Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does SSRS think he can get away with marauding a congregation?
Edg, do you really think I was "slippery"? Considering your tone in your original post, I was rather polite IMHO. Much of what you ask would be pure speculation on my part regarding SSRS. You also make a lot of assumptions and then react to your assumptions as if they're facts. I'll answer any question about SSRS to the best of my ability. Did SSRS know about Maharishi's intimate contacts with other women? I don't know. You can't conclude that he did and then get mad at him for hiding the fact! Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I don't know and you don't know. If I get the opportunity to ask him it will be in the spirit of trying to understand the paradox of Maharishi, not to be outraged and to scream out the brutal, horrible injustice. Oh the humanity, THE HUMANITY!! Also, I'm not trying to "nail" your ass. I'm not in any sort of competition with you over anything. "Words from behind a mask" Dude, WTF are you talking about? You say,"Has SSRS ever gone on record excoriating the TMO for its excesses and calling Maharishi to admit and atone?" Yes and no. He deeply loves Maharishi but recognizes the craziness of the TMO. Over the years, with "former" TM people he has made comments that we all make here and rolled his eyes, so to speak. He also has taken deliberate steps to prevent his movement, The Art of Living (AOL) from morphing into the rigid structure that the TMO became. You know, Edg, if you wanted to ask SSRS these question you actually could. He doesn't isolate himself. Find out where he is and go to his room. Give your name to the "guard" and why you want to talk to him. I was the "guard" when he came to Florida last April and people would talk to me and I would write down why they wanted to see him and then I would show him the list. He would point at various names and tell me they could come in and in what order. Her saw everybody eventually. If you sincerely want answers, go to the source! --- On Tue, 8/10/10, Duveyoung wrote: > From: Duveyoung > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does SSRS think he can get away with > marauding a congregation? > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Tuesday, August 10, 2010, 9:22 AM > I don't see any reason to continue > this ping-ponging. You're smart enough to be slippery, > and my only wish is that I had the "heart of Judy Stein" to > bring forth the issues and show how you're non-responsive in > large regard. I don't have that kind of grit, and I've > abandoned many a thread here just because the slog was too > much for the little profit that might be garnered. > > Anyone here think that Pete nailed my ass good and > countered my confrontationals with clear answers? > > I will admit that Pete scrambled a bit and ponied up some > nice safe answers, but, clearly, because of my rude tone, > well, who would expect someone to come back at me with > openness instead of spin? If I had expected suchly, > shame on me, eh? I didn't, and I have been rewarded > with exactly what I expected from Pete: words from > behind a mask. > > That experiment concluded, with nothing more to gain from > poking at him, I don't think I'll be smacking Pete about his > SSRS stuff anymore. My profit is a personal "take" > that Pete is now a confirmed-by-me true believer and immune > to most arguments. If SSRS gets caught with > his dong somewhere outside his dhoti, then we might see some > actual clockworks whirling inside Pete's head. I > await. > > Does anyone here at FFL think that SSRS is "clean" compared > to Maharishi's "dirt?" Any other followers of SSRS > here? > > Seems to me that shit rolls downhill, and SSRS was, by dint > of spiritual osmosis, fully educated about processing the > punters. To think that SSRS came away from his TMO > experiences as more moral than Maharishi -- when virtually > every single person around Maharishi was keeping secrets > large and small about the various shenanigans -- or that > SSRS is/will be less likely to milk the crowd for buckazoids > is about as blinkered a view of SSRS as can be. And, > isn't that very dynamic the one that saved Maharishi all > kinds of negativity -- because, hey, how bad could a > guy be if he spent 13 years at the feet of Guru Dev? > > Sorry, but if SSRS is enlightened and huggywuggyji > incarnate, one would have to ask where suchlike was during > his stay with Maharishi when so many false-fronts had to be > maintained that it is certain he was privy to them and said > nothing to rock the boat. > > Did SSRS get Maharishi's hand-me-down girls? Just > askin! Maybe they ate roast beef and boozed it up -- > why not speculate this way when money laundering, hush-up > extortions, rich-privileges, real-estate flimflams, fudged > science reports, and flat out lies were the order of the > day? Even if the sexcapades had not come to light, I > don't feel asking the question is out of line in the > least. > > Has SSRS ever gone on record excoriating the TMO for it
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does SSRS think he can get away with marauding a congregation?
On Aug 9, 2010, at 9:18 AM, tartbrain wrote: > Tone in writing is never certain -- one can always read a post or essay in a > variety of different tones -- each having a different inflection of meaning. > The tone we hear is often, it seems, reflective of what we would intend in > writing such words. > > This may be particularly true when words, in themselves, are amped up, a > characteristic, perhaps talent, that edg displays. When words in themselves > are amped up, I tend to read tone in a way I would deliver such a message. > Which may have nothing to do with the writer -- only my own inner dynamics. > As an exercise, more for fun, I often try to read the same post in several > different, opposing, or variant tones. Its quite amazing how different the > message is -- from the exact same words. > > Everything is a reflection of ourselves -- certainly true in ordinary > consciousness. Which of course~~on the great bus ride that's life~~ most of us left behind a long time ago (snicker). Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does SSRS think he can get away with marauding a congregation?
Yes very much like Suzanne Seagal. It's there in Maharshi's discourse, but it is more overt Buddhist literature. Peter On Aug 8, 2010, at 10:58 PM, "emptybill" wrote: > > > "Oh, you are talking about me! Yes, in 1986 I was on the rebound because my > poor "I" was utterly missing." > > Thus spake Suzanne Segal. > > "I had to read a lot of Buddhist literature to figure out what was going on." > > A free soul, I ejaculated!" > > Thus spake Yogananda. > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote: > > > > Really "Edg (sic.)", you crack me up, man. I'll answer you "questions" > > below. > > > > --- On Sun, 8/8/10, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > > > From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Why does SSRS think he can get away with > > > marauding a congregation? > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Date: Sunday, August 8, 2010, 7:32 PM > > > Why would anyone give this guy a free > > > pass after he mimics Maharishi down to his giggle and then > > > comes to the one town where that Maharishi's followers are > > > and sets up business there to ride the coattails and grab > > > some bucks? > > > > You got me. Lots of assumptions there that have more to do with you than > > SSRS. Honestly, I don't know. You'll have to ask him. But you don't really > > want answers though, these are just complaints. You probably have only seen > > tapes of SSRS. Really, he's not like Maharishi at all. I used to think that > > he was too when I first saw a tape of him. I actually was a little > > pissed-off too. But then I met him personally and over the years I've had > > quite a bit of interaction with him. In fact, I saw him about two weeks > > ago. I assure you, not like MMY at all outside of a white dhoti, long hair, > > beard and an Indian accent. > > > > > > > > Why would any "previously true believing in TMer" deign to > > > put up with this wannabe? > > > > Well, maybe the "true believer" is still a true believer and doesn't > > perceive him to be a wannabe. I don't agree with your assumptions, > > obviously. > > > > > > > > Why would this TMO DESERTER think he could wedge himself > > > into this community and not come off as a conniving > > > spiritual thief? > > > > The hell if I know! Why do you see him as "wedging himself" into the > > Fairfield/TM community? I think he came to Fairfield once a number of years > > ago, but he was uncomfortable with being perceived as the very same thing > > you are accusing him of. > > > > > > > > Why would anyone in FF after decades of "no results" jump > > > ship to another ship made by a cowardly disciple of the > > > builder of a just-abandoned ship? > > > > Are you talking about me or just generic others? I got plenty of results > > through TM and the TM-siddhis program. Those results were pure grace and > > freed me from any conceptual bondage to any organization or guru. I'm in > > bondage to the lotus eyed lord only in all his infinite forms > > > > > > > > > > How stupid does a person have to be to think, "Oh, here's a > > > personal guru sure to love me forever and always tell the > > > truth and never be smug or snobby or elitist or "too busy > > > like Maharishi?" > > > > You're right, you'd have to be very stupid, spiritually immature, lacking > > life discernment or naive to assume a relationship with a Sat guru is all a > > cake walk. > > > > > Sounds someone was on the rebound. > > > > Oh, you are talking about me! Yes, in 1986 I was on the rebound because my > > poor "I" was utterly missing. I had to read a lot of Buddhist literature > > to figure out what was going on. Maharishi's concepts were a good basic > > context to place a label on what was occurring and to understand certain > > dynamics, but I needed more detail. Life was not bliss, but a flat 2 > > dimensional skein over pure consciousness. Very odd indeed. > > > > > > There's your questions, Pete. Let's see you and your > > > mostly worthless PhD talk yourself out of this corner you've > > > painted yourself into. > > > > First, I don't have a Ph.D., it's a Psy.D.. Now this corner you refer to > > seems to be a construct of your mind, not mine. I don't see a corner. What > > is the corner you see? > > > > > > > > > > Tell us why you jumped ship? Bet you can't without > > > lying or spinning the truth or saying something like "Edg is > > > too angry right now for me to share this kind of intimacy." > > > > You want to share intimacies? I'll have to run that by my wife! I never > > jumped ship. I love Maharishi dearly, although I'm a little baffled by the > > recent Judy revelations. In fact I was just talking to Maharishi the other > > night after I read Judith's book. We had a delightful conversation. He is a > > little chagrined by his past behavior and actually needs our deeper > > understanding of him and our forgiveness. It's hard to convey the
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does SSRS think he can get away with marauding a congregation?
Well, it's a good thing we all know now that Edg is not angry. --- On Sun, 8/8/10, emptybill wrote: From: emptybill Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does SSRS think he can get away with marauding a congregation? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 8, 2010, 8:07 PM "I'm not always pissed off -- as my posts herein prove -- and even when I'm turning out another screed, I do so as a writer trying his best to create with aplomb and really put some neat flourishes onto my insults." Edg, You're just a comedian with a hopped up sense of rage. It may not be in the manual yet but as a layman I'm diagnosing you with a psycho- humour malabnormality - I'm calling it "Luniticle Syndrome". Maybe you'll become famous - in the bardo at least. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > Why would anyone give this guy a free pass after he mimics Maharishi down to > his giggle and then comes to the one town where that Maharishi's followers > are and sets up business there to ride the coattails and grab some bucks? > > Why would any "previously true believing in TMer" deign to put up with this > wannabe? > > Why would this TMO DESERTER think he could wedge himself into this community > and not come off as a conniving spiritual thief? > > Why would anyone in FF after decades of "no results" jump ship to another > ship made by a cowardly disciple of the builder of a just-abandoned ship? > > How stupid does a person have to be to think, "Oh, here's a personal guru > sure to love me forever and always tell the truth and never be smug or snobby > or elitist or "too busy like Maharishi?" > > Sounds someone was on the rebound. > > There's your questions, Pete. Let's see you and your mostly worthless PhD > talk yourself out of this corner you've painted yourself into. > > Tell us why you jumped ship? Bet you can't without lying or spinning the > truth or saying something like "Edg is too angry right now for me to share > this kind of intimacy." > > And you can't even spell my name correctly. How'd you get a PhD with that > inability to pick up on a common detail that everyone attends? Some > psychologist you are to lose your cool and label me as always pissed off and > come down to my level by a juvenile sniping at my name's spelling -- if I can > put a burr under your saddle so easily, I wonder how long you can keep a > client from seeing your attachments disabling your therapeutic usefulness. > > I'm not always pissed off -- as my posts herein prove -- and even when I'm > turning out another screed, I do so as a writer trying his best to create > with aplomb and really put some neat flourishes onto my insults. Didn't your > psychological training give you the insight to see the difference? I'm doing > stand-up, performance art here, but if you learned anything in college it > should have been that "being pissed off" is the death of a truly soaring > creativity. Best a pissed off person can do is iterate a one note song again > and again as it attaches to issues. Maybe just maybe Michelangelo was pissed > when he yelled at Moses, "Why don't you speak!" -- but that would be about as > rare and artistic moment as what ever wuz. I amplify my nuances into > nose-dives with nine-yards aspewin' for the sheer impact of doing so, and > once in print, I'm done and on to the next moment of my lifeI un-invest > myself of the nuance thereby, see? > > I specialize in being angry in print, but I've not thrown a punch in 55 > years, never been fired for insulting fellow employees, have never taken > anyone to small claims court, and was in the dome for five years morning and > evening sessions and if that didn't quell my cantankerousness, then why would > you glom onto a wannabe technique of the same ilk if it has had so little > effect -- after 29 years of almost perfect dedication to it -- on my > personality? > > Face it: you found yourself spiritually adrift from the TMO and you > panic-grabbed on to some barnacle encrusted flotsam thinking it was dry land. > > How's that working for ya if you're here in a pissing contest with the likes > of me? > > I'm laughing here -- don't mistake a rude crude gnarly guffaw for a growl. > > Edg >
