Respecting the list policies and the list moderator...

[Guest guest]

I think that Harsha would prefer that "M-M" language NOT be used on this

list. I say this because he point blank said so just a few weeks ago in

response to someone else using it in a post:

 

v's post:

/message/37558

 

Harsha's response:

/message/37564

 

We would not have this list but for the generosity of spirit of Harshaji.

He has asked us to behave in a certain fashion when we are in his home,

as this sangha is a home of sorts. I think we should respect his request.

It would be a shame for him to come online and see the thread that has

been weaving its way through the archives, after he just asked that we refrain

from using this type of language here.

 

He gifts us with so much wisdom and love...can we not return it with respect?

I know there have been times when I have unknowingly posted in a fashion which

was not

acceptable to the list policies, so please do not think that I am thinking for

even

a moment that I am "above" all this!!! But, as to this specific line of

language,

he said just a few weeks ago that he would prefer not to see it here, so let us

please respect his wishes, rather than testing his immense but not unlimited

patience.

 

Love,

 

Joyce

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Joyce wrote:

> I think that Harsha would prefer that

> "M-M" language NOT be used on this list.

 

Hi everyone,

 

 

M-M stands for Mind Mucking, doesn't it? :-))

 

I agree that we should respect language sensitivities,

however the language issue should not let us deviate

us from the point that Zenbob was making, that the

list was usurped by _ _ _ well, you fill in the

blanks.

 

For many years I used to be an avid participating

member... and maybe in those days some thought that I

was a Mind Mucker as well...

Anyway, I became a lurker, then I only d to

the digests but could not even get myself to read

them, then I even stopped lurking and set my member

preferences to be just a member, receiving no

correspondence whatsoever. Only once in about every

four or five months would I pay a cursory visit.

 

Some may remember that in the days that I participated

intensively, that I engaged Tony quite a bit... The

Sai Baba issue, other chips on Tony's shoulder, etc. I

even invited him to my home to improve mutual

understanding... that did not happen of course.

 

Someone suggested to Zenbob "to start one's own

list..."

Hmm? Instead of suggesting that to "dissenters" could

it not - by the same token - be suggested to... for

example Tony, to start his own?

 

Anyway, a constant application of "start your own

list" leads to the same proliferation that we see in

the fragmentation of religious factions. In Dutch we

call those factions "fractions." The more splinter

groups one gets the less overall communication takes

place...

"Each to his own" may eventually lead to having

nothing to do with each other whatsoever!

 

Someone brought up the word "democratic".

Whatever this lists shows right now could possibly be

called democratic if Tony (as we are apparently

discussing his contributions) were "one person who

spoke for us all". But I doubt that he is... He surely

does not speak FOR me nor does what he writes speak TO

me...

To say it nicely, Tony's "purports" on the Thomas

Gospel do not resonate with me...

 

But that is OK, I don't have to read them as there is

plenty of other interesti... stu...

No...! There is NOT plenty of other material to be

read here...

It is not for nothing that some use CAPITAL LETTERS to

lodge their complaints.

And if you ask me if it is the usurping aspect of the

Tony's "Jesus Sayings" commentaries as well as his

very predictable responses to pretty well everything

else that he comments on... then yes, my answer is

YES.

 

Wim.

 

PS.

There are about 114 sayings in the Thomas Gospel, is at now at 76...

:-)

[Guest guest]

, Wim <wim_borsboom> wrote:

> Joyce wrote:

> > I think that Harsha would prefer that

> > "M-M" language NOT be used on this list.

>

> Hi everyone,

>

>

>

> M-M stands for Mind Mucking, doesn't it? :-))

>

> I agree that we should respect language sensitivities,

> however the language issue should not let us deviate

> us from the point that Zenbob was making, that the

> list was usurped by _ _ _ well, you fill in the

> blanks.

>

> For many years I used to be an avid participating

> member... and maybe in those days some thought that I

> was a Mind Mucker as well...

> Anyway, I became a lurker, then I only d to

> the digests but could not even get myself to read

> them, then I even stopped lurking and set my member

> preferences to be just a member, receiving no

> correspondence whatsoever. Only once in about every

> four or five months would I pay a cursory visit.

>

> Some may remember that in the days that I participated

> intensively, that I engaged Tony quite a bit... The

> Sai Baba issue, other chips on Tony's shoulder, etc. I

> even invited him to my home to improve mutual

> understanding... that did not happen of course.

 

Namaste Wim et al,

 

I'm surprised my four line purports on three and four line sayings

are regarded as taking over the list. I don't start my own list for

I don't want the ego ownership, that's all. It changes the dynamics

and responses as a gift effects the mind. Yes we did engage a little

after I left sai baba, for it was still fresh in my mind and I

hadn't come to terms with it, but most of the exchange was about

interpretation of 'K' and your 'magic' machine was it not?

 

Yes you invited me to your home, but I didn't see the need for a

ferry journey over to the island to repeat the same conversations.

Looking at your post re me, after some years, I guess it was a wise

decision.....Why don't you invite Zenbob hahahah........ONS..Tony.

[Guest guest]

By the way, I love the Gospel of Thomas...

I actually have a copy of the first commercial edition

of the coptic script and its translation.

 

Some forty years ago, when I became a Trappist monk,

it was common practice to acquire a new monastic name.

I chose "Didymus".

Didymus???

I would have chosen Thomas if that did not make others

think that I meant to be called after Thomas Aquinas.

In no way did I want that association to be made, so I

went for Didymus "twin brother" the apostle Thomas'

nickname.

I felt a strong kinship to this man who was not at all

afraid to question Jesus, also this Thomas Didymus

appeared in many quintessential and radical passages

describing Jesus' teachings as recorded in the New

Testament.

 

Wim

[Guest guest]

> Joyce wrote:

> > I think that Harsha would prefer that

> > "M-M" language NOT be used on this list.

>

> Hi everyone,

> >

>

> M-M stands for Mind Mucking, doesn't it? :-))

 

 

No matter what, Wim, you still make me laugh :-)

 

> I agree that we should respect language sensitivities,

> however the language issue should not let us deviate

> us from the point that Zenbob was making, that the

> list was usurped by _ _ _ well, you fill in the

> blanks.

 

I think that you are confusing the two threads.

I am not referring to the thread having to do with at all, but the one which David posted with regard to

Greg's list. They are two very different issues.

I am not a member of Greg's list and I do not have

much interest in technical philosophical exchanges, as

I come from a much more experiential perspective.

In fact, that is why I did not join the list in the first place.

Whatever happened on the list which upset David so

much does not interest me...what struck me was the manner

in which David chose to express it here as well as the fact that

he felt the need to express it here. And so it is done.

 

You are addressing the issue which has to do with Tony and

not only his gospel of St. Thomas posts, but the feeling

that...well, I will let you say it again...

> Someone brought up the word "democratic".

> Whatever this lists shows right now could possibly be

> called democratic if Tony (as we are apparently

> discussing his contributions) were "one person who

> spoke for us all". But I doubt that he is... He surely

> does not speak FOR me nor does what he writes speak TO

> me...

> To say it nicely, Tony's "purports" on the Thomas

> Gospel do not resonate with me...

>

> But that is OK, I don't have to read them as there is

> plenty of other interesti... stu...

> No...! There is NOT plenty of other material to be

> read here...

> It is not for nothing that some use CAPITAL LETTERS to

> lodge their complaints.

> And if you ask me if it is the usurping aspect of the

> Tony's "Jesus Sayings" commentaries as well as his

> very predictable responses to pretty well everything

> else that he comments on... then yes, my answer is

> YES.

>

> Wim.

 

As I read it, you are not just addressing his gospel posts,

but the nature of his responses to some of the other posts.

And you are right, you can just delete him and read what is left.

But, I beg to differ with you that what is left is little :-) Sometimes

less is more, Wim, and a proliferation of words and threads

does not always mean that there is anything of substance

being said. There has been a lot of wonderful communication

on this list, and you just don't know it, because you are not

reading the list on a regular basis :-)

 

Personally, I can negotiate my way around Tony, and like

you, sometimes, but not always, he does make me laugh.

Why anyone would want to from this list because

of Tony is beyond me. I am not here for Tony. More than

anything, I am here for Harsha's spiritual guidance and posts.

I suspect there are many more on the list who feel the way

that I do. And, unlike you, I do find other posts of interest here.

I enjoy the poetry that some folks post, and the photos which

Alan posts, and other articles and stories (Hi Adi :-)

 

At the same time, there may be others who feel the way you and

Zenbob do, and perhaps they should speak up so that Harsha can

get a better sense of what is going on, and perhaps Tony may get a new

perspective on some of what he posts. And then again, maybe not :-)

 

Love,

 

Joyce

> PS.

> There are about 114 sayings in the Thomas Gospel, > is at now at 76...

> :-)

 

PPSS You know that you can program your email software to delete

all messages from a specific author?

 

PPPSSS As far as Mind Muckers, I have learned that it is not for

me to judge how others approach spirituality. While it may not

be my approach, or should I say the way I have been approached :-),

I just let them do their thing, which seems to satisfy their needs. Anyone

who posts with long long long long winding sentences and too many

paragraphs, should know that I do not read you!!!! I only have the

patience

for a little bit at a time...so if the shoe fits, put it on and wear it.

That

includes you, Wim ;-)

[Guest guest]

lady Joy-ce !

 

thank you so much for reminding about the list policies...

 

we should respect Harsha and not use M M WORDS HERE ? i agre with

you!!

 

so i deleted all my 3 posts ... out of respect for you... and

harsha!!

 

regards

 

ps i think everyone got the message

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "Lady Joyce" <shaantih@c...>

wrote:

> I think that Harsha would prefer that "M-M" language NOT be used on

this

> list. I say this because he point blank said so just a few weeks

ago in

> response to someone else using it in a post:

>

> v's post:

> /message/37558

>

> Harsha's response:

> /message/37564

>

> We would not have this list but for the generosity of spirit of

Harshaji.

> He has asked us to behave in a certain fashion when we are in his

home,

> as this sangha is a home of sorts. I think we should respect his

request.

> It would be a shame for him to come online and see the thread that

has

> been weaving its way through the archives, after he just asked that

we refrain

> from using this type of language here.

>

> He gifts us with so much wisdom and love...can we not return it

with respect?

> I know there have been times when I have unknowingly posted in a

fashion which was not

> acceptable to the list policies, so please do not think that I am

thinking for even

> a moment that I am "above" all this!!! But, as to this specific

line of language,

> he said just a few weeks ago that he would prefer not to see it

here, so let us

> please respect his wishes, rather than testing his immense but not

unlimited patience.

>

> Love,

>

> Joyce

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

[Guest guest]

Ah, my work is done. All the comments now have explored the nature of

discourse and opened the gates of Truth...

 

And that is a very good thing. I feared we had all gone numb with Post 911

Bush-itis.

 

Joyce you make many good sound comments...here...no one should be driven

away by anyone person's comments...or responses...and really, in fact, that was

my intended point in all this. I truly had derived the impression that the

Satsangh was either losing or would lose it's very best contributors and thaat

was the tragedy I sought to correct. The threads had gone astray and those

who otherwise might have contributed has simply long ago given up responding

or trying to offer insight or guidance.

 

The only cure is to shake the tree and get the best birds to fly once more.

 

Much Love,

 

Zenbob

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Joyce, you wrote:

> I think that you are confusing the two threads.

 

I tried to combine two issues in one post, as they are both related as far as

some recent 'critical observations' are concerned.

 

I refer to post 37614 from July 28 in which Zenbob said:

> "Please, I have read so much of this drivel

> and cannot imagine why everyone else continues

> to lovingly tolerate it. It is merely drivel

> in the end. Get to matters of substance,

> stop hounding at the good people on this list

> and nit-picking at truly invisible nits and

> the angels dancing on the pinhead of your imagination.

 

 

I found it quite humorous actually that rather than answering to Zenbob's - let

me call it - grumblings, that he just got some 'I love you's instead...

Nice, but...

When concerns like that are glossed over, things obviously do not get addressed

appropriately. As well, the gloss, however well meant and loving, does not make

the concern go away and thus... 'lo and behold'... it raised its head again but

now with capital characters and some choice words.

 

Wouldn't you expect that the issue will be dealt with now in a straightforward

manner?

 

Yes, but no ! Instead the focus shifts to language use, deflecting away from the

original issue at hand.

 

Why this shying away, this deflection?

 

(Oh, and by the way, is the word "mas-turbation" actually that dis-turbing?

The history of the word dates back not only to temple practices in India, Egypt

and the Roman empire it also has to do with early farm animal husbandry

practices where manual turbulation produced semen that was put to use in

producing a better breed of horses and various kind of cattle.)

 

Well - that aside - I decided to join in adding my own observations...

 

There is room for everyone, true... and there is indeed always the "Next"

button. But when we find that the "room for everyone" does not seem as inviting

as it used to be, then it needs to be addressed without fear.

Look at what happened to NonDualitySalon... it is reviewing its way of operating

as similar things happened there over the last while...

> I think that you are confusing the two threads.

and

> so if the shoe fits, put it on and wear it.

 

Always happy to do so... : )

 

In combining these issues in one post, I tried to make it a 'one size fits all'

shoe...

 

Let's all have an honest personal look at this...

 

Wim

 

 

 

Lady Joyce <shaantih wrote:

> Joyce wrote:

> > I think that Harsha would prefer that

> > "M-M" language NOT be used on this list.

>

> Hi everyone,

> >

>

> M-M stands for Mind Mucking, doesn't it? :-))

 

 

No matter what, Wim, you still make me laugh :-)

 

> I agree that we should respect language sensitivities,

> however the language issue should not let us deviate

> us from the point that Zenbob was making, that the

> list was usurped by _ _ _ well, you fill in the

> blanks.

 

I think that you are confusing the two threads.

I am not referring to the thread having to do with at all, but the one which David posted with regard to

Greg's list. They are two very different issues.

I am not a member of Greg's list and I do not have

much interest in technical philosophical exchanges, as

I come from a much more experiential perspective.

In fact, that is why I did not join the list in the first place.

Whatever happened on the list which upset David so

much does not interest me...what struck me was the manner

in which David chose to express it here as well as the fact that

he felt the need to express it here. And so it is done.

 

You are addressing the issue which has to do with Tony and

not only his gospel of St. Thomas posts, but the feeling

that...well, I will let you say it again...

> Someone brought up the word "democratic".

> Whatever this lists shows right now could possibly be

> called democratic if Tony (as we are apparently

> discussing his contributions) were "one person who

> spoke for us all". But I doubt that he is... He surely

> does not speak FOR me nor does what he writes speak TO

> me...

> To say it nicely, Tony's "purports" on the Thomas

> Gospel do not resonate with me...

>

> But that is OK, I don't have to read them as there is

> plenty of other interesti... stu...

> No...! There is NOT plenty of other material to be

> read here...

> It is not for nothing that some use CAPITAL LETTERS to

> lodge their complaints.

> And if you ask me if it is the usurping aspect of the

> Tony's "Jesus Sayings" commentaries as well as his

> very predictable responses to pretty well everything

> else that he comments on... then yes, my answer is

> YES.

>

> Wim.

 

As I read it, you are not just addressing his gospel posts,

but the nature of his responses to some of the other posts.

And you are right, you can just delete him and read what is left.

But, I beg to differ with you that what is left is little :-) Sometimes

less is more, Wim, and a proliferation of words and threads

does not always mean that there is anything of substance

being said. There has been a lot of wonderful communication

on this list, and you just don't know it, because you are not

reading the list on a regular basis :-)

 

Personally, I can negotiate my way around Tony, and like

you, sometimes, but not always, he does make me laugh.

Why anyone would want to from this list because

of Tony is beyond me. I am not here for Tony. More than

anything, I am here for Harsha's spiritual guidance and posts.

I suspect there are many more on the list who feel the way

that I do. And, unlike you, I do find other posts of interest here.

I enjoy the poetry that some folks post, and the photos which

Alan posts, and other articles and stories (Hi Adi :-)

 

At the same time, there may be others who feel the way you and

Zenbob do, and perhaps they should speak up so that Harsha can

get a better sense of what is going on, and perhaps Tony may get a new

perspective on some of what he posts. And then again, maybe not :-)

 

Love,

 

Joyce

> PS.

> There are about 114 sayings in the Thomas Gospel, > is at now at 76...

> :-)

 

PPSS You know that you can program your email software to delete

all messages from a specific author?

 

PPPSSS As far as Mind Muckers, I have learned that it is not for

me to judge how others approach spirituality. While it may not

be my approach, or should I say the way I have been approached :-),

I just let them do their thing, which seems to satisfy their needs. Anyone

who posts with long long long long winding sentences and too many

paragraphs, should know that I do not read you!!!! I only have the

patience

for a little bit at a time...so if the shoe fits, put it on and wear it.

That

includes you, Wim ;-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/join

 

 

 

 

"Love itself is the actual form of God."

 

Sri Ramana

 

In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Lady Joyce!

 

You write ...

 

(I am not referring to the thread having to do with at all, but the one which David posted with regard to

Greg's list. They are two very different issues.

I am not a member of Greg's list and I do not have

much interest in technical philosophical exchanges, as

I come from a much more experiential perspective.

In fact, that is why I did not join the list in the first place.

Whatever happened on the list which upset David so

much does not interest me...what struck me was the manner

in which David chose to express it here as well as the fact that

he felt the need to express it here. And so it is done.)

 

Yes, i know you do not post in greg's list ; so i gathered you are

not a member in Greg's list.

 

 

However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on this

subject of M-M in that list today ....

 

was it from a private exchange you had with him?

 

 

i was wondering how did that come about?

 

love

 

ps thank you for your kind words about me! you know how to charm

everyone...

[Guest guest]

, "adi_shakthi16"

<adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> Whatever happened on the list which upset David so

> much does not interest me...

 

Nothing was upset.

What gave you the impression

something was?

> what struck me was the manner

> in which David chose to express it here as well as the fact that

> he felt the need to express it here. And so it is done.)

 

I am a zany guy.

Lately

I have realized that I *am* indeed enlightned too.

 

Tomorrow,

well...

 

who knows?

 

peace

[Guest guest]

, Wim <wim_borsboom> wrote:

> Anyway, a constant application of "start your own

> list" leads to the same proliferation that we see in

> the fragmentation of religious factions. In Dutch we

> call those factions "fractions." The more splinter

> groups one gets the less overall communication takes

> place...

> "Each to his own" may eventually lead to having

> nothing to do with each other whatsoever!

 

Hi Wim.

 

Some people would prefer we send all the black people

back to Africa.

 

But what's so funny about that is that

all the *other* people came from Africa too!

 

 

peace & good will to All

[Guest guest]

Re: Re: Respecting the list policies and the list

moderator...

 

> Hi Joyce, you wrote:

>

> > I think that you are confusing the two threads.

>

> I tried to combine two issues in one post, as they are both related as far

as some recent 'critical observations' are concerned.

 

I understand that was what you think you were trying to do.

However, there is no reason why they cannot be properly separated :-)

>

> I refer to post 37614 from July 28 in which Zenbob said:

> > "Please, I have read so much of this drivel

> > and cannot imagine why everyone else continues

> > to lovingly tolerate it. It is merely drivel

> > in the end. Get to matters of substance,

> > stop hounding at the good people on this list

> > and nit-picking at truly invisible nits and

> > the angels dancing on the pinhead of your imagination.

>

>

> I found it quite humorous actually that rather than answering to

Zenbob's - let me call it - grumblings, that he just got some 'I love you's

instead...

 

Yes, that is quite funny!

What Zenbob wrote, I mean :-)

Perhaps the "i love you's" were a diplomatic way

to avoid rubbing salt in the wound, not that there is

"anyone" to be wounded :-) Or is there?

 

> Nice, but...

> When concerns like that are glossed over, things obviously do not get

addressed appropriately. As well, the gloss, however well meant and loving,

does not make the concern go away and thus... 'lo and behold'... it raised

its head again but now with capital characters and some choice words.

>

> Wouldn't you expect that the issue will be dealt with now in a

straightforward manner?

>

> Yes, but no ! Instead the focus shifts to language use, deflecting away

from the original issue at hand.

> Why this shying away, this deflection?

 

Oh, Wim, calm down, why don't you?

The focus did not shift to language use at all.

What I tried to do was separate the two,

and you just plain don't want to.

 

> There is room for everyone, true... and there is indeed always the "Next"

button. But when we find that the "room for everyone" does not seem as

inviting as it used to be, then it needs to be addressed without fear.

 

I agree. So I invited those who wish to do so to address it

in my response to you. I do think that Harsha will listen to

the list members on this subject. But they need to air it here.

Private emails do not work, because then the email box gets

too full, and bounces emails.

> Look at what happened to NonDualitySalon... it is reviewing its way of

operating as similar things happened there over the last while...

 

Really? Are you so sure about that?

>

> > I think that you are confusing the two threads.

> and

> > so if the shoe fits, put it on and wear it.

>

> Always happy to do so... : )

>

> In combining these issues in one post, I tried to make it a 'one size fits

all' shoe...

>

> Let's all have an honest personal look at this...

 

I agree. I think I have said what I need to say in this thread.

What do others think?

 

Love,

 

Joyce

[Guest guest]

, "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16>

wrote:

> Lady Joyce!

>

> However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on this

> subject of M-M in that list today ....

>

> was it from a private exchange you had with him?

 

 

I have no idea what this is about.

I once quoted something nice Joyce

said in an email about my Swamiji,

and I should not even have done that.

But I never quoted Joyce in connection

with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

were somehow pasted into someone's

message. I did mention the discussion

going on over here, and I wish I had

not even done that.

 

Ben

[Guest guest]

well , here it is Ben!!

 

Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

 

from: Insight <insight@s...>

Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

 

 

 

 

 

Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

there is talk of this list and Advaitin

lists in general and how we are all

just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

 

Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

stimulating? Why bother with that list?

 

 

Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

they are using. I guess I'm now

more Hindu than the Hindus!

 

 

Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

 

 

Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

Is this all just an ego-trip?

 

Joyce: Does it matter?

There's just a bridge

coming out of no where going nowhere.

Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

For those who enjoy the trip

of guilt and atonement.

I see a few have begun early.

 

 

Joyce

 

**********************************************************************

well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

 

I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and caring

person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond words !!

 

btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors soneone's mind!!

LOL!!!

 

only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

offended!

 

love and take it easy folks!!

 

ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to hear

your discourses on buddhism!!!

 

[

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "Benjamin" <orion777ben>

wrote:

> , "adi_shakthi16"

<adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > Lady Joyce!

> >

> > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on

this

> > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> >

> > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

>

>

> I have no idea what this is about.

> I once quoted something nice Joyce

> said in an email about my Swamiji,

> and I should not even have done that.

> But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> were somehow pasted into someone's

> message. I did mention the discussion

> going on over here, and I wish I had

> not even done that.

>

> Ben

[Guest guest]

Oh, I thought you meant Lady Joyce!

 

Anyhow, what was the problem?

I can't even remember.

 

BTW, I still enjoy reading Advaitin

list, but I am tired of discussing

whether objects are real. I know

what I think. So I disagree with

this Joyce on the Advaitin list.

It's a good list, and I am sure this

one is too, though I don't come

here often. Greg's list is a full

time job!

 

Ben

 

 

 

, "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16>

wrote:

> well , here it is Ben!!

>

> Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

>

> from: Insight <insight@s...>

> Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

> Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

>

>

>

>

>

> Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

> Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

> there is talk of this list and Advaitin

> lists in general and how we are all

> just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

>

> Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

> as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

> Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

> stimulating? Why bother with that list?

>

>

> Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

> they are using. I guess I'm now

> more Hindu than the Hindus!

>

>

> Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

> Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

>

>

> Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

> Is this all just an ego-trip?

>

> Joyce: Does it matter?

> There's just a bridge

> coming out of no where going nowhere.

> Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

> For those who enjoy the trip

> of guilt and atonement.

> I see a few have begun early.

>

>

>

> Joyce

>

> **********************************************************************

> well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

>

> I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and caring

> person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond words !!

>

> btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors soneone's mind!!

> LOL!!!

>

> only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

> offended!

>

> love and take it easy folks!!

>

> ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to hear

> your discourses on buddhism!!!

>

> [

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

, "Benjamin" <orion777ben>

> wrote:

> > , "adi_shakthi16"

> <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > Lady Joyce!

> > >

> > > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on

> this

> > > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> > >

> > > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

> >

> >

> > I have no idea what this is about.

> > I once quoted something nice Joyce

> > said in an email about my Swamiji,

> > and I should not even have done that.

> > But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> > with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> > were somehow pasted into someone's

> > message. I did mention the discussion

> > going on over here, and I wish I had

> > not even done that.

> >

> > Ben

[Guest guest]

hey ben!

 

Be for real!!!

 

now you have created Two joyces !! lol!!

 

I know only one Joyce and she is definitely a Lady!!

 

so who is this other Joyce?

 

i guess it is time we all 'reinvented' ourselves in true Madonna

fashion!!!! Kabbala IS THE WAY TO GO!!! LOL!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- In , "Benjamin" <orion777ben>

wrote:

> Oh, I thought you meant Lady Joyce!

>

> Anyhow, what was the problem?

> I can't even remember.

>

> BTW, I still enjoy reading Advaitin

> list, but I am tired of discussing

> whether objects are real. I know

> what I think. So I disagree with

> this Joyce on the Advaitin list.

> It's a good list, and I am sure this

> one is too, though I don't come

> here often. Greg's list is a full

> time job!

>

> Ben

>

>

>

> , "adi_shakthi16"

<adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > well , here it is Ben!!

> >

> > Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

> >

> > from: Insight <insight@s...>

> > Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

> > Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

> > Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

> > there is talk of this list and Advaitin

> > lists in general and how we are all

> > just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

> >

> > Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

> > as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

> > Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

> > stimulating? Why bother with that list?

> >

> >

> > Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

> > they are using. I guess I'm now

> > more Hindu than the Hindus!

> >

> >

> > Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

> > Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

> >

> >

> > Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

> > Is this all just an ego-trip?

> >

> > Joyce: Does it matter?

> > There's just a bridge

> > coming out of no where going nowhere.

> > Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

> > For those who enjoy the trip

> > of guilt and atonement.

> > I see a few have begun early.

> >

> >

> >

> > Joyce

> >

> >

**********************************************************************

> > well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

> >

> > I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and

caring

> > person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond words !!

> >

> > btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors soneone's

mind!!

> > LOL!!!

> >

> > only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

> > offended!

> >

> > love and take it easy folks!!

> >

> > ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to hear

> > your discourses on buddhism!!!

> >

> > [

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , "Benjamin"

<orion777ben>

> > wrote:

> > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > Lady Joyce!

> > > >

> > > > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on

> > this

> > > > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> > > >

> > > > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

> > >

> > >

> > > I have no idea what this is about.

> > > I once quoted something nice Joyce

> > > said in an email about my Swamiji,

> > > and I should not even have done that.

> > > But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> > > with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> > > were somehow pasted into someone's

> > > message. I did mention the discussion

> > > going on over here, and I wish I had

> > > not even done that.

> > >

> > > Ben

[Guest guest]

Is the Joyce who calls herself Insight

the same as Lady Joyce? I would

like to know. I think not.

 

Ben

 

 

 

, "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16>

wrote:

> hey ben!

>

> Be for real!!!

>

> now you have created Two joyces !! lol!!

>

> I know only one Joyce and she is definitely a Lady!!

>

> so who is this other Joyce?

>

> i guess it is time we all 'reinvented' ourselves in true Madonna

> fashion!!!! Kabbala IS THE WAY TO GO!!! LOL!!!

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

-- In , "Benjamin" <orion777ben>

> wrote:

> > Oh, I thought you meant Lady Joyce!

> >

> > Anyhow, what was the problem?

> > I can't even remember.

> >

> > BTW, I still enjoy reading Advaitin

> > list, but I am tired of discussing

> > whether objects are real. I know

> > what I think. So I disagree with

> > this Joyce on the Advaitin list.

> > It's a good list, and I am sure this

> > one is too, though I don't come

> > here often. Greg's list is a full

> > time job!

> >

> > Ben

> >

> >

> >

> > , "adi_shakthi16"

> <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > well , here it is Ben!!

> > >

> > > Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

> > >

> > > from: Insight <insight@s...>

> > > Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

> > > Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

> > > Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

> > > there is talk of this list and Advaitin

> > > lists in general and how we are all

> > > just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

> > >

> > > Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

> > > as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

> > > Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

> > > stimulating? Why bother with that list?

> > >

> > >

> > > Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

> > > they are using. I guess I'm now

> > > more Hindu than the Hindus!

> > >

> > >

> > > Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

> > > Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

> > >

> > >

> > > Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

> > > Is this all just an ego-trip?

> > >

> > > Joyce: Does it matter?

> > > There's just a bridge

> > > coming out of no where going nowhere.

> > > Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

> > > For those who enjoy the trip

> > > of guilt and atonement.

> > > I see a few have begun early.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Joyce

> > >

> > >

> **********************************************************************

> > > well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

> > >

> > > I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and

> caring

> > > person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond words !!

> > >

> > > btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors soneone's

> mind!!

> > > LOL!!!

> > >

> > > only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

> > > offended!

> > >

> > > love and take it easy folks!!

> > >

> > > ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to hear

> > > your discourses on buddhism!!!

> > >

> > > [

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "Benjamin"

> <orion777ben>

> > > wrote:

> > > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > > Lady Joyce!

> > > > >

> > > > > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on

> > > this

> > > > > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> > > > >

> > > > > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > I have no idea what this is about.

> > > > I once quoted something nice Joyce

> > > > said in an email about my Swamiji,

> > > > and I should not even have done that.

> > > > But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> > > > with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> > > > were somehow pasted into someone's

> > > > message. I did mention the discussion

> > > > going on over here, and I wish I had

> > > > not even done that.

> > > >

> > > > Ben

[Guest guest]

Gotta laugh, at ALL of this!!!!

The Joyce referred to in the post below is

most definitely NOT me. There are more than

two Joyces on the lists Adiji. I am a member of

Advaitin list, and I have high regard for that list.

While I do not understand some of the threads

and do not read them when I am not interested in them,

there are many threads which I enjoy immensely,

especially when they are more tuned in to the bhakti

and/or mystic bent.

 

So, let us all follow our own path, knowing that

we are all really going to the same place :-)

Some of us just use more gas getting there!!!!

 

Love,

 

Joyce

 

 

 

 

-

"adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16

<>

Friday, August 06, 2004 10:46 AM

Re: Respecting the list policies and the list

moderator...

 

> hey ben!

>

> Be for real!!!

>

> now you have created Two joyces !! lol!!

>

> I know only one Joyce and she is definitely a Lady!!

>

> so who is this other Joyce?

>

> i guess it is time we all 'reinvented' ourselves in true Madonna

> fashion!!!! Kabbala IS THE WAY TO GO!!! LOL!!!

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

-- In , "Benjamin" <orion777ben>

> wrote:

> > Oh, I thought you meant Lady Joyce!

> >

> > Anyhow, what was the problem?

> > I can't even remember.

> >

> > BTW, I still enjoy reading Advaitin

> > list, but I am tired of discussing

> > whether objects are real. I know

> > what I think. So I disagree with

> > this Joyce on the Advaitin list.

> > It's a good list, and I am sure this

> > one is too, though I don't come

> > here often. Greg's list is a full

> > time job!

> >

> > Ben

> >

> >

> >

> > , "adi_shakthi16"

> <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > well , here it is Ben!!

> > >

> > > Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

> > >

> > > from: Insight <insight@s...>

> > > Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

> > > Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

> > > Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

> > > there is talk of this list and Advaitin

> > > lists in general and how we are all

> > > just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

> > >

> > > Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

> > > as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

> > > Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

> > > stimulating? Why bother with that list?

> > >

> > >

> > > Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

> > > they are using. I guess I'm now

> > > more Hindu than the Hindus!

> > >

> > >

> > > Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

> > > Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

> > >

> > >

> > > Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

> > > Is this all just an ego-trip?

> > >

> > > Joyce: Does it matter?

> > > There's just a bridge

> > > coming out of no where going nowhere.

> > > Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

> > > For those who enjoy the trip

> > > of guilt and atonement.

> > > I see a few have begun early.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Joyce

> > >

> > >

> **********************************************************************

> > > well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

> > >

> > > I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and

> caring

> > > person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond words !!

> > >

> > > btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors soneone's

> mind!!

> > > LOL!!!

> > >

> > > only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

> > > offended!

> > >

> > > love and take it easy folks!!

> > >

> > > ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to hear

> > > your discourses on buddhism!!!

> > >

> > > [

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "Benjamin"

> <orion777ben>

> > > wrote:

> > > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > > Lady Joyce!

> > > > >

> > > > > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting you on

> > > this

> > > > > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> > > > >

> > > > > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > I have no idea what this is about.

> > > > I once quoted something nice Joyce

> > > > said in an email about my Swamiji,

> > > > and I should not even have done that.

> > > > But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> > > > with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> > > > were somehow pasted into someone's

> > > > message. I did mention the discussion

> > > > going on over here, and I wish I had

> > > > not even done that.

> > > >

> > > > Ben

>

>

>

>

> /join

>

>

>

>

>

> "Love itself is the actual form of God."

>

> Sri Ramana

>

> In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

> Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

now, come on, Ben!

 

don't be over smart!

 

insight is another member re- posting the apparent conversation

between you and joyce!

 

you know it! now, don't try to wiggle out of this one!

 

it is o.k. it is ok now! david is back in non-dual and u r back in

harsha !

 

so , let us all be cool about it!

 

peace!

 

joyce has many insights! but she does not post under id 'insight'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "Benjamin" <orion777ben>

wrote:

> Is the Joyce who calls herself Insight

> the same as Lady Joyce? I would

> like to know. I think not.

>

> Ben

>

>

>

> , "adi_shakthi16"

<adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > hey ben!

> >

> > Be for real!!!

> >

> > now you have created Two joyces !! lol!!

> >

> > I know only one Joyce and she is definitely a Lady!!

> >

> > so who is this other Joyce?

> >

> > i guess it is time we all 'reinvented' ourselves in true Madonna

> > fashion!!!! Kabbala IS THE WAY TO GO!!! LOL!!!

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > -- In , "Benjamin"

<orion777ben>

> > wrote:

> > > Oh, I thought you meant Lady Joyce!

> > >

> > > Anyhow, what was the problem?

> > > I can't even remember.

> > >

> > > BTW, I still enjoy reading Advaitin

> > > list, but I am tired of discussing

> > > whether objects are real. I know

> > > what I think. So I disagree with

> > > this Joyce on the Advaitin list.

> > > It's a good list, and I am sure this

> > > one is too, though I don't come

> > > here often. Greg's list is a full

> > > time job!

> > >

> > > Ben

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > well , here it is Ben!!

> > > >

> > > > Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

> > > >

> > > > from: Insight <insight@s...>

> > > > Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

> > > > Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

> > > > Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

> > > > there is talk of this list and Advaitin

> > > > lists in general and how we are all

> > > > just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

> > > >

> > > > Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

> > > > as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

> > > > Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

> > > > stimulating? Why bother with that list?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

> > > > they are using. I guess I'm now

> > > > more Hindu than the Hindus!

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

> > > > Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

> > > > Is this all just an ego-trip?

> > > >

> > > > Joyce: Does it matter?

> > > > There's just a bridge

> > > > coming out of no where going nowhere.

> > > > Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

> > > > For those who enjoy the trip

> > > > of guilt and atonement.

> > > > I see a few have begun early.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Joyce

> > > >

> > > >

> >

**********************************************************************

> > > > well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

> > > >

> > > > I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and

> > caring

> > > > person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond

words !!

> > > >

> > > > btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors

soneone's

> > mind!!

> > > > LOL!!!

> > > >

> > > > only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

> > > > offended!

> > > >

> > > > love and take it easy folks!!

> > > >

> > > > ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to

hear

> > > > your discourses on buddhism!!!

> > > >

> > > > [

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "Benjamin"

> > <orion777ben>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > > > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > > > Lady Joyce!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting

you on

> > > > this

> > > > > > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> > > > > >

> > > > > > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I have no idea what this is about.

> > > > > I once quoted something nice Joyce

> > > > > said in an email about my Swamiji,

> > > > > and I should not even have done that.

> > > > > But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> > > > > with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> > > > > were somehow pasted into someone's

> > > > > message. I did mention the discussion

> > > > > going on over here, and I wish I had

> > > > > not even done that.

> > > > >

> > > > > Ben

[Guest guest]

thank you Lady Joyce!

 

Yes , adwaithin is a great list with real scholars...

 

and i love to be part of it ...

 

and i am thankful to you for the clarification...

 

who is this other Joyce? and what is she talking about anyway ?

 

but JOYCE IS JOYCE, NOT INSIGHT, RIGHT!

 

I AM VERY CONFUSED ....

 

anyway, ben, you are truly innocent even though you were talking to

the Other joyce about m m !!

 

my point is this , if you do not like a list and its goindgs o,

complain straight to the moderators ! that is what i do!!!!

 

that is the right thing to do! see how david is now back in the non-

dual list and he will be joined sooon by zenbob, his soulmate!!!

smiles!! we can enjoy heir comedy there as well!!! they are so

imaginative and creative!!!

 

i have never heard of these terms before!M M !!!

 

love always

 

 

, "Lady Joyce" <shaantih@c...>

wrote:

> Gotta laugh, at ALL of this!!!!

> The Joyce referred to in the post below is

> most definitely NOT me. There are more than

> two Joyces on the lists Adiji. I am a member of

> Advaitin list, and I have high regard for that list.

> While I do not understand some of the threads

> and do not read them when I am not interested in them,

> there are many threads which I enjoy immensely,

> especially when they are more tuned in to the bhakti

> and/or mystic bent.

>

> So, let us all follow our own path, knowing that

> we are all really going to the same place :-)

> Some of us just use more gas getting there!!!!

>

> Love,

>

> Joyce

>

>

>

>

> -

> "adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16>

> <>

> Friday, August 06, 2004 10:46 AM

> Re: Respecting the list policies and the

list

> moderator...

>

>

> > hey ben!

> >

> > Be for real!!!

> >

> > now you have created Two joyces !! lol!!

> >

> > I know only one Joyce and she is definitely a Lady!!

> >

> > so who is this other Joyce?

> >

> > i guess it is time we all 'reinvented' ourselves in true Madonna

> > fashion!!!! Kabbala IS THE WAY TO GO!!! LOL!!!

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > -- In , "Benjamin"

<orion777ben>

> > wrote:

> > > Oh, I thought you meant Lady Joyce!

> > >

> > > Anyhow, what was the problem?

> > > I can't even remember.

> > >

> > > BTW, I still enjoy reading Advaitin

> > > list, but I am tired of discussing

> > > whether objects are real. I know

> > > what I think. So I disagree with

> > > this Joyce on the Advaitin list.

> > > It's a good list, and I am sure this

> > > one is too, though I don't come

> > > here often. Greg's list is a full

> > > time job!

> > >

> > > Ben

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > well , here it is Ben!!

> > > >

> > > > Message 1900 of 1982 in non-dual philosophy

> > > >

> > > > from: Insight <insight@s...>

> > > > Thu Aug 5, 2004 11:38 am

> > > > Re: Ben's Mental Stimulation

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ben: Boy, over on Harshasatsangh and

> > > > Advaitin List (mirror only so far),

> > > > there is talk of this list and Advaitin

> > > > lists in general and how we are all

> > > > just mentally 'stimulating' ourselves!

> > > >

> > > > Joyce: Fortunately I didn't tick off "Advaitan"

> > > > as a career choice. Gotta laugh!

> > > > Those there guys over there are NOT mentally

> > > > stimulating? Why bother with that list?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ben: I'm too squeamish to use the word

> > > > they are using. I guess I'm now

> > > > more Hindu than the Hindus!

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Joyce: What word is upsetting you?

> > > > Perhaps today is the day for break-throughs.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Ben: Well, let's ask the question:

> > > > Is this all just an ego-trip?

> > > >

> > > > Joyce: Does it matter?

> > > > There's just a bridge

> > > > coming out of no where going nowhere.

> > > > Greg hands out hair shirts on Fridays

> > > > For those who enjoy the trip

> > > > of guilt and atonement.

> > > > I see a few have begun early.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Joyce

> > > >

> > > >

> >

**********************************************************************

> > > > well, ben! this is the post i am referring to!!

> > > >

> > > > I know lady Joyce - she is the most positive and loving and

> > caring

> > > > person in the whole wide world ... she can look beyond

words !!

> > > >

> > > > btw i have no problem with the M M word if it mrrors soneone's

> > mind!!

> > > > LOL!!!

> > > >

> > > > only, we cannot use such words in a Hindu list -they will be

> > > > offended!

> > > >

> > > > love and take it easy folks!!

> > > >

> > > > ben , why don't you post here more often? they would love to

hear

> > > > your discourses on buddhism!!!

> > > >

> > > > [

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "Benjamin"

> > <orion777ben>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > , "adi_shakthi16"

> > > > <adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> > > > > > Lady Joyce!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > However, i was surprised to see Ben (orion777) quoting

you on

> > > > this

> > > > > > subject of M-M in that list today ....

> > > > > >

> > > > > > was it from a private exchange you had with him?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I have no idea what this is about.

> > > > > I once quoted something nice Joyce

> > > > > said in an email about my Swamiji,

> > > > > and I should not even have done that.

> > > > > But I never quoted Joyce in connection

> > > > > with any 'M-M'. May be that my words

> > > > > were somehow pasted into someone's

> > > > > message. I did mention the discussion

> > > > > going on over here, and I wish I had

> > > > > not even done that.

> > > > >

> > > > > Ben

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > /join

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > "Love itself is the actual form of God."

> >

> > Sri Ramana

> >

> > In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

> > Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

> So, let us all follow our own path, knowing that

> we are all really going to the same place :-)

> Some of us just use more gas getting there!!!!

 

 

That's a good one, LADY Joyce! :-)

 

Ben

[Guest guest]

, "adi_shakthi16"

<adi_shakthi16> wrote:

> thank you Lady Joyce!

>

> Yes , adwaithin is a great list with real scholars...

>

> and i love to be part of it ...

>

> and i am thankful to you for the clarification...

>

> who is this other Joyce? and what is she talking about anyway ?

>

> but JOYCE IS JOYCE, NOT INSIGHT, RIGHT!

>

> I AM VERY CONFUSED ....

>

> anyway, ben, you are truly innocent even though you were talking to

> the Other joyce about m m !!

>

> my point is this , if you do not like a list and its goindgs o,

> complain straight to the moderators ! that is what i do!!!!

>

> that is the right thing to do! see how david is now back in the non-

> dual list and he will be joined sooon by zenbob, his soulmate!!!

> smiles!! we can enjoy heir comedy there as well!!! they are so

> imaginative and creative!!!

>

> i have never heard of these terms before!M M !!!

>

> love always

 

dear friends, adi, harsha and all.

 

mea culpa, mea maxima culpa...

 

i am afraid that it was me some years ago who used the term "mental

masturbation" (do not fear words - they were created to be used) to

describe those who stmulate themselves in order to reach their

preconceived conclusions, under the veil of 'non-dual" (or advaita,

which is translation of the same, or rather vice versa) philosophy

and understanding.

true virtue fears not critique. it is my firm belief that even the

most apparently abusive words maybe used in an uninsulting form; and

on the other hand softly spoken and apparently very polite wording

maybe be used to convey the most abusive, insulting and harming

ideas. it is the intent that matters.

 

my apology for causing anyone unintentionally (mental) pain.

 

yosy

 

ps. dear harsha, my apology for causing uneasy feelings; but i know

you can handle it perfectly well and see beyond the words...

[Guest guest]

> i have never heard of these terms before!M M !!!

> >

> > love always

>

> dear friends, adi, harsha and all.

>

> mea culpa, mea maxima culpa...

>

> i am afraid that it was me some years ago who used the term "mental

> masturbation" (do not fear words - they were created to be used) to

> describe those who stmulate themselves in order to reach their

> preconceived conclusions, under the veil of 'non-dual" (or advaita,

> which is translation of the same, or rather vice versa) philosophy

> and understanding.

> true virtue fears not critique. it is my firm belief that even the

> most apparently abusive words maybe used in an uninsulting form; and

> on the other hand softly spoken and apparently very polite wording

> maybe be used to convey the most abusive, insulting and harming

> ideas. it is the intent that matters.

>

> my apology for causing anyone unintentionally (mental) pain.

>

> yosy

>

> ps. dear harsha, my apology for causing uneasy feelings; but i know

> you can handle it perfectly well and see beyond the words...

 

Dear Yosy:

 

You are apologizing NOW for something you did years ago???

Or are you trying to take credit for coining the term???

Get real...I think it was around long before you ever used it :-)

Sheesh...what some people won't do for attention... ;-)

 

 

Love,

 

Joyce

[Guest guest]

> > Whatever happened on the list which upset David so

> > much does not interest me...

>

> Nothing was upset.

> What gave you the impression

> something was?

> > what struck me was the manner

> > in which David chose to express it here as well as the fact that

> > he felt the need to express it here. And so it is done.)

>

> I am a zany guy.

> Lately

> I have realized that I *am* indeed enlightned too.

>

> Tomorrow,

> well...

>

> who knows?

>

> peace

 

Well, the least you could do is learn how to spell :-)

 

Love,

 

Joyce

[Guest guest]

> Ah, my work is done. All the comments now have explored the nature of

> discourse and opened the gates of Truth...

 

Oh no it is not!!!

We need you to keep Tony on his toes,

and to keep us laughing, if you please :-)

>

> And that is a very good thing. I feared we had all gone numb with Post

911

> Bush-itis.

>

> Joyce you make many good sound comments...here...no one should be driven

> away by anyone person's comments...or responses...and really, in fact,

that was

> my intended point in all this. I truly had derived the impression that

the

> Satsangh was either losing or would lose it's very best contributors and

thaat

> was the tragedy I sought to correct. The threads had gone astray and

those

> who otherwise might have contributed has simply long ago given up

responding

> or trying to offer insight or guidance.

 

You may be right in that some folks do not post because of the responses

which sometimes are posted by Tony and this has been said to him before.

Or...maybe some of the best contributors have

gone into permanent samadhi and couldn't be bothered.

>

> The only cure is to shake the tree and get the best birds to fly once

more.

>

> Much Love,

>

> Zenbob

 

Much love to you, too, Zenbob...

Joyce