RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 9:13 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer r...@... wrote: snip I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. Q: If everything is perfect just as it is, why are we working so hard to change things? MMY: That too is perfect just as it is. ...There is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: You might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery--either way--and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can. --Ken Wilber Busy week, but I've been meaning to respond to this. I agree about being passionately committed to things, but I think that development of consciousness results in the tendency to consciously incorporate paradox in pretty much all situations. One may be fighting fiercely for something one believes in, but that focus is never the totality of one's life. One lives a larger reality that incorporates not only that conviction, but a simultaneous appreciation of other, possibly conflicting perspectives. It's hard to take anything utterly seriously. Think Krishna smiling on the battlefield. Most wars, suicide bombings, abortion clinic bombings, church burnings, religious inquisitions, and chat room arguments result from a failure to have developed such a vision.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 9:43 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Thanks for the appreciative words, Barry. It so happens that that particular Zen story is one of my inspirations and I've told it often. The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. Another thought on this, and on why some folks seem to get the wisdom of Is that so? and others do not. I have found in my life that those who seem most driven to defend themselves when either criticized or when someone sees them differently than they like to see themselves *have rarely bucked the system*. And, in fact in spiritual contexts, they have often *submitted* to the system for many years, making compromises to do so. For example, in organizations with a bit (or a lot) of cultic nature to them, it is not unusual for members to regularly be expected to defend themselves to be considered a member in good standing. Do this long enough, and you get used to it and consider it normal. The people in my experience who most get the Is that so? thang are those who have gone through a period of doubting or who have shifted their priorities in life and have to some extent walked away from an organization that they were strongly committed to for many years. Those who have never done this in a spiritual context simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND how the shit hits the fan when you do. Former friends in the organization you are walking away from (or distancing yourself from) have a tendency to suddenly turn on you and start saying things you never imagined them capable of. Former close friends cross the street to avoid talking to you. You start to hear rumors about yourself that defy belief. Some people even say shit to your face, and call you traitor or worse for leaving the highest path. I had a brick thrown through one of my windows when I walked away from the Rama trip. At first your impulse is to defend yourself. After all, you don't *understand* how these former friends and fellow seekers can one day treat you as an equal and as a valued member of the spiritual community and path that you shared for years or decades and the next day treat you like you were a child molestor or the spawn of Satan. So you try to explain yourself. If you care about these people (even if you don't really care what they think of you), you try to tell them that nothing has really changed about who and what you are, or you even try to explain your reasons for having made the decision that you did. But it never works. Your reasons are invalid. There can *be* no valid reasons for walking away from the highest path. By doing so you have shamed yourself and shamed the holy trad- ition you walked away from. You are pond scum, lower than the lint in a snake's navel. Sound familiar, Rick? I'll bet it does. It does, but I think that system-bucking is as much a symptom as a cause. Doing it may culture a broader perspective, but you have to have developed a certain degree of inner freedom before you can do it. I used to be nearly as fanatical as Nabby in my own way. It took me decades to get to the point where I could transition smoothly and almost spontaneously out of the TMO.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 3:34 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. You nailed it. I saw the weasel in Rick's post as well, and I gave him a pass on it. I admit to making nice with him at the time. I'm glad you caught the varmint. An excellent specimen, indeed. I agree with Rick's peephole into the universe concept so far as the play of opposites is concerned but not as an excuse for weakly weaseling, Oh, it's just a game, so why should I care. Yeah, it all depends on how the insight is used. It's like the famous Charles Manson quote, If all is One, then what could be wrong? Disastrous category error. Manson's perspective denies the importance of relative values. By that logic, if all is one you should be just as happy eating shit and drinking battery acid as eating wholesome food. As Maharishi always put it, knowledge (or reality) is different in different states of consciousness. The ultimate oneness o things does not negate relative values, laws, ethics, etc., but living that oneness means that you have gained a broader perspective. You still view the world from your individual perspective, but at the same time, you are the totality which includes all perspectives. You can champion your own perspective, but you are less rigid about it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: [Rick wrote:] I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. [I wrote:] Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. Q: If everything is perfect just as it is, why are we working so hard to change things? MMY: That too is perfect just as it is. ...There is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: You might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery--either way--and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can. --Ken Wilber [Rick wrote:] Busy week, but I've been meaning to respond to this. I agree about being passionately committed to things, but I think that development of consciousness results in the tendency to consciously incorporate paradox in pretty much all situations. One may be fighting fiercely for something one believes in, but that focus is never the totality of one's life. I agree. What I'm getting at is the tendency to use the don't take yourself too seriously meme as an excuse to *avoid* passionate commitment, to put the background, the wider view, in the foreground and reduce the individual elements to insignificance--as if the fact that there *is* a wider view means there's no reason to care about anything in particular. It may all be just Cosmic Play, but we're here to play as well and as hard and as wisely as we can. We don't get to opt out.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of authfriend Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 10:15 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity [Rick wrote:] Busy week, but I've been meaning to respond to this. I agree about being passionately committed to things, but I think that development of consciousness results in the tendency to consciously incorporate paradox in pretty much all situations. One may be fighting fiercely for something one believes in, but that focus is never the totality of one's life. I agree. What I'm getting at is the tendency to use the don't take yourself too seriously meme as an excuse to *avoid* passionate commitment, to put the background, the wider view, in the foreground and reduce the individual elements to insignificance--as if the fact that there *is* a wider view means there's no reason to care about anything in particular. It may all be just Cosmic Play, but we're here to play as well and as hard and as wisely as we can. We don't get to opt out. I completely agree with you. Both I and folks in the TMO in general have played the cosmic cop out game. Hopefully I don't do that much anymore. If the cosmic and the individual are properly balanced and integrated, one can be passionately committed to one's action, yet not bound by it. It also seems that one can more easily sympathize with those holding viewpoints opposite to one's own, and see how they might hold those viewpoints.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Thanks for the appreciative words, Barry. It so happens that that particular Zen story is one of my inspirations and I've told it often. Why am I not surprised? You live it. The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. It surprises many people who aren't into the pursuit of revenge as a lifestyle. As you say, it's just a little forum, and I might add that we're all just visitors on a little planet in a vast galaxy, a perspective trick I find useful. I often look at astronomy photos to broaden my perspective. If one can get a sense of how small we are in comparison to the actuality of things, it's hard to take oneself too seriously. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buqtdpuZxvk Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour, That's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned, A sun that is the source of all our power. The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see Are moving at a million miles a day In an outer spiral arm, at forty thousand miles an hour, Of the galaxy we call the 'Milky Way'. Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars. It's a hundred thousand light years side to side. It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand light years thick, But out by us, it's just three thousand light years wide. We're thirty thousand light years from galactic central point. We go 'round every two hundred million years, And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions In this amazing and expanding universe. The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding In all of the directions it can whizz As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth, And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth. Another thing is that I can usually find something to like in most people. Judy has many admirable qualities. Yes, she does. That is what is so pity-provoking when she doesn't use them. As a friend of mine used to say about a mutual acquaintance, The thing about W*** is that he never fails to disappoint. I've known Raunchy personally for decades and I think she's a wonderful person. I'm sure she is, when she isn't being monotopical. Nabby is the most entertaining guy here. In many ways, yes he is. As many have pointed out, we really wouldn't get much of the True TM True Believer point of view if he weren't here to provide it. I'd be disappointed if he left. As would I. I have given him shit over the years, but I really do feel a kind of weird affection for the guy. I tend to think of people as sense organs of the infinite. Some occasionally act more like the excretory organs of the infinite. :-) Light that is one though the lamps be many, as the Incredible String Band put it. I used to hang with Robin Williamson of the ICB back when I lived in L.A., post-TM period for me, post-Scientology and post-ICB period for him. He is really a remarkable and inspiring guy. God wants to taste all varieties of experience, from the bum in the gutter to the President of the United States (little distinction in Raunchy's opinion). http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=env=alT19_AzXFUgl=US Down at the bus station Shark grins and sandpaper conversation Men's faces women's bodies on the magazine stand And a headline about Sarajevo and Tehran They are radiant angels, they are earthly slaves They are predators moving in their endless days Days of striving, nights of novocaine Never going to bring them freedom from their pain - Bruce Cockburn ( If you have never heard Bruce's song Loner, listen to this and stick around until Hugh Marsh's solo at the end. It is one of the most amazing performances on the violin I have ever heard.) So from that perspective, all the clashing personalities on FFL and in the world at large aren't really clashing; they're just expressing various facets of a much larger, more inclusive perspective. You see the extremes Of what humans can be? In that distance some tension's born Energy surging like a storm You plunge your hand in And draw it back scorched Beneath it's shining like Gold but better Rumours of glory - Bruce Cockburn (No video available for this one, sorry.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Thanks for the appreciative words, Barry. It so happens that that particular Zen story is one of my inspirations and I've told it often. The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. As you say, it's just a little forum, and I might add that we're all just visitors on a little planet in a vast galaxy, a perspective trick I find useful. I often look at astronomy photos to broaden my perspective. If one can get a sense of how small we are in comparison to the actuality of things, it's hard to take oneself too seriously. Another thing is that I can usually find something to like in most people. Judy has many admirable qualities. I've known Raunchy personally for decades and I think she's a wonderful person. Nabby is the most entertaining guy here. I'd be disappointed if he left. I tend to think of people as sense organs of the infinite. Light that is one though the lamps be many, as the Incredible String Band put it. God wants to taste all varieties of experience, from the bum in the gutter to the President of the United States (little distinction in Raunchy's opinion). So from that perspective, all the clashing personalities on FFL and in the world at large aren't really clashing; they're just expressing various facets of a much larger, more inclusive perspective. God is entertaining himself. It's my understanding that Brahman incorporates all apparent opposites and polarities. I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Thanks Rick. I like you too. I appreciate your perspective and I share it. Everyone plays a role, we dance and wear many hats throughout the day. I'll fiercely defend your peep hole into the universe today and argue against you with guns a-blazing the next. I play my role passionately. I embrace it and I honor your passion play as well. Opposites are the spice of life. By the way Obama is not a bum in the gutter, he's a corporate tool in the White House.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. Actually I said you were really pissed because I'd reposted your account of Obama's telling you he was going to repair the holes Bush had blasted in the Constitution. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. So it must also have surprised you that Raunchy and I objected to your suggestion that we criticize Obama only because we're angry that Hillary lost, and that we would never criticize Hillary if she were in office and doing the same things Obama is doing. I mean, why on earth should that have bothered us? You never had any intention of insulting us, right? snip I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. Q: If everything is perfect just as it is, why are we working so hard to change things? MMY: That too is perfect just as it is. ...There is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: You might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery--either way--and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can. --Ken Wilber
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Thanks for the appreciative words, Barry. It so happens that that particular Zen story is one of my inspirations and I've told it often. The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. Another thought on this, and on why some folks seem to get the wisdom of Is that so? and others do not. I have found in my life that those who seem most driven to defend themselves when either criticized or when someone sees them differently than they like to see themselves *have rarely bucked the system*. And, in fact in spiritual contexts, they have often *submitted* to the system for many years, making compromises to do so. For example, in organizations with a bit (or a lot) of cultic nature to them, it is not unusual for members to regularly be expected to defend themselves to be considered a member in good standing. Do this long enough, and you get used to it and consider it normal. The people in my experience who most get the Is that so? thang are those who have gone through a period of doubting or who have shifted their priorities in life and have to some extent walked away from an organization that they were strongly committed to for many years. Those who have never done this in a spiritual context simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND how the shit hits the fan when you do. Former friends in the organization you are walking away from (or distancing yourself from) have a tendency to suddenly turn on you and start saying things you never imagined them capable of. Former close friends cross the street to avoid talking to you. You start to hear rumors about yourself that defy belief. Some people even say shit to your face, and call you traitor or worse for leaving the highest path. I had a brick thrown through one of my windows when I walked away from the Rama trip. At first your impulse is to defend yourself. After all, you don't *understand* how these former friends and fellow seekers can one day treat you as an equal and as a valued member of the spiritual community and path that you shared for years or decades and the next day treat you like you were a child molestor or the spawn of Satan. So you try to explain yourself. If you care about these people (even if you don't really care what they think of you), you try to tell them that nothing has really changed about who and what you are, or you even try to explain your reasons for having made the decision that you did. But it never works. Your reasons are invalid. There can *be* no valid reasons for walking away from the highest path. By doing so you have shamed yourself and shamed the holy trad- ition you walked away from. You are pond scum, lower than the lint in a snake's navel. Sound familiar, Rick? I'll bet it does. It would also sound familiar to any Catholic priest who decided to leave the priesthood. Or to any celibate monk from any tradition who fell in love and decided to get married. And I'll bet it sounds familiar to a lot of the posters on this forum who, one way or another, *have* distanced themselves from an organi- zation they once felt proud of being a part of and no longer can. Right? Depending on the length of time *since* they did this distancing, they probably understand Is that so? to a lesser or greater degree. After a while it's the only thing that makes sense. Yes men who CARE about being perceived as part of a tradition or organization feel the need to defend themselves. Those who really *aren't* a part of that tradition or organization do not. After a while all you *can* do when you encounter the hatred beamed at you by those who feel that by being true to yourself you somehow betrayed them is shrug and walk away -- the physical counterpart of saying Is that so? Or laugh, which in my opinion is the best possible way of saying the same thing. By laughing at those who attack you, you avoid the temptation to stoop to their level. And, if your walking away has taught you anything, you realize that *before* you walked away you were just like them. Laughing at them is a way of laughing at that part of yourself, and wishing it good riddance.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. Actually I said you were really pissed because I'd reposted your account of Obama's telling you he was going to repair the holes Bush had blasted in the Constitution. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. So it must also have surprised you that Raunchy and I objected to your suggestion that we criticize Obama only because we're angry that Hillary lost, and that we would never criticize Hillary if she were in office and doing the same things Obama is doing. I mean, why on earth should that have bothered us? You never had any intention of insulting us, right? snip I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. Q: If everything is perfect just as it is, why are we working so hard to change things? MMY: That too is perfect just as it is. ...There is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: You might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery--either way--and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can. --Ken Wilber I love these quotes. Thanks, Judy. I admire your debating skills immensely. You are fearless. Taking a stand on principle against injustice and speaking passionately as well as rationally about your beliefs means debating opponents vigorously. Other than Curtis, very few people on FFLife have the courage to squeeze their truth through the sieve of ideas along with yours. Perhaps they are afraid their ideas will not survive the press. Sadly, they may never know the joy of confluence, the merging, and reconciliation of differences. Just know that whatever makes is through the sieve is golden.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: The other day Judy mentioned that I must be really pissed because of something Raunchy said. Actually I said you were really pissed because I'd reposted your account of Obama's telling you he was going to repair the holes Bush had blasted in the Constitution. It surprised me a bit that she would think I would get upset by something someone wrote here. So it must also have surprised you that Raunchy and I objected to your suggestion that we criticize Obama only because we're angry that Hillary lost, and that we would never criticize Hillary if she were in office and doing the same things Obama is doing. I mean, why on earth should that have bothered us? You never had any intention of insulting us, right? snip I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. You nailed it. I saw the weasel in Rick's post as well, and I gave him a pass on it. I admit to making nice with him at the time. I'm glad you caught the varmint. An excellent specimen, indeed. I agree with Rick's peephole into the universe concept so far as the play of opposites is concerned but not as an excuse for weakly weaseling, Oh, it's just a game, so why should I care. I hope to I care with all my heart or I fear I would live with out a conscience to right what is wrong or aspire to be a champion for those less fortunate. Hillary is my champion. She has set the bar very high for women to follow. I only hope the Left has not set the bar so low in the gutter that the next woman cannot run a successful presidential campaign. Q: If everything is perfect just as it is, why are we working so hard to change things? MMY: That too is perfect just as it is. ...There is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: You might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery--either way--and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can. --Ken Wilber I love these quotes. Thanks, Judy. I admire your debating skills immensely. You are fearless. Taking a stand on principle against injustice and speaking passionately as well as rationally about your beliefs means debating opponents vigorously. Other than Curtis, very few people on FFLife have the courage to squeeze their truth through the sieve of ideas along with yours. Perhaps they are afraid their ideas will not survive the press. Sadly, they may never know the joy of confluence, the merging, and reconciliation of differences. Just know that whatever makes is through the sieve is golden.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: And what is happening in Sitges nowadays? We aren't hearing much about that place anymore for some reason. i think Barry realized shortly after coming down from his high on initially escaping to Sitges, is that he came along too.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: And what is happening in Sitges nowadays? We aren't hearing much about that place anymore for some reason. i think Barry realized shortly after coming down from his high on initially escaping to Sitges, is that he came along too.:-) Heh. We've seen this happen over and over again, first after he escaped from the U.S. to Paris (that was on alt.m.t), then after his escape from Paris to that little French town, and now after his escape from the little French town to Sitges. He didn't keep us informed of whatever moves he was making while he was still in the U.S., but he kept changing his handle at regular intervals, which may have been a symptom of the same realization. It doesn't seem to stick, though...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: snip I love these quotes. Thanks, Judy. I admire your debating skills immensely. You are fearless. Taking a stand on principle against injustice and speaking passionately as well as rationally about your beliefs means debating opponents vigorously. Other than Curtis, very few people on FFLife have the courage to squeeze their truth through the sieve of ideas along with yours. Perhaps they are afraid their ideas will not survive the press. Sadly, they may never know the joy of confluence, the merging, and reconciliation of differences. Just know that whatever makes is through the sieve is golden. Thanks for the kind words...we seem to have a mutual admiration society going on here, because I could say the same about you. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I think the Vedic literature is written the way it is, with so many expectation-shattering stories, to culture the perspective that one's own little peephole on the Universe does not afford a view of the whole, and that therefore one should not take oneself too seriously. Because if you don't take yourself too seriously, you never need to take a stand on anything; you don't need to take any risks or fight any battles. The injustice and cruelty and suffering you see through your little peephole just doesn't matter in the larger scale of things; no need to exert yourself to remedy it. You nailed it. I saw the weasel in Rick's post as well, and I gave him a pass on it. I admit to making nice with him at the time. I'm glad you caught the varmint. An excellent specimen, indeed. I agree with Rick's peephole into the universe concept so far as the play of opposites is concerned but not as an excuse for weakly weaseling, Oh, it's just a game, so why should I care. Yeah, it all depends on how the insight is used. It's like the famous Charles Manson quote, If all is One, then what could be wrong? Disastrous category error. snip ...There is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: You might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery--either way--and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can. --Ken Wilber I should confess, I've taken the Wilber quote somewhat out of context. He was referring specifically to one's *spiritual* vision, not relative concerns. But I thought the principle applied to the latter as well.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: And what is happening in Sitges nowadays? We aren't hearing much about that place anymore for some reason. i think Barry realized shortly after coming down from his high on initially escaping to Sitges, is that he came along too.:-) Heh. We've seen this happen over and over again, first after he escaped from the U.S. to Paris (that was on alt.m.t), then after his escape from Paris to that little French town, and now after his escape from the little French town to Sitges. He didn't keep us informed of whatever moves he was making while he was still in the U.S., but he kept changing his handle at regular intervals, which may have been a symptom of the same realization. It doesn't seem to stick, though... Barry's theme song: http://www.jilldaniels.com/blackbird.htm
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Thanks for the appreciative words, Barry. It so happens that that particular Zen story is one of my inspirations and I've told it often. Why am I not surprised? You live it. I know, he got to enlightenment with Maharishi. It reminds me of what Maharishi said when someone asked him about Krishnamurti. Maharishi said that Krishnamurti was like a man who woke up on the roof, and forget how he got up there. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: snip I love these quotes. Thanks, Judy. I admire your debating skills immensely. You are fearless. Taking a stand on principle against injustice and speaking passionately as well as rationally about your beliefs means debating opponents vigorously. Other than Curtis Is Curtis dead? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Is that so? -- an homage to Rick and his equanimity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: And what is happening in Sitges nowadays? We aren't hearing much about that place anymore for some reason. i think Barry realized shortly after coming down from his high on initially escaping to Sitges, is that he came along too.:-) Heh. We've seen this happen over and over again, first after he escaped from the U.S. to Paris (that was on alt.m.t), then after his escape from Paris to that little French town, and now after his escape from the little French town to Sitges. He didn't keep us informed of whatever moves he was making while he was still in the U.S., but he kept changing his handle at regular intervals, which may have been a symptom of the same realization. It doesn't seem to stick, though... So are there others you compulsively stalk or is TurquoiseB the sole recipients of your, ah, affection? Its quite touching actually, in a Stephen King kinda way.
