Barry Wright "Uncle Tantra" Trashing Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz - An analysis
Garuda
---------------
This is a psychological analysis of Barry Wright "Uncle Tantra",
X-Buddhist Monk of Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz and X-TM practitioner.
Barry "Uncle Tantra" Wright is the author of a poorly disjointed
online "book" called Road Trip Mind:
http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
As one can see, "Uncle Tantra" (UT) has written a series of rambling
and unorganized essays containing jumbled spiritual stories of UT's
time with Rama -Dr. Frederick Lenz. This series of babbling essays
attempts to paint "Uncle Tantra" and his time with Rama in a positive
light. Yet once you visit the message board of the www.ramalila.org
website you will find Uncle Tantra writing very different things about
his teacher Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz:
Uncle Tantra's "other" writings on Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz
----------------------------------------------------------
I feel it [meditation] matters a lot, even for the enlightened.
Possibly especially for the enlightened, if they teach. Personally, I
believe Rama stopped meditating regularly soon after we moved to New
York, and it showed.
I believe that when I first met him he was having pretty serious
enlightenment experiences, but I didn't see *anything* in the last few
years I was around him to indicate that those experiences were still
going on..."
Rama flip-flopped on this issue [avatar]. In the beginning of his
teaching, he was very clear about just being an ordinary Joe who was
fortunate enough to realize enlightenment. In the latter days, in my
opinion as a result of drug use and runaway ego and starting to
believe his own PR, he shifted the myth such that it was all about him
and his specialness.
With all due respect, reliable first-hand reports suggest that at the
time, the incarnation of Vishnu who said such things had a tendency to
prepare for public events by gulping down 5-10 capsules of a Class IV
narcotic. It's not like any of us know or will ever know the answer,
but being a bit of a heretic I can't help but wonder how much of those
talks was Rama in pain talking, how much was the Valium talking, and
how much was enlightenment talking.
From the point of view of a female student who never got closer to
Rama than the audience, he could easily have been perceived as safe
and respectful. For some women, however, Rama's pursuit of them
*outside* the meditation hall became rather problematic for them. It
didn't matter whether the women were already involved in a
relationship, or married, or whatever. If Rama wanted them, he
expected them to want him, too. I personally know several women who
left the study because Rama simply would not accept "No" as an answer,
and the women got tired of getting midnight phone calls from Rama
every time their husbands were out of town.
As I said, I knew many of them. Most of them left the study early on
because their marriages or relationships meant more to them than
submitting to Rama's advances.
We were *also* very aware (I mean, all you had to do was look around)
that if any of us ever showed up with an attractive girlfriend or
wife, that Rama would do his best to seduce her. It was simply a
given. You dealt with that given however you dealt with it.
My personal explanation for some (most) of Rama's bizarre behavior
during that period [1994-1998] is 1) that he stopped meditating
regularly (something he personally said to several people close to
him) and 2) that he developed a dependency on Valium (which has been
verified by several people close to him, and which drug has documented
symptoms that parallel the behavior that I saw and considered
bizarre).
While you are entitled to that point of view, I see it as the
inevitable result of one of Rama's most common "teaching tactics" --
if anything went well and turned out successfully, it was always his
doing; if anything went badly and turned out unsuccessfully, it was
always our fault. The man was the Master Of The Imposed Guilt Trip.
Some students of self discovery thrive on guilt and feeling bad about
themselves. I just don't get off on that stuff any more, so you can
have my share.
Might I suggest you go back and reread the "Status Reports" you had to
submit from time to time? I know several people who have done that
recently and were simply *amazed* at the stuff they "admitted to" or
the bad stuff they claimed to have done in those reports, simply
because it was expected of them, and they knew it was the only way
they could stay in the program.
But rather than viewing it as "trashing Rama," I actually think my
theory is fairly compassionate, because my only alternative is to
believe that he was crazy.
Rama was VERY human, and in my opinion fucked up a lot. But in my view
that does not mean he wasn't enlightened. He could very well have been
an enlightened fuckup.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis:
Uncle Tantra (UT) is suffering from acute Narcissism. Because he
dropped-out of both TM and Rama's program he needs to "rewrite"
history and trash religious groups that he once belonged to. Yet at
the same time he needs to "show-off" to current "followers" and write
spiritual essays of the same teachers he trashes in private. By
engaging in this neurotic contradiction any personal failures are
covered-up by UT's dual positions. Uncle Tantra's ego can instead
present to others the image he clings to: a great writer, an advanced
spiritual seeker that has gone into "Samadhi", and the hip 60's
Jungian wise-old man persona that he so pathetically attempts to
cultivate in his ramblings and even through his name "Uncle Tantra".
When someone points out UT's "trashing" of all other positions both
pro and con, Uncle Tantra's inner lonely child lashes out in a fit of
rage. Like many others, Uncle Tantra trashes people in his past as a
rationalization to avoid responsibility and the realization of his
failures in life. I am sure UT will lash-out at this essay as only
proof of his courage, seeing, and how he is persectued by those that
are afraid of his "light" and knowledge.
The fact that "Uncle Tantra" (UT) proclaims that his Buddhist teacher
Rama is the "Master of the Imposed Guilt Trip", or the fact that he
accuses Rama of constant drug use or losing the ability to meditate
after 1988 - makes UT a wise-old man to the anti-Rama crowd. UT's
Road-Trip mind fosters the same ego illusion towards the pro-Rama
crowd. In both cases, UT can see what others can't see, and out of
compassion, he reveals to others the "truth". This points to a
deep-rooted inferority complex and an obsessive need by UT to prop-up
his ego.
UT also sets himself up as superior to those that critique TM or
Castaneda. He feels that because of his experience and subsequent
trashing of Rama, along with his ability to enter into "Samadhi" -
that the anti-mystical skeptical types, unlike the great Uncle Tantra,
are stuck in intellectualism; those that critique TM or Castaneda
don't have the great spiritual foundation UT has. On the other hand,
those that love TM, Castaneda or Rama lack intellectual clarity. UT's
mysterious transcendence of this contradiction - has only produced
disjointed literary garbage such as road-trip mind or even more
disjointed trashings of both Rama and TM.
Ultimately UT will always be in a club of one person. He will never
accept equality with the anti-TM people, the pro-TM people, the
anti-Castaneda fans, the pro-Castaneda fans, Rama's devoted monks, or
even those that hate Rama. UT has conviently created a new persona for
himself. Barry Wright now becomes the wise spiritual rational
oh-so-hip Uncle Tantra who sees the folly of all people, and who out
of compassion, will teach others his perfect way - which is only the
expression and indulgence of his anger and Narcissism.
All of this drama by the Neurotic UT is based on his deep inferiority
complex and his anger towards his father and thus all authority
figures, teachers, organizations, etc.. This anger is probably rooted
in the fact that young Barry grew up as a military brat.
This Oedipus-based tension can be illustrated by UT's deep rage and
jealousy that Rama was a good-looking man and attracted many women.
This uncontrollable jealousy and hostility towards Rama's sexuality is
rooted in UT's powerful Oedipus complex that plays into his
inner-hatred of his father and all authority figures. Rama becomes
UT's opressive father who seduces the "mother" figures of UT's life.
This Oedipus obsession of UT is even evident in Road Trip Mind, as he
writes in great length about actual experiences with his mother that
seem very out of place - even in his rambling collection of essays.
In conclusion, UT is an obsessive-compulisive internet poster, yet the
product of his postings is simply his rage and inability to deal with
his deep-rooted Oedipus complex, his hatred of authority figures, and
his life-long obsessive narcisism.
Should Uncle Tantra's posts be taken seriously? I don't think so,
unless you are studying psychology and neurosis. Should UT be
encouraged to post? Most definetly! Even though the Internet fuels
his delusions, posting, I feel, is a very effective anger management
tool for the Uncle. Hopefully he will oneday realize that his
opinions are not based on widsom but sadly instead on common neurotic
forces within his own mind.
Peace :-)
cr...@att.net
> Introduction
> ---------------
> This is a psychological analysis of Barry Wright "Uncle Tantra",
> X-Buddhist Monk of Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz and X-TM practitioner.
> Barry "Uncle Tantra" Wright is the author of a poorly disjointed
> online "book" called Road Trip Mind:
Tell me why first you feel it is important that we here at ADC
land should know this stuff about Unc?
> http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
> As one can see, "Uncle Tantra" (UT) has written a series of rambling
> and unorganized essays containing jumbled spiritual stories of UT's
> time with Rama -Dr. Frederick Lenz. This series of babbling essays
> attempts to paint "Uncle Tantra" and his time with Rama in a positive
> light. Yet once you visit the message board of the www.ramalila.org
> website you will find Uncle Tantra writing very different things about
> his teacher Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz:
Since when is 'ego' stuff important? It's all horseshit but we
look at it and laugh. We haven't built a shrine yet for Unc.
Then he was full of caca then. Just another over-sexed guru looking
to get laid. So what? They are a dime a dozen in the world. What
makes him so special?
> As I said, I knew many of them. Most of them left the study early on
> because their marriages or relationships meant more to them than
> submitting to Rama's advances.
Smart gals, they didn't miss much then. Rama was out to lunch it
sounds like.
> We were *also* very aware (I mean, all you had to do was look around)
> that if any of us ever showed up with an attractive girlfriend or
> wife, that Rama would do his best to seduce her. It was simply a
> given. You dealt with that given however you dealt with it.
Wow sounds just like shorty (that's Pincho Arana aka CC).
> Analysis:
Anal eyes for us eh? Oh go ahead then.
> Uncle Tantra (UT) is suffering from acute Narcissism.
Anyone who worships their own opinions or believes is
a narcissist. So unless you are an enlightened being
you too are into narcissism. Surprise huh! lol
We don't take anything here seriously.
Seriously though, thanx for pulling Unc's pants down.
Now we know he is a big dick!
> Should UT be
> encouraged to post? Most definetly! Even though the Internet fuels
> his delusions, posting, I feel, is a very effective anger management
> tool for the Uncle. Hopefully he will oneday realize that his
> opinions are not based on widsom but sadly instead on common neurotic
> forces within his own mind.
Yeah we all have a little of that in us.
Neurotic to the bone, big fucking indulging narsos!
All praise to the belief systems in our minds!
They ALL are horseshit, so what's new? :)
John Manning
Apparently he got *your* attention big time - to the degree that you
have read his material and now have tried to provide a psychological
diagnosis. Are you a psychologist; a psychiatrist? Do you have a point,
other than to condemn this fellow? Do you have anything positive to
offer?
I suspect that you are projecting your own inadequacies. A person, in my
view, with genuine advanced awareness would offer something good rather
than just trash another as you have extensively and exclusively
attempted to do here. In fact Uncle Tantra's posts, in my view, are
directional toward the positive - while what you have posted here is
just a seemingly negative rant; a somehow self-serving attempt to
discredit another to no positive end. Even a personal vindictiveness
from you is indicated.
My father told me many years ago that it's easy to criticize, but it is
in vain if you have nothing positive to offer. I'm just beginning to
actually learn that one myself.
Unc may have some flaws, as most of us do (like me). But you have made a
major one of yours very apparent.
Further, Unc and I don't always see eye to eye on everything even though
I like much of his stuff. So don't think that I'm just taking his side
as a buddy. My comments are solely directed in response to your post.
BTW, Your signature "Peace" :-)" is disingenuous, since you have just
viciously attacked a fellow human being. Some might refer to that as
"hip 60's or 70's" hypocrisy.
John Manning
>
> Peace :-)
Rbb
Well you little hypocryt. Who's leg are you trying to pull?
You couldn't pull your own leg now, no matter how hard you try.
But post more. You only can become better.
Nothing like a good piece of garbage to introduce yourself in a new place.
I have always felt that a crossposted attempt of characterassasination
invokes utter trust in the writer.
And considering from what you write you must be his analyst, so who am I to
disagree with you.
You are obviously the authority here.
Just a small hint, don't you think it is illegal to post your clients
dossier on newsnet?
Welcome to Shantytown.
You are right in time for our gurutrashing convention
take a number to have yours trashed without cost.
How would you like it, well done, medium or raw?
And don't miss the evenings with our enlightenment mudfights.
We have special mud that gives a pink glow.
If you have a tutu you are free to join.
If you have no tutu...
uh...oh....hm..... I think you are in trouble.
Peace :)
RBB
Steve Ralph
SR
"Garuda" <garu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c0b9b4cc.0305...@posting.google.com...
Back by popular demand
"John Manning" <joh...@terra.com.br> wrote in message
news:3EB988E3...@terra.com.br...
>
> Apparently he got *your* attention big time - to the degree that you
> have read his material and now have tried to provide a psychological
> diagnosis. Are you a psychologist; a psychiatrist? Do you have a point,
> other than to condemn this fellow? Do you have anything positive to
> offer?
>
> I suspect that you are projecting your own inadequacies. A person, in my
> view, with genuine advanced awareness would offer something good rather
> than just trash another as you have extensively and exclusively
> attempted to do here. In fact Uncle Tantra's posts, in my view, are
> directional toward the positive - while what you have posted here is
> just a seemingly negative rant; a somehow self-serving attempt to
> discredit another to no positive end. Even a personal vindictiveness
> from you is indicated.
>
> My father told me many years ago that it's easy to criticize, but it is
> in vain if you have nothing positive to offer. I'm just beginning to
> actually learn that one myself.
>
> Unc may have some flaws, as most of us do (like me). But you have made a
> major one of yours very apparent.
>
> Further, Unc and I don't always see eye to eye on everything even though
> I like much of his stuff. So don't think that I'm just taking his side
> as a buddy. My comments are solely directed in response to your post.
>
> BTW, Your signature "Peace" :-)" is disingenuous, since you have just
> viciously attacked a fellow human being. Some might refer to that as
> "hip 60's or 70's" hypocrisy.
>
Talk about calling the kettle black. You are correct John, you ARE a slow
learner.
Steve Ralph
"Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
news:ghgua.4775$A%3.1...@news01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net...
Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
is a cutting comment indeed.
Putroid, I'm glad you joined in. You are like the reference terminal in a
thermocouple,
a rare gift indeed. I am wondering if you can accomplish the feat of not
only a.m.t and a.d.c,
but also a.b.s.f.g actually agreeing on something.
In Shantytown, just down the lane from a.m.t, doutless you will shine like
an amber glow,
when all around is dark.
Steve Ralph
Stu
garu...@yahoo.com wrote on 5/7/03 1:39 PM:
> Should Uncle Tantra's posts be taken seriously?
This is the key question. His posts are generally thought provoking and
entertaining. That is a all we can ask for on the Usenet.
If you don't like him there is always plonk land.
--
~Stu
Back by popular demand
"Steve Ralph" <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:YLgua.16052$9C6.8...@wards.force9.net...
>
> "Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
> news:ghgua.4775$A%3.1...@news01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net...
> >
>
> Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> is a cutting comment indeed.
Steve you seem to have a problem with bearing false witness eh? You did not
answer my previous question as what that would one who bears false witness
would be called. I consider creationism to be a theory, just as evolution
is an theory.
>
> Putroid, I'm glad you joined in. \
Thank you. I did it mainly because of your reply to that one post. So
thanks you once again. I had forgotted how much of a blast it is.
Jenadbc
Barry is our friend. Do you think your opinion will alter that? Does this ease
your pain of Dr. Lenz's death?
Usually one opens champagne for sendoffs, not garbage bins.
BE NICE!
John Manning
Likely why he hasn't responded.
John Manning
>
> Peace :)
>
> RBB
Uncle Tantra
a.d.c. As some of you who replied to this thread
have surmised, James has somewhat of an
"issue" with me. You who are open-minded
enough to realize that Cleargreen has fanatics
among its midst, meet James. He's an example
of a Rama-student fanatic.
He likes to believe that Rama (Dr. Frederick
Lenz) was the literal reincarnation of the Hindu
god Vishnu, and that therefore he is kinda
special for having gotten to hang with Vishnu
in lectures, at movies, and occasionally at
high-vibe eating joints like Windows On The
World (while it was still available) or Denny's.
I don't exactly believe that. In Road Trip Mind,
I was careful to write *my* story, from *my*
point of view, with all of *my* samkaras
firmly in place, thank you. I make no apologies,
to him, to the larger body of Rama students,
to Rama himself, wherever the fuck he may
be in the cosmos at this point, or to you guys,
for my opinions about him, no more than you
have seen me do here about my opinions
about Castaneda and both his failings and
his strong points.
My policy towards Mr. Forgy (who was
driven to this extreme by an exchange we
had a few months ago on a forum hosted
by the Ramalila website), is pretty much
the same as my policy towards you guys,
many of whom I am *much* fonder of than
James -- fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.
And you thought only Cleargreen had crazies...
:-) :-) :-)
Unc
P.S. I didn't bother to read his rant, so don't
expect me to comment on it. I've heard it
all before.
Uncle Tantra
>We don't take anything here seriously.
>Seriously though, thanx for pulling Unc's pants down.
>Now we know he is a big dick!
Biggus Dickus. That's me. Thanks for the
vote of confidence. :-)
Unc
cr...@att.net
> Unc
> P.S. I didn't bother to read his rant, so don't
> expect me to comment on it. I've heard it
> all before.
Yep why bother.
Whatever he had to say was
coming from ego--so to me
it's a total waste of time.
If you don't have something
from your heart to say then
chances are it's bullshit anyway. :)
Jeremy
garu...@yahoo.com (Garuda) wrote:
>This is a psychological analysis of Barry Wright "Uncle Tantra",
Cool. A sending off "roast" of Unc. :-)
Like Unc could give a fuck if some brainwashed cult butt-sniffer
without any real qualifications tries to "analyze" him. Dude, he's
going to France! :-) You want to psychologically analyze something,
try your own wasted life.
>X-Buddhist Monk of Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz and X-TM practitioner.
>Barry "Uncle Tantra" Wright is the author of a poorly disjointed
You say 'poorly disjointed'. Do you mean then that it flows well, and
cohesively? :-)
>online "book" called Road Trip Mind:
>
>http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
I kinda like it, personally. Don't agree with some of the
conclusions, but very much enjoy the spirit of it, and find a lot of
the writing to be of high quality.
>This series of babbling essays
>attempts to paint "Uncle Tantra" and his time with Rama in a positive
>light.
How many people write their own life stories and paint themselves in a
negative light? Oh, then again, you might have to some day, if you
ever wake up. LOL!!! :-)
> Yet once you visit the message board of the www.ramalila.org
>website you will find Uncle Tantra writing very different things about
>his teacher Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz:
Oh reaaaaaheeeellly?? :-) Bet I'd enjoy that...
Unc:
>Rama was VERY human, and in my opinion fucked up a lot. But in my view
>that does not mean he wasn't enlightened. He could very well have been
>an enlightened fuckup.
C'mon Unc. What the heck is an "enlightened fuckup"? :-)
Objectively, Freddie was a drug addict, was playing authoritarian
blame you/elevate me games, and was hitting on every woman in sight.
He wasn't even doing the major "spiritual" practice of his own
tradition, and he killed himself in the end. It's totally stretching
it to conceive of this man as "enlightened". He sounds like a clone
of Hubbard and Carlos and all the rest.
>Analysis:
>
>Uncle Tantra (UT) is suffering from acute Narcissism.
Hey, this section isn't really "analysis". It is a series of
assertions and claims, regarding most of which YOU would have only
very scanty information.
> Because he
>dropped-out of both TM and Rama's program he needs to "rewrite"
>history and trash religious groups that he once belonged to.
It's about coming to an understanding of one's life.
Who knows, you may even try it some day.
> Yet at
>the same time he needs to "show-off" to current "followers" and write
>spiritual essays of the same teachers he trashes in private.
He wants to keep the things he found worthwhile in his journeys, while
leaving behind the things he did not. That's a good practice, in
general.
> By engaging in this neurotic contradiction any personal failures are
>covered-up by UT's dual positions.
So a natural part of maturing and growing you call "neurotic
contradiction". No doubt while uncritically accepting the divinity of
every turd that ever dropped from Rama's behind... :-)
> Uncle Tantra's ego can instead
>present to others the image he clings to: a great writer, an advanced
>spiritual seeker that has gone into "Samadhi", and the hip 60's
>Jungian wise-old man persona that he so pathetically attempts to
>cultivate in his ramblings and even through his name "Uncle Tantra".
I go along with good writer and hip seeker, and although I'm more of a
skeptic, I'd say yeah, Unc has some real wisdom. For sure.
>When someone points out UT's "trashing" of all other positions both
>pro and con, Uncle Tantra's inner lonely child lashes out in a fit of
>rage.
Uh oh. He's a mean person?? :-)
To me it looks like Unc strives for balance, while yet holding on
tightly and passionately to a few treasured illusions. I'd have to be
pretty hard to grudge a fellow human being a few treasured illusions
to ward off the ever-approaching inevitable.
Okay, I am pretty hard... :-)
> Like many others, Uncle Tantra trashes people in his past as a
>rationalization to avoid responsibility and the realization of his
>failures in life. I am sure UT will lash-out at this essay as only
>proof of his courage, seeing, and how he is persectued by those that
>are afraid of his "light" and knowledge.
He won't need to. Most of us can already see that you ARE afraid of
his knowledge, specifically, his portrait of Rama, no doubt because it
is more realistic than your absurd true believer picture. It probably
isn't realistic ENOUGH.
>The fact that "Uncle Tantra" (UT) proclaims that his Buddhist teacher
>Rama is the "Master of the Imposed Guilt Trip", or the fact that he
>accuses Rama of constant drug use or losing the ability to meditate
>after 1988 - makes UT a wise-old man to the anti-Rama crowd.
Only makes him a person who opened his eyes and looked at what was
really happening. Again, try it.
> UT's Road-Trip mind fosters the same ego illusion towards the pro-Rama
>crowd. In both cases, UT can see what others can't see, and out of
>compassion, he reveals to others the "truth". This points to a
>deep-rooted inferority complex and an obsessive need by UT to prop-up
>his ego.
You seem to be implying a person cannot have both desirable and
undesirable traits. That'd be a weird claim.
Don't you believe Rama supposedly could "see what others couldn't"?
And don't you believe that out of compassion he revealed to others the
"truth"? Does this point to your deep-rooted psychological problems?
Only if someone has told you some negative facts about him and you
refused to hear. Oh wait, that already happened.
>UT also sets himself up as superior to those that critique TM or
>Castaneda.
Yeah, I really HATE that! LOL!! :-) I've been hoping for a long
time that Unc would acknowledge my superiority. Guess it just doesn't
happen much on Usenet. Forces me to maintain my own superiority,
which can be hard work.
> He feels that because of his experience and subsequent
>trashing of Rama, along with his ability to enter into "Samadhi" -
>that the anti-mystical skeptical types, unlike the great Uncle Tantra,
>are stuck in intellectualism; those that critique TM or Castaneda
>don't have the great spiritual foundation UT has. On the other hand,
>those that love TM, Castaneda or Rama lack intellectual clarity. UT's
>mysterious transcendence of this contradiction - has only produced
>disjointed literary garbage such as road-trip mind or even more
>disjointed trashings of both Rama and TM.
As one of our favorite songs here says: everybody wants to rule the
world.
>Ultimately UT will always be in a club of one person.
Unc, I think he just called you unique. Break out the champagne!
I'll drink to that.
{...snip... hard-core cultie does Sigmund Freud Jr. ...}
>Should Uncle Tantra's posts be taken seriously? I don't think so.
Unc's the first to tell you not to take anything too seriously.
I usually feel he should be taking things *more* seriously. :-)
>Peace :-)
Love,
Jeremy
Ether St. Vying
> garu...@yahoo.com (Garuda) wrote:
>
> >This is a psychological analysis of Barry Wright "Uncle Tantra",
>
> Cool. A sending off "roast" of Unc. :-)
Then how come you flamed Garuda432? Well, he's crispy now! Think he'd go
good with peanut sauce?
[snip recreational spanking]
>
> >Analysis:
> >
> >Uncle Tantra (UT) is suffering from acute Narcissism.
>
> Hey, this section isn't really "analysis".
It's analizing.
> It is a series of
> assertions and claims, regarding most of which YOU would have only
> very scanty information.
[snip recreational spanking]
> > By engaging in this neurotic contradiction any personal failures are
> >covered-up by UT's dual positions.
>
> So a natural part of maturing and growing you call "neurotic
> contradiction". No doubt while uncritically accepting the divinity of
> every turd that ever dropped from Rama's behind... :-)
Betcha he spends hours polishing them. :-) Imagine, polishing someone else's
turds ... eeeeoooowwwww!
> > Uncle Tantra's ego can instead
> >present to others the image he clings to: a great writer, an advanced
> >spiritual seeker that has gone into "Samadhi", and the hip 60's
> >Jungian wise-old man persona that he so pathetically attempts to
> >cultivate in his ramblings and even through his name "Uncle Tantra".
>
> I go along with good writer and hip seeker, and although I'm more of a
> skeptic, I'd say yeah, Unc has some real wisdom. For sure.
>
> >When someone points out UT's "trashing" of all other positions both
> >pro and con, Uncle Tantra's inner lonely child lashes out in a fit of
> >rage.
I've only seen his inner child come out to play. Are you sure your're not
talking about yourself here, Garuda432?
> Uh oh. He's a mean person?? :-)
>
> To me it looks like Unc strives for balance, while yet holding on
> tightly and passionately to a few treasured illusions. I'd have to be
> pretty hard to grudge a fellow human being a few treasured illusions
> to ward off the ever-approaching inevitable.
>
> Okay, I am pretty hard... :-)
LOL! I had no idea Unc had THATeffect on you!!!
Or maybe you're just excited by your own scathing wit? 8-D
[snip recreational spanking]
> >UT also sets himself up as superior to those that critique TM or
> >Castaneda.
>
> Yeah, I really HATE that! LOL!! :-) I've been hoping for a long
> time that Unc would acknowledge my superiority. Guess it just doesn't
> happen much on Usenet. Forces me to maintain my own superiority,
> which can be hard work.
LOL! Nahhh, it's easy, admit it! ;-D
[]
>
> >Ultimately UT will always be in a club of one person.
Party of One.
Be your own guru!
> Unc, I think he just called you unique. Break out the champagne!
> I'll drink to that.
Me too! I love Unc! It's always a pleasure to have him in Shantytown.
> {...snip... hard-core cultie does Sigmund Freud Jr. ...}
I thought you had more spank in you than that! I'm disappointed. You had me
in stitches a few times! Finally, someone new to spank!
> >Should Uncle Tantra's posts be taken seriously? I don't think so.
>
> Unc's the first to tell you not to take anything too seriously.
And he seriously means it ... about not being serious ...
> I usually feel he should be taking things *more* seriously. :-)
Enh ... serious schmerious ...
>
> >Peace :-)
>
> Love,
>
> Jeremy
Groovy
Ether St. Vying
Ether St. Vying
> Garuda.... peace????
>
> Well you little hypocryt. Who's leg are you trying to pull?
> You couldn't pull your own leg now, no matter how hard you try.
Ummm, sweetie, it's not his own leg that he's pulling ....
> But post more. You only can become better.
>
> Nothing like a good piece of garbage to introduce yourself in a new place.
> I have always felt that a crossposted attempt of characterassasination
> invokes utter trust in the writer.
It certainly goes a long way in creating an impression.
> And considering from what you write you must be his analyst,
He's an analist.
> so who am I to
> disagree with you.
Supreme Being or Saint? :-)
> You are obviously the authority here.
> Just a small hint, don't you think it is illegal to post your clients
> dossier on newsnet?
Who would take his rant to heart?
> Welcome to Shantytown.
Where everyone likes their own shit best!
> You are right in time for our gurutrashing convention
> take a number to have yours trashed without cost.
We also have a lovely bonus square pill for you.
> How would you like it, well done, medium or raw?
Should I heat up the hotplate?
> And don't miss the evenings with our enlightenment mudfights.
> We have special mud that gives a pink glow.
And a tingle!
> If you have a tutu you are free to join.
> If you have no tutu...
> uh...oh....hm..... I think you are in trouble.
>
> Peace :)
>
> RBB
Love, groovy,
Ether St. Vying
Ether St. Vying
> Introduction
> ---------------
>
[plonk!]
Uncle Tantra
> Like Unc could give a fuck if some brainwashed cult butt-sniffer
> without any real qualifications tries to "analyze" him. Dude, he's
> going to France! :-) You want to psychologically analyze something,
> try your own wasted life.
"Brainwashed cult butt-sniffer?" Damn, Jer, you got me
laughing out loud. :-)
> >X-Buddhist Monk of Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz and X-TM practitioner.
> >Barry "Uncle Tantra" Wright is the author of a poorly disjointed
>
> You say 'poorly disjointed'. Do you mean then that it flows well, and
> cohesively? :-)
I believe that James is referring to the fact that some
time ago I lost my arms and legs (thus, "disjointed") but
manage to type anyway, using...uh...uh...well, I manage
to type. But poorly. :-)
> > Yet once you visit the message board of the www.ramalila.org
> >website you will find Uncle Tantra writing very different things about
> >his teacher Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz:
>
> Oh reaaaaaheeeellly?? :-) Bet I'd enjoy that...
He quoted the best of them. Completely out of context, but
I really did say all of that. And believe it.
> Unc:
> >Rama was VERY human, and in my opinion fucked up a lot. But in my view
> >that does not mean he wasn't enlightened. He could very well have been
> >an enlightened fuckup.
>
> C'mon Unc. What the heck is an "enlightened fuckup"? :-)
A fuckup who fucks up in terms of personality or behavior
yet is nonetheless experiencing enlightenment.
What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past
has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior?
What if, just as those who described it in the past have said,
it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly
perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing*
to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality
and behavior?
> > Because he
> >dropped-out of both TM and Rama's program he needs to "rewrite"
> >history and trash religious groups that he once belonged to.
>
> It's about coming to an understanding of one's life.
> Who knows, you may even try it some day.
Naaaah. He's content to buy everything Rama ever said as
literal truth. Which presents a problem, cognitive-dissonance-
wise, because Rama would contradict himself continually, often
in the same paragraph. :-)
> > Yet at
> >the same time he needs to "show-off" to current "followers" and write
> >spiritual essays of the same teachers he trashes in private.
>
> He wants to keep the things he found worthwhile in his journeys, while
> leaving behind the things he did not. That's a good practice, in
> general.
Damn. Jeremy said this? I'm gonna go outside and watch
the pigs fly by. :-)
Unc
Steve Ralph
> > Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> > is a cutting comment indeed.
>
> Steve you seem to have a problem with bearing false witness eh? You did
not
> answer my previous question as what that would one who bears false witness
> would be called. I consider creationism to be a theory, just as
evolution
> is an theory.
> >
Ooh ohh, o no, he got me there. Never mind, doutless God will punish me for
that. Yes,
you think it is a theory. Weasel words! You subscribe to a religion that
puts creationism
way above evolution, don't you?
> > Putroid, I'm glad you joined in. \
>
> Thank you. I did it mainly because of your reply to that one post. So
> thanks you once again. I had forgotted how much of a blast it is.
Yes, lets go back to your recent post
someone posts:
> The SuperPower of Peace is our only hope
>
> By Harvey Wasserman, Columbus Free Press
>
> George W. Bush has fittingly stopped short of declaring victory in
> Iraq. He doesn't want to claim a definitive triumph because it would
> legally obligate the US to begin cleaning the place up and enforcing
> human rights obligations.
>
> But in fact, the US attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan have been
> shattering defeats.
>
> Let's count the ways:
>
> o At least three times US troops have fired live ammunition against
> angry crowds of "liberated" Iraqis. Far from "dancing in the streets"
> over the American presence, the people of Iraq have made it clear they
> want the US out just days after the removal of Saddam Hussein, who
> most Iraqis understand was put in power by the US in the first place.
>
> o US troops have now killed at least twenty Iraqis in demonstrations
> that appear to be nonviolent. Military claims of self-defense are
> reminiscent of lies that Kent State students fired weapons during the
> 1970 massacre there. Those four deaths put the US in an uproar; in
> Iraq, 1/20 the size of the US, the equivalent of 20 dead would be 400.
>
Petrugs (turd polisher extraordinaire) response:
>Such blinded rhetoric is not worthy to continue to read. It reminds me
that
>the organizations that sponsored the Anti War demonstrations (not cheap to
>set up a demonstration) were the usual anti American & Marxist
>organizations. Those people should live where they feel at home. It does
>not seem that a free America is that place.
This leads me to the theory that you are in fact a racist, who does not
believe in free speech.
Or did you get the words in the wrong order as usual?
SR
Uncle Tantra
>
> [snip recreational spanking]
and made me laugh out loud. Cool. :-)
Unc
S.o.B.
So... what *ever* provoked you to bring this discussion to a.b.s.f.g.?
One of the more innerestink x-posts I've seen in a while 'round
here...
> I feel it [meditation] matters a lot, even for the enlightened.
> Possibly especially for the enlightened, if they teach.
Actually it's kind of essential to dharmic practice, but that never
stopped me from slacking off...
> Personally, I
> believe Rama stopped meditating regularly soon after we
> moved to New York, and it showed.
What? No more tell-tale scorch marks on the zafu (mediation cushion)?
> I believe that when I first met him he was having pretty serious
> enlightenment experiences, but I didn't see *anything* in the last few
> years I was around him to indicate that those experiences were still
> going on..."
Geez, it's like you expect something from a guru b'sides sex & drugs.
> In the latter days, in my
> opinion as a result of drug use and runaway ego and starting to
> believe his own PR,
Take a look over here in absfg... we have Bernie. We had Tang. We have
cupcake. We just got over the perennial absfg thread about "Drunkpa."
We expect runaway egos & brain-damage caused by drug use.
> he shifted the myth such that it was all
> about him and his specialness.
You say that as tho that is a bad thing. Hey, he's unique &
one-of-a-kind, like the other 6 billion people on the planet.
> the incarnation of Vishnu who said such things had a tendency to
> prepare for public events by gulping down 5-10 capsules of a Class IV
> narcotic.
Yum. Hopefully with a whiskey chaser.
> the women got tired of getting midnight phone calls from Rama
> every time their husbands were out of town.
Well, it'd be really rude to call when the husbands were at home,
wouldn't it?
> that if any of us ever showed up with an attractive girlfriend or
> wife, that Rama would do his best to seduce her. It was simply a
> given.
So how many times did he score? That's what I want to know!
> My personal explanation for some (most) of Rama's bizarre behavior
Bizarre? What's bizarre about all of this? Sounds like he took up
having too much fun. That's not bizarre, that's as American as biker
bars & promiscuous teenagers.
> if anything went badly and turned out unsuccessfully, it was
> always our fault.
What? It takes this long for the followers of a guru to figure these
things out? What the hell do you think self-proclaimed gurus grand
epiphany really is? To sit & be holy & or to realize they got a bigger
opportunity to get laid than an MLM marketroid meeting?
True believers... GEEZ!
> The man was the Master Of The Imposed Guilt Trip.
Works on children, sheep, flocks & suckers. If PT Barnum could've used
guilt he would have.
> Some students of self discovery thrive on guilt and feeling bad about
> themselves.
Right. That's what that Orgone Box is for. It'll help them get over
those bad feelings. The dialectic of the "Carrot & Stick" always go
together, SUCKERS!
> Rama was VERY human, and in my opinion fucked up a lot. But in my view
> that does not mean he wasn't enlightened. He could very well have been
> an enlightened fuckup.
Ahah! Now you are learning! See what he taught you?
--S.o.B. (this concludes our broadcast day)
Steve Ralph
> > > Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> > > is a cutting comment indeed.
> >
> > Steve you seem to have a problem with bearing false witness eh? You did
> not
> > answer my previous question as what that would one who bears false
witness
> > would be called. I consider creationism to be a theory, just as
> evolution
> > is an theory.
> > >
failed to address as regards
this mostly discredited theory. Why do you think the human race is so damm
important that
God decided to build the whole damm universe around us? Seems very
egocentric to me.
SR
S.o.B.
[..snip...]
> This Oedipus-based tension can be illustrated by UT's deep rage and
> jealousy that Rama was a good-looking man and attracted many women.
This has to be satire...
> neurotic forces within his own mind.
Just gotta be kidding...
> Peace :-)
Perfect ending too.
--S.o.B.
Jeremy
"Ether St. Vying" <he...@now.eh> wrote:
>I thought you had more spank in you than that! I'm disappointed.
I thought if I didn't go completely over the top Vini might love me
again. Then again, maybe I'm just getting old and weak...
-J.
slider
Uncle Tantra wrote
Biggus Dickus. That's me.
### - stwike him centurwion... wery woughly! ;-)
cr...@att.net
> > Welcome to Shantytown.
> Where everyone likes their own shit best!
Your essence is better Evita.
I know you're just gonna tell me so too!
When are you going to talk some more
about 'essence'? I want to hear what
you have to say on the subject. :)
cr...@att.net
> Damn. Jeremy said this? I'm gonna go outside and watch
> the pigs fly by. :-)
In the spirit of Jackass the Movie, how about some
bottlerockets out your ass on the 4th July in France? :)
Where's the video?
Uncle Tantra
> garu...@yahoo.com (Garuda) wrote
>
> So... what *ever* provoked you to bring this discussion to a.b.s.f.g.?
> One of the more innerestink x-posts I've seen in a while 'round
> here...
The guy posting as Garuda (real name James Forgy) obviously
has an issue with me, based on a cyberdiscussion we had literally
months ago on a non-Usenet forum. James is basically a nice guy,
but he tends to lash out when his beliefs are threatened, and my
writings pushed his buttons. So now, months later, not having
heard anything from him in the interim, this post shows up,
crossposted to 2 newsgroups I currently write to, and to a.b.s.f.g.,
where I haven't set foot for years. How you guys and gals doin'?
> > I feel it [meditation] matters a lot, even for the enlightened.
> > Possibly especially for the enlightened, if they teach.
>
> Actually it's kind of essential to dharmic practice, but that never
> stopped me from slacking off...
I tend to agree. I suspect James feels that Rama "didn't have
to meditate because he was enlightened." Well, we all know how
*that* experiment turned out. :-)
Have fun over there, all you short buddhas...
Unc
Ned Ludd
news:75774cde.03050...@posting.google.com...
>
> The guy posting as Garuda (real name James Forgy) obviously
> has an issue with me, based on a cyberdiscussion we had literally
> months ago on a non-Usenet forum. James is basically a nice guy,
> but he tends to lash out when his beliefs are threatened, and my
> writings pushed his buttons. So now, months later, not having
> heard anything from him in the interim, this post shows up,
> crossposted to 2 newsgroups I currently write to, and to a.b.s.f.g.,
> where I haven't set foot for years. How you guys and gals doin'?
>
Fine. Who's the next Zen Master Rama?
Ned
S.o.B.
>>> You did not answer my previous question as what that would
>>> one who bears false witness would be called.
Just an wild guess, but would that person be called:
"He who doesn't answer leading questions?"
or
"He who doesn't respond to ad hominem attacks by Xians?"
>>> I consider creationism to be a theory, just as
>>> evolution is an theory.
Ahhh, his intellectual credentials are showing. What pedigree!
> In fact, there is one point about creationism that you
> have consistently failed to address as regards
> this mostly discredited theory. Why do you think the
> human race is so damm important that God decided to build
> the whole damm universe around us?
"It is better to have no opinion of God at all than such as one as is
unworthy of him; for the one is only unbelief -- the other is
contempt." -- Plutarch (46-120)
"Christians are like a council of frogs in a marsh
or a synod of worms on a dung-hill croaking and squeaking
'For our sakes was the world created.'"
- Julian The Apostate (332-363)
"Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." --
Voltaire
> Seems very egocentric to me.
"God created man in his own image, and we have certainly repaid the
compliment" -- Voltaire
--S.o.B.
AUMsi...@webtv.net
Rbb
"John Manning" <joh...@terra.com.br> wrote in message
> > If you have a tutu you are free to join.
> > If you have no tutu...
> > uh...oh....hm..... I think you are in trouble.
>
> Likely why he hasn't responded.
>
> John Manning
Who can blame him...
Tutu's are hard to get these days....
Rbb
"Ether St. Vying" <he...@now.eh> wrote in message
news:3EBA0F04...@now.eh...
> Rbb wrote:
>
> > Garuda.... peace????
> >
> > Well you little hypocryt. Who's leg are you trying to pull?
> > You couldn't pull your own leg now, no matter how hard you try.
>
> Ummm, sweetie, it's not his own leg that he's pulling ....
No legs? Wheeling and dealing ?
>
> > But post more. You only can become better.
> >
> > Nothing like a good piece of garbage to introduce yourself in a new
place.
> > I have always felt that a crossposted attempt of characterassasination
> > invokes utter trust in the writer.
>
> It certainly goes a long way in creating an impression.
So much for pointilism without a point.
>
> > And considering from what you write you must be his analyst,
>
> He's an analist.
as long as he swings his anal phase around his own neck.
>
> > so who am I to
> > disagree with you.
>
> Supreme Being or Saint? :-)
You are blowing my cover!
>
> > You are obviously the authority here.
> > Just a small hint, don't you think it is illegal to post your clients
> > dossier on newsnet?
>
> Who would take his rant to heart?
The heartless ?
>
> > Welcome to Shantytown.
>
> Where everyone likes their own shit best!
And eats it too....
>
> > You are right in time for our gurutrashing convention
> > take a number to have yours trashed without cost.
>
> We also have a lovely bonus square pill for you.
But we have no more room on our private ward ....
>
> > How would you like it, well done, medium or raw?
>
> Should I heat up the hotplate?
Absolutly, we do a flip turn over.
>
> > And don't miss the evenings with our enlightenment mudfights.
> > We have special mud that gives a pink glow.
>
> And a tingle!
Yeap,but only to the enlightened.
>
> > If you have a tutu you are free to join.
> > If you have no tutu...
> > uh...oh....hm..... I think you are in trouble.
> >
> > Peace :)
> >
>
> Love, groovy,
hanky dory
RBB
Rbb
He is is hilarious.
RBB
Rbb
"Ned Ludd" <ned...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:b9e7jr$r1p$1...@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
Enough crucifications.
Back by popular demand
"Steve Ralph" <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HQsua.16119$9C6.8...@wards.force9.net...
> > >
> > > Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> > > is a cutting comment indeed.
> >
> > Steve you seem to have a problem with bearing false witness eh? You did
> not
> > answer my previous question as what that would one who bears false
witness
> > would be called. I consider creationism to be a theory, just as
> evolution
> > is an theory.
> > >
>
> Ooh ohh, o no, he got me there. Never mind, doutless God will punish me
for
> that. Yes,
> you think it is a theory. Weasel words! You subscribe to a religion that
> puts creationism
> way above evolution, don't you?
Steveboy, are you so intolerant about other people's beliefs? Why you can
not even provide one shred of scientific evidence that your religion can
create something from nothing and life out of inorganic materials. Your
faith in evolution requires more imagination than mine.
Do I really have to explain what a Marxist government does to free speech?
If you and your friends really want to create that Marxist state, you will
have to move out of the US. Because the US is a free country. Are you that
dense stevy boy?
Back by popular demand
>
> > > > Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> > > > is a cutting comment indeed.
> > >
> > > Steve you seem to have a problem with bearing false witness eh? You
did
> > not
> > > answer my previous question as what that would one who bears false
> witness
> > > would be called. I consider creationism to be a theory, just as
> > evolution
> > > is an theory.
> > > >
> In fact, there is one point about creationism that you have consistently
> failed to address as regards
> this mostly discredited theory.
Really? And why do you think that NOBODY has collected that $250,000.00?
The only thing they needed was scientific proof for the Macro Evolution
theory. In over 12 years - no takers - Does that tell you something? No I
did not think so.
> Why do you think the human race is so damm
> important that
> God decided to build the whole damm universe around us? Seems very
> egocentric to me.
>
Steve just because you don't believe God exists, does not mean that He does
not exist.
Back by popular demand
think those up yourself?
"S.o.B." <sciono...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d1fb396e.03050...@posting.google.com...
cr...@att.net
> "God created man in his own image, and we have certainly repaid the
> compliment" -- Voltaire
God doesn't have an "image".
That's man's idea all the way.
Welcome to purgatory, now get back to work! LOL! :)
Ned Ludd
news:AQAua.304989$qm4.31...@amsnews03.chello.com...
>
>>> The guy posting as Garuda (real name James Forgy) obviously
>>> has an issue with me, based on a cyberdiscussion we had literally
>>> months ago on a non-Usenet forum. James is basically a nice guy,
>>> but he tends to lash out when his beliefs are threatened, and my
>>> writings pushed his buttons. So now, months later, not having
>>> heard anything from him in the interim, this post shows up,
>>> crossposted to 2 newsgroups I currently write to, and to a.b.s.f.g.,
>>> where I haven't set foot for years. How you guys and gals doin'?
>>
>> Fine. Who's the next Zen Master Rama?
>
> Enough crucifications.
>
How will we know the last crucifixion? Don't the crucifixionees
ask for it? Really. Do they think the power structure is not going
to react the way they do, and have done through time immemorial?
Why did Waco piss off so many of the power people? Why did Randy
Weaver piss off so many people (in the ATF)? What is it about a
non-wired 'master' that pisses off so many people?
Ned
willytex
"Garuda" - Thats Pat!
> This is a psychological analysis of Barry Wright "Uncle Tantra",
> X-Buddhist Monk of Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz and X-TM practitioner.
> Barry "Uncle Tantra" Wright is the author of a poorly disjointed
> online "book" called Road Trip Mind:
>
> http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/index.html
>
> As one can see, "Uncle Tantra" (UT) has written a series of rambling
> and unorganized essays containing jumbled spiritual stories of UT's
> time with Rama -Dr. Frederick Lenz. This series of babbling essays
> attempts to paint "Uncle Tantra" and his time with Rama in a positive
> light. Yet once you visit the message board of the www.ramalila.org
> website you will find Uncle Tantra writing very different things about
> his teacher Rama, Dr. Frederick Lenz:
>
> Uncle Tantra's "other" writings on Rama Dr. Frederick Lenz
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> I feel it [meditation] matters a lot, even for the enlightened.
> Possibly especially for the enlightened, if they teach. Personally, I
> believe Rama stopped meditating regularly soon after we moved to New
> York, and it showed.
>
> I believe that when I first met him he was having pretty serious
> enlightenment experiences, but I didn't see *anything* in the last few
> years I was around him to indicate that those experiences were still
> going on..."
>
> Rama flip-flopped on this issue [avatar]. In the beginning of his
> teaching, he was very clear about just being an ordinary Joe who was
> fortunate enough to realize enlightenment. In the latter days, in my
> opinion as a result of drug use and runaway ego and starting to
> believe his own PR, he shifted the myth such that it was all about him
> and his specialness.
>
> With all due respect, reliable first-hand reports suggest that at the
> time, the incarnation of Vishnu who said such things had a tendency to
> prepare for public events by gulping down 5-10 capsules of a Class IV
> narcotic. It's not like any of us know or will ever know the answer,
> but being a bit of a heretic I can't help but wonder how much of those
> talks was Rama in pain talking, how much was the Valium talking, and
> how much was enlightenment talking.
>
> From the point of view of a female student who never got closer to
> Rama than the audience, he could easily have been perceived as safe
> and respectful. For some women, however, Rama's pursuit of them
> *outside* the meditation hall became rather problematic for them. It
> didn't matter whether the women were already involved in a
> relationship, or married, or whatever. If Rama wanted them, he
> expected them to want him, too. I personally know several women who
> left the study because Rama simply would not accept "No" as an answer,
> and the women got tired of getting midnight phone calls from Rama
> every time their husbands were out of town.
>
> As I said, I knew many of them. Most of them left the study early on
> because their marriages or relationships meant more to them than
> submitting to Rama's advances.
>
> We were *also* very aware (I mean, all you had to do was look around)
> that if any of us ever showed up with an attractive girlfriend or
> wife, that Rama would do his best to seduce her. It was simply a
> given. You dealt with that given however you dealt with it.
>
> My personal explanation for some (most) of Rama's bizarre behavior
> during that period [1994-1998] is 1) that he stopped meditating
> regularly (something he personally said to several people close to
> him) and 2) that he developed a dependency on Valium (which has been
> verified by several people close to him, and which drug has documented
> symptoms that parallel the behavior that I saw and considered
> bizarre).
>
> While you are entitled to that point of view, I see it as the
> inevitable result of one of Rama's most common "teaching tactics" --
> if anything went well and turned out successfully, it was always his
> doing; if anything went badly and turned out unsuccessfully, it was
> always our fault. The man was the Master Of The Imposed Guilt Trip.
> Some students of self discovery thrive on guilt and feeling bad about
> themselves. I just don't get off on that stuff any more, so you can
> have my share.
>
> Might I suggest you go back and reread the "Status Reports" you had to
> submit from time to time? I know several people who have done that
> recently and were simply *amazed* at the stuff they "admitted to" or
> the bad stuff they claimed to have done in those reports, simply
> because it was expected of them, and they knew it was the only way
> they could stay in the program.
> But rather than viewing it as "trashing Rama," I actually think my
> theory is fairly compassionate, because my only alternative is to
> believe that he was crazy.
>
> Rama was VERY human, and in my opinion fucked up a lot. But in my view
> that does not mean he wasn't enlightened. He could very well have been
> an enlightened fuckup.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Analysis:
>
> Uncle Tantra (UT) is suffering from acute Narcissism. Because he
> dropped-out of both TM and Rama's program he needs to "rewrite"
> history and trash religious groups that he once belonged to. Yet at
> the same time he needs to "show-off" to current "followers" and write
> spiritual essays of the same teachers he trashes in private. By
> engaging in this neurotic contradiction any personal failures are
> covered-up by UT's dual positions. Uncle Tantra's ego can instead
> present to others the image he clings to: a great writer, an advanced
> spiritual seeker that has gone into "Samadhi", and the hip 60's
> Jungian wise-old man persona that he so pathetically attempts to
> cultivate in his ramblings and even through his name "Uncle Tantra".
>
> When someone points out UT's "trashing" of all other positions both
> pro and con, Uncle Tantra's inner lonely child lashes out in a fit of
> rage. Like many others, Uncle Tantra trashes people in his past as a
> rationalization to avoid responsibility and the realization of his
> failures in life. I am sure UT will lash-out at this essay as only
> proof of his courage, seeing, and how he is persectued by those that
> are afraid of his "light" and knowledge.
>
> The fact that "Uncle Tantra" (UT) proclaims that his Buddhist teacher
> Rama is the "Master of the Imposed Guilt Trip", or the fact that he
> accuses Rama of constant drug use or losing the ability to meditate
> after 1988 - makes UT a wise-old man to the anti-Rama crowd. UT's
> Road-Trip mind fosters the same ego illusion towards the pro-Rama
> crowd. In both cases, UT can see what others can't see, and out of
> compassion, he reveals to others the "truth". This points to a
> deep-rooted inferority complex and an obsessive need by UT to prop-up
> his ego.
>
> UT also sets himself up as superior to those that critique TM or
> Castaneda. He feels that because of his experience and subsequent
> trashing of Rama, along with his ability to enter into "Samadhi" -
> that the anti-mystical skeptical types, unlike the great Uncle Tantra,
> are stuck in intellectualism; those that critique TM or Castaneda
> don't have the great spiritual foundation UT has. On the other hand,
> those that love TM, Castaneda or Rama lack intellectual clarity. UT's
> mysterious transcendence of this contradiction - has only produced
> disjointed literary garbage such as road-trip mind or even more
> disjointed trashings of both Rama and TM.
>
> Ultimately UT will always be in a club of one person. He will never
> accept equality with the anti-TM people, the pro-TM people, the
> anti-Castaneda fans, the pro-Castaneda fans, Rama's devoted monks, or
> even those that hate Rama. UT has conviently created a new persona for
> himself. Barry Wright now becomes the wise spiritual rational
> oh-so-hip Uncle Tantra who sees the folly of all people, and who out
> of compassion, will teach others his perfect way - which is only the
> expression and indulgence of his anger and Narcissism.
>
> All of this drama by the Neurotic UT is based on his deep inferiority
> complex and his anger towards his father and thus all authority
> figures, teachers, organizations, etc.. This anger is probably rooted
> in the fact that young Barry grew up as a military brat.
>
> This Oedipus-based tension can be illustrated by UT's deep rage and
> jealousy that Rama was a good-looking man and attracted many women.
> This uncontrollable jealousy and hostility towards Rama's sexuality is
> rooted in UT's powerful Oedipus complex that plays into his
> inner-hatred of his father and all authority figures. Rama becomes
> UT's opressive father who seduces the "mother" figures of UT's life.
> This Oedipus obsession of UT is even evident in Road Trip Mind, as he
> writes in great length about actual experiences with his mother that
> seem very out of place - even in his rambling collection of essays.
>
> In conclusion, UT is an obsessive-compulisive internet poster, yet the
> product of his postings is simply his rage and inability to deal with
> his deep-rooted Oedipus complex, his hatred of authority figures, and
> his life-long obsessive narcisism.
>
> Should Uncle Tantra's posts be taken seriously? I don't think so,
> unless you are studying psychology and neurosis. Should UT be
> encouraged to post? Most definetly! Even though the Internet fuels
> his delusions, posting, I feel, is a very effective anger management
> tool for the Uncle. Hopefully he will oneday realize that his
> opinions are not based on widsom but sadly instead on common neurotic
> forces within his own mind.
>
> Peace :-)
willytex
> but it is in vain if you have nothing positive to offer. I'm just
> beginning to actually learn that one myself.
That's John.
> Garuda wrote:
> >
> > Introduction
> > ---------------
> Apparently he got *your* attention big time - to the degree that you
> have read his material and now have tried to provide a psychological
> diagnosis. Are you a psychologist; a psychiatrist? Do you have a point,
> other than to condemn this fellow? Do you have anything positive to
> offer?
>
> I suspect that you are projecting your own inadequacies. A person, in my
> view, with genuine advanced awareness would offer something good rather
> than just trash another as you have extensively and exclusively
> attempted to do here. In fact Uncle Tantra's posts, in my view, are
> directional toward the positive - while what you have posted here is
> just a seemingly negative rant; a somehow self-serving attempt to
> discredit another to no positive end. Even a personal vindictiveness
> from you is indicated.
>
> My father told me many years ago that it's easy to criticize, but it is
> in vain if you have nothing positive to offer. I'm just beginning to
> actually learn that one myself.
>
> Unc may have some flaws, as most of us do (like me). But you have made a
> major one of yours very apparent.
>
> Further, Unc and I don't always see eye to eye on everything even though
> I like much of his stuff. So don't think that I'm just taking his side
> as a buddy. My comments are solely directed in response to your post.
>
> BTW, Your signature "Peace" :-)" is disingenuous, since you have just
> viciously attacked a fellow human being. Some might refer to that as
> "hip 60's or 70's" hypocrisy.
>
> John Manning
>
> >
> > Peace :-)
willytex
That's Peter.
"Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
news:ghgua.4775$A%3.1...@news01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net...
>
> "John Manning" <joh...@terra.com.br> wrote in message
> news:3EB988E3...@terra.com.br...
> >
> > Apparently he got *your* attention big time - to the degree that you
> > have read his material and now have tried to provide a psychological
> > diagnosis. Are you a psychologist; a psychiatrist? Do you have a point,
> > other than to condemn this fellow? Do you have anything positive to
> > offer?
> >
> > I suspect that you are projecting your own inadequacies. A person, in my
> > view, with genuine advanced awareness would offer something good rather
> > than just trash another as you have extensively and exclusively
> > attempted to do here. In fact Uncle Tantra's posts, in my view, are
> > directional toward the positive - while what you have posted here is
> > just a seemingly negative rant; a somehow self-serving attempt to
> > discredit another to no positive end. Even a personal vindictiveness
> > from you is indicated.
> >
> > My father told me many years ago that it's easy to criticize, but it is
> > in vain if you have nothing positive to offer. I'm just beginning to
> > actually learn that one myself.
> >
> > Unc may have some flaws, as most of us do (like me). But you have made a
> > major one of yours very apparent.
> >
> > Further, Unc and I don't always see eye to eye on everything even though
> > I like much of his stuff. So don't think that I'm just taking his side
> > as a buddy. My comments are solely directed in response to your post.
> >
> > BTW, Your signature "Peace" :-)" is disingenuous, since you have just
> > viciously attacked a fellow human being. Some might refer to that as
> > "hip 60's or 70's" hypocrisy.
> >
>
> Talk about calling the kettle black. You are correct John, you ARE a slow
> learner.
>
willytex
That's Ralph.
"Steve Ralph" <st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:YLgua.16052$9C6.8...@wards.force9.net...
> Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> is a cutting comment indeed.
>
> Putroid, I'm glad you joined in. You are like the reference terminal in a
> thermocouple,
> a rare gift indeed. I am wondering if you can accomplish the feat of not
> only a.m.t and a.d.c,
> but also a.b.s.f.g actually agreeing on something.
>
> In Shantytown, just down the lane from a.m.t, doutless you will shine like
> an amber glow,
> when all around is dark.
>
>
> Steve Ralph
>
>
>
>
>
>
willytex
That would be Rahula.
"S.o.B." <sciono...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d1fb396e.03050...@posting.google.com...
slider
popular demand wrote
just because you don't believe God exists, does not mean
that He does not exist.
### - likewise: just because you 'believe' god exists, does not mean
that He does exist.
heh, so now what - it's a total no-brainer ain't it? (like much of
duality)
imho the 'wiser' fool keeps the hell away from crap like that...
(that is unless he knows what he's doing ;)
slider
Ned Ludd wrote
How will we know the last crucifixion? Don't the crucifixionees
ask for it? Really. Do they think the power structure is not going
to react the way they do, and have done through time immemorial?
### - ah but isn't it also true that some of those 'crucifixionees'
were actually 'depending' plus 'relying' on that rather predictable
reaction of the power structure they were perhaps challenging in order
to insert something new into the collective-mind + understanding of
man?;)
i.e. that's what makes martyrs so very powerful for example no?:)
Ether St. Vying
> "Ether St. Vying" said:
> >
> > [snip recreational spanking]
>
> and made me laugh out loud. Cool. :-)
Giddiness is next to gawdliness!
Ether
Ether St. Vying
> "Ether St. Vying" <he...@now.eh> wrote:
>
> >I thought you had more spank in you than that! I'm disappointed.
>
> I thought if I didn't go completely over the top Vini might love me
> again.
If love is all there is, he has to love you regardless ... even if he
thinks you're mean!
I remember the good old days in Shantytown when Skeet Shooting was a
popular recreational activity. Remember how much fun we had with Pete
Ross?
> Then again, maybe I'm just getting old and weak...
You can't kid a kidder. :-)
Ether
Ether St. Vying
Ether St. Vying
> "Ether St. Vying" <he...@now.eh> wrote in message
> news:3EBA0F04...@now.eh...
> > Rbb wrote:
> >
> > > Garuda.... peace????
> > >
> > > Well you little hypocryt. Who's leg are you trying to pull?
> > > You couldn't pull your own leg now, no matter how hard you try.
> >
> > Ummm, sweetie, it's not his own leg that he's pulling ....
>
> No legs?
Leg central!
> Wheeling and dealing ?
I hope not!
> > > But post more. You only can become better.
> > >
> > > Nothing like a good piece of garbage to introduce yourself in a new
> place.
> > > I have always felt that a crossposted attempt of characterassasination
> > > invokes utter trust in the writer.
> >
> > It certainly goes a long way in creating an impression.
>
> So much for pointilism without a point.
He generated a handful of fingers pointing back.
> > > And considering from what you write you must be his analyst,
> >
> > He's an analist.
>
> as long as he swings his anal phase around his own neck.
I'm trying to picture this ...
>
> > > so who am I to
> > > disagree with you.
> >
> > Supreme Being or Saint? :-)
>
> You are blowing my cover!
What do you expect when you hide right out in the open!
> > > You are obviously the authority here.
> > > Just a small hint, don't you think it is illegal to post your clients
> > > dossier on newsnet?
> >
> > Who would take his rant to heart?
>
> The heartless ?
Tin men looking for the crack between words?
> > > Welcome to Shantytown.
> >
> > Where everyone likes their own shit best!
>
> And eats it too....
There's one on every Combo Platter!
> > > You are right in time for our gurutrashing convention
> > > take a number to have yours trashed without cost.
> >
> > We also have a lovely bonus square pill for you.
>
> But we have no more room on our private ward ....
The Random Attention Generator will have to do.
> > > How would you like it, well done, medium or raw?
> >
> > Should I heat up the hotplate?
>
> Absolutly, we do a flip turn over.
Then we'll have to uncook it anyone wants it raw. As long as we don't have to
unscramble the eggs, it shouldn't be a problem.
> > > And don't miss the evenings with our enlightenment mudfights.
> > > We have special mud that gives a pink glow.
> >
> > And a tingle!
>
> Yeap,but only to the enlightened.
And you all know who you are!
> > > If you have a tutu you are free to join.
> > > If you have no tutu...
> > > uh...oh....hm..... I think you are in trouble.
> > >
> > > Peace :)
> > >
> >
> > Love, groovy,
>
> hanky dory
>
> RBB
All's well that blends well.
Ether
Steve Ralph
"slider" <sli...@heh.com> wrote in message
news:b9fmlk$18r$2...@sparta.btinternet.com...
exist is the word for it - this is absolutely no proof at all that he
actually does exist.
So, Pooter-scooter, the onus is on you to prove that you exist, and are not
part of a random
monkeys experiment trying to emulate Shakespeare
SR
Steve Ralph
"Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
> You have to use other people to insult me? You are not smart enough to
> think those up yourself?
>
I always thaught you did rather well at insulting yourself, you don't need
help!
SR
Steve Ralph
> >
> > Ooh ohh, o no, he got me there. Never mind, doutless God will punish me
> for
> > that. Yes,
> > you think it is a theory. Weasel words! You subscribe to a religion that
> > puts creationism
> > way above evolution, don't you?
>
>
> Steveboy, are you so intolerant about other people's beliefs?
You spend enough of your time reviling the opinions and beliefs of others,
you tell me! You just hate your sister for sticking to what she believes,
and
not doing what you wanted. You whine about that every opportunity you get.
Why you can
> not even provide one shred of scientific evidence that your religion can
> create something from nothing and life out of inorganic materials. Your
> faith in evolution requires more imagination than mine.
>
It is true. I cannot provide even one shred of evidence that my religion ( C
of E lapsed b.t.w)
can create something from nothing and life out of inorganic materials.
I cannot provide even one shred of evidence that *any* religion can create
something
out of nothing and life out of inorganic materials.
If I could create something out of nothing I would follow your example and
create a total
idiot out of nothing. I would pick up a lump of inorganic material, like a
rock, and make
it come to life. I could call it Pet rock, and spend a lot of time kicking
it.
Obviously when I drop a brick on my foot, that is a matter of faith, not
physics.
You seem to have got big bang theory mixed up with darwinism.
> > > > Putroid, I'm glad you joined in. \
> > >
> > > Thank you. I did it mainly because of your reply to that one post.
So
> > > thanks you once again. I had forgotted how much of a blast it is.
No, you are just pathetically easy troll-bait
> > Yes, lets go back to your recent post
> >
> > someone posts:
> >
> > > The SuperPower of Peace is our only hope
> > >
<SNIP>
> > This leads me to the theory that you are in fact a racist, who does not
> > believe in free speech.
> > Or did you get the words in the wrong order as usual?
>
> Do I really have to explain what a Marxist government does to free speech?
No, the U.S.A is obviously becoming marxist, so I can see for myself. And
you have
not even attempted to refute the accusation that you are a racist, as usual.
> If you and your friends really want to create that Marxist state, you will
> have to move out of the US. Because the US is a free country. Are you
that
> dense stevy boy?
>
If the U.S was a free country, I could create a Marxist state if I wished
to. Otherwise
it would be against the law, and not a free country at all. And how can I
move out of
a country I do not live in, have never lived in, and will probably never
live in? And why on
earth do you think I would wish to create a Marxist state? Wherever have I
expressed that
view? I know you love to spend hours doing Google searches to find an off
the cuff remark
made years ago, so go to it.
I can't think of anything more uninteresting. Marxists are terminally boring
i.m.h.o, and not nearly
as much fun as fundies.
SR
>
Ned Ludd
I don't think martyrs are powerful. They get used by other people
for whatever purpose those other people want. Do you really think
Jesus wanted the Christianity that evolved into the mess it became
(quite quickly) after his death? Do you think Gandhi wanted the
India that evolved under his name-sakes?
Ned
slider
Ned Ludd wrote...
>
How will we know the last crucifixion? Don't the crucifixionees
ask for it? Really. Do they think the power structure is not
going to react the way they do, and have done through time
>> immemorial?
> ah but isn't it also true that some of those 'crucifixionees'
were actually 'depending' plus 'relying' on that rather predictable
reaction of the power structure they were perhaps challenging in order
to insert something new into the collective-mind + understanding of
man?;) i.e. that's what makes martyrs so very powerful for example
> no?:)
I don't think martyrs are powerful. They get used by other people
for whatever purpose those other people want. Do you really think
Jesus wanted the Christianity that evolved into the mess it became
(quite quickly) after his death? Do you think Gandhi wanted the
India that evolved under his name-sakes?
### - aye... but then i reckon old jc (for example) would have
probably been quite pleased that his story of say the good Samaritan +
that of turning the other cheek etc (+ many others like that) had
persisted + influenced society to this day no?
plus and that's the point really... that leaving the obvious
corruption aside (there is always corruption:) not ALL martyrs were
just a bunch of self-seeking, deluded idiots - but were, in many
instances, genuine people giving/donating the only 'real' thing
anyone actually HAS trying to further some worthy cause or
another: their life!
plus just think of people like Luther king's influence on the
civil rights movement for example - or that of Malcolm X's revealing
clarity on racism and bullshit rt-wing religion - plus indeed
many others who DIED for their convictions and to 'establish' their
truth which the world didn't (and in most cases still doesn't;) want
to see...
mind you, when one is in a bit of a bad mood... 'everything' seems
like bullshit no? (smile:)
Stu
st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk wrote on 5/9/03 6:37 AM:
Emulate Shakespeare? In this case the monkey just barely types out
discernable sentences.
--
~Stu
Back by popular demand
"Stu" <nos...@no.spam> wrote in message
news:BAE13BD6.1D432%nos...@no.spam...
> in article B8Oua.16464$xd5.8...@stones.force9.net, Steve Ralph at
> st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk wrote on 5/9/03 6:37 AM:
>
>
> discernable sentences.
ROTFLOL, you just got a mayor trouncing by alt.skeptics and you call me a
monkey?
Jeremy Donovan
> Jeremy wrote:
>
> > "Ether St. Vying" <he...@now.eh> wrote:
> >
> > >I thought you had more spank in you than that! I'm disappointed.
> >
> > I thought if I didn't go completely over the top Vini might love me
> > again.
>
> If love is all there is, he has to love you regardless ... even if he
> thinks you're mean!
Well, new testament Jer wants to forgive Vin for being so difficult,
and get back to being on friendly terms. Old testament Jer wants to
visit meanness upon him for an entire season. Everyday ordinary Jer
can't be bothered with that beyond a few posts, and wants to go have
lunch. So ... if you're out there listening, Vin, peace out, and have
a good lunch!! :-)
> I remember the good old days in Shantytown when Skeet Shooting was a
> popular recreational activity. Remember how much fun we had with Pete
> Ross?
Sure, we had 'rediculous' amounts of fun with old Peat Moss. :-)
Now there was a real shaman...
> > Then again, maybe I'm just getting old and weak...
>
> You can't kid a kidder. :-)
No? I thought they liked to kid around.
I wish I wasn't really getting old and weak...
-Jeremy
fredrock
No more than buddha would have wanted a Japanese cult to release Sarin gas
in a subway. Or Muhammad wanted criminals to fly airplanes into buildings. I
think Jesus did what he did without worrying about potential
misinterpretations through the centuries. the misinterpretations and our
analyses of them are overlays. If he (or anyone) tried to second-guess every
word, every action, there would be no movement whatsoever.
Fred
Love
(fke...@NOSPAMatt.net) wrote...
Whoa, look at that odd list of newsgroups!
Anyway, you are right IMO. Some might say that the results
of what Jesus or Muhammed or Buddha did is reason to forgo
*any* such activity, that you just know no good will come of
it if your influence takes root and inspires a lot of
people. They might say it's not a matter of second-guessing
but just a matter of avoiding it altogether because it turns
out badly too often. I don't accept that argument because
it always seems to be made by those who are collecting
evidence _against_, not any and all available evidence.
For instance, "Islamic extremists crashed airplanes into the
WTC" looks bad for the religion Muhammed founded, but only
if you can draw a reasonably straight line between the two.
Was it Islam that made (or even lubricated) their extremism,
or did they merely have to find ways to make their
extremism compatible with Islam, since Islam would impede
them if they could not, because it was their faith?
The CIA World Factbook reveals something about whether
Islam has been beneficial or not, in at least one way.
If you get a chance start looking up AIDS/HIV incidence
and religious mixes in different countries in Africa.
By that measure Islam has saved millions of people. That's
not the whole story either, but it's as much a part of it
as the notion that Islam led to the WTC terrorist acts.
Probably more.
--
May Shai-Hulud clear the path before you.
Love - to email me add dawt addr dawt komm
cr...@att.net
> mind you, when one is in a bit of a bad mood... 'everything' seems
> like bullshit no? (smile:)
Just a position. Seems like shit
but it's not. Self-reflection only
reflects back shitty ego. Not much
you can do at that POINT. (get it?) :)
Virtual Vin
> > Jeremy wrote:
> > > "Ether St. Vying" <he...@now.eh> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I thought you had more spank in you than that! I'm disappointed.
> > >
> > > I thought if I didn't go completely over the top Vini might love me
> > > again.
> >
> > If love is all there is, he has to love you regardless ... even if he
> > thinks you're mean!
>
> Well, new testament Jer wants to forgive Vin for being so difficult,
> and get back to being on friendly terms. Old testament Jer wants to
> visit meanness upon him for an entire season. Everyday ordinary Jer
> can't be bothered with that beyond a few posts, and wants to go have
> lunch. So ... if you're out there listening, Vin, peace out, and have
> a good lunch!! :-)
Smitty Werben Jaeger Mann-Jensen,
I have been having diffi-cultie with my newsgroups server on Verizon
and we wound up ditching our Verizon DSL for Comcast Cable. s'taking a
while to figure out and get an appt. to have it installed. I am
phoning this one in through Google groups, which I am not totally
adept with yet. So I hope this post makes it, if not, oh well...
LIFE IN HELL
by Matt Groening (a close friend of Frank Zappa)
(two guys, one is dancing naked)
Vini: I know what's good, not only for myself but for you as well.
Jeremy:(dancing naked)
Vini: I'm not trying to control you. I'm just trying to get you to do
what I want you to do.
Jeremy: (dancing naked)
Vini: I just can't stand by, when I have such valuable advice for you.
Jeremy: (dancing naked)
Vini: You just need to allow me to rescue you from your own misguided
desires.
Jeremy: (dancing naked)
Vini: Don't worry about me, let's keep the focus on you.
Jeremy: (dancing naked)
Vini: Just let me steer you and you'll be much happier.
Jeremy: (dancing naked)
Vini: Just admit I am right and we can proceed in harmony.
Jeremy: (poised on his head, upside down) Fine. I'll do whatever you
want.
Vini: Well, I didn't say to stop dancing.
Virtual Vin
cr...@att.net
> If it seems like butter
> but it's snot...
> It's Chifon.
Is that water on your chin?
answer: "No it's snot" ....:)
Steve Ralph
"Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
> >
> > > > > Coming from one who considers creationism to be reality, that
> > > > > is a cutting comment indeed.
> > > >
> did
> > > not
> > > > answer my previous question as what that would one who bears false
> > witness
> > > evolution
> > > > is an theory.
> > > > >
> > In fact, there is one point about creationism that you have consistently
> > failed to address as regards
> > this mostly discredited theory.
>
> The only thing they needed was scientific proof for the Macro Evolution
> theory. In over 12 years - no takers - Does that tell you something? No
I
> did not think so.
>
I haven't a clue what you are talking about.
O.K. Right, put 'macro evolution' into a search engine.
Right. What is this to do with creationism? What has this got to
do with the comment I made? Absolutely none as far as I can see. Why don't
you
just attempt to answer the question asked, or do you really not understand
it?
I have 15 year olds in class that seem to understand plain ordinary English
better than you do.
> > Why do you think the human race is so damm
> > important that
> > God decided to build the whole damm universe around us? Seems very
> > egocentric to me.
> >
>
> Steve just because you don't believe God exists, does not mean that He
does
> not exist.
>
Where in the above sentence have I said I don't believe that God exists? The
logic of this
appears to run : Steve thinks creationism is a load of nonsense, so
therefore he doesn't believe
God exists. Or - Steve thinks Darwinism is more likely than spontaneous
creation of a universe
complete with planets, evolved species, etc, etc, so therefore he thinks god
doesn't exist.
Yes, right, that follows.
Let me rephrase the question.
Why are we considered so important that we would be placed in the center of
the universe by the
creator? Why are we so special? Why are we so much more important than other
sentient
species?
I don't think Darwinism is the whole story, not at all, but that doesn't
give creationism
any validity as a result. Oh, look, Darwinism is a bit wonky, creationism
must be
o.k. after all.
To quote: "The meek shall inherit the earth"
I'm told that Dolphins are resistant to radiation.
SR
Ned Ludd
news:3ebc1819$1...@news.eol.ca...
Ned:
>> I don't think martyrs are powerful. They get used by other people
>> for whatever purpose those other people want. Do you really think
>> Jesus wanted the Christianity that evolved into the mess it became
>> (quite quickly) after his death? Do you think Gandhi wanted the
>> India that evolved under his name-sakes?
Fred:
> No more than buddha would have wanted a Japanese cult to release
> Sarin gas in a subway. Or Muhammad wanted criminals to fly airplanes
> into buildings. I think Jesus did what he did without worrying
> about potential misinterpretations through the centuries. the
> misinterpretations and our analyses of them are overlays. If he
> (or anyone) tried to second-guess every word, every action, there
> would be no movement whatsoever.
>
Except I'm suggesting that any initial 'movement' is counteracted
centuries later by the retarding influence of the religion, after
it gets established. I'm not sure that the net effect is any more
than it would have been without the religion at all.
Love:
I wouldn't push that argument too far at all. You are talking
about people who are essentially slaves to their mullahs and imams
'enjoying' the benefit of being imprisoned in their countries and
denied the freedoms of economic and social interaction that, yes,
breed AIDS, drug addiction, etc. which come from that personal
freedom.
Ned
willytex
Ralph - It could be his wife for all you know! What makes you think you're
dialoging with one person?
Steve Ralph
"willytex" <will...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mOmcnZnbLqs...@texas.net...
SR
Back by popular demand
Why does that not surprise me? Maybe you should read the posts, in which
we discussed this before, again?
> O.K. Right, put 'macro evolution' into a search engine.
I will repeat this for the umpteeth time.
1. Create something from nothing.
2. Create life from inorganic materials.
> Right. What is this to do with creationism?
It is the basic problem with explaining how life on earth comes from
nothing. Your god - "millions and millions or year" - sometimes called
"mother nature" has the same scientific problem, the lack of any shred of
scientific evidence that a biblical creation theory has.
> What has this got to
> do with the comment I made? Absolutely none as far as I can see. Why don't
> you
> just attempt to answer the question asked, or do you really not understand
> it?
My apologies that you can not understand me.
> I have 15 year olds in class that seem to understand plain ordinary
English
> better than you do.
Well that makes sense, my English teacher told me I should not play cards in
his class. Maybe he was correct. But does my grammar have anything to do
with the fact that you annd Stu still cannot produce any scientific evidence
for the two points I made above?
>
> > > Why do you think the human race is so damm
> > > important that
> > > God decided to build the whole damm universe around us? Seems very
> > > egocentric to me.
> > >
> >
> > Steve just because you don't believe God exists, does not mean that He
> does
> > not exist.
> >
>
> Where in the above sentence have I said I don't believe that God exists?
Do you want me to go through the archives and find it for you, or did you
change your mind and now claim to believe there is a God?
> The
> logic of this
> appears to run : Steve thinks creationism is a load of nonsense, so
> therefore he doesn't believe
> God exists.
No: Steve does not believe there is a God because he has stated so
previously.
> Or - Steve thinks Darwinism is more likely than spontaneous
> creation of a universe
> complete with planets, evolved species, etc, etc, so therefore he thinks
god
> doesn't exist.
>
> Yes, right, that follows.
>
> Let me rephrase the question.
>
> Why are we considered so important that we would be placed in the center
of
> the universe by the
> creator?
Why do you think that? I don't. You like to set up strawman arguments
don't you?
> Why are we so special? Why are we so much more important than other
> sentient
> species?
Think Steve. Think.
>
> I don't think Darwinism is the whole story, not at all, but that doesn't
> give creationism
> any validity as a result. Oh, look, Darwinism is a bit wonky, creationism
> must be
> o.k. after all.
>
> To quote: "The meek shall inherit the earth"
Sorry about that. You lose out again.
>
> I'm told that Dolphins are resistant to radiation.
Yes but they lost in the play offs.
Steve Ralph
Petrig, *this* was the question I asked you about creationism
Why do you think the human race is so damm
> > > > important that
> > > > God decided to build the whole damm universe around us? Seems very
> > > > egocentric to me.
*that* was what I asked, and you have not given any answer.
O.K.? Got that?
> > > Really? And why do you think that NOBODY has collected that
> $250,000.00?
> > > The only thing they needed was scientific proof for the Macro
Evolution
> > > theory. In over 12 years - no takers - Does that tell you something?
> No
> > I
> > > did not think so.
> > >
> >
> > I haven't a clue what you are talking about.
>
> Why does that not surprise me? Maybe you should read the posts, in which
> we discussed this before, again?
Why do you think I keep details of posts in my head? Or even on the computer
for that matter.
You are the one who loves going through google to drag up what someone said
years before as
proof of something.
You halfwit. I am trying to get you to answer a question.
I AM NOT TRYING TO PROVE DARWINISM
nor could I, as I cannot disprove creationism. And why would I bother, its
all a big
mystery. Though I think given the sheer weight of observed fact creationism
is on a bit of a looser.
That is an *opinion*
Got that?
I am asking you a polite question. (o.k, I'll take the d word out)
The question is:
> > > > Why do you think the human race is so
> > > > important that
> > > > God decided to build the whole universe around us? Seems very
> > > > egocentric to me.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Steve just because you don't believe God exists, does not mean that He
> > does
> > > not exist.
> > >
Thanks for the answer. BUT YOU HAVE ANSWERED THE WRONG QUESTION.
> > Where in the above sentence have I said I don't believe that God exists?
>
> Do you want me to go through the archives and find it for you, or did you
> change your mind and now claim to believe there is a God?
>
Whatever turns you on
> > The
> > logic of this
> > appears to run : Steve thinks creationism is a load of nonsense, so
> > therefore he doesn't believe
> > God exists.
>
> No: Steve does not believe there is a God because he has stated so
> previously.
>
Yup, got me there. Thats proof.
Just incredible really. Stuff like this deserves framing.
SR
Steve Ralph
"Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
Back by popular demand
>
> Petrig, *this* was the question I asked you about creationism
>
> Why do you think the human race is so damm
> > > > > important that
> > > > > God decided to build the whole damm universe around us? Seems very
> > > > > egocentric to me.
>
> *that* was what I asked, and you have not given any answer.
>
> O.K.? Got that?
I got it alright, but did you get the answer I gave you:
> > Why do you think that? I don't.
Do I need to spell it for you?
<snip>
.
> >
> > Why does that not surprise me? Maybe you should read the posts, in
which
> > we discussed this before, again?
>
> Why do you think I keep details of posts in my head? Or even on the
computer
> for that matter.
I am sorry, I forgot you had the attention span of a long time TMer. Must
be all those TM "better than a drug" high experiences.
> You are the one who loves going through google to drag up what someone
said
> years before as
> proof of something.
A terrible habit. Truth does matter.
<snip>
>> But does my grammar have anything to
do
> > with the fact that you and Stu still cannot produce any scientific
> evidence
> > for the two points I made above?
> >
> >
> You halfwit. I am trying to get you to answer a question.
> I AM NOT TRYING TO PROVE DARWINISM
> nor could I, as I cannot disprove creationism.
Why then do you feel the need to ridicule it?
> And why would I bother, its
> all a big
> mystery. Though I think given the sheer weight of observed fact
creationism
> is on a bit of a looser.
Would you be so kind as to show us the sheer weight of observed facts that
prove that one can create "something from nothing" and "life from inorganic
matter"?
> That is an *opinion*
I am glad you are an opinionated person.
>
> Got that?
I don't think that escaped anyone's mind.
>
> I am asking you a polite question. (o.k, I'll take the d word out)
> The question is:
>
> > > > > Why do you think the human race is so
> > > > > important that
> > > > > God decided to build the whole universe around us? Seems very
> > > > > egocentric to me.
> > > > >
I already answered your strawman setup: I don't
Back by popular demand
Love
wrote...
Oh I recognize that, and your point about the "net
effect" after the initial movement is a good one
too. Nevertheless I do not think we can assess
religion as a thing in itself, or even particular
religions, with lists of pros and cons, especially
if we aren't being rigourous about trying to make
those lists comprehensive and contextualizing each
item well enough. Calling the WTC attack a result
of Muhammed's teaching is an example of a failure
to contextualize, IMO, or at least it very well
could be.
Stu
st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk wrote on 5/10/03 11:29 AM:
My dearest Steve:
I think he is referring to the Mayor who trounced me on alt.skeptics. Its
part of a program he has of misreading posts and commenting on them.
BTW I was not trounced. My arguments were rebutted by people who do not
give any credibility to a spiritual side of man. I was arguing in his favor
suggesting there may be more to the world than just a bunch of atoms
floating around in time. But I guess he missed that. It would have been an
opportune time for his holiness to chime in and enlighten a whole group of
rank atheists.
Do you think his lack of understanding of simple posts has anything to do
with his obsessive focus on the Rabbi on a stick?
--
~Stu
Steve Ralph
"Stu" <nos...@no.spam> wrote in message
> in article 3xbva.18450$xd5.9...@stones.force9.net, Steve Ralph at
> st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk wrote on 5/10/03 11:29 AM:
>
> >
> > "Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
> > news:HHSua.5690$t53....@news02.roc.ny.frontiernet.net...
> >>
> >> "Stu" <nos...@no.spam> wrote in message
> >> news:BAE13BD6.1D432%nos...@no.spam...
> >>> in article B8Oua.16464$xd5.8...@stones.force9.net, Steve Ralph at
> >>> st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk wrote on 5/9/03 6:37 AM:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Emulate Shakespeare? In this case the monkey just barely types out
> >>> discernable sentences.
> >>
> >> ROTFLOL, you just got a mayor trouncing by alt.skeptics and you call me
a
> >> monkey?
> >>
> > I think that is 'major' not mayor.
> >
LMAO!
Ned Ludd
Yes, it's the Indians all over again. Except this time
they have nukes. No, that's not quite right. It is empire,
and they had their turn, through the Seljuk and Ottoman
Turks, and now it's our turn. And we will most certainly
end up in decrepitude and torpor, and they did and all did.
Two hundred years after Augustus (10 generations) the Romans
were still stomping the Germans. (To no avail, obviously.)
So, in 2203 we will probably still be dealing with Islamic
terrorists.
A small point - when the scripture of a religion directly
supports terrorism and forced conversions, as does the Koran,
it is germane to the discussion, and both it and the religion
as a whole are subject to retribution for extreme terrorist
acts. (Ergo, my proposed three treasured holes.)
Ned
Back by popular demand
"Stu" <nos...@no.spam> wrote in message
> in article 3xbva.18450$xd5.9...@stones.force9.net, Steve Ralph at
> st...@steveralph.f9.co.uk wrote on 5/10/03 11:29 AM:
>
>
> give any credibility to a spiritual side of man. I was arguing in his
favor
> suggesting there may be more to the world than just a bunch of atoms
> floating around in time. But I guess he missed that. It would have been
an
> opportune time for his holiness to chime in and enlighten a whole group of
> rank atheists.
>
You got trounced, because you were attempting to justify your religious
leaning in s scientific court. As the former mayor of Carmel used to say:
"Man's gotto know his limitations."
I know not to mix religion with science or visa versa. But that is what you
have been raised up with in the TM world, so what can you do? Learn and
lick your wounds, I guess. Of course you could always pick on others.
Steve Ralph
Petrus, one of my critisicisms of creationism is that it appears to put
mankind very much in the
centre of creation.
I disagree with this, as I do not see why we are any more or less important
than anyone else
who might (or might not) inhabit our universe, or indeed this Earth.
Awaiting you response,
Steve Ralph.
"Back by popular demand" <Nos...@Nono.Nothere> wrote in message
news:ymcva.5855$b5...@news02.roc.ny.frontiernet.net...
Love
(ned...@ix.netcom.com) wrote...
"The Three Treasured Holes" heh heh heh
Well, I bet I could find a pile of Islamic scholars
to contextualize that stuff differently for ya, but
point taken nonetheless. It IS germane to any
analysis.
Retribution is such a funny word, funny as in odd,
queer, peculiar. It is imbued with a sense of
cosmic justice, not just revenge, although that's
all it really is. Careful you don't burn your
hands while holding your enemies feet to the fire.
Ether St. Vying
> "Ether St. Vying" <ro...@rain.gdn> wrote:
>
>
> > I remember the good old days in Shantytown when Skeet Shooting was a
> > popular recreational activity. Remember how much fun we had with Pete
> > Ross?
>
> Sure, we had 'rediculous' amounts of fun with old Peat Moss. :-)
Yeah! The guy was killed by a fir trapper in a past life!
> Now there was a real shaman...
He was special.
> > > Then again, maybe I'm just getting old and weak...
> >
> > You can't kid a kidder. :-)
>
> No? I thought they liked to kid around.
I thought you were joking about getting old and weak ...
>
> I wish I wasn't really getting old and weak...
But maybe not. The old part is inevitable, provided you don't die. :-)
Vitality needn't fade with age. Weakness is a state of mind (unless it's
a physical fact), if you know what I mean.
Steve Ralph
> >
> > BTW I was not trounced. My arguments were rebutted by people who do not
> > give any credibility to a spiritual side of man. I was arguing in his
> favor
> > suggesting there may be more to the world than just a bunch of atoms
> > floating around in time. But I guess he missed that. It would have
been
> an
> > opportune time for his holiness to chime in and enlighten a whole group
of
> > rank atheists.
> >
>
> You got trounced, because you were attempting to justify your religious
> leaning in s scientific court. As the former mayor of Carmel used to say:
> "Man's gotto know his limitations."
>
> I know not to mix religion with science or visa versa.
What? Really? You mix religion and science ALL THE TIME!!
LMAO, keep 'em coming Petroid. You'll be telling us
creationism has nothing to do with religion next!
Steve Ralph
But that is what you
> have been raised up with in the TM world, so what can you do? Learn and
> lick your wounds, I guess. Of course you could always pick on others.
Or convert them, like you attempt to do
I tried to x-post this to alt.sci.skeptics but failed, I'm wondering what
they have to say
Back by popular demand
> O.K. Lets try again.
>
> Petrus, one of my critisicisms of creationism is that it appears to put
> mankind very much in the
> centre of creation.
> I disagree with this, as I do not see why we are any more or less
important
> than anyone else
> who might (or might not) inhabit our universe, or indeed this Earth.
>
> Awaiting you response,
>
> Steve Ralph.
Ah my fine Stevey, as I see you still have the need to mark all my posts
like a drunken Chihuahua.
I do not think that we are anymore special in God's eyes than anyone else.
It is obvious to me that you do not understand that God is love. Have a
nice life.
kab...@iipmail.net
i can just feel the love
Love
(kab...@iipmail.net) wrote...
on the permafrost
kab...@iipmail.net
ever fucked in a snow drift
its kinda cool
Love
(kab...@iipmail.net) wrote...
I'll bet, but no, I was saving that experience
for when I got bored with everything else.
small tortoiseshell
> >>>>
> >>>>I do not think that we are anymore special in God's eyes than anyone else.
> >>>>It is obvious to me that you do not understand that God is love.
if "anymore special in gods eyes then anyone ells" as you say, you
speak as that "no moore special" as well, so your "obvious" is your
not-love, Period.
Garuda
> directional toward the positive - while what you have posted here is
> just a seemingly negative rant; a somehow self-serving attempt to
> discredit another to no positive end. Even a personal vindictiveness
> from you is indicated.
>
I loved all these responses from strangers. John above critiques me
for being critical...that seems to be the height of the intellectual
aspirations here.
>
> My father told me many years ago that it's easy to criticize, but it is
> in vain if you have nothing positive to offer.
>
John seems to have the opposite relationship with his Father than
Uncle Tantra, a trusting one, that is why John becomes offended by my
critique of the cyber-father symbol Uncle Tantra. It also points to
why John in a fatherly way, trys to point out the error of my ways.
He is really saying:
"Father (Uncle Tantra Knows Best".
In terms of Transactional Analysis, John is the Parent admonishing, in
a fatherly way, the Child [myself] and his post.
No one has addressed the issue of how powerful sub-conscious forces
compell Uncle Tantra to both trash and praise his teachers (Fathers).
I wish Uncle Tantra would provide us with information regarding his
childhood relationship with his father and mother, so I can gleam more
regarding his Odepius complex and its relationship to his rebellion to
spiritual father figures such as Rama, Castaneda (Don Juan), or TM.
Facinating.
Uncle Tantra
>John seems to have the opposite relationship with his Father than
>Uncle Tantra, a trusting one, that is why John becomes offended by my
>critique of the cyber-father symbol Uncle Tantra.
Hey James, I think you're barking up the
wrong tree here. I suspect no one in the
entire universe, much less these newsgroups,
considers me a "father figure." If *you* do,
have no fear, I was nowhere near that neigh-
borhood when your Mom got knocked up.
;-)
Unc
P.S. May I ask what on earth inspired you
(if that is the correct term) to post what you
did? I mean, it's been months since we last
"talked" on Ramalila. Are you still holding
a grudge against me (for believing what I do)
and them (for limiting you to one board that
they renamed The Village Idiot in your honor
for being abusive) after all this time? Real
Buddhist of you, dude. :-)
I *know* you're a smart guy, with many good
qualities -- I just think you have either too much
time on your hands or are indulging in a bit
too much of Hawaii's #1 cash crop or both.
I also know that you're still, all these years
down the road, having a difficult time dealing
with the fact that Rama just offed himself
without a wave goodbye or a backward
glance at dedicated students such as yourself.
But you might want to consider honoring his
memory in more productive ways than by
posting vitriol to folks who don't know you
from Adam and might mistake you for a
*typical* Rama student. Just a suggestion...
Bese
not appear to be good. I'm honestly worried about what's going on with you.
Why are you so focused on UT?
Your post should have been kept in house where it belongs. Now you are
spreading what say you hate so much, and you aren't coming off very well in
the process.
so far your actions have gotten publishers interested in UT's book. That
should tell you something about what your doing. while UT's off living his
life, jetting off to France getting calls from publishers what is going on
with you? Stick to the positives you do, teaching and spreading the dharma
and let this stuff go. Your attachment is showing and not on in a way I
(IMHO) consider good for you. So from my heart please give it break let it
go and start letting the positive come out.
All this battling between folks trying to find their way to Enlightenment is
BS. It's detrimental to ALL involved.
Sow some of the good stuff you've got going on. As my dear old Mom says
"you attract more flies with honey."
Take it easy,
Bese
"Garuda" <garu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c0b9b4cc.0305...@posting.google.com...
Steve Ralph
> No one has addressed the issue of how powerful sub-conscious forces
> compell Uncle Tantra to both trash and praise his teachers (Fathers).
No-one, particularly yourself, has addressed the issue of why you feel
obliged
to post such a badly polished turd.
> I wish Uncle Tantra would provide us with information regarding his
> childhood relationship with his father and mother, so I can gleam more
> regarding his Odepius complex and its relationship to his rebellion to
> spiritual father figures such as Rama, Castaneda (Don Juan), or TM.
>
> Facinating.
No-one, particularly yourself, has addressed the issue of why you find this
fascinating.
And I dout very much that anyone could care less.
SR
RoboDwarfe
:-)
Gotta watch out for those "number one fan" guys.
Looking for a Rama substitute to butt heads with.
Rbb
>>In fact Uncle Tantra's posts, in my view, are
>>directional toward the positive - while what you have posted here is
>>just a seemingly negative rant; a somehow self-serving attempt to
>>discredit another to no positive end. Even a personal vindictiveness
>>from you is indicated.
>>
>>
> I loved all these responses from strangers.
You are ever so welcome. We like to respond to strangers. The stranger
the better.
> John above critiques me
> for being critical...that seems to be the height of the intellectual
> aspirations here.
I would rather call that the low of intellectual aspirations, but never
mind.
>
>
>>My father told me many years ago that it's easy to criticize, but it is
>>in vain if you have nothing positive to offer.
He loved his sandwich with something in between. A wise man.
>>
>>
>
> John seems to have the opposite relationship with his Father than
> Uncle Tantra, a trusting one, that is why John becomes offended by my
> critique of the cyber-father symbol Uncle Tantra. It also points to
> why John in a fatherly way, trys to point out the error of my ways.
> He is really saying:
>
> "Father (Uncle Tantra Knows Best".
Right now I feel like being confronted with one of those see something
in all those points pictures. If you look long enough you see something.
Specially when you have a great imagination.
>
> In terms of Transactional Analysis, John is the Parent admonishing, in
> a fatherly way, the Child [myself] and his post.
I have done a lot of TA but your way of interpreting astonishes me to
put it lightly.
>
> No one has addressed the issue of how powerful sub-conscious forces
> compell Uncle Tantra to both trash and praise his teachers (Fathers).
> I wish Uncle Tantra would provide us with information regarding his
> childhood relationship with his father and mother, so I can gleam more
> regarding his Odepius complex and its relationship to his rebellion to
> spiritual father figures such as Rama, Castaneda (Don Juan), or TM.
Man you should build a keyhole in front of your monitor to heighten
your pleasure.
Keep up the digging, just make sure it is not your own grave..
RBB