Guest guest Posted December 5, 2006 Report Share Posted December 5, 2006 Not every one is on broadband; some are still on dialup. In addition many who are receiving emails get email "clog". Finally small emails (posts) are processed quicker and easier than long, cluttered up email and posts. Intellectual rationalizations for cluttering up posts are not in the spirit of Sat-Chit-Ananda. Namaste, Layman John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 5, 2006 Report Share Posted December 5, 2006 I beg to differ. Of course Peter mentioned this the other day, and the fact is that the first of the two nearly identical posts that I sent was delivered to the group without my new comment in it. keeps messing up my messages or not delivering them. So when my message arrived at the group without my new comment I checked what I had writtten in the message that was still in my Sent Items Folder to make sure that I had actually included it. Then I reformatted the message in question, changed it to plain text format and sent it out. It arrived with my new comment at the bottom of the message where I placed it. As far as the Headers being there and not being snipped, etc., I did that on purpose and I also left all of our (Yosy and my) signatures at the bottom. I deleted everything else because I thought that the content of the email thread was "inane". And my point was that the Headers and signatures were all that was worth saving. Do you get my drift? I had hoped that my comment at the bottom would be a clue to the fact that I was just joking around; but I was wrong. It is not easy to effectively communicate in cyber space, especially when one is trying to create a rather subtle joke. But I'm not going to have to deal with that much longer because when I have time I have a few statements that I would like to make in parting and then I'll be out of your hair. Peace and Love, michael ---- John Logan <johnrloganis > wrote: > Not every one is on broadband; some are still on dialup. > In addition many who are receiving emails get email "clog". > Finally small emails (posts) are processed quicker and easier than > long, cluttered up email and posts. > > Intellectual rationalizations for cluttering up posts are not in the > spirit of Sat-Chit-Ananda. > > Namaste, > Layman John > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 Dear Michael, John, Peter, Yosy, Joyce, Alan, Anna, and everyone, Thanks for all your contributions. I am in a very busy period for the next three or four weeks. Michael, you are a great contributor to the list and hope you won't leave. We all need to take a break now and then sometimes for weeks or months but the sangha is always here in some form. If not here, you will find it where ever you are. Good people gravitate to one another. Hearts resonate with each other. There have been periods where I am very involved and able to post regularly but sometimes I am not. I have confidence that the teachings of Sri Ramana and the presence of Bhagavan's devotees are enough to sustain the spirit of the fellowship. Of course, people have to attend to their needs, personal and professional and that has to be respected. There are some people that I don't talk to for months or years, but we are still friends. When I left my teacher Chitrabhanu-ji, I did not speak to him or communicate with him at all for about 5 years, perhaps a little longer. No communication. No letters, no cards, no visitations, nothing. It was like I had never had a Guru. So years went by. One day, I was thinking about him and all the time spent with my teacher, attending his talks, walking with him. Questioning him, laughing with him. Once I had even laughed at him when he dressed up in a western suite with coat and tie at the meditation center. Seeing him look so funny I had laughed so hard that all the other students were shocked at my open disrespect. Amazingly, my teacher then came over and hugged me. He said, "Harshadeva is like that. He is just natural." Sometimes, I would tease my teacher and say, "I am your best student and certainly your favorite". He would only smile and not say yes or no. I knew he could never say no, because that would be violation of the principle of Ahimsa. Once in a while, I used that as leverage with my teacher. I was thinking such things and how tender and gentle my teacher had been. Yes, he was human, like we all are, but I thought how well and how thoroughly he had taught me everything by his presence. Not the details of of this and that but the art of being. My teacher was the one who had guided me towards Sri Ramana whom he used to visit as a teenager. So, on this day, I thought I have not been fair to my teacher, not talking to him at all for so many years after he gave me so much. I picked up the phone (I had the number memorized) and called his house a 1000 miles away from where I was. Usually, his secretary would answer or his wife or a student. Surprisingly, Chitrabhanu-ji picked up himself and said, something like either "Hello" or "Namaste" or "Blessings" or some other phrase, I can't recall. Listening to his voice sent such a thrill in me. I forgot to even introduce myself and said immediately, "Gurudev, how are you doing? I have been missing you." There was a pause on the other side for a few seconds and then his voice soft and yet smiling, "Harshadeva, Harshadeva, how have you been my dear?" He called everyone, man, woman, child, "my dear" when he spoke. He had almost instantly recognized my voice. And we talked like old friends and he said many things and I said many things and we felt good and satisfied to close the circle. Now, many times, I want to visit my teacher and can't. Too many other worldly obligations. We go without talking for years. It is destiny or karma when we get to see our friends. But the friendship remains ever strong. What you said Michael reminded me of this story. We are all human and we are not perfect. Somehow spiritual friendship, true friendship overlooks those limitations. So we are always friends whether you are here or not Michael. You are always here because you are in our hearts. Love, Harsha aumshanti (AT) cox (DOT) net wrote: > It is not easy to effectively communicate in cyber space, especially when one is trying to create a rather subtle joke. But I'm not going to have to deal with that much longer because when I have time I have a few statements that I would like to make in parting and then I'll be out of your hair. > > Peace and Love, > > michael > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 , <aumshanti wrote: > > I beg to differ. > > Of course Peter mentioned this the other day, and the fact is that the first of the two nearly identical posts that I sent was delivered to the group without my new comment in it. keeps messing up my messages or not delivering them. So when my message arrived at the group without my new comment I checked what I had writtten in the message that was still in my Sent Items Folder to make sure that I had actually included it. Then I reformatted the message in question, changed it to plain text format and sent it out. It arrived with my new comment at the bottom of the message where I placed it. > > As far as the Headers being there and not being snipped, etc., I did that on purpose and I also left all of our (Yosy and my) signatures at the bottom. I deleted everything else because I thought that the content of the email thread was "inane". And my point was that the Headers and signatures were all that was worth saving. Do you get my drift? > > I had hoped that my comment at the bottom would be a clue to the fact that I was just joking around; but I was wrong. --------------- ) why do you think so? only because john did not get it? --------------- > > It is not easy to effectively communicate in cyber space, especially when one is trying to create a rather subtle joke. But I'm not going to have to deal with that much longer because when I have time I have a few statements that I would like to make in parting and then I'll be out of your hair. ---------------------- dear michael, i hope you mean john's hair, and not the sangha. i enjoy your presence here a lot, my friend. specially your sincerity and humor. ------------------- > > Peace and Love, > > michael > > > > > > ---- John Logan <johnrloganis wrote: > > Not every one is on broadband; some are still on dialup. > > In addition many who are receiving emails get email "clog". > > Finally small emails (posts) are processed quicker and easier than > > long, cluttered up email and posts. > > -- sometimes exceptions to a rule may serve as a good example of the applicability of the rule... i'm pretty sure your above words will cause some who did not think about it previously to be more considerate and cut their messages. usually both me, and michael too (as far as i remember), do cut the superfluous... ------------------------------- > > Intellectual rationalizations for cluttering up posts are not in the > > spirit of Sat-Chit-Ananda. -------------------- ) sounds like a lovely intelectual rationalization, does it not? and btw, by "cluttering up posts" do you mean only the size/form of the posts, or the contents as well? ----------------------- > > > > Namaste, > > Layman John > > > namaz-te, _()_ yosy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 Hello Yosy and all, While we are on this detailed discussion of email etiquette and snipping posts, I would like to chime in briefly. For about the past year there have been some lovely contributors here who aren't familiar with the usual list etiquette of placing responses at the TOP of the email they are responding to. As a result the reader has to scroll down, sometimes kind of far, to find their contribution/comment. About a year ago I raised this and asked everyone to please put their writing at the top of their email, but got little response. As a result, I tend to skip or delete those emails, or emails in general from those who post their comments down at the bottom of the text of accumulated discussion/exchange--and I suppose that others might, too. We would all maybe like to have time to read everything that comes our way, but for me jumping into posts on this list is often in a quick moment stolen when my attention should be on my work-- . I really appreciate it when those posting take the time of others into consideration and make their writing easily accessible. Thank you, and may we all have a lovely peaceful evening, and I look forward to finding you all--John, Peter, Yosy, Michael, and everyone else-- here in the morning. Or sometime thereafter. Peace, Jill On Dec 5, 2006, at 8:42 PM, yosyx wrote: > , <aumshanti wrote: > > > > I beg to differ. > > > > Of course Peter mentioned this the other day, and the fact is that > the first of the two nearly identical posts that I sent was delivered > to the group without my new comment in it. keeps messing up my > messages or not delivering them. So when my message arrived at the > group without my new comment I checked what I had writtten in the > message that was still in my Sent Items Folder to make sure that I > had actually included it. Then I reformatted the message in > question, changed it to plain text format and sent it out. It > arrived with my new comment at the bottom of the message where I > placed it. > > > > As far as the Headers being there and not being snipped, etc., I > did that on purpose and I also left all of our (Yosy and my) > signatures at the bottom. I deleted everything else because I > thought that the content of the email thread was "inane". And my > point was that the Headers and signatures were all that was worth > saving. Do you get my drift? > > > > I had hoped that my comment at the bottom would be a clue to the > fact that I was just joking around; but I was wrong. > > --------------- > ) why do you think so? > only because john did not get it? > --------------- > > > > > It is not easy to effectively communicate in cyber space, > especially when one is trying to create a rather subtle joke. But > I'm not going to have to deal with that much longer because when I > have time I have a few statements that I would like to make in > parting and then I'll be out of your hair. > > ---------------------- > dear michael, i hope you mean john's hair, > and not the sangha. i enjoy your presence > here a lot, my friend. specially your sincerity > and humor. > ------------------- > > > > > Peace and Love, > > > > michael > > > > > > > > > > > > ---- John Logan <johnrloganis wrote: > > > Not every one is on broadband; some are still on dialup. > > > In addition many who are receiving emails get email "clog". > > > Finally small emails (posts) are processed quicker and easier than > > > long, cluttered up email and posts. > > > > > -- > sometimes exceptions to a rule may serve as > a good example of the applicability of the > rule... i'm pretty sure your above words > will cause some who did not think about it > previously to be more considerate and cut > their messages. > > usually both me, and michael too (as far as > i remember), do cut the superfluous... > ------------------------------- > > > > Intellectual rationalizations for cluttering up posts are not in > the > > > spirit of Sat-Chit-Ananda. > > -------------------- > ) sounds like a lovely intelectual rationalization, > does it not? > and btw, by "cluttering up posts" do you mean only > the size/form of the posts, or the contents as well? > ----------------------- > > > > > > > Namaste, > > > Layman John > > > > > > > namaz-te, > > _()_ > yosy > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 _____ [] On Behalf Of Harsha Tuesday, December 05, 2006 5:52 PM Re: Snip messages Dear Michael, John, Peter, Yosy, Joyce, Alan, Anna, and everyone, Thanks for all your contributions. snip Usually, his secretary would answer or his wife or a student. Surprisingly, Chitrabhanu-ji picked up himself and said, something like either "Hello" or "Namaste" or "Blessings" or some other phrase, I can't recall. Listening to his voice sent such a thrill in me. I forgot to even introduce myself and said immediately, "Gurudev, how are you doing? I have been missing you." There was a pause on the other side for a few seconds and then his voice soft and yet smiling, "Harshadeva, Harshadeva, how have you been my dear?" He called everyone, man, woman, child, "my dear" when he spoke. He had almost instantly recognized my voice. And we talked like old friends and he said many things and I said many things and we felt good and satisfied to close the circle. Now, many times, I want to visit my teacher and can't. Too many other worldly obligations. We go without talking for years. It is destiny or karma when we get to see our friends. But the friendship remains ever strong. What you said Michael reminded me of this story. We are all human and we are not perfect. Somehow spiritual friendship, true friendship overlooks those limitations. So we are always friends whether you are here or not Michael. You are always here because you are in our hearts. Love, Harsha Dear Harsha, It is good to have appreciation for the teacher, the guru. It is good to reconnect. Connection is an ever present reality that is not always re-cognized in the moment. I have supreme respect for the guru. But I no longer wish to communicate about spirituality and/or religion / philosophy on the internet. In the United States there is an old saying that persons ".shouldn't discuss politics or religion", especially in public. The longer I live, the more I realize the wisdom in that proverb. I no longer wish to discuss these things in cyber-space. This is the only group that I have been participating in. I respect you Harshaji and indeed everyone who participates here. And for that reason I shall not subject you to my self any longer. The greatest lesson that I learned from Ramana, is the lesson of silence. Peace and Love, michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 You are a good hearted and a wise person Dear Michael-ji. Be gentle with yourself. Thank you for what you shared and thank you for your kindness. Love and Blessings Maharishi On 12/5/06, Michael Bowes <aumshanti (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote: This is the only group that I have been participating in. I respect you Harshaji and indeed everyone who participates here. And for that reason I shall not subject you to my self any longer. > The greatest lesson that I learned from Ramana, is the lesson of silence. > Peace and Love, > > michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 <<<<<<<nothing to be snipped above. "not subject you to myself anymore." My darling Michael, you gotta be kidding for the following reasons, take your pick;-) l. where could you go that is not here? 2. once you have been in our hearts, you remain forever. 3. sounds a wee bit pretentious, n'est pas? Silence is not about not speaking. Silence Is everything and nothing at all. Silence is the great Unknown out of which all enters, exits, exists and ever shall remain. However, I feel the same way you do about these lists, being a woman, I maintain the right to change my mind;-) Love and Light, Anna everything carefully snipped below>>>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 , "Michael Bowes" <aumshanti wrote: > <snip> > > It is good to have appreciation for the teacher, the guru. It is good to > reconnect. Connection is an ever present reality that is not always > re-cognized in the moment. > > > > I have supreme respect for the guru. But I no longer wish to communicate > about spirituality and/or religion / philosophy on the internet. In the > United States there is an old saying that persons ".shouldn't discuss > politics or religion", especially in public. The longer I live, the more I > realize the wisdom in that proverb. I no longer wish to discuss these > things in cyber-space. > > > > This is the only group that I have been participating in. I respect you > Harshaji and indeed everyone who participates here. And for that reason I > shall not subject you to my self any longer. > > what self are you talking about? > > The greatest lesson that I learned from Ramana, is the lesson of silence. > silence is not the absence of speech. silence is the absence of a speaker. > > > Peace and Love, > > michael > yosy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 The same for me I tend to skip all the messages that have the answer at the bottom of a long letter, no time to scroll down many messages sometimes a different colour might prevent me doing this. Marifa - Jill Eggers Wednesday, December 06, 2006 3:12 AM Re: Snip messages Hello Yosy and all, While we are on this detailed discussion of email etiquette and snipping posts, I would like to chime in briefly. For about the past year there have been some lovely contributors here who aren't familiar with the usual list etiquette of placing responses at the TOP of the email they are responding to. As a result the reader has to scroll down, sometimes kind of far, to find their contribution/comment. About a year ago I raised this and asked everyone to please put their writing at the top of their email, but got little response. As a result, I tend to skip or delete those emails, or emails in general from those who post their comments down at the bottom of the text of accumulated discussion/exchange--and I suppose that others might, too. We would all maybe like to have time to read everything that comes our way, but for me jumping into posts on this list is often in a quick moment stolen when my attention should be on my work-- . I really appreciate it when those posting take the time of others into consideration and make their writing easily accessible. Thank you, and may we all have a lovely peaceful evening, and I look forward to finding you all--John, Peter, Yosy, Michael, and everyone else-- here in the morning. Or sometime thereafter. Peace, Jill On Dec 5, 2006, at 8:42 PM, yosyx wrote: , <aumshanti wrote: > > I beg to differ. > > Of course Peter mentioned this the other day, and the fact is that the first of the two nearly identical posts that I sent was delivered to the group without my new comment in it. keeps messing up my messages or not delivering them. So when my message arrived at the group without my new comment I checked what I had writtten in the message that was still in my Sent Items Folder to make sure that I had actually included it. Then I reformatted the message in question, changed it to plain text format and sent it out. It arrived with my new comment at the bottom of the message where I placed it. > > As far as the Headers being there and not being snipped, etc., I did that on purpose and I also left all of our (Yosy and my) signatures at the bottom. I deleted everything else because I thought that the content of the email thread was "inane". And my point was that the Headers and signatures were all that was worth saving. Do you get my drift? > > I had hoped that my comment at the bottom would be a clue to the fact that I was just joking around; but I was wrong. --------------- ) why do you think so? only because john did not get it? --------------- > > It is not easy to effectively communicate in cyber space, especially when one is trying to create a rather subtle joke. But I'm not going to have to deal with that much longer because when I have time I have a few statements that I would like to make in parting and then I'll be out of your hair. ---------------------- dear michael, i hope you mean john's hair, and not the sangha. i enjoy your presence here a lot, my friend. specially your sincerity and humor. ------------------- > > Peace and Love, > > michael > > > > > > ---- John Logan <johnrloganis wrote: > > Not every one is on broadband; some are still on dialup. > > In addition many who are receiving emails get email "clog". > > Finally small emails (posts) are processed quicker and easier than > > long, cluttered up email and posts. > > -- sometimes exceptions to a rule may serve as a good example of the applicability of the rule... i'm pretty sure your above words will cause some who did not think about it previously to be more considerate and cut their messages. usually both me, and michael too (as far as i remember), do cut the superfluous... ------------------------------- > > Intellectual rationalizations for cluttering up posts are not in the > > spirit of Sat-Chit-Ananda. -------------------- ) sounds like a lovely intelectual rationalization, does it not? and btw, by "cluttering up posts" do you mean only the size/form of the posts, or the contents as well? ----------------------- > > > > Namaste, > > Layman John > > > namaz-te, _()_ yosy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2006 Report Share Posted December 6, 2006 , "Emanuele De Benedetti" <e.debenedetti wrote: > > The same for me > I tend to skip all the messages that have the answer at the bottom > of a long letter, no time to scroll down many messages > > sometimes a different colour might prevent me doing this. > > Marifa my apology, marifa, didn't know you are in such a hurry... yosy ps. btw, where are hurrying to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2006 Report Share Posted December 7, 2006 Yosy, Who wants to know? And why is it important for you to know? Layman John > my apology, marifa, didn't know you > are in such a hurry... > > yosy > > ps. btw, where are hurrying to? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2006 Report Share Posted December 7, 2006 Now that it's been brought up, do you see what I did here? I deleted the previous message and just sent mine. Makes it less messy. If I respond to a particular part of a long message I will delete all but that part. Why can't everyone be like me? It would be a much better world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2006 Report Share Posted December 7, 2006 , "John Logan" <johnrloganis wrote: > > Yosy, > Who wants to know? curiosity... > And why is it important for you to know? it is? > Layman John dead cat yosy > > > > my apology, marifa, didn't know you > > are in such a hurry... > > > > yosy > > > > ps. btw, where are hurrying to? > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2006 Report Share Posted December 7, 2006 , "Richard" <richarkar wrote: > > Now that it's been brought up, do you see what I did here? I deleted > the previous message and just sent mine. Makes it less messy. > > If I respond to a particular part of a long message I will delete all > but that part. > > Why can't everyone be like me? It would be a much better world. > right. me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2006 Report Share Posted December 8, 2006 , "yosyx" <yosyflug wrote: > > , "Richard" <richarkar@> wrote: > > > > Now that it's been brought up, do you see what I did here? I deleted > > the previous message and just sent mine. Makes it less messy. > > > > If I respond to a particular part of a long message I will delete > all > > but that part. > > > > Why can't everyone be like me? It would be a much better world. > > > > > right. > > me > or him: http://www.dailymotion.com/visited/search/jerome% 20murat/video/xf9oo_jerome-murat N-joy ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2006 Report Share Posted December 8, 2006 Dear Richard what a "funny" message: Why can't everyone be like me? It would be a much better world. in Ramana michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2006 Report Share Posted December 9, 2006 Hi Michael, It wasn't intended to be "funny"; it was intended to be funny. Maybe if I use smiley faces....? Richard , "Michael Bindel" <michael.bindel wrote: > > Dear Richard > > what a "funny" message: > > Why can't everyone be like me? It would be a much better world. > > > in Ramana > > > michael > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.