as the guilty party
> was that Curtis was outraged and demanded to know who it
> was, and I went back and looked it up. (And of course
> when Curtis found out it was Barry, he backed off fast.)
> 

As you know Judy, this is an inaccurate portrayal of what went down.  Since you 
yourself made a post to Dan making my objection clear, we both know that you 
are not being truthful here.  There is a name for that is that you are doing, 
but it slips my mind...

When I made my post to Dan I was outraged by his claim. (Not the faux one)  I 
purposely made my statement unequivocal.  Whoever had purposely gotten a 
poster's wife's email in order to send her offensive emails deserved to be cast 
out to the outer darkness for all of eternity.   The line that our spouses and 
family should be off limits hit home, I was on board for the cause immediately. 
  I meant it and I didn't care if it turned out to me sleep posting on some bad 
combination of ambian and bourbon, lurching about my home and banging out 
offensive emails to other people's wifes whose email I had somehow gotten in my 
somnambulistic trance.

So you sent me the links and I read them.  And those posts did not support the 
claim that someone had somehow gotten a poster's wife's email address in order 
to harass her.  What I found was the typical FFL scrum with fur and accusations 
flying, but no smoking gun for the claim that someone had  gotten a poster's 
wife's email in order to harrass her.

 I repeated my specific objection numerous times so that there could be no lack 
of clarity in what I objected to and what it was that made me call "bullshit" 
on the claim.

Trying to draw attention away from my ligitimate objection you attempted to get 
me interested in your regurgitated meal of FFL rancorous non- communication as 
it dried into the carpet and even small dogs took a sniff and split. (And they 
love regurgitated crap)  As if my non particiapation the first time around was 
not enough of a message that I didn't care about the hilarity that ensued in 
the clusterfuck misadventures of people who hate each other finding each other 
despite all odds on a SPIRITUAL internet forum devoted to sharing insights into 
the meaning of life, and who said what to whom when that person said the other 
thing to some other person and it just wasn't right.  Like if Hollywood 
scripted spirituality in the dialogue for a Nickolodian sitcom set in Junior 
High. "Oh that Mr. Foxworth is so boring in class that I fell asleep and 
drooled all over my rudraksha beads."  "Oh no, not the ones that Kevin gave you 
on Guru Purnima! What are you going to do on your walk to the dome if he 
notices..."  And scene.

So for you to try to spin my position as some kind of unfair Barry bias, as if 
I was operating in bad faith concerning the claim and the lack of support in 
the referenced posts is a blatant um...it's on the tip of my tongue, its a 
small word, one that is rarely invoked here on FFL, an obscure little word 
probably derived from the Latin...it will come to me soon enough...damn almost 
had it but it slipped away again.

I'll just have to settle for this in liu of the right word for the job:  Judy 
is knowingly misrepresenting my objections and is creating a false impression 
ment to mislead the readers into drawing an erroneous conclusion concerning my 
POV and my stated postition and this was not an innocent error, but is a 
malicious attempt to obfuscate the truth and perpetrate a falsehood, something 
not true, lacking in veracity and honestyshit I am so close again, there is 
that word dangeling in the air right in front of me so close I can almost touch 
itgone.  Complete blank.  I guess I'll try my Thesaurus app to see what 
small word would sum up this verbose paragraph, making my point in three 
letters or less if possible. 

I'll have to get back to you.









> Three more lies in that single sentence: (1) Dan did not
> misrepresent what happened. (2) The offense was by no
> means "largely imagined"; it was fully and openly
> intentional. Barry *boasted* about it and posted the email
> he sent Dan's wife. (3) If Dan holds a grudge against
> Barry, it's because Barry has repeatedly attacked and
> insulted him.
> 
> I submit that one of the most telling signs of a person
> indulging in "afflictive emotions" is lying.
> 
> And the lyi

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of authfriend
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 10:54 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

 

  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> On Behalf Of authfriend
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
>  , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> 
> [Nabby wrote:]
> > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> > 
[Rick wrote:]
> > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists?
> > What if you were to ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> 
[I wrote:]
> False equivalence. You know better than that, Rick.
> 
[Rick wrote:]
> I don't agree. Nabby constantly uses "Buddhist" as a
> pejorative. If he constantly referred to Jews with the
> same tone, I think you would be offended.

Being a Buddhist is a choice. Being Jewish is not.
It's completely out of line for you to equate the two.

As to Nabby's lack of respect for Buddhism, Vaj and
Barry don't respect Hinduism, but I don't see you
criticizing Vaj or Barry, just Nabby.

> He also often refers to the "Dolly" Lama, not only in an
> attempt to rankle anyone (especially Vaj and Barry) who
> might respect him, but to belittle the man

And of course neither Vaj or Barry ever refer to MMY in
a belittling manner in an attempt to rankle those who
might respect him, right, Rick?

Boy, this seems to be double-standards day on FFL.

You have a point Judy. Can't dispute it. I think it's juvenile whoever does
it. As Bill Maher said last night on Piers Morgan, people have a problem
with nuance. It's so easy to paint people and things in black and white, but
reality is never that way. From my perspective, there's much more good than
bad to be said about Maharishi, the Dali Lama, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. It's
silly to paint any of them entirely one way or the other.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[Vaj]

On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:21 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:

I'll just have to settle for this in liu of the right word for the  
job: Judy is knowingly misrepresenting my objections and is  
creating a false impression ment to mislead the readers into  
drawing an erroneous conclusion concerning my POV and my stated  
postition and this was not an innocent error, but is a malicious  
attempt to obfuscate the truth and perpetrate a falsehood,  
something not true, lacking in veracity and honestyshit I am so  
close again, there is that word dangeling in the air right in front  
of me so close I can almost touch itgone. Complete blank. I  
guess I'll try my Thesaurus app to see what small word would sum up  
this verbose paragraph, making my point in three letters or less if  
possible.



Sounds to me like Judy is LYING again.

HINT: if her fingers are typing, she's probably lying. Although she  
used to pepper her posts occasionally with nice "check this neat link  
out" kind of posts to try to offset her indiscretions.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

> > The only reason Barry was identified as the guilty party
> > was that Curtis was outraged and demanded to know who it
> > was, and I went back and looked it up. (And of course
> > when Curtis found out it was Barry, he backed off fast.)
>

> I'll just have to settle for this in liu of the right word
> for the job:  Judy is knowingly misrepresenting my objections

I made no representation of your objections in the post
you're responding to. And you've already acknowledged 
that my representation of your objections in an earlier
post was correct.

So who is knowingly engaging in misrepresentation here?

> and is creating a false impression ment to mislead the
> readers into drawing an erroneous conclusion concerning
> my POV and my stated postition and this was not an
> innocent error, but is a malicious attempt to obfuscate
> the truth and perpetrate a falsehood

I stand by what I said. You found out it was Barry, and
you backed off fast.

Your initial outrage was based on a misinterpretation of
what Dan had said, reading into it stuff that wasn't
there and then taking it in the worst possible light,
accusing him of misrepresentation because what had
actually happened turned out not to confirm your
misinterpretation. His description was accurate, just
an oversimplification of a complicated situation created
by Barry (who had taken Dan's accidental email in the
worst possible light and then attempted viciously to
humiliate him for an innocent mistake).

But even granting, for the sake of argument, that you
had good reason to back off your initial outrage when
you found out the situation was not what you had at
first imagined on the basis of Dan's remark, you were 
unwilling to criticize Barry with regard to what had
actually gone down once you had read the original posts.

I submit that if it hadn't been Barry who had pulled
that inexcusable stunt with Dan, you wouldn't have been
so quick to brush it off.

That's what I meant by "backed off fast."

And speaking of misrepresentation:

> As if my non particiapation the first time around was not
> enough of a message that I didn't care about the hilarity
> that ensued in the clusterfuck misadventures of people who
> hate each other 

You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.

That's why you demanded to know who the perp was. You'd
never seen the original episode and had no idea what Dan
was talking about.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of authfriend
> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 10:54 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement
> 
>  
> 
>   
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> >
> > On Behalf Of authfriend
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  
> >  , "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > 
> > [Nabby wrote:]
> > > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> > > 
> [Rick wrote:]
> > > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists?
> > > What if you were to ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> > 
> [I wrote:]
> > False equivalence. You know better than that, Rick.
> > 
> [Rick wrote:]
> > I don't agree. Nabby constantly uses "Buddhist" as a
> > pejorative. If he constantly referred to Jews with the
> > same tone, I think you would be offended.
> 
> Being a Buddhist is a choice. Being Jewish is not.
> It's completely out of line for you to equate the two.
> 
> As to Nabby's lack of respect for Buddhism, Vaj and
> Barry don't respect Hinduism, but I don't see you
> criticizing Vaj or Barry, just Nabby.
> 
> > He also often refers to the "Dolly" Lama, not only in an
> > attempt to rankle anyone (especially Vaj and Barry) who
> > might respect him, but to belittle the man
> 
> And of course neither Vaj or Barry ever refer to MMY in
> a belittling manner in an attempt to rankle those who
> might respect him, right, Rick?
> 
> Boy, this seems to be double-standards day on FFL.
> 
> You have a point Judy. Can't dispute it. I think it's juvenile
> whoever does it. As Bill Maher said last night on Piers Morgan,
> people have a problem with nuance. It's so easy to paint people
> and things in black and white, but reality is never that way.
> From my perspective, there's much more good than bad to be said 
> about Maharishi, the Dali Lama, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. It's
> silly to paint any of them entirely one way or the other.

Thank you. I agree.

But do you understand why your reference to Jews was
inappropriate in this context?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Summa Wrestling

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> They have medicines for that.
> 

* * I think not.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[Vaj]

On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Rick Archer wrote:

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com  
[mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of authfriend

Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 10:54 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
>
> On Behalf Of authfriend
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>  , "Rick Archer"   
wrote:

> 
> [Nabby wrote:]
> > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> >
[Rick wrote:]
> > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists?
> > What if you were to ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
>
[I wrote:]
> False equivalence. You know better than that, Rick.
>
[Rick wrote:]
> I don't agree. Nabby constantly uses "Buddhist" as a
> pejorative. If he constantly referred to Jews with the
> same tone, I think you would be offended.

Being a Buddhist is a choice. Being Jewish is not.
It's completely out of line for you to equate the two.

As to Nabby's lack of respect for Buddhism, Vaj and
Barry don't respect Hinduism, but I don't see you
criticizing Vaj or Barry, just Nabby.

> He also often refers to the "Dolly" Lama, not only in an
> attempt to rankle anyone (especially Vaj and Barry) who
> might respect him, but to belittle the man

And of course neither Vaj or Barry ever refer to MMY in
a belittling manner in an attempt to rankle those who
might respect him, right, Rick?

Boy, this seems to be double-standards day on FFL.

You have a point Judy. Can’t dispute it. I think it’s juvenile  
whoever does it. As Bill Maher said last night on Piers Morgan,  
people have a problem with nuance. It’s so easy to paint people and  
things in black and white, but reality is never that way. From my  
perspective, there’s much more good than bad to be said about  
Maharishi, the Dali Lama, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. It’s silly to  
paint any of them entirely one way or the other.




I'm actually a great lover of Hinduism. But it doesn't mean I have to  
love EVERYTHING about Hinduism. So, no, I don't like widows hurling  
themselves onto funderal pyres and while I love many saints and many  
different traditions, not so much the pedophiles posing as saints -  
and the followers trying to whitewash history to make such creeps  
look like miracle workers (when they're merely glorified street  
magicians).


I DO like to see the historical record set straight and then people  
can decide for themselves what's what. That's certainly the case with  
MMY where the remaining hardcore TB'ers work hard at making him look  
like "the greatest rishi of all yugas" and thus to obscure the actual  
historical record. The truth is better than fiction.


Buddhism's not immune from these same patterns. There are scam  
artists everywhere. There are also beautiful people in the most  
unsuspecting places.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Warehouse 13 and Alphas

[Bhairitu]

On 07/12/2011 08:02 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> Saw both of these, was underwhelmed. Mediocre scfi,
> but pretty women, so I watched all the way through.
> At least W13 was funny. David Strathairn is wasted
> on Alphas.
>
> It's difficult finding TV I can enjoy right now,
> having seen The Shadow Line recently, twice. Paligap
> was *so* right about it being better than Luther.

"Alphas" though directed by Jack Bender ("Lost") had stiff acting and 
takes itself too seriously.  If you're going to do serious drama then 
there better be some kind of edge and this pilot didn't have it.  I'll 
check out the next episode to see if it works better.  I did like that 
it looked more like and movie and not a TV show however it still had the 
"Ford commercial look" as the late Sidney Lumet would say or too slick 
looking.  This is why I less funded foreign series better.  I just 
finished up the first two seasons of "Survivors", a BBC series.  And 
though the first season was a little weak the second played very well.  
Apparently US TV execs believe that Americans like their shows slick 
looking over substance.

"Warehouse 13" doesn't take itself seriously and is a comedy/drama and 
makes for some fun entertainment.  Same with "Eureka".

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Trouble With Normal

[Bob Price]

Hey, do you mind if I call you WingNut? If you don't, I thought we could just 
shorten it to
WN. And for the Nabster, if he doesn't mind, we could just use NNfor NumNut. 
What do you think?

WN,

Since we still haven't established a market to allow me to give Turqsome posts, 
I'm pleased he's
decided to pace himself, hope you don't mind if I give it a go, but I can't 
promise, I'll waste more than
one. I'm not the kind of lady that needs the "last word".

Frankly, I think we're all eight year olds,when we start throwing spitballs. 
And just as frankly,
if I'm going to go for a drink with an eight year old, which I do regularly, 
I insist on doing it with an "precocious eight year old". At my age, the only 
real sin, 
is going for a drink with someone- who's boring and unlike some on FFL Turqis 
never boring.

Have you ever heard the term "terminal uniqueness", I believe its a form of 
later stage
narcissism, where the psychopathology of extreme self absorption turns on 
itself in the 
same way the visitor started eatingthe host in the film "Alien".  

This is what came to mind, when I read you bragging about the fact you don't 
read any more
and then trying to back up by rattlingoff a list of authors from a 9th grade 
reading list. I was
surprised you didn't mention "Catcher in The Rye". No, I don't mean you've 
nailed
Holden Caulfield'svoice.

It's true many people don't read anymore, but most of them are smart enough not 
to brag about it
in polite company. Of all the things one could chose to demonstrate uniqueness, 
I would never have thought 
to embraceilliteracy, well done WN! In addition to adornment, I was pleased you 
brought up lipstick, 
reading is on the very short list of what separates us from the animals. The 
jury is still out on meditation. 
Good luck with your realization, I'm still holding out for "improved 
socialbehaviour", frankly, it seems the atheist 
is the only one who's nailed that one.

And since we're on the topic of NN, would he please stop bringing up 
Maharishi's politics, now 
that's embarrassing! In politics, Maharishi was a right wing nut bar(nobody's 
perfect) and any one 
who spent any time with him knows that. One of my fondest memories (that would 
be a joke) is sitting 
a few feet from him (yes, they didn't steal all my ATRcredits) as he shared his 
dais with Isabel Peron's"Angel of Death" 
and anointedhim a "Governor of the Age Of Enlightenment". Of course we can't 
forget that other beacon of
hope he anointed, Ferdinand, "do you really need to take all those shoes, 
Imelda" Marcos. Again, anyone who has
studied (read) anything about Maharishi knows what he really wanted was to be 
President of India and when
that was obviously not going happen he invented his own "Magic Kingdom". And 
calling the Dalai Lama
a politicianis not unlike calling Nelson Mandela an ex-con. For Gods sake, if 
you're not going to read, get out more!   



From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:17:19 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Trouble With Normal


  
Do you still subscribe to Tiger Beat?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Thirty years ago my favorite singer-songwriter released a song with the
> same title as this post. Bruce Cockburn was accurate in his description
> of the vibe of his time, but also IMO *our* time as well. He traveled
> the world, sat in cafes and looked around as he traveled, and tried to
> extract the *trends* he saw going down in the different places. Then,
> being a deeply spiritual person, he tried to extrapolate from these
> trends what they might mean about our collective future as humans
> sharing this blue-green ball in black space. As usual, he was prescient.
> 
> http://www.uulyrics.com/music/bruce-cockburn/song-the-trouble-with-norma\
> l/
>  al/>
> 
> Bruce IMO was brilliant at capturing what he saw as "normal" in the
> places he traveled to and the people he observed. And I think he did an
> admirable job of it in this song. But the real "take away" of the song
> for me is the phrase that follows the Subject title of this post in the
> chorus:
> 
>The trouble with normal
>Is it always get worse.
> 
> Lately, taking advantage of my summer vacation, I've had occasion to
> cruise a few more of the spiritual drive-ins on the Internet than usual.
> Some of the trends I've seen there among the participants uplift me and
> make me feel all warm and fuzzy again about the spiritual path, and
> where it might lead. Other trends...uh...not so much. What I'm pondering
> over this glass of beer in this cafe is the latter trend's
> representation of what constitutes normal. And, if Bruce's insight is
> correct, what will these forums -- and these people -- be like in a few
> years when their idea of normal actually gets worse.
> 
> For some posters -- sad to say, on any of the forums, the rare ones --
> n

[FairfieldLife] Re: Out there, In here [was; another question for MZ,..]

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002"  
wrote:
>
> Rory,
> 
> I´m just cleaning the dust off my mirror. (an old analogy from MMY, where the 
> mirror represents the nervous system, and the dust represents the ¨stresses¨.)
> 
>
* * Sweet, Dan! Me too... I like to call the dust our "thought-waves" or 
"I-particles" and clean them by accelerating and integrating them into blissful 
alignment with me, but it's all the same process, I suspect!

:-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[richardjwilliamstexas]

danfriedman:
> Your promise to stop mentioning me in your 
> posts means nothing to you. I continue to 
> find your posts offensive and intentionally 
> provacative...
> 
There are at least three informants here that
you need to watch, Dan - one gave out my real 
name (a year after I posted it on Usenet). LoL!

Another one actually went on the WWW to my 
place of employ and gave out the address and 
made fun of a photo of me (without posting a 
photo of himself). LoL!

There are a few dangerous characters that lurk 
here. 

Doesn't matter to me anymore since I'm retired 
now and fully vested. All my writing stuff is 
public now for anyone to see. In my opinion, 
anyone posting here anonymously is pretty much 
a troll and not being really totally honest.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[richardjwilliamstexas]

Vaj:
> Sounds to me like Judy is LYING again...
> 
Maybe you should provide a link to the 
lies, if any, that you think Judy posted 
so we can sort this all out. I know someone 
is lying, but I don't think it's Judy.

[FairfieldLife] Victorians DID smile!

[authfriend]

 
[http://www.howtobearetronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Unknown-Ste\
ve-Chasmar.jpg]

Is that the sweetest thing you've ever seen? Nobody knows who they were
or when this was taken (sometime in the late 1800s), but what a
day-brightener from over a century ago.

There are more charming smiling-Victorian photos here:

http://www.howtobearetronaut.com/2010/06/smiling-victorians/

[FairfieldLife] Victorians DID smile!

[authfriend]

Is that the sweetest thing you've ever seen? Nobody knows who they were
or when this was taken (sometime in the late 1800s), but what a
day-brightener from over a century ago.

There are more charming smiling-Victorian photos here:

http://www.howtobearetronaut.com/2010/06/smiling-victorians/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:21 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> 
> > I'll just have to settle for this in liu of the right word for the  
> > job: Judy is knowingly misrepresenting my objections and is  
> > creating a false impression ment to mislead the readers into  
> > drawing an erroneous conclusion concerning my POV and my stated  
> > postition and this was not an innocent error, but is a malicious  
> > attempt to obfuscate the truth and perpetrate a falsehood,  
> > something not true, lacking in veracity and honestyshit I am so  
> > close again, there is that word dangeling in the air right in front  
> > of me so close I can almost touch itgone. Complete blank. I  
> > guess I'll try my Thesaurus app to see what small word would sum up  
> > this verbose paragraph, making my point in three letters or less if  
> > possible.
> 
> 
> Sounds to me like Judy is LYING again.

Since Judy doesn't lie, it's not possible for her to be
lying *again*.

Vaj knows I don't lie. But what's he gonna do? He has no
way to discredit my exposure of his lies, so he just
makes this wild accusation over and over, hoping somebody
will believe him.

He's never caught me in a lie. Neither has anybody else
here. Barry's tried *very* hard a number of times but has
failed miserably. Curtis just took a shot at it and came
badly a-cropper.

Vaj can't even come up with a specific accusation.

It isn't a matter of being virtuous; lying is just stupid.
As Vaj and Barry are only too well aware, most lies come
back to bite you in the butt. It's a lot easier and a lot
less stressful to tell the truth.

> HINT: if her fingers are typing, she's probably lying.
> Although she used to pepper her posts occasionally with
> nice "check this neat link out" kind of posts to try to
> offset her indiscretions.

That's pretty funny. Vaj missed the self-portrait taken
by a monkey I posted a couple of days ago, and as his
luck would have it, I just posted another day-brightener
("Victorians DID smile!") before reading his post.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Victorians DID smile!

[RoryGoff]

God, I love this! Many thanks, Judy ...

... and also for the nearly "ad-hominid" grinning monkey self-portrait a few 
days back. Beautiful!

:-D *click*



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the sweetest thing you've ever seen? Nobody knows who they were
> or when this was taken (sometime in the late 1800s), but what a
> day-brightener from over a century ago.
> 
> There are more charming smiling-Victorian photos here:
> 
> http://www.howtobearetronaut.com/2010/06/smiling-victorians/
> 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: More honestly-captioned photos

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans  wrote:
>
> COMPASSION IN ACTION!
> Let us not forget what the Bush years gave us.  We all should
> be rallying behind one of the most intelligent, articulate, 
> accountable president's we've had in a good while.

I'll give you intelligent and articulate, but accountable??

Surely you jest. You need to read some Glenn Greenwald:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

> Can you understand what he is up against?  Seriously.I
> am so sick of the statement "Obama is a wimp".

He's not a wimp, he's a Republican posing as a Democrat.
Some of us saw this from the beginning of his campaign.
We're not surprised that he's now proposing to cut
Social Security and raise the eligibility age for
Medicare.

> Toxic..from Democrats I hear this.

Damn right. The Democrats who were taken in by him feel
betrayed.

[FairfieldLife] Self-Unawareness Seminars

[turquoiseb]

This latest round of TMers claiming that they have been
personally insulted by someone criticizing or making fun
of their teacher or their path has caused me to think 
back to my time in the TM movement. Those memories are
full of people -- my fellow TM teachers -- making all
*sorts* of jokes about and poking fun at Maharishi, TM,
the hours we spent on "program," our completely artificial
way of speaking in SIMS-speak and, most of all, ourselves.
People back then weren't so *touchy*. We had senses of
humor. We could *laugh* about ourselves, and the silly
thing we'd gotten ourselves involved with. 

So WTF happened?

I think that part of it is that *over time* many people
became "self unaware." That is, they got so completely
immersed in the cult that they became incapable of 
seeing themselves the way that someone outside the cult
might see them. There was a kind of homogenized self-
referentiality about always hanging with people who
believed the same things that you did and dressed the
same way that you did and said the same things you did
and...well...you get the point. It's as if people lost
the ability to discriminate between themselves and the
beliefs or people (spiritual teachers) or lifestyles
they had attached themselves to. Criticize one of these
things, and the self-unaware types react as if you
had criticized *them*. 

The fascinating thing is that I don't see this inability
to "see oneself in context" in spiritual seekers who 
only "signed on" to their spiritual trip for shorter
periods of time. I think that the rigidity and the loss
of the ability to laugh at oneself and one's spiritual
trip may be something that "accrues" over time -- many
years or decades.

What about it, you long-timers out there? Don't you
remember being able to make jokes about Maharishi or
TM or ourselves and the silly things we believed and
did in rooms full of other TBs...and have everyone 
laugh? I sure do. 

So WTF happened? If you have theories other than my
"stayed too long at the party" theory, I'd love to
hear them.

[FairfieldLife] A Third Party is Needed in the USA

[John]

This is the solution to breaking the deadlock between the Republicans and 
Democrats.  The USA needs to improve its ways of running the government.

http://news.yahoo.com/economy-crash-government-checks-run-100600863.html

[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Unawareness Seminars

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> This latest round of TMers claiming that they have been
> personally insulted by someone criticizing or making fun
> of their teacher or their path

Which "latest round" was this, Barry?

(Hint: There wasn't any; Barry fantasized it. He needed
*something* to introduce his latest demonization of TMers,
so he just made it up.)

[FairfieldLife] ARTICLE ON TM IN INDEPENDENT ON SUNDAY, and other recent press reports

[merlin]

--- Hubert  schrieb am Di, 12.7.2011:


Von: Hubert 
Betreff: Fwd: ARTICLE ON TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION IN INDEPENDENT ON SUNDAY, 
and other recent press reports
An: "Hubert" 
Datum: Dienstag, 12. Juli, 2011 10:40 Uhr



The Independent on Sunday is a major national paper in the UK. 






  
ARTICLE IN SUNDAY’S INDEPENDENT ON SUNDAY, 10th July:

TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION: WERE THE HIPPIES RIGHT ALL ALONG?

"if its impact on public health is as great as Dr Rosenthal believes, one could 
argue it [the Transcendental Meditation organisation] has a moral 
responsibility to spread its message"

This article on Transcendental Meditation, written by journalist Laura Tennant, 
is the latest in a recent series of excellent articles featured in the British 
press. 

The journalist attended Dr Norman Rosenthal's London press conference in May, 
where he reviewed his research and other research on Transcendental Meditation 
and mental and physical health, and presented his latest book - "Healing and 
Transformation Through Transcendental Meditation". She then went on to learn 
Transcendental Meditation herself before writing this piece for the Independent 
on Sunday. 

Laura deals with many of the misconceptions that have come up over the years 
about Maharishi's teachings, but comes out firmly in favour. She ends the 
article - "As for me, I'm seriously considering introducing my children to a 
stress- and anxiety-busting daily ritual that seems to do no harm and may well 
do a great deal of good."


 
 
Links to other recent articles:

Telegraph 28th June 2011 - "How meditation could help your health"

The original print version of this article "Meditation can cut heart attacks by 
as much as half" contained the following quote:

"If Transcendental Meditation were a drug conferring so many benefits, it would 
be a billion-dollar blockbuster." - quote by Dr Norman Rosenthal 


 
 
Telegraph 28th June 2011 - "Celebrities who meditate"

This related article features celebrities who meditate. Most of those mentioned 
practise Transcendental Meditation


 

Yahoo Lifestyle 28th June 2011 - "Meditation good for the heart"

 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Fwd: More honestly-captioned photos

[Tom Pall]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Denise Evans  wrote:

>
> COMPASSION IN ACTION!
>
> Let us not forget what the Bush years gave us.  We all should be rallying
> behind one of the most intelligent, articulate, accountable president's
> we've had in a good while.  Can you understand what he is up against?
>  Seriously.I am so sick of the statement "Obama is a wimp".  Toxic..from
> Democrats I hear this.  I like to tell my familyya'll made your money on
> the backs of people like me.and they ain't sharingperiod!  Get real.
>  I will see the movie Company Men...but how many of you have spent years in
> corporate america?
>
>
Obama is a wimp.   Compare him to Harry Truman or FDR.  I've spent my life
in corporate America.  What's your point?

Obama is a wimp.  I have seen great presidents in my lifetime.  Obama is a
disappointment.  He offered change.  Little did he realize it would be a
change from presidents who have a set.   This guy's claim to fame was that
he taught constitutional law (but doesn't know the Constitution) and was a
community organizer.  He brought little except a fresh face and knowledge of
how to use a teleprompter to the campaign.  We elected him and we got a
former community organizer as president.  I would rather he did the WRONG
thing than nothing at all.   In the history of recent great Democrats, he's
fighting for bottom with Jimmie Carter.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Victorians DID smile!

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> Is that the sweetest thing you've ever seen? Nobody knows who they were
> or when this was taken (sometime in the late 1800s), but what a
> day-brightener from over a century ago.
> 
> There are more charming smiling-Victorian photos here:
> 
> http://www.howtobearetronaut.com/2010/06/smiling-victorians/
> 
>

Marvelous. Many thanks.

(Old photos fascinate me. Keep 'em coming Yifu BTW. But these in
particular are wonderful for their alternative 'take' on the
Victorians. It's funny how we associate them with such high
seriousness by default. I suppose because they valued that, and
so posed that way for the most part. Whereas we value irony? I dunno.)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Warehouse 13 and Alphas

[Bhairitu]

On 07/12/2011 08:02 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
> Saw both of these, was underwhelmed. Mediocre scfi,
> but pretty women, so I watched all the way through.
> At least W13 was funny. David Strathairn is wasted
> on Alphas.
>
> It's difficult finding TV I can enjoy right now,
> having seen The Shadow Line recently, twice. Paligap
> was *so* right about it being better than Luther.

I forgot to mention too that the "people with extraordinary powers" 
shtick has run it's course so most folks could care less about another 
show like that.

And Turq forgot to mention that a new character joining the crew in W13 
is a Buddhist!  There was banter on that topic. :-D

[FairfieldLife] Knabenshue's airship

[Yifu]

1905, Toledo 
http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/50287.jpg

[FairfieldLife] UFO attack

[Yifu]

could be retitled "Pirates of the Caribbean vs Aliens":

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/3/29519.jpg

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[Tom Pall]

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Ravi Yogi  wrote:

>
> It's only a matter of time before Tom Pall creates a couple of well
> disguised profiles which get approved and he starts posting TM copyrighted
> materials to take FFL down.
>
>
Looks like your enlightened shtick has a couple holes in it, Ravi.  What
happened to the sweetness and light, I love everything and everybody,
everyone and everything is my teacher?   One could conclude that you're a
fraud.  Assuming one didn't decide you were ages ago.

[FairfieldLife] Krishnamurti ph

[Yifu]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jiddu-Krishnamurti/1739055?v=photos#!/photo.php?fbid=1087456388748&set=o.1739055&type=1&theater

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[Tom Pall]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Tom Pall  wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Ravi Yogi  wrote:
>
>>
>> It's only a matter of time before Tom Pall creates a couple of well
>> disguised profiles which get approved and he starts posting TM copyrighted
>> materials to take FFL down.
>>
>>
> Looks like your enlightened shtick has a couple holes in it, Ravi.  What
> happened to the sweetness and light, I love everything and everybody,
> everyone and everything is my teacher?   One could conclude that you're a
> fraud.  Assuming one didn't decide you were ages ago.
>

In the realm of mind, like attracts like. If the soul is peaceful, then it
attracts peaceful environment and people around it.

*~ H. H. H. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar*

Re: [FairfieldLife] Self-Unawareness Seminars

[Vaj]

On Jul 12, 2011, at 1:47 PM, turquoiseb wrote:

> I think that part of it is that *over time* many people
> became "self unaware." That is, they got so completely
> immersed in the cult that they became incapable of 
> seeing themselves the way that someone outside the cult
> might see them. There was a kind of homogenized self-
> referentiality about always hanging with people who
> believed the same things that you did and dressed the
> same way that you did and said the same things you did
> and...well...you get the point. It's as if people lost
> the ability to discriminate between themselves and the
> beliefs or people (spiritual teachers) or lifestyles
> they had attached themselves to. Criticize one of these
> things, and the self-unaware types react as if you
> had criticized *them*. 
> 
> The fascinating thing is that I don't see this inability
> to "see oneself in context" in spiritual seekers who 
> only "signed on" to their spiritual trip for shorter
> periods of time. I think that the rigidity and the loss
> of the ability to laugh at oneself and one's spiritual
> trip may be something that "accrues" over time -- many
> years or decades.
> 
> What about it, you long-timers out there? Don't you
> remember being able to make jokes about Maharishi or
> TM or ourselves and the silly things we believed and
> did in rooms full of other TBs...and have everyone 
> laugh? I sure do. 
> 
> So WTF happened? If you have theories other than my
> "stayed too long at the party" theory, I'd love to
> hear them.


There's a long distance between TM-style dissociation and Burns "O would some 
power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us" and his observation 
"If there is another world, he lives in bliss. If there is none, he made the 
best of this" - the only thing was, "the next new thing" became the "best of 
this", and that removed us from "the ever-present now". "If only, if only".

Simplicity was never enough.

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Trouble With Normal

[whynotnow7]

Hey Bob, is this your version of damned if I do and damned if I don't?

In any case I'd prefer the nom de plume "Butter Nut Squash" please.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price  wrote:
>
> Hey, do you mind if I call you WingNut? If you don't, I thought we could just 
> shorten it to
> WN. And for the Nabster, if he doesn't mind, we could just use NNfor NumNut. 
> What do you think?
> 
> WN,
> 
> Since we still haven't established a market to allow me to give Turqsome 
> posts, I'm pleased he's
> decided to pace himself, hope you don't mind if I give it a go, but I can't 
> promise, I'll waste more than
> one. I'm not the kind of lady that needs the "last word".
> 
> Frankly, I think we're all eight year olds,when we start throwing spitballs. 
> And just as frankly,
> if I'm going to go for a drink with an eight year old, which I do regularly, 
> I insist on doing it with an "precocious eight year old". At my age, the 
> only real sin, 
> is going for a drink with someone- who's boring and unlike some on 
> FFL Turqis never boring.
> 
> Have you ever heard the term "terminal uniqueness", I believe its a form of 
> later stage
> narcissism, where the psychopathology of extreme self absorption turns on 
> itself in the 
> same way the visitor started eatingthe host in the film "Alien".  
> 
> This is what came to mind, when I read you bragging about the fact you don't 
> read any more
> and then trying to back up by rattlingoff a list of authors from a 9th grade 
> reading list. I was
> surprised you didn't mention "Catcher in The Rye". No, I don't mean you've 
> nailed
> Holden Caulfield'svoice.
> 
> It's true many people don't read anymore, but most of them are smart enough 
> not to brag about it
> in polite company. Of all the things one could chose to demonstrate 
> uniqueness, I would never have thought 
> to embraceilliteracy, well done WN! In addition to adornment, I was pleased 
> you brought up lipstick, 
> reading is on the very short list of what separates us from the animals. The 
> jury is still out on meditation. 
> Good luck with your realization, I'm still holding out for "improved 
> socialbehaviour", frankly, it seems the atheist 
> is the only one who's nailed that one.
> 
> And since we're on the topic of NN, would he please stop bringing up 
> Maharishi's politics, now 
> that's embarrassing! In politics, Maharishi was a right wing nut 
> bar(nobody's perfect) and any one 
> who spent any time with him knows that. One of my fondest memories (that 
> would be a joke) is sitting 
> a few feet from him (yes, they didn't steal all my ATRcredits) as he shared 
> his dais with Isabel Peron's"Angel of Death" 
> and anointedhim a "Governor of the Age Of Enlightenment". Of course we can't 
> forget that other beacon of
> hope he anointed, Ferdinand, "do you really need to take all those shoes, 
> Imelda" Marcos. Again, anyone who has
> studied (read) anything about Maharishi knows what he really wanted was to be 
> President of India and when
> that was obviously not going happen he invented his own "Magic Kingdom". And 
> calling the Dalai Lama
> a politicianis not unlike calling Nelson Mandela an ex-con. For Gods sake, if 
> you're not going to read, get out more!   
> 
> 
> 
> From: whynotnow7 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:17:19 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Trouble With Normal
> 
> 
>   
> Do you still subscribe to Tiger Beat?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > Thirty years ago my favorite singer-songwriter released a song with the
> > same title as this post. Bruce Cockburn was accurate in his description
> > of the vibe of his time, but also IMO *our* time as well. He traveled
> > the world, sat in cafes and looked around as he traveled, and tried to
> > extract the *trends* he saw going down in the different places. Then,
> > being a deeply spiritual person, he tried to extrapolate from these
> > trends what they might mean about our collective future as humans
> > sharing this blue-green ball in black space. As usual, he was prescient.
> > 
> > http://www.uulyrics.com/music/bruce-cockburn/song-the-trouble-with-norma\
> > l/
> >  > al/>
> > 
> > Bruce IMO was brilliant at capturing what he saw as "normal" in the
> > places he traveled to and the people he observed. And I think he did an
> > admirable job of it in this song. But the real "take away" of the song
> > for me is the phrase that follows the Subject title of this post in the
> > chorus:
> > 
> >The trouble with normal
> >Is it always get worse.
> > 
> > Lately, taking advantage of my summer vacation, I've had occasion to
> > cruise a few more of the spiritual drive-ins on the Internet than usual.
> > Some of the trends I've seen there among the participants uplift me and
> > make me feel all warm and fuzzy again abo

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Tom Pall
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 3:37 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

 

 

In the realm of mind, like attracts like. If the soul is peaceful, then it
attracts peaceful environment and people around it.

~ H. H. H. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar

What does that say about my mind? Look at what I've attracted with FFL!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[whynotnow7]

"I'm actually a great lover of Hinduism."

Let's see the sex tape, Vaj.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
> 
> > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com  
> > [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of authfriend
> > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 10:54 PM
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Behalf Of authfriend
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > >  , "Rick Archer"   
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > [Nabby wrote:]
> > > > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> > > >
> > [Rick wrote:]
> > > > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists?
> > > > What if you were to ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> > >
> > [I wrote:]
> > > False equivalence. You know better than that, Rick.
> > >
> > [Rick wrote:]
> > > I don't agree. Nabby constantly uses "Buddhist" as a
> > > pejorative. If he constantly referred to Jews with the
> > > same tone, I think you would be offended.
> >
> > Being a Buddhist is a choice. Being Jewish is not.
> > It's completely out of line for you to equate the two.
> >
> > As to Nabby's lack of respect for Buddhism, Vaj and
> > Barry don't respect Hinduism, but I don't see you
> > criticizing Vaj or Barry, just Nabby.
> >
> > > He also often refers to the "Dolly" Lama, not only in an
> > > attempt to rankle anyone (especially Vaj and Barry) who
> > > might respect him, but to belittle the man
> >
> > And of course neither Vaj or Barry ever refer to MMY in
> > a belittling manner in an attempt to rankle those who
> > might respect him, right, Rick?
> >
> > Boy, this seems to be double-standards day on FFL.
> >
> > You have a point Judy. Can't dispute it. I think it's juvenile  
> > whoever does it. As Bill Maher said last night on Piers Morgan,  
> > people have a problem with nuance. It's so easy to paint people and  
> > things in black and white, but reality is never that way. From my  
> > perspective, there's much more good than bad to be said about  
> > Maharishi, the Dali Lama, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. It's silly to  
> > paint any of them entirely one way or the other.
> >
> 
> I'm actually a great lover of Hinduism. But it doesn't mean I have to  
> love EVERYTHING about Hinduism. So, no, I don't like widows hurling  
> themselves onto funderal pyres and while I love many saints and many  
> different traditions, not so much the pedophiles posing as saints -  
> and the followers trying to whitewash history to make such creeps  
> look like miracle workers (when they're merely glorified street  
> magicians).
> 
> I DO like to see the historical record set straight and then people  
> can decide for themselves what's what. That's certainly the case with  
> MMY where the remaining hardcore TB'ers work hard at making him look  
> like "the greatest rishi of all yugas" and thus to obscure the actual  
> historical record. The truth is better than fiction.
> 
> Buddhism's not immune from these same patterns. There are scam  
> artists everywhere. There are also beautiful people in the most  
> unsuspecting places.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[whynotnow7]

"Barry's really been on quite a hypocrisy trip these last couple of weeks."

I actually find it sad that Barry is apparently on vacation with nothing better 
to do than hang out on Internet chat forums (He said he is following about ten 
of them now). Nothing to do apparently, and no one to do it with. He was even 
complaining that there is nothing to watch on TV. Bored stiff.

Here he moves to another country, again, and within a few months has absolutely 
nothing to do, no friends, and no interests except stroking his neuroses. Why 
bother moving around when you can't even get out of your own head?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> 
> > that the things we write push theirs, and 3) they
> > like referring to people they don't like with nick-
> > names they consider insulting. You know, like "dork"
> > for do.rflex, or calling another poster Stupid Sal,
> > or referring to Vaj as Vag or Curtis a "hillbilly."
> 
> Gee, if you didn't know any better, you might almost
> think Barry never uses insulting nicknames for the
> folks he doesn't like.
> 
> Barry's really been on quite a hypocrisy trip these
> last couple of weeks.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Unawareness Seminars

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

Aside from all the flak flying lately on FFL, it has been my observation also 
that those in the TMO and other orgs and companies do sometimes seem to lack 
the ability to visualise how they appear to a supposedly normative group of 
people outside their fold. Some things in the TMO would appear absolutely 
bizarre to such a group. Maybe we all have such a blind spot, but conceptual 
flexibility and the ability to imagine other points of view, even if you think 
those points of view are nuts is probably a plus. Actors and writers of fiction 
probably have this ability to imagine this way. Writers of science fiction and 
fantasy might have an even better chance at doing this because they have to 
imagine whole alternate worlds in their profession.

It is my understanding that meditative disciplines are supposed to expand one's 
experience rather than constrict it. There is always an opposing force to 
expansion which is the world view found in the meditative tradition. Woe if you 
take it too seriously, it's like a map: maps are not where you are, they are a 
useful reference if you know their limitations.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> This latest round of TMers claiming that they have been
> personally insulted by someone criticizing or making fun
> of their teacher or their path has caused me to think 
> back to my time in the TM movement. Those memories are
> full of people -- my fellow TM teachers -- making all
> *sorts* of jokes about and poking fun at Maharishi, TM,
> the hours we spent on "program," our completely artificial
> way of speaking in SIMS-speak and, most of all, ourselves.
> People back then weren't so *touchy*. We had senses of
> humor. We could *laugh* about ourselves, and the silly
> thing we'd gotten ourselves involved with. 
> 
> So WTF happened?
> 
> I think that part of it is that *over time* many people
> became "self unaware." That is, they got so completely
> immersed in the cult that they became incapable of 
> seeing themselves the way that someone outside the cult
> might see them. There was a kind of homogenized self-
> referentiality about always hanging with people who
> believed the same things that you did and dressed the
> same way that you did and said the same things you did
> and...well...you get the point. It's as if people lost
> the ability to discriminate between themselves and the
> beliefs or people (spiritual teachers) or lifestyles
> they had attached themselves to. Criticize one of these
> things, and the self-unaware types react as if you
> had criticized *them*. 
> 
> The fascinating thing is that I don't see this inability
> to "see oneself in context" in spiritual seekers who 
> only "signed on" to their spiritual trip for shorter
> periods of time. I think that the rigidity and the loss
> of the ability to laugh at oneself and one's spiritual
> trip may be something that "accrues" over time -- many
> years or decades.
> 
> What about it, you long-timers out there? Don't you
> remember being able to make jokes about Maharishi or
> TM or ourselves and the silly things we believed and
> did in rooms full of other TBs...and have everyone 
> laugh? I sure do. 
> 
> So WTF happened? If you have theories other than my
> "stayed too long at the party" theory, I'd love to
> hear them.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Help a Saint -Lose Your BadgeNO SIGN EVER inDOMES

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002"
 wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> The elegance of the contest, as proposed, is that there are no rules,
only winners. Enjoy the read!


Right.  Thank you.  I think the first time you get turned on to it, you
might start at page one and work your way through.  For me, it's more
like the Physician's Reference book.  If I have a question about
something, or want to refresh something I read previously, I turn to it.
I've also read most of his other books, and found them equally
insightful  I also subscribed to a journal the organization put out for
a while and also found that interesting.   I like those early
Theosophists.  Some stayed with the organization, some became
disillusioned and left, some started similiar organizations.  Imagine
that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
They've been huge festering,
  smelly heaps.


It's a good phrase and makes the point irregardless of what it is
referring to.  I say this editor CAN write pretty decently.  Quite
decently in fact.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
 wrote:
As if my non particiapation the first time around was not enough of a
message that I didn't care about the hilarity that ensued in the
clusterfuck misadventures of people who hate each other finding each
other despite all odds on a SPIRITUAL internet forum devoted to sharing
insights into the meaning of life, and who said what to whom when that
person said the other thing to some other person and it just wasn't
right. Like if Hollywood scripted spirituality in the dialogue for a
Nickolodian sitcom set in Junior High. "Oh that Mr. Foxworth is so
boring in class that I fell asleep and drooled all over my rudraksha
beads." "Oh no, not the ones that Kevin gave you on Guru Purnima! What
are you going to do on your walk to the dome if he notices..." And
scene.

I say we end the discussion on this note.  Can we ever quit on the high
note?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
> from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
> March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.


And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Summa Wrestling

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
>> > They have medicines for that.
> >
>> * * I think not.
>
It was insensitive.  I realize the "event" is still so recent,  and that
you have barely had enough time to even begin mourning.  But know that
you are among friends here.  We can try to help you in this difficult
period.  Let me know if *I can do anything.

* "I" in this case refers to my relative personality, the one that
exists within time and space in this dimension, and within causal
boundries. (-:

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[emptybill]

Quite funny … good shot!



But you'd think with a rupee to dollar exchange rate of 44 to 1 and the
cell-phone video technology so cheap he could get some Dravidian
hierodules to emulate the apsaras. You know … the old "Hey,
let's play Kamasutra tonight".

…….



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" 
wrote:
>
> "I'm actually a great lover of Hinduism."
>
> Let's see the sex tape, Vaj.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jul 12, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Rick Archer wrote:
> >
> > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of authfriend
> > > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 10:54 PM
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Behalf Of authfriend
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > >  , "Rick Archer" 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > [Nabby wrote:]
> > > > > Could it be one of the two Buddhists here ? :-)
> > > > >
> > > [Rick wrote:]
> > > > > Does it have anything to do with their being Buddhists?
> > > > > What if you were to ask, "Could it be one of the Jews here?"
> > > >
> > > [I wrote:]
> > > > False equivalence. You know better than that, Rick.
> > > >
> > > [Rick wrote:]
> > > > I don't agree. Nabby constantly uses "Buddhist" as a
> > > > pejorative. If he constantly referred to Jews with the
> > > > same tone, I think you would be offended.
> > >
> > > Being a Buddhist is a choice. Being Jewish is not.
> > > It's completely out of line for you to equate the two.
> > >
> > > As to Nabby's lack of respect for Buddhism, Vaj and
> > > Barry don't respect Hinduism, but I don't see you
> > > criticizing Vaj or Barry, just Nabby.
> > >
> > > > He also often refers to the "Dolly" Lama, not only in an
> > > > attempt to rankle anyone (especially Vaj and Barry) who
> > > > might respect him, but to belittle the man
> > >
> > > And of course neither Vaj or Barry ever refer to MMY in
> > > a belittling manner in an attempt to rankle those who
> > > might respect him, right, Rick?
> > >
> > > Boy, this seems to be double-standards day on FFL.
> > >
> > > You have a point Judy. Can't dispute it. I think it's juvenile
> > > whoever does it. As Bill Maher said last night on Piers Morgan,
> > > people have a problem with nuance. It's so easy to paint people
and
> > > things in black and white, but reality is never that way. From my
> > > perspective, there's much more good than bad to be said about
> > > Maharishi, the Dali Lama, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. It's silly to
> > > paint any of them entirely one way or the other.
> > >
> >
> > I'm actually a great lover of Hinduism. But it doesn't mean I have
to
> > love EVERYTHING about Hinduism. So, no, I don't like widows hurling
> > themselves onto funderal pyres and while I love many saints and many
> > different traditions, not so much the pedophiles posing as saints -
> > and the followers trying to whitewash history to make such creeps
> > look like miracle workers (when they're merely glorified street
> > magicians).
> >
> > I DO like to see the historical record set straight and then people
> > can decide for themselves what's what. That's certainly the case
with
> > MMY where the remaining hardcore TB'ers work hard at making him look
> > like "the greatest rishi of all yugas" and thus to obscure the
actual
> > historical record. The truth is better than fiction.
> >
> > Buddhism's not immune from these same patterns. There are scam
> > artists everywhere. There are also beautiful people in the most
> > unsuspecting places.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[curtisdeltablues]

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
> > from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
> > March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.
> 
> 
> And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]

Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan battle didn't bring me 
out of lurk mode!  I was letting absence make my heart grow fonder like when 
you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for the cat-O-nine 
tails.  (Did I say that last part out loud?)



>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
>  wrote:
> As if my non particiapation the first time around was not enough of a
> message that I didn't care about the hilarity that ensued in the
> clusterfuck misadventures of people who hate each other finding each
> other despite all odds on a SPIRITUAL internet forum devoted to sharing
> insights into the meaning of life, and who said what to whom when that
> person said the other thing to some other person and it just wasn't
> right. Like if Hollywood scripted spirituality in the dialogue for a
> Nickolodian sitcom set in Junior High. "Oh that Mr. Foxworth is so
> boring in class that I fell asleep and drooled all over my rudraksha
> beads." "Oh no, not the ones that Kevin gave you on Guru Purnima! What
> are you going to do on your walk to the dome if he notices..." And
> scene.
> 
> I say we end the discussion on this note.  Can we ever quit on the high
> note?


Much appreciated.




>

[FairfieldLife] Post Count

[FFL PostCount]

Fairfield Life Post Counter
===
Start Date (UTC): Sat Jul 09 00:00:00 2011
End Date (UTC): Sat Jul 16 00:00:00 2011
452 messages as of (UTC) Tue Jul 12 23:58:19 2011

48 authfriend 
38 turquoiseb 
36 seventhray1 
34 whynotnow7 
30 nablusoss1008 
22 Bob Price 
21 curtisdeltablues 
19 danfriedman2002 
19 RoryGoff 
18 Rick Archer 
16 Vaj 
14 Robert 
14 Bhairitu 
11 emptybill 
10 Yifu 
10 Tom Pall 
 9 sparaig 
 9 maskedzebra 
 7 richardjwilliamstexas 
 7 obbajeeba 
 7 cardemaister 
 7 Ravi Yogi 
 5 Denise Evans 
 5 Alex Stanley 
 4 merlin 
 4 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 
 3 wgm4u 
 3 stevelf 
 3 Buck 
 2 raunchydog 
 2 mainstream20016 
 2 m 13 
 2 wle...@aol.com
 2 John 
 2 Duveyoung 
 1 mleroygoffiv 
 1 merudanda 
 1 fflmod 
 1 at_man_and_brahman 
 1 Sal Sunshine 
 1 PaliGap 
 1 "do.rflex" 

Posters: 42
Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times
=
Daylight Saving Time (Summer):
US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM
Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM
Standard Time (Winter):
US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM
Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM
For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[whynotnow7]

"like when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for the 
cat-O-nine tails."

Your mother must be very proud of you Curtis. Did she teach you that, or was it 
your dad? 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> 
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
> > > from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
> > > March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.
> > 
> > 
> > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> 
> Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan battle didn't bring me 
> out of lurk mode!  I was letting absence make my heart grow fonder like when 
> you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for the 
> cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out loud?)
> 
> 
> 
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
> 
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > You weren't here the first time around. You were 
> > > absent from the group from before Thanksgiving
> > > till the end of March. The Barry-debacle took
> > > place in January.
> > 
> > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> 
> Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan
> battle didn't bring me out of lurk mode!  I was letting 
> absence make my heart grow fonder like when you use a 
> feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for 
> the cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out 
> loud?)

What Curtis had said that I was responding to:

"As if my non particiapation the first time around was
not enough of a message that I didn't care about the
hilarity that ensued in the clusterfuck misadventures
of people who hate each other [yada yada]..."

Curtis, when you're standing on your head trying to
cobble together a plausible case out of nothing for
someone else lying, it really doesn't look too good
when you lie yourself, and then when caught, lie again.

(Yes, I get the "joke." No, it doesn't excuse the 
dishonesty.)

[FairfieldLife] De Gesmurfde Smurf

[Yifu]

by Erik Suidman, Netherlands
http://www.museumsyndicate.com/item.php?item=48717

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> "like when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for 
> the cat-O-nine tails."
> 
> Your mother must be very proud of you Curtis.

Thanks for asking Jim.  She really was before she suffered a massive heart 
attack and died in the hospital hours later.  Kind of a dicy few hours that was 
as you can imagine. So she isn't proud of me right this minute because she is 
dead.  But when she was alive she often expressed this kind of loving 
supportive emotion. 

< Did she teach you that, or was it your dad?>

No Jim we did not discuss the kind of sex role play that some consenting adults 
engage in because she was my mother.  That would be an inappropriate discussion 
to have between a mother and her son.  But all the years I shared with her we 
did often discuss a lot of other stuff like how beautiful the crocuses are when 
they come out as the first flowers that break through the snow in the Spring 
and announce that life is on the move and we will soon be enjoying the bounty 
of Summer.  She was a big fan of Thoreau, not just the obvious Walden Pond, but 
did you know he also wrote books for each of the seasons?  He did, and they 
talked about all the signs unique to each season like the crocuses blooming 
through the snow. 








> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
> > > > from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
> > > > March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> > 
> > Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan battle didn't bring 
> > me out of lurk mode!  I was letting absence make my heart grow fonder like 
> > when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for the 
> > cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out loud?)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Crocuses blooming in the Alps

[Yifu]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Eiger.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> > 
> > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > You weren't here the first time around. You were 
> > > > absent from the group from before Thanksgiving
> > > > till the end of March. The Barry-debacle took
> > > > place in January.
> > > 
> > > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> > 
> > Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan
> > battle didn't bring me out of lurk mode!  I was letting 
> > absence make my heart grow fonder like when you use a 
> > feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for 
> > the cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out 
> > loud?)
> 
> What Curtis had said that I was responding to:
> 
> "As if my non particiapation the first time around was
> not enough of a message that I didn't care about the
> hilarity that ensued in the clusterfuck misadventures
> of people who hate each other [yada yada]..."
> 
> Curtis, when you're standing on your head trying to
> cobble together a plausible case out of nothing for
> someone else lying, it really doesn't look too good
> when you lie yourself, and then when caught, lie again.
> 
> (Yes, I get the "joke." No, it doesn't excuse the 
> dishonesty.)

Yeah.  So the deal is that it wasn't interesting enough when I saw it the first 
time and I'm sure I didn't read every post because it was pretty easy to 
identify the type of thread, and my second reading didn't make the mess look 
any better, so that is what happened.  I can't even follow your dishonesty 
bullshit enough to address it. My reporting on what I was doing when I was not 
posting is pretty much gunna have to be the last word and your opinion is not 
being solicited by me.

I nailed you on your lie, and made my case.  You misrepresented my position.  
We both know what you were up to.  I called you on it and you doubled down.  
FFL mix tape.  Nothing changes.

However, since you have pursued this to the point of me having to triple think 
myself, I would like to say that I am not privy to Dan's intentions in posting 
that sentence the way he did.  He may be more of an innocent than my summation 
"bullshit" conveys.  So since I have had some nice posts with the guy I will 
give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that my reaction was more than he 
bargained for and was not his intention.  I am still happy to have spoken up 
when I read it because it conveyed something I do not support.  My assessment 
of what I read in the posts remains.  I am most sorry that it was brought to my 
attention at all on a day with otherwise very compellingly deep communications 
with other posters.




>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[whynotnow7]

Damn dude, so its only funny when you or Barry make the belittling jokes? I'll 
try to keep that in mind. Pardon moi?   

In the meantime, you oughta thank your dad for the feather duster and 
cat-o-nine tails tricks *he* taught you. Sounds like a real creative fellow! 

Oh wait, I have to add the smiley face at the end like Barry does, so you know 
I'm "just joking". :-) 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > "like when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for 
> > the cat-O-nine tails."
> > 
> > Your mother must be very proud of you Curtis.
> 
> Thanks for asking Jim.  She really was before she suffered a massive heart 
> attack and died in the hospital hours later.  Kind of a dicy few hours that 
> was as you can imagine. So she isn't proud of me right this minute because 
> she is dead.  But when she was alive she often expressed this kind of loving 
> supportive emotion. 
> 
> < Did she teach you that, or was it your dad?>
> 
> No Jim we did not discuss the kind of sex role play that some consenting 
> adults engage in because she was my mother.  That would be an inappropriate 
> discussion to have between a mother and her son.  But all the years I shared 
> with her we did often discuss a lot of other stuff like how beautiful the 
> crocuses are when they come out as the first flowers that break through the 
> snow in the Spring and announce that life is on the move and we will soon be 
> enjoying the bounty of Summer.  She was a big fan of Thoreau, not just the 
> obvious Walden Pond, but did you know he also wrote books for each of the 
> seasons?  He did, and they talked about all the signs unique to each season 
> like the crocuses blooming through the snow. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > > You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
> > > > > from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
> > > > > March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> > > 
> > > Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan battle didn't 
> > > bring me out of lurk mode!  I was letting absence make my heart grow 
> > > fonder like when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging 
> > > you for the cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out loud?)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Cat o nine tails

[Yifu]

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/tzu/lowres/tzun815l.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[whynotnow7]

PS I'll be waiting to see how Barry can pretzel himself into addressing this 
while continuing to pretend he doesn't read my stuff. That's some buddy you got 
there Curtis. I'll bet *he's* proud of you, and still alive too...*above* the 
waist anyway...

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
>
> Damn dude, so its only funny when you or Barry make the belittling jokes? 
> I'll try to keep that in mind. Pardon moi?   
> 
> In the meantime, you oughta thank your dad for the feather duster and 
> cat-o-nine tails tricks *he* taught you. Sounds like a real creative fellow! 
> 
> Oh wait, I have to add the smiley face at the end like Barry does, so you 
> know I'm "just joking". :-) 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> > >
> > > "like when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is begging you 
> > > for the cat-O-nine tails."
> > > 
> > > Your mother must be very proud of you Curtis.
> > 
> > Thanks for asking Jim.  She really was before she suffered a massive heart 
> > attack and died in the hospital hours later.  Kind of a dicy few hours that 
> > was as you can imagine. So she isn't proud of me right this minute because 
> > she is dead.  But when she was alive she often expressed this kind of 
> > loving supportive emotion. 
> > 
> > < Did she teach you that, or was it your dad?>
> > 
> > No Jim we did not discuss the kind of sex role play that some consenting 
> > adults engage in because she was my mother.  That would be an inappropriate 
> > discussion to have between a mother and her son.  But all the years I 
> > shared with her we did often discuss a lot of other stuff like how 
> > beautiful the crocuses are when they come out as the first flowers that 
> > break through the snow in the Spring and announce that life is on the move 
> > and we will soon be enjoying the bounty of Summer.  She was a big fan of 
> > Thoreau, not just the obvious Walden Pond, but did you know he also wrote 
> > books for each of the seasons?  He did, and they talked about all the signs 
> > unique to each season like the crocuses blooming through the snow. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > > > You weren't here the first time around. You were absent
> > > > > > from the group from before Thanksgiving till the end of
> > > > > > March. The Barry-debacle took place in January.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> > > > 
> > > > Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan battle didn't 
> > > > bring me out of lurk mode!  I was letting absence make my heart grow 
> > > > fonder like when you use a feather duster on a chick when she is 
> > > > begging you for the cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out 
> > > > loud?)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Eduard Spelterini

[Yifu]

photographer, 1904, Switzerland
Self-portrait with balloon
http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/6/53215.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 2

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > > You weren't here the first time around. You were 
> > > > > absent from the group from before Thanksgiving
> > > > > till the end of March. The Barry-debacle took
> > > > > place in January.
> > > > 
> > > > And here I thought he was lurking all that time.  [:(]
> > > 
> > > Of course I was.  I can't imagine why a Judy Barry Dan
> > > battle didn't bring me out of lurk mode!  I was letting 
> > > absence make my heart grow fonder like when you use a 
> > > feather duster on a chick when she is begging you for 
> > > the cat-O-nine tails.  (Did I say that last part out 
> > > loud?)
> > 
> > What Curtis had said that I was responding to:
> > 
> > "As if my non particiapation the first time around was
> > not enough of a message that I didn't care about the
> > hilarity that ensued in the clusterfuck misadventures
> > of people who hate each other [yada yada]..."
> > 
> > Curtis, when you're standing on your head trying to
> > cobble together a plausible case out of nothing for
> > someone else lying, it really doesn't look too good
> > when you lie yourself, and then when caught, lie again.
> > 
> > (Yes, I get the "joke." No, it doesn't excuse the 
> > dishonesty.)
> 
> Yeah.  So the deal is that it wasn't interesting enough when
> I saw it the first time and I'm sure I didn't read every post
> because it was pretty easy to identify the type of thread,
> and my second reading didn't make the mess look any better,
> so that is what happened.  I can't even follow your
> dishonesty bullshit enough to address it.

Allow me to explain. The first lie was the "enough of a
message" part. There was no such "message," whether you
were lurking for four months or not. If nobody knows
you're watching, you can't send a message by not
commenting on what you see, obviously.

The second lie was in your response to Steve, pretending
that "enough of a message" wasn't a lie.

> My reporting on what I was doing when I was not posting is
> pretty much gunna have to be the last word

Not the issue.

But now we may have another issue. If you did remember
the episode, as you indicate above, how come you asked
Dan if it had really happened? Either you saw it the
first time and knew the answer to your question, or you
did not see it after all, contrary to your "lurking"
claim.

> and your opinion is not being solicited by me.

Of course not.

> I nailed you on your lie, and made my case.

You failed utterly to make any such case, and you know
it. Not one of your claims held up.

> However, since you have pursued this to the point of me
> having to triple think myself,

 Try thinking straight the first time. Saves
energy and embarrassment.

> I would like to say that I am not privy to Dan's intentions
> in posting that sentence the way he did.  He may be more of
> an innocent than my summation "bullshit" conveys.  So since
> I have had some nice posts with the guy I will give him the
> benefit of the doubt and assume that my reaction was more
> than he bargained for and was not his intention.

Good, that's well done, at least. Of course it further
demolishes your pretensions to having made a case for
my misrepresenting your objection:

"Since you yourself made a post to Dan making my
objection clear..."

And then a few paragraphs later:

"Judy is knowingly misrepresenting my objections..."

The only representation I made of your objection was
the one you validated. You know that, I know that, I
know you know that, you know I know you know it.

> I am still happy to have spoken up when I read it because
> it conveyed something I do not support.

Which, according to what you say above, you knew hadn't
happened anyway.

You're digging yourself in deeper and deeper, Curtis.

  My assessment of
> what I read in the posts remains.  I am most sorry that it
> was brought to my attention at all on a day with otherwise
> very compellingly deep communications with other posters.

Too bad MZ hasn't been around to see you mess up, see
what's under the Mr. Wonderful veneer when things don't
quite go your way.

That's 50 and out for me. If decide you have more to say,
I'll address it when I come back. But if I were you, I'd
stop digging.

[FairfieldLife] Pretzel

[Yifu]

from the German Bretzel. A crisp, dry biscuit usually in the form of a knot or 
stick salted on the outside.
http://mihaeela.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/free-auntie-annes-pretzel-day1.jpg

[FairfieldLife] German soldiers being entertained

[Yifu]

http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/5/40409.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Lucian's strange creatures

[Yifu]

Aubrey Beardsley, 1894
http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/1/1528.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Truffle Gatherer

[Yifu]

http://www.art.com/asp/View_HighZoomResPop.asp?apn=15526187&imgloc=37-3792-Z00FIA1M.jpg&imgwidth=670&imgheight=894&artistName=Published+by+Art.com%2C+inc.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Summa Wrestling

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
> wrote:
> > >
> >> > They have medicines for that.
> > >
> >> * * I think not.
> >
> It was insensitive.  I realize the "event" is still so recent,  and that
> you have barely had enough time to even begin mourning.  But know that
> you are among friends here.  We can try to help you in this difficult
> period.  Let me know if *I can do anything.
> 
> * "I" in this case refers to my relative personality, the one that
> exists within time and space in this dimension, and within causal
> boundries. (-:

* * Ha! Good one; thanks! That sounds very familiar... Maybe I am talking to 
myself yet again! :-)

[FairfieldLife] "Maybe this world is another planet's Hell"

[Yifu]

http://www.huxley.net/ah/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Summa Wrestling

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> * * Ha! Good one; thanks! That sounds very familiar... Maybe I am
talking to myself yet again! :-)
>
I always like hearing your ruminations.  I guess Robin sort of had the
tuning fork effect going on.

[FairfieldLife] 4-th of July parade in Nome

[Yifu]

1916
http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/5/49574.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Political Maneuvering by Republicans

[John]

A Republican senator has a plan to let President Obama raise the debt limit.  
This is called "posturing" to gain a political advantage.  Now, they can blame 
the Democrats for raising taxes and failing to cut expenditures.  IMO, most 
Americans can see through this charade.  In the meantime, we're all stuck in 
paying for the bills.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/fury-mcconnell-outlines-plan-obama-raise-debt-ceiling-204213811.html;_ylt=AvfjfT4doJ9MDCSFBfMUuOGZCMZ_;_ylu=X3oDMTNzZzU0NnRwBHBrZwNhNjBkZWEyYS1hNWQ1LTNlNmQtYTA1OS00YzEzNmYzNzdiNjkEcG9zAzEEc2VjA0ZlYXR1cmVkIEJsb2cgVGhlIFVwc2hvdCBOZXR3b3JrBHZlcgNlY2I2MTlmMC1hY2ZmLTExZTAtYmY3Yi0zMWYxYTZiZTdkM2Y-;_ylg=X3oDMTM3ZDFnbGxnBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDMmJjMzcxMjUtZmZkYS0zOWM1LTlkNDQtYjI2MGQyZWQ1MjY3BHBzdGNhdANvcmlnaW5hbHN8dGhlbG9va291dARwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2U-;_ylv=3

[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Unawareness Seminars

[sparaig]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> This latest round of TMers claiming that they have been
> personally insulted by someone criticizing or making fun
> of their teacher or their path has caused me to think 
> back to my time in the TM movement. Those memories are
> full of people -- my fellow TM teachers -- making all
> *sorts* of jokes about and poking fun at Maharishi, TM,
> the hours we spent on "program," our completely artificial
> way of speaking in SIMS-speak and, most of all, ourselves.
> People back then weren't so *touchy*. We had senses of
> humor. We could *laugh* about ourselves, and the silly
> thing we'd gotten ourselves involved with. 
> 
> So WTF happened?
[...]
> So WTF happened? If you have theories other than my
> "stayed too long at the party" theory, I'd love to
> hear them.
>

This group group is hardly representative of the TM population living in 
Fairfield, IA, letalone the TM population worldwide.

Anyone who stays on a group like this has issues with TM, one way or the other.


L.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Pretzel

[merudanda]

http://baeckereimuseum.eu/baeckerwappen.html

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> from the German Bretzel. A crisp, dry biscuit usually in the form of a
knot or stick salted on the outside.
>
http://mihaeela.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/free-auntie-annes-pretzel-da\
y1.jpg
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Summa Wrestling

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> >
> I always like hearing your ruminations.  I guess Robin sort of had the
> tuning fork effect going on.
>
* * Thanks, Steve... It appears that that tuning-fork resonance is always there 
amongst us if we listen closely enough, but for whatever reason(s) many of us 
block it out much of the time. Perhaps we're afraid it will shatter us, like 
crystal, and perhaps indeed it will! :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Unawareness Seminars

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> This group group is hardly representative of the TM population living in 
> Fairfield, IA, letalone the TM population worldwide.
> 
> Anyone who stays on a group like this has issues with TM, one way or the 
> other.
> 
* * I am just here for the Love :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Notice of Infringement

[Ravi Yogi]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Tom Pall  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Ravi Yogi  wrote:
> 
> >
> > It's only a matter of time before Tom Pall creates a couple of well
> > disguised profiles which get approved and he starts posting TM copyrighted
> > materials to take FFL down.
> >
> >
> Looks like your enlightened shtick has a couple holes in it, Ravi.  What
> happened to the sweetness and light, I love everything and everybody,
> everyone and everything is my teacher?   One could conclude that you're a
> fraud.  Assuming one didn't decide you were ages ago.
>

Sorry I was just kidding Tom, I love ya 'bro.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Unawareness Seminars

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> Aside from all the flak flying lately on FFL, it has been 
> my observation also that those in the TMO and other orgs 
> and companies do sometimes seem to lack the ability to 
> visualise how they appear to a supposedly normative group 
> of people outside their fold. 

Absolutely. There is often an absolute inability
to not only see themselves from a different POV,
but to accept that such a different POV could 
even legitimately exist.

> Some things in the TMO would appear absolutely bizarre to 
> such a group. 

They certainly appeared bizarre to me, even when
I was part of it. :-)

> Maybe we all have such a blind spot, but conceptual 
> flexibility and the ability to imagine other points of 
> view, even if you think those points of view are nuts 
> is probably a plus. 

I agree. 



> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > This latest round of TMers claiming that they have been
> > personally insulted by someone criticizing or making fun
> > of their teacher or their path has caused me to think 
> > back to my time in the TM movement. Those memories are
> > full of people -- my fellow TM teachers -- making all
> > *sorts* of jokes about and poking fun at Maharishi, TM,
> > the hours we spent on "program," our completely artificial
> > way of speaking in SIMS-speak and, most of all, ourselves.
> > People back then weren't so *touchy*. We had senses of
> > humor. We could *laugh* about ourselves, and the silly
> > thing we'd gotten ourselves involved with. 
> > 
> > So WTF happened?
> > 
> > I think that part of it is that *over time* many people
> > became "self unaware." That is, they got so completely
> > immersed in the cult that they became incapable of 
> > seeing themselves the way that someone outside the cult
> > might see them. There was a kind of homogenized self-
> > referentiality about always hanging with people who
> > believed the same things that you did and dressed the
> > same way that you did and said the same things you did
> > and...well...you get the point. It's as if people lost
> > the ability to discriminate between themselves and the
> > beliefs or people (spiritual teachers) or lifestyles
> > they had attached themselves to. Criticize one of these
> > things, and the self-unaware types react as if you
> > had criticized *them*. 
> > 
> > The fascinating thing is that I don't see this inability
> > to "see oneself in context" in spiritual seekers who 
> > only "signed on" to their spiritual trip for shorter
> > periods of time. I think that the rigidity and the loss
> > of the ability to laugh at oneself and one's spiritual
> > trip may be something that "accrues" over time -- many
> > years or decades.
> > 
> > What about it, you long-timers out there? Don't you
> > remember being able to make jokes about Maharishi or
> > TM or ourselves and the silly things we believed and
> > did in rooms full of other TBs...and have everyone 
> > laugh? I sure do. 
> > 
> > So WTF happened? If you have theories other than my
> > "stayed too long at the party" theory, I'd love to
> > hear them.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Self-Unawareness Seminars

[Ravi Yogi]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > This group group is hardly representative of the TM population living in 
> > Fairfield, IA, letalone the TM population worldwide.
> > 
> > Anyone who stays on a group like this has issues with TM, one way or the 
> > other.
> > 
> * * I am just here for the Love :-)
>

No issues with TM here either.

[FairfieldLife] Re: "Maybe this world is another planet's Hell"

[turquoiseb]

Maybe Fairfield Life is what happens karmically to 
Off The Program TMers.  :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> http://www.huxley.net/ah/
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Afflictive Emotions, part 3 - the example

[Ravi Yogi]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi"  wrote:
> >
> > Did you even bother to check if the poor lady below [in 
> > the story I told about "M"] had any medical problems? 
> 
> Ravi, if you are suggesting that someone who obsesses
> on one person for years and goes out of her way to not
> only badmouth that person every time she sees an oppor-
> tunity to do so but actively tries to get others to do 
> the same thing just might have some medical or sanity 
> issues, I completely agree with you.
>

Barry - You know damn well I wasn't talking about Judy but I guess you couldn't 
resist twisting my message to target her :-).

But your suggestions apply to you equally as well.