Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: I don't think anybody's idolizing anybody. Maybe > you misunderstood my comment about sitting at Judi's > feet. I don't idolize Judi. And my comment about > looking for a thrower was a joke. It was ironic. > > Here's how I regard Judi: > > I think she has seen something that I want to see for > myself. She has seen it and she talks about it. I'm > curious about this thing that she has seen, so naturally > I listen to her with attention. dear Rob! what Judi seen you CAN NOT see. You have to DO your own frickin' vichara > Why would I not listen > with attention? You criticized her intelligence, her use > of language, and her attitude, but none of these things > make it impossible for me to learn something by listening > to her describe what she's seen. And listening to her > describe how the seeing came about causally in time. > > > > K: was Judi's *state* desirable for > > you? > > R: I don't understand this question. I had a glimpse once > of something that was a state (it was temporary) that is > like what Judi describes. K: and how do you see Judi TODAY? in action? that is her *state* of BEING, not the phenomena [what she lost anyway] she experienced. That was not a lasting awakening and you keep on referring to her like it was. what is up with that? and belive me Consciousness is CONTAGIOUS! her rhetoric is mutated: it was shown in the first thread about the " vigilance " etc and I see it all over the Internet, that the gullable newbies are parokeeing her boolshit and that is bad; that is brainwashing, what looks like happened to you too. Dan is the last standing by her; the rest of intelligent ones fled already [he is good friend to have] > While I was " in " that state, I knew > that nothing had changed. All that had happened was that I was > seeing (temporarily) how things had really been all along. But > I knew that if I ever " left " that state, I would regret it > enormously and feel like I had lost the most valuable thing > I had ever found. And that turned out to be the case. So > here I am now trying to get that " state " back, even though > I know that efforts to regain that " state " are precisely the thing > that make me feel like I'm not in that " state. " > > > sorry, I did not mean to spoil your > > Holiday, but I though that, you need > > a better smelling lotus feet .... > > My holiday is in shambles, but I'll survive. > > Maybe we should retire this " sitting at the Guru's > feet " metaphor. It doesn't seem to translate well > into Western langugages. I know :-( Love, Karta > > Cheers, > > Rob > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 Dear Karta, > dear Rob! what Judi seen you CAN > NOT see. You have to DO your own > frickin' vichara I agree. Of course she can't give me her experience. Nonetheless it's interesting and possibly even useful to hear about it. > > K: and how do you see Judi TODAY? > in action? that is her *state* of > BEING, not the phenomena [what she > lost anyway] she experienced. That > was not a lasting awakening and > you keep on referring to her like it > was. She says her state (if I can use that word) has been continuous for seven years. I believe her. If it has lasted for seven years, then it's probably permanent. You don't like her behavior, but that has nothing to do with waking up or understanding. I don't share your preconceptions about how an awakened person should act. > > and belive me Consciousness is > CONTAGIOUS! How can you catch what you are? > > her rhetoric is mutated: it was shown > in the first thread about the > " vigilance " etc She talks about things that are hard to put into words. In an effort to make herself clear to people who are not trying hard to understand, she sometimes says things in different ways. Everybody does this, even Ramana Maharshi. I haven't noticed any substantial inconsistency in anything she has said. > and I see it all over the Internet, > that the gullable newbies are > parokeeing her boolshit and that > is bad; that is brainwashing, what > looks like happened to you too. Okay, I'm brainwashed. I believe Judi had a permanent awakening and in fact she didn't. So what? Nothing is going to happen as a result of this belief. It doesn't matter. > Dan is the last standing by her; > the rest of intelligent ones fled > already [he is good friend to have] Standing by her? Are we in some kind of fight? Is there a war here between Judi's side and Karta's side? What is this war about? What are we fighting over? If Karta " wins " , what is the prize? Love, Rob - " satkartar7 " <mi_nok <Realization > Sunday, April 20, 2003 1:17 PM Re: the ghost of One / Rob > " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > I don't think anybody's idolizing anybody. Maybe > > you misunderstood my comment about sitting at Judi's > > feet. I don't idolize Judi. And my comment about > > looking for a thrower was a joke. It was ironic. > > > > Here's how I regard Judi: > > > > I think she has seen something that I want to see for > > myself. She has seen it and she talks about it. I'm > > curious about this thing that she has seen, so naturally > > I listen to her with attention. > > > dear Rob! what Judi seen you CAN > NOT see. You have to DO your own > frickin' vichara > > > > Why would I not listen > > with attention? You criticized her intelligence, her use > > of language, and her attitude, but none of these things > > make it impossible for me to learn something by listening > > to her describe what she's seen. And listening to her > > describe how the seeing came about causally in time. > > > > > > K: was Judi's *state* desirable for > > > you? > > > > R: I don't understand this question. I had a glimpse once > > of something that was a state (it was temporary) that is > > like what Judi describes. > > > K: and how do you see Judi TODAY? > in action? that is her *state* of > BEING, not the phenomena [what she > lost anyway] she experienced. That > was not a lasting awakening and > you keep on referring to her like it > was. > > what is up with that? > > and belive me Consciousness is > CONTAGIOUS! > > her rhetoric is mutated: it was shown > in the first thread about the > " vigilance " etc > > and I see it all over the Internet, > that the gullable newbies are > parokeeing her boolshit and that > is bad; that is brainwashing, what > looks like happened to you too. > > Dan is the last standing by her; > the rest of intelligent ones fled > already [he is good friend to have] > > > > While I was " in " that state, I knew > > that nothing had changed. All that had happened was that I was > > seeing (temporarily) how things had really been all along. But > > I knew that if I ever " left " that state, I would regret it > > enormously and feel like I had lost the most valuable thing > > I had ever found. And that turned out to be the case. So > > here I am now trying to get that " state " back, even though > > I know that efforts to regain that " state " are precisely the thing > > that make me feel like I'm not in that " state. " > > > > > sorry, I did not mean to spoil your > > > Holiday, but I though that, you need > > > a better smelling lotus feet .... > > > > My holiday is in shambles, but I'll survive. > > > > Maybe we should retire this " sitting at the Guru's > > feet " metaphor. It doesn't seem to translate well > > into Western langugages. > > I know :-( > > Love, Karta > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Rob > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 Lol, I just noticed I wrote " awakened person. " That's like writing: " This sentence is false. " - " Rob Sacks " <editor <Realization > Sunday, April 20, 2003 1:47 PM Re: Re: the ghost of One / Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 - " Rob Sacks " <editor <Realization > Sunday, April 20, 2003 2:14 PM Re: Re: the ghost of One / Rob > Lol, I just noticed I wrote " awakened person. " > > That's like writing: > > " This sentence is false. " > > Hi Rob, You may smile and even laugh at the contradiction of " awakened person " , but, for me at least, this so-called oxymoron has not sucumbed to attempts at exorcism. It is deeply rooted, alive, well, and thriving. My guess, for the moment, is that the contradiction is in the concept of a person as a separate aspect of reality. Once we are keyed into talking persons, it may make as much sense to ask if they are enlightened as if they have other capacities. We have had quite a few discussions on this and other lists about whether this or that person is enlightened. It would seem that even though these discussions often get bogged down in juvenile nastiness, they are not at heart pointless. Harvey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Hi Rob,You may smile and even laugh at the contradiction of "awakened person",but, for me at least, this so-called oxymoron has not sucumbed to attemptsat exorcism. It is deeply rooted, alive, well, and thriving.My guess, for the moment, is that the contradiction is in the concept of aperson as a separate aspect of reality. Once we are keyed into talkingpersons, it may make as much sense to ask if they are enlightened as if theyhave other capacities.We have had quite a few discussions on this and other lists about whetherthis or that person is enlightened. It would seem that even though thesediscussions often get bogged down in juvenile nastiness, they are not atheartpointless.Harvey ************ Hi Harvey, I'm glad you're taking notice. And a lot of it boils down to this - there are those who advocate and teach the "search", which is all about "experience", and those who cut that whole entire business at it's knees. So, for people who are looking to "get" something, whatever, will follow those who advocate the search and experience. But those that have been around the block enough and are starting to see through the nonsense and ultimate going nowhere of all that, have developed the *ears* such that Understanding can dawn. If that makes sense? In other words, if you're looking for a "good time", DON'T go to a Realizer! :-) Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Hi Harvey, > My guess, for the moment, is that the contradiction > is in the concept of a person as a separate aspect of > reality. Once we are keyed into talking persons, it may > make as much sense to ask if they are enlightened as if > they have other capacities. Here's why it seems funny to me to say " enlightened person. " The feature of psychological life that makes us feel like persons is that we have the sense that we are the owners, operators, recipients, controllers, doers, deciders, etc. of our actions, thoughts, feelings, experiences. And this is one of the things we mean when we say we are " persons. " This feature of psychological life is exposed as an illusion when a person becomes enlightened. In this sense, the person who becomes enlightened is no longer a person. That's all I meant when I laughed at myself for saying " enlightened person. " I don't think this is a terribly complicated thing. The only tricky thing about it is that it's impossible for people to imagine what it's like to lose that psychological illusion before it happens. Any attempt to imagine the loss of the illusion must necessarily be an embroidering of the illusion. > We have had quite a few discussions on this and other lists > about whether this or that person is enlightened. It would > seem that even though these discussions often get bogged > down in juvenile nastiness, they are not at heart pointless. I agree. The discussion yesterday about " an improved self " vs. " cutting the whole thing off at the knees " is very substantial. Cheers, Rob - " Harvey Schneider " <haarvi1 <Realization > Monday, April 21, 2003 9:56 AM Re: Re: the ghost of One / Rob > > - > " Rob Sacks " <editor > <Realization > > Sunday, April 20, 2003 2:14 PM > Re: Re: the ghost of One / Rob > > > > Lol, I just noticed I wrote " awakened person. " > > > > That's like writing: > > > > " This sentence is false. " > > > > > > Hi Rob, > > You may smile and even laugh at the contradiction of " awakened person " , > but, for me at least, this so-called oxymoron has not sucumbed to attempts > at exorcism. It is deeply rooted, alive, well, and thriving. > > My guess, for the moment, is that the contradiction is in the concept of a > person as a separate aspect of reality. Once we are keyed into talking > persons, it may make as much sense to ask if they are enlightened as if they > have other capacities. > > We have had quite a few discussions on this and other lists about whether > this or that person is enlightened. It would seem that even though these > discussions often get bogged down in juvenile nastiness, they are not at > heart > pointless. > > Harvey > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Realization , " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> wrote: > Dan is the last standing by her; > the rest of intelligent ones fled > already [he is good friend to have] Hi Karta, I wouldn't claim to be 'standing by' Judi and I don't suppose she'd thank me if I did. However I do find her refreshing and exciting. She has *integrity* that I have rarely seen. She helps me to look at myself for what I really am and see how immensly far that is from what I want to be. It seems the rest of you are so busy 'building yourselves up' and 'protecting/defending yourselves' all in the name of 'letting go' of the self which is such crap, really honey it does stink! I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I understand her better - or maybe its because I've been round the block a few times and have learned some *humility* which is a rare commodity around here. I have just heard that Manju was really Ganja in disguise - well, I hope so. If that's the case maybe she'll stay pissed off and stop fouling up this board and boring us all huh? Or maybe she's trying Debs trick - to depress us all to the point of suicide - now that I would respect! Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Dear Tanya wrote in snip: I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I understand her better - Ramana aka Alton: My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. Love, Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Let me just grade this little essay, haha: <She helps me to look at myself for what I > really am and see how immensly far that is from what I want to be.> RED CHECK WRONG!! There's nothing to want to be in the Judi school of nooses, stupid! <It seems the rest of you are so busy 'building yourselves up' > and 'protecting/defending yourselves' all in the name of 'letting go' > of the self which is such crap, really honey it does stink!> WRONG AGAIN! 'Rest of you' is an impossible assumption as intellectually you can never know that. Emotionally, you will assume that only if your world view is paranoid. <I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I understand > her better - or maybe its because I've been round the block a few > times and have learned some *humility* which is a rare commodity > around here.> Another big RED check. You are not intelligent, you're an idiot. If you weren't, you would have understood that calling yourself humble becomes the opposite and also that using an IQ score to defend your stance is the dumbest and most transparent move you could have made. It's like Oooooo, Tanya wants everyone to see how smaaart she is, we better listen to her, hahaha! <I have just heard that Manju was really Ganja in disguise - well, I > hope so. If that's the case maybe she'll stay pissed off and stop > fouling up this board and boring us all huh?> You heard that Manju was Ganga in disguise and you've been around the block a few times but you still didn't see something lying there on the sidewalk labled: ANY ANONOMOUS WRITER WHO DEFENDS ANOTHER WILL ALWAYS BE ACCUSED BY SOMEONE OF BEING THE ONE THEY DEFENDED! Tanya, you have to be about the dimmest bulb on the marquis. Your essay gets an 'F' Love, Onniko, Karta, Ganga, Manju, Dan, Ramana, and Judi Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > Realization , " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> wrote: > > > Dan is the last standing by her; > > the rest of intelligent ones fled > > already [he is good friend to have] > > Hi Karta, > > I wouldn't claim to be 'standing by' Judi and I don't suppose she'd > thank me if I did. > > However I do find her refreshing and exciting. She has *integrity* > that I have rarely seen. She helps me to look at myself for what I > really am and see how immensly far that is from what I want to be. > > It seems the rest of you are so busy 'building yourselves up' > and 'protecting/defending yourselves' all in the name of 'letting go' > of the self which is such crap, really honey it does stink! > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I understand > her better - or maybe its because I've been round the block a few > times and have learned some *humility* which is a rare commodity > around here. > > I have just heard that Manju was really Ganja in disguise - well, I > hope so. If that's the case maybe she'll stay pissed off and stop > fouling up this board and boring us all huh? Or maybe she's trying > Debs trick - to depress us all to the point of suicide - now that I > would respect! > > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because there are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, I would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, humorous, yet not insulting. Love, Huck Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I understand > her better - > > Ramana aka Alton: > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. > > Love, > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Dear Onniko: You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you think? Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after the attack there is a pick up. Where was your? Dear Tanya: Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in any of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a Self Realization group therapy medium. Love, Ramana Maharshi. Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because there > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, I > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, humorous, > yet not insulting. > > Love, Huck > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts > me > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > understand > > her better - > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. > > > > Love, > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Dear Dan, > > > > Rob: I suspect that people can't help it. > > > > Dan: No one can help anything. > > > > Dan: It's quite remarkable and funny, actually. > > > > Dan: The sense of being able to help it involves > > a thought taken as following an event, > > then leading to an action. > > > > Dan: And that's not how it is really happening at > > all, when observed clearly. > > > > Dan: The whole conventional sense of before and after > > that we depend on, turns out to be merely > > assumption based on relating what has no > > true connection. > > I don't follow this. Before and after is something > we observe, isn't it? Well, that's just it, Rob. We are there, observing what is before and after. It depends on the me-observer having a sense of its existence in the past, present, and future -- having a position now, from which to view and compare there in the past, to another there in the past, to a future yet-to-come moment. Conventionally, according to conditioning, according to the automatic sorting and arranging of the nervous system -- yes, it is like that -- must be like that to function as a being in time. > If you had said, " We can never prove a causal > connection between two sequential events of any > sort, " I would agree. Sure, but my comment isn't about logical deduction about what can't really be proved. It is about direct knowing in which there isn't any separable observer from observed. It's cumbersome to try to explain this in words, when the truth of it is immediate. But the observer function is an abstraction, no matter how solid it apparently feels and is believed to be known to be (supposedly at the center of the whole experience). In fact, that observer is an imagined construct, abstracted by using memory in a subliminal way -- this is automatic, conditioned, how the nervous system formulates and relates experiences. Again, in fact, as that observer is construct, there is no actual position to be had " in " an experience, so as to be " in " the present moment, knowing yourself to have also been " in " a past moment, etc. There literally is no such thing as before or after, except as conceptuality, as conventional ways of explaining experience -- so that cause and effect can be used, so that society can function, so that we can impose order on chaos, and personality where there actually is none. Or if you had said, " There > are discontinuities in our subjective awareness of > intentions and actions -- in other words, we > constantly do things without a sense of intending > them, and we constantly make intentions that don't > translate into action, " I would agree with that too. O.K. > But I don't understand how " before " and " after " are > conventional rather than observed. Did my way of explaining it in words make any sense? > > Yet, we all talk and think that way, as if. > > > > As if anyone could help it or not help it. > > Yes, it's good that you remind me of that free will is an > illusion. Well, that's the same, essentially, as not observing any real passage of time, no real before or after. As no observer is really situated, no doer is situated, no experiencer, etc. Although subjectively, a passage of time is constructed, and must be, so we can order and arrange, understand word meanings, etc. > But actually I meant to say something narrower than that > with regard to this business of recognizing the extent of the > mind. I really meant to say not that people have no free > will in the matter, but rather, that it's absolutely impossible > for them to recognize the extent of the mind no matter what > they hear or see or read or think or ponder until they have > some kind of glimpse in which (at least temporarily) they > dissociate from their loop-running activity. O.K. > > > Rob: Until they see the ego illusion for what it really is, > >> they can't imagine how totally it encompasses every > > > frickin thing they ever imagined. > > > > Dan: Sure. > > Haha, Dan. It took me 30 years to reach that extent of > insight, and for you, it's just something you shrug off with > " sure. " I ain't shrugging it off. Just agreeing. > I feel like I'm squinting through fog in the dark > describing what I see to a man who is viewing the same > scene in brilliant sunlight on a clear day. Not really. You and I are equally manifestations of " this " as beings in time. You can't help manifesting like that, I can't help manifesting like this. We are our experience, our sense of time, our perspective on qualities and events. The imaginary aspect of this is the same, the differences that appear can't help but appear exactly as they appear. > > And the truth of it is, realizing anything is itself > > a passing experiential moment in which the concept > > of controlling it, making it happen, or not controlling > > it -- has no relevance. Some call this " surrender " > > but it's beyond that -- everything already is in a > > " state " of total surrender at all times ... > > The sense that there is a controller who makes > a difference in outcomes is very tenacious for me. I'm not > really convinced of this, even intellectually. Yes. Essentially, it is one's claim to being. To give up that claim, is to have never been born, never had an experience, never be able to get anything for oneself, or make something of oneself. Not even spiritually speaking. That sense is taken away, it isn't given up joyously, no matter what anyone says about it. It can't be surrendered joyously, because the one doing the surrender and feeling the joy is still there. It is surrendered only with the realization that it has never been any other way - the idea that a " self " got added into reality somehow, is clearly seen as an untenable position, as wishful thinking, as a holding on to what can't be claimed. For anyone. Not for special enlightened people with glorious experiences of light and bliss -- but for anyone, ever. > > There's no way out of > > the loop, because the attempt to get out of the > > loop is the loop. And the assumption that there > > could be a getting out of it, or a getting into > > it -- is the same assumption as the loop, as time, > > as a separable knower. > > I " m saying Yes, Yes, Yes as I read this -- meaning, " Dan is > saying what I've just barely come to understand better > than I could say it myself " -- until I get to " as time. " I > don't get the time stuff at all. The loop is experience in time, as time. Beginnings and ends, comings and goings, getting into situations and out of them. All of which involves a separated knower, be-er, doer. > > Yes. And Ganga thinks she got out. And the more she > > preaches about how she got out, is one with the > > Absolute, and selflessly wants people who can be taught -- > > the more clearly the loop can be seen as demonstrated. > > Ganga the Loop Lady. By claiming to have gotten out, I give the impression that there is an escape. That fuels the loop. The loop ends by virtue of its nonescapability. Only at the point where escape is clearly impossible, can the foundation for it collapse. Which can't be " my " doing -- nor can it be " my " doing of nothing. > > Now, I'm not claiming that I'm out of the loop and > > Ganga isn't. I'm just observing that clarity > > about this matter ends any superstitions about > > beings that come in and go out, get somewhere or > > remain as is -- > > Nice point. > > > And you see, once in a while, something is heard. > > Heh. > > Chronologically, > > Rob Nice talking to you, Rob. Peace on you, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > Hi Karta, > > I wouldn't claim to be 'standing by' Judi and I don't suppose she'd > thank me if I did. > > However I do find her refreshing and exciting. She has *integrity* > that I have rarely seen. She helps me to look at myself for what I > really am and see how immensly far that is from what I want to be. Tanya, If you feel at home with Judi at the Rope Ranch I've nothing against that. To be encouraged to do vichara is a good thing. I happened not to agree with Judi's statements eg that: being vigilant means " doing something " for me it means being AWARE, which is a state of being. > > It seems the rest of you are so busy 'building yourselves up' > and 'protecting/defending yourselves' all in the name of 'letting go' > of the self which is such crap, really honey it does stink! Brain-washed! huh I believe in fine-tuning the body-mind-spirit organism; with exercise meditation and constant self-introspection aka vichara to achieve such awareness Judi has many other statements I do not agree with: that all sadhana, the yogas and meditation is for " saving yourself " , or " is leading to some experience " and should not be practiced etc. It is just a slick way she is using language-understanding to make her points. Sadhana is NOT leading to an experience, but to a refined state of *BEING* which is after you stop and you REST in the *being* it is just one step further.. She advertises the experience; she had 7 years ago; what she refers to as realization and I don't think that such an experience can be duplicated by coaching. But again to be reminded to do vichara is a good thing. If you need a coach to remember it, it is your choice to have one. I remember without one and that is my choice. Judi posts these statements all over the Internet and since I am strongly convinced, that the her statements are wrong; embedded in slick linguistics and can be harmful, misleading as she is coming from her own erroneous mutated believes. If you don't see, that her statements are faulty; I can't help you. I do understand the errors in them and I do respond with my opinion about them. Realization is but one, each for her-his own. > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me > in the top 0.4% of the population good, that is a good thing to have so maybe that's why I understand > her better - or maybe its because I've been round the block a few > times and have learned some *humility* which is a rare commodity > around here. > > I have just heard that Manju was really Ganja in disguise - well, I > hope so. About Manju being Ganga here are the tracks: they are not even on the same continent. Manju she is at PST -7 hours what puts her in to Indonesia her IP: 67.30.78 Ganga: IP: 209.244.111.219 at PST awareness-love, Karta > If that's the case maybe she'll stay pissed off and stop > fouling up this board and boring us all huh? Or maybe she's trying > Debs trick - to depress us all to the point of suicide - now that I > would respect! > > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which puts me > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I understand > her better - > > Ramana aka Alton: > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. " be all you can be; join the Army " ROFL, Aton, you are tooo funny <smiles> this is one jokes about her sargent style, and why old army boys are drawn to her " coaching' peace, Karta > > Love, > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Dear Ramana: Please don't think of my correspondence as an attack, I enjoy relating to people in their own way. Tanya won't see it as an attack, just a friendly hello letter. I've never been or seen a therapy group so I don't know what a pick up is. What do you pick up, there? Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > Dear Onniko: > You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you think? > Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. > In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after the > attack there is a pick up. Where was your? > > Dear Tanya: > Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in any > of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read > onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. > > > Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a Self > Realization group therapy medium. > > Love, > Ramana Maharshi. > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> > > > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because there > > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, I > > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, humorous, > > yet not insulting. > > > > Love, Huck > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which > puts > > me > > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > > understand > > > her better - > > > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. > > > > > > Love, > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Dear onniko: Maybe you are right. Let's see what Tanya says about it. It seems that Tanya has some masochistic tendencies and might like your responses. Anyway, I should not say it, but this is better than comedy central, that my grandson occasionally makes me watch for 5 minutes. > > I've never been or seen a therapy group so I don't know what a pick > up is. What do you pick up, there? Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some nice things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the pull ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results? Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted or not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already vaunted EGO. ROFLMAO. Love, Ramana Maharshi.. Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > Dear Ramana: > > Please don't think of my correspondence as an attack, I enjoy > relating to people in their own way. Tanya won't see it as an > attack, just a friendly hello letter. > > I've never been or seen a therapy group so I don't know what a pick > up is. What do you pick up, there? > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > Dear Onniko: > > You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you > think? > > Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. > > In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after > the > > attack there is a pick up. Where was your? > > > > Dear Tanya: > > Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in > any > > of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read > > onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. > > > > > > Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a Self > > Realization group therapy medium. > > > > Love, > > Ramana Maharshi. > > > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, > so > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> > > > > > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because > there > > > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, > I > > > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, > humorous, > > > yet not insulting. > > > > > > Love, Huck > > > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " > <unbound@h...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which > > puts > > > me > > > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > > > understand > > > > her better - > > > > > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, > so > > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing > special. > > > > > > > > Love, > > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Hi Everyone! Well, what can I say, thank you, thank you, thank you for all the attention!! My last post barely got a mention, I think I'm finally getting the hang of this (is this trolling, Onniko, can I join your club?). It feels a bit like sucking venom out of a wound. Or using a vending machine - you push this button here and out pops a can of Karta spit! I am a bit worried that some of you don't like 'Tanya' very much which kind of hurts cause I've put so much energy and time and thought into her and all. I love you all anyway, you little, twinkling reflective beady things. Joy on Earth, peace be to all men! Suck you later! Tanya x. Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > Dear Onniko: > You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you think? > Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. > In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after the > attack there is a pick up. Where was your? > > Dear Tanya: > Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in any > of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read > onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. > > > Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a Self > Realization group therapy medium. > > Love, > Ramana Maharshi. > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> > > > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because there > > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, I > > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, humorous, > > yet not insulting. > > > > Love, Huck > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which > puts > > me > > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > > understand > > > her better - > > > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. > > > > > > Love, > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Dear Tanya: I swear to Jesus that I love you Tanya, but it might now work because I was born Jewish and so far have not come to Christ. Have you played that role of, " nobody loves Tanya " , all your life? Is that what drove you to the bottle? Love, Ramana Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > Hi Everyone! > > Well, what can I say, thank you, thank you, thank you for all the > attention!! > > My last post barely got a mention, I think I'm finally getting the > hang of this (is this trolling, Onniko, can I join your club?). > It feels a bit like sucking venom out of a wound. > Or using a vending machine - you push this button here and out pops a > can of Karta spit! > > I am a bit worried that some of you don't like 'Tanya' very much > which kind of hurts cause I've put so much energy and time and > thought into her and all. > > I love you all anyway, you little, twinkling reflective beady things. > Joy on Earth, peace be to all men! > > Suck you later! > Tanya x. > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > Dear Onniko: > > You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you > think? > > Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. > > In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after the > > attack there is a pick up. Where was your? > > > > Dear Tanya: > > Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in > any > > of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read > > onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. > > > > > > Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a Self > > Realization group therapy medium. > > > > Love, > > Ramana Maharshi. > > > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> > > > > > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because > there > > > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, I > > > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, > humorous, > > > yet not insulting. > > > > > > Love, Huck > > > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which > > puts > > > me > > > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > > > understand > > > > her better - > > > > > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, > so > > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. > > > > > > > > Love, > > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > Dear Tanya: > > I swear to Jesus that I love you Tanya, but it might not work because > I was born Jewish and so far have not come to Christ. > > Have you played that role of, " nobody loves Tanya " , all your life? > Is that what drove you to the bottle? > > Love, > Ramana Hey there Karta, now ain't this fun! Yep, you've got me there, right on the nose - I spent my whole life up to the age of 35 playing " nobody loves Tanya " and I certainly had some right good benders on it. Billy Holiday and a bottle of whisky - heaven on earth. Then I found what I'd suspected all along, that 'Tanya' was completely unloveable and incapable of love. 'Tanya' and 'Love' - never the Twain shall meet. Now where are you getting the Jesus stuff from - I think Jesus was a great guy, don't get me wrong, often mis-understood and mis-quoted but he ain't my personal saviour so we needn't let that come between us. Amen, Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Dear Tanya: Did you mean Ramana aka Alton instead of karta? This was my post to you not karta's I know it's late there so its ok. By the way if nobody loves you it might be easier to become enlightened. All this personal love stuff binds one. Someday I hope nobody will love me too. Love, Ramana Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > Dear Tanya: > > > > I swear to Jesus that I love you Tanya, but it might not work > because > > I was born Jewish and so far have not come to Christ. > > > > Have you played that role of, " nobody loves Tanya " , all your life? > > Is that what drove you to the bottle? > > > > Love, > > Ramana > > Hey there Karta, now ain't this fun! > > Yep, you've got me there, right on the nose - I spent my whole life > up to the age of 35 playing " nobody loves Tanya " and I certainly had > some right good benders on it. Billy Holiday and a bottle of whisky - > heaven on earth. > > Then I found what I'd suspected all along, that 'Tanya' was > completely unloveable and incapable of love. > 'Tanya' and 'Love' - never the Twain shall meet. > > Now where are you getting the Jesus stuff from - I think Jesus was a > great guy, don't get me wrong, often mis-understood and mis-quoted > but he ain't my personal saviour so we needn't let that come between > us. > > Amen, > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > Dear Tanya: > Did you mean Ramana aka Alton instead of karta? > This was my post to you not karta's > I know it's late there so its ok. > > By the way if nobody loves you it might be easier to become > enlightened. All this personal love stuff binds one. Someday I hope > nobody will love me too. > Love, > Ramana > did you guys just punched me out? uh! that hurts: a hit on the nose peace, Karta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 <Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some nice things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the pull ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results?> Oh no, Mark, I would never do that. It would be condescending to them to need to add something nice. I know they're strong and won't be damaged by what I say. <Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted or > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already vaunted > EGO. ROFLMAO.> Sorry, Ramana, but i don't contrive to do anything for any reason. I just react to whatever comes into view. I can't imagine deliberately saying anything to you to try and make you mad. Love, MOther Teresa Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > Dear onniko: > Maybe you are right. Let's see what Tanya says about it. It seems > that Tanya has some masochistic tendencies and might like your > responses. Anyway, I should not say it, but this is better than > comedy central, that my grandson occasionally makes me watch for 5 > minutes. > > > > I've never been or seen a therapy group so I don't know what a pick > > up is. What do you pick up, there? > > Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some nice > things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial > effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the pull > ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results? > > Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted or > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already vaunted > EGO. ROFLMAO. > > Love, > Ramana Maharshi.. > > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > Dear Ramana: > > > > Please don't think of my correspondence as an attack, I enjoy > > relating to people in their own way. Tanya won't see it as an > > attack, just a friendly hello letter. > > > > I've never been or seen a therapy group so I don't know what a pick > > up is. What do you pick up, there? > > > > > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > > wrote: > > > Dear Onniko: > > > You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you > > think? > > > Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. > > > In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after > > the > > > attack there is a pick up. Where was your? > > > > > > Dear Tanya: > > > Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in > > any > > > of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read > > > onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. > > > > > > > > > Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a > Self > > > Realization group therapy medium. > > > > > > Love, > > > Ramana Maharshi. > > > > > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > > > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, > > so > > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing > special.> > > > > > > > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because > > there > > > > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, > > I > > > > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, > > humorous, > > > > yet not insulting. > > > > > > > > Love, Huck > > > > > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " > > <unbound@h...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > > > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which > > > puts > > > > me > > > > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > > > > understand > > > > > her better - > > > > > > > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > > > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, > > so > > > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing > > special. > > > > > > > > > > Love, > > > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Tanya, don't you remember the whole string of nice posts you got in return for your own nice post? Go back and look. Nearly everyone here responded. Some people would say that some people pay more attention to the bad memories than to the good memories and so they become morbid and depressed. Some people here say not to remember anything except your phone number and where you left your keys, though *shrug*. I don't have a club. Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > Hi Everyone! > > Well, what can I say, thank you, thank you, thank you for all the > attention!! > > My last post barely got a mention, I think I'm finally getting the > hang of this (is this trolling, Onniko, can I join your club?). > It feels a bit like sucking venom out of a wound. > Or using a vending machine - you push this button here and out pops a > can of Karta spit! > > I am a bit worried that some of you don't like 'Tanya' very much > which kind of hurts cause I've put so much energy and time and > thought into her and all. > > I love you all anyway, you little, twinkling reflective beady things. > Joy on Earth, peace be to all men! > > Suck you later! > Tanya x. > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > Dear Onniko: > > You critique on Tanya's essay was just a little heavy, dont you > think? > > Well it is good that you dont repress those kinds of energies. > > In the alternative therapies that I have participated in, after the > > attack there is a pick up. Where was your? > > > > Dear Tanya: > > Looks like you will get more cleaning of attachments here then in > any > > of your other therapy programs. How did you feel when you read > > onniko's post? We here are willing to listen and love sometimes. > > > > > > Tanya did you react. Please tell us about it as this is now a Self > > Realization group therapy medium. > > > > Love, > > Ramana Maharshi. > > > > Realization , " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > > > <My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, so > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special.> > > > > > > Mark, I retired from teaching a couple of minutes ago because > there > > > are so many papers to be graded, but if I would have continued, I > > > would have given you an A+. It was correct, yet concise, > humorous, > > > yet not insulting. > > > > > > Love, Huck > > > > > > Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Tanya wrote in snip: > > > > I do have great intelligence though, my IQ's about 146 which > > puts > > > me > > > > in the top 0.4% of the population so maybe that's why I > > > understand > > > > her better - > > > > > > > > Ramana aka Alton: > > > > My IQ was recorded at 104 and somehow I understand Judi also, > so > > > > maybe it has nothing to do with IQ. > > > > > > > > I understand her to be all she can be, which is nothing special. > > > > > > > > Love, > > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 <Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some nice things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the pull ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results?>Oh no, Mark, I would never do that. It would be condescending to them to need to add something nice. I know they're strong and won't be damaged by what I say. Onniko: If you are talking to "they're" then you are right about being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a "they're, but someone who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving? If you continue on the same tack I will ask Judi to loan you one of her whips or do you already have a collection. hehehe You see that I have gone back on email because I like to come in colors, you dont?. ROFL<Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted or > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already vaunted > EGO. ROFLMAO.>Sorry, Ramana, but i don't contrive to do anything for any reason. I just react to whatever comes into view. I can't imagine deliberately saying anything to you to try and make you mad. Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up after knocking them down to size. I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you dont I will have just made another enemy. It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. How's yours, enlightened? I cleverly worked in Realization so that Rob will think that is what we have been talking about. LOL. Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 <Onniko: If you are talking to " they're " then you are right about being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a " they're, but someone who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving?> Ramana, I know you are one of the most loving beings on the planet, but it's still condescending to someone to be all sugary sweet when they ask for spicy food. It's a holier than thou stance at best. --- <You see that I have gone back on email because I like to come in colors, you dont?. ROFL> I love the colors and all the cool fonts but I don't want alot of e- mail from groups. You know how it is when you get so much junk mail that you accidentally throw away a bill? <Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up after knocking them down to size.> That's gross! < I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you dont I will have just made another enemy.> I love you no matter what. > It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. How's yours, enlightened?> That's true. I don't think I have any enemies, though, except maybe a guy I evicted for not paying his rent. Yes, my relationship is enlightened. It's gone on so long that I don't give it a thought, haha! In Realization , " RAMANA MAHARSHI " <unbound@h...> wrote: > > > > <Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some nice > things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial > effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the pull > ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results?> > > Oh no, Mark, I would never do that. It would be condescending to > them to need to add something nice. I know they're strong and won't > be damaged by what I say. > Onniko: If you are talking to " they're " then you are right about being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a " they're, but someone who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving? If you continue on the same tack I will ask Judi to loan you one of her whips or do you already have a collection. hehehe You see that I have gone back on email because I like to come in colors, you dont?. ROFL > > <Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted or > > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already vaunted > > EGO. ROFLMAO.> > > Sorry, Ramana, but i don't contrive to do anything for any reason. I > just react to whatever comes into view. I can't imagine deliberately > saying anything to you to try and make you mad. > > Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up after knocking them down to size. I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you dont I will have just made another enemy. It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. How's yours, enlightened? I cleverly worked in Realization so that Rob will think that is what we have been talking about. LOL. > > Ramana 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.