CAMPBELLJD@webtv.net (J.D. Campbell) wrote:

I don't know; either my English isn't quite up to the task, or you are
utterly incoherent. If correct speech means expressing one's thoughts
in a clear line, and in an understandable manner, well, you're not
doing it. Your writing looks like an attempt of a million monkeys with
typewriters to write Hamlet.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Maja Marchig

Maja Marchig wrote:
>>Naravno, to je dakako istina, i zato rasprave o tome nisu racionalne,
>>sto se vidi iz kolicine gluposti koje su ljudi u stanju bubnuti na tu
>>temu, a koje nikako ne bi mogli smisliti da misle hladnom glavom, jer
>>bi im se neke stvari cinile ocigledno glupima, kako i izgledaju
>>objektivnom promatracu.
>
>well, meni se cini da za kvalitetno okoncanje rasprave postoji samo
>jedan izlaz : izvanredni religija meeting; posjet klaonici u 11:00,
>rucak u 12:00

:))))

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

"Hari Har Singh" wrote:
>> It looks like the best thing one can do to attack someone is to claim
>> that (s)he's a victim. Victims are always right. Victims can
>> retaliate. Victims don't get blamed. Gee, I should find myself some
>> guru to sexually abuse me, then I'll be really cool. I could make my
>> own crusade, fueled by righteous anger. Never mind that it's only a
>> diversion, a ploy meant to divert attention from the real problems.
>
>Yes, that's a problem posts like Kunal Singhs can create: That ppl react
>like Daniel did.
>Of course there is sexual abuse of women (and man), girls and boys, and of
>course gurus, priests, etc. are able to do this too.
>I remeber just a short time ago the case of a catholic cardinal who had over
>decades used little boys for his sexual needs. This man is still a priest.
>
>In Germany every 3rd woman and every 5th man has been sexually abused in
>their childhood or as a grown up. The number of unknown cases is probably
>much higher.

I don't dispute those facts, and sexual abuse is an unfortunate fact
of our world, as well as female circumcision in Africa, mine fields in
Kambodia, oil spils and nuclear pollution. It shows that people are
disaligned with dharma, and that something has to be done about it, or
everything will keep going to hell.

There are several problems that I manage to notice. First is that some
people, mostly those who are _not_ victims of abuse, exploit sexual
abuse as a means of an ad hominem attack, which is extremely difficult
to defend oneself from. If you have a child and someone accuses you of
sexual abuse, it is a problem to defend oneself even if you're
absolutely innocent. The very thought of being blamed for such a thing
makes people avoid every possibility of an accusation; they will avoid
children, or avoid showing them any physical sign of affection. They
won't hug them or cuddle with them or tickle them until they laugh.
They will avoid touching "problematic areas", thus implicitly making
kids know that something is wrong with that, that they are not fully
accepted and loved, that some parts of them are rejected. This will
create trauma and frustrations, of course.

And you know what will happen then? Children will want their entire
being accepted, and sexuality is an important part of everyone's
being. They will want others not to be rejected as they were. Since
their thoughts dwell on sexuality, and people's sexuality is seldom
pure, the sexual instincts will become intermixed with protective
instincts, and so they'll want to teach the children how to experience
their sexuality, and the very thought of such education will be
extremely sexually appealing to them, because they project, they
themselves are the ones who wanted to be sexually accepted as
children.
And so, the righteously appalled individuals, who demonize the
perpetrators and pamper the victims, and who condemn every form of
children's sexual education, are the very ones who produce pedophilia
and sexual abuse.
This is, of course, one of the causes of the problem. The other cause
can be real sickness, pedophilia in the narrow sense, or one's own
sexual victimization in the childhood, which creates an imprint, of
how it's supposed to be, and that pattern repeats itself.
People who demonize the pedophiles and sexuality are in fact afraid of
the truth: sexuality cannot be restrained to just one narrow corner in
human life. It is all-pervading, because it is inseparably integrated
with the life itself. Every aspect of life is saturated with the
sexual force, and in our relationship with children our sense of being
alive becomes very, very present. We open up and play, and when we
open up, all the artificial barriers drop. Similarly, that's how the
relationship with gurus and their disciples become sexual: these
relationships are usually very deep and loving, they go to the core of
the being, beyond the habits and blockages. If one isn't accustomed of
letting one's sexuality flow freely, without restraint and expression
through physical sex, the control will undoubtedly burst and we'll
sometimes have cases of sexual abuse, or mutually consensual sexual
relations that become mistaken for abuse, because of the "villain
guru" patterns. I know all those things from experience with my
students: hugs are normal among us, because people need that physical
contact in order to express love. When we hug, the energy balances
itself, it doesn't build up to explode through sex. People don't need
to have sex in order to express affection, and if they express love
through words and hugs, they won't be forced into sex on one side or
alienation and rejection on the other; they'll have sex when they
really want to have sex, out of mutual consent, not out of despair.
Instead of understanding those mechanisms, people think in terms of
victims and villains; that's because they can't accept themselves and
their own sexuality; they see it as wrong. Those who criticize the
homosexuals are most often desperately afraid of their own need to
express love to other men; they don't know how to do it in a benign
way, but the need doesn't go away, and so they sometimes jump into
another extreme, open homosexuality, which is in fact something they
don't really want; but they don't dare to simply hug another man and
tell him that they love him; in such situations, sex seems to become
inevitable.
If I even for a moment tried to repress the flow of my sexual energy,
by now I would have had sex with all of my students or most of them,
both male and female. That is a fact. In fact, the flow of love/energy
is even greater than it would be if I _did_ have sex with them, but
physical sex is obsolete, because there is no feeling of rejection or
separation. I think that this is the real formula for healing this
problem.
But I guess that the problem is going to stay with us, at least for as
long as people scream for more sexual repression and alienation in
response to the increasingly greater number of sexual incidents.
So, when you lovingly hug a child, and feel the love flowing through
both of you, and somebody starts encouraging the child to press
charges against you, convincing it that it has in fact been victimized
by the mere loving touch, you will remember me.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Zoran Znidaric

"Zoran Znidaric" wrote:
>> Sto je uzbudljivo, pedofilija? Ili 'pogled iz prve ruke'?
>
>Uzbudljivo je da je neko tako mocan i dobar kraj tebe i podrzava te u tvojoj
>aktivnosti, u ovom slucaju sexualnoj.

Kak tek mora biti uzbudljivo ako te netko tako mocan i dobar pojebe u
guzicu, pogotovo ako si samo malo dijete... nema svako cast da mu
avatar osobno masira korjensku cakru iznutra. Kak to tek mora buditi
Kundalini... ;)))

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

"White" wrote:
>> As a professional therapist it is my experience that suppressed problems
>> do cause problems over long periods of time.
>
>Of course they do: when one is loosing weight there will be problems, when
>one is getting rid of cigarettes there will be problems, when one is getting
>rid of alcohol there will be problems, long time problems. The laws of
>addictions are not known to psychology well enough, that's why you don't
>know this point as well as you should. It's about the memory of action; all
>will be stored, and from there they die only if they are suppressed. The
>main argument about the suppressed matter I have already given, I have shown
>that the idea that is given to people of that term "suppress" is wrong.

This is quite absurd. It's like saying that if you suppress hunger, it
will gradually go away. Sure, it will, and your life will go away with
it.

You are an extremist, because you think in extremes: all suppression
is good. Rajinish was an extremist in the opposite; he said that no
suppression is good. The truth is not always in the middle, but this
time it seems to be.

People have desires because they are unfulfilled. They keep attempting
to become complete and fulfilled, but they have limited concepts of
fulfillment, which causes suffering. They think that they will attain
inner unity by money, or sex, or control, or some other means. Whether
they suppress it or not, they will remain unfulfilled. If they indulge
their whims, they will increase their attachment to the wrong things
and thus become even more entangled in the sphere of illusion, to the
point where they won't be able to recognize the reality even if they
see it in front of them; they will thus be ruined.

The worldly desires appear when the spiritual connection to God is
clouded or severed; people then try to fill the holes within them with
what they have, and that is usually in the world of senses. Not only
that it doesn't give them the fulfillment, but it even further clouds
their spiritual eye, and thus increase the problem, and when the
problem becomes extreme, people turn either to drugs or to suicide.

From this perspective, you are right, and Rajinish is wrong. He didn't
realize that desires are a fire that can't be extinguished with
gasoline; they are a symptom of a very real need, but the solution is
not in gratifying them, in setting them free and putting them in
control of one's life, but in finding the solution to their source, in
finding the real, lasting fulfillment, which can be accomplished only
through firm focus on God, on the Absolute, which is the foundation of
the human soul. One should build one's life on awareness of this
foundation, and then the need for control will end.

From this perspective, you are wrong, and so is Rajinish. Control
doesn't accomplish anything; you won't stop the baby from crying by
silencing it with hits; or mayby you will, by killing it. You can put
the baby in the bag, where you won't hear its cries, but the fact that
the cries are suppressed doesn't mean that they are not there, that
their source is not there. Eventually, the baby will either break free
and cry its lungs out, or die in silence. Repression of senses and
needs, without higher satisfaction and fulfillment, can cause only the
death of the soul, which can be seen in many repressive cults. People
there keep rationalizing the suppression of their needs, while their
needs keep popping up at the most inconvenient moments. Rajinish saw
that pattern and went into another extreme - let's turn everything
free, that will cure everything. You noticed that this turned people
into animals and you are right, this doesn't work, if you let the fire
loose you get to lose your home.

There is, of course, a legitimate place for control. One should at the
same time apply firm control of oneself, in order to stop everything
(s)he's doing, and to turn the focus inwards. This is impossible if we
keep our focus on sense gratification and worldly affairs; it all has
to stop and some degree of control is necessary. However, such control
is only temporary; with correct yogic practice, one will almost
immediately be correctly aligned, and the connection with the source
of all things will be re-established, and then, with practice, further
enforced. The inner fulfillment, which is the result, will make all
the worldly desires obsolete, and the control will no longer be
necessary.

It's like the situation where a child wants to cross a dangerous
street in order to get the candies. You have to stop it, and then show
the child that it already has the candies in its pockets. The child is
then pleased and it no longer wishes to run over the street where it
can be hit by a car. If you, however, keep restraining the child, it
will eventually run away, when your control weakens for even a moment,
and you will face a disaster.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Felix

Stovanje Felix!

felix@inet.hr (Felix) wrote:
> Napisao si da STABILIZIRA i URAVNOTEZUJE donje CAKRE.. Objasni mi
>samo zasto je njemu, koji je !!__tolika velika faca__!!, pri URAVNOTEZENJU
>CAKRI nekome, potreban FIZICKI DODIR sa tom osobom??
>I ako ti nije problem, kako on to stabilizira i uravnotezuje donje
>cakre? Akupresurom?

Spaja ugodno s korisnim. ;>> :)))

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Vicko Vitasovic

"Vicko Vitasovic" wrote:
>> Jednako kao sto je isto upitno za Isusa, pod istim kriterijima.
>
>Sigurno nije isto jer se u temelju razlikuju spisi koji svjedoce o njima.

:)))

>Razlike su u tome tko, kako, zasto i za koga je pisano. Evandjelja su pisali
>ljudi koji su teoloski neobrazovani ali pismeni: Matej - carinik, Luka -
>lijecnik, Marko (ne znam tocno sto je bio ali nije pismoznanac), Ivan (jos
>dijete u vrijeme Isusovog navjestanja) dok su im to diktirali ljudi koji i
>teoloski neobrazovani i nepismeni: ribari (sv. Petar i njegov brat) i ostali
>(tezaci i obrtnici).

:)))))
Sakupio Matej nekoliko narodnih legendi i zapisao ih na Aramejskom,
Luka i Marko prepisali na grckom, uz malo modifikacija da bas ne
ispadne cista kopija, a Ivan je bio lud pa su mu se pricinjale stvari,
brijao covjek neku svoju brijicu o kraljevstvu nebeskom i tako to.
Falsificirali dva rodoslovlja Isusu koja nemaju valjda dva zajednicka
imena na sebi, a vode do Josipa umjesto do Marije. Sve u svemu, jadan
falsifikat. Bezvrijedno.

>Naravno, Danijele, ti si se vec ovdje razisao s Bogom

Svaki ludi po sebi sudi.

>JA sam pametan(u nedavnom postu o prehrani)"

:))) Najbolje da bih jos trebao pisati da sam glup i da nista ne znam.
To bi bilo tek fino pljuvanje Bogu u lice. On mi daje, a ja kazem
"nista nemam, nisam primio". Fini recept za ici u pakao.

>to da je Bog
>progovorio preko usta "najmanjih" i najponizenijih u ovome svijetu
>jednostavno se kosi sa njegovim zdravim razumom.

:))))))) Mozes si misliti. Tesar govorio ribaru, to se tak jako kosi
sa zdravim razumom da nemres vjerovat.

>U posljednje dane, govori Bog: Izlit ?u Duha svoga na svako tijelo i
>proricat ?e vaši sinovi i k?eri, vaši ?e mladi?i gledati vi?enja, a starci
>vaši sne sanjati. (18)?ak ?u i na sluge i sluškinje svoje izliti Duha svojeg
>u dane one i proricat ?e.

Trla baba lan, da joj prodje dan. Svi budu dakle ludovali i
halucinirali po cesti. Kaj, netko bude pustio LSD u vodovod? ;))

>Upravo zbog ovog nekonvencionalnog nacina i sveukupnih razloga oko kojih se
>vrtila dotadasnja Zidovska objava pokazuje se da je ova "ludost" zaista od
>pravoga Boga.

:))) Ludost, jedinstvena i neponovljiva, nastaje i kad se neko napusi
droge, ne treba za to pravi Bog, dovoljno je biti lud.

>> (Bhagavad-gita 7,1-15)
>
>Znas, kad bih ja zelio napisati nesto slicno a da zvuci kao da je od Boga
>napisao bih nesto slicno ovome u Giti.

Ti ovakvo nesto nisi u stanju ni shvatiti, a kamo li napisati.

>Malo naravne teologije, malo
>dotadasnje filozofije, obvezna mitologija, obavezan mitsko-pjesnicki element
>koji ostavlja dojam strahopostovanja i na kraju prijetnja onima koji
>drugacije misle. Dobro je i dosta toga ostaviti neoredredjenim da bi se
>dobio misticni element. I eto ti religije, koju naivci nakon par tisuca
>godina komentiraju kao da je to ne znam sta ("znas to ti je materijal toliko
>jak da...."). Ocit falsifikat.

:))))
Eto, ja nekako vise volim falsifikate koje je pisao Bog nego Bozju
rijec koju su pisali Zidovi.

>> Cuo sam ljude kojima evandjelja zvuce kao hrpa bajki bez ikakve veze
>> sa stvarnoscu.
>
>Cuo sam da ti ljudi nisu u pravu.

Zasto, pa ljudi su samo objektivni. Tko jos moze hrpu nekakvih bapskih
naklapanja i falsifikata shvatiti ozbiljno? Dodje frajer i veli da je
Bozji sin, i to nakon sto ga je puklo sunce u pustinji, gdje su mu se
prividjali vragovi ili sto vec ne? Svasta.

>> >Nisi rekao ali iz svega sto pises tako izlazi. Vise potpunih objava znaci
>> >nedosljednost Boga i zbunjivanje onih kojima je objava upucena.
>>
>> Jedna objava znacila bi nedosljednost Boga u zelji da se svi spase,
>> jer bi ih kulturne razlike u shvacanju mogle omesti.
>
>Ako je Bog vec dao da postoje kulturne razlike objava bi trebala biti takva
>da u njoj nema primjesa kulture - kao sto je krscanstvo - oslobodilo se svog
>zidovskog nasljedja i postalo "Svjetlo svim narodima".

:)))) Krscanstvo se tako efikasno oslobodilo zidovskog nasljedja da ga
nitko ne bi razumio bez starog zavjeta, a kad bi iz liturgije maknuo
hebrejske rijeci, tipa alaluja, hosana, mesija i slicne, nitko vise ne
bi znao o cemu se tu radi. Sto je slobodnije od kulturnih primjesa,
"ja sam okus vode, ja sam svjetlo sunca i mjeseca", ili "ja sam
Mesija, pomazanik, sin Davidov"? ;))

>A buduci da je
>kulturni identiet neovisan od egzistencijalnog identiteta,dakle "Sto sam?" u
>kulturnom smislu neovisno je od religijskog pitanja "Tko sam?" kultura nije
>prepreka stvarnoj i jednoj objavi.

Onda je konkluzija da krscanstvo nije ni stvarna ni jedina objava, jer
su svi krscanski spisi jako kulturno obojeni.

>> Tocno. Kako onda Ti smijes ustvrditi da si upravo Ti taj koji zna kako
>> se Bog i kome objavio, tj. da se u cijelosti objavio jedino po Isusu?
>
>Pa on sam to kaze koliko ja znam i oni koje je on poslao.

:))) A Ti si dakle taj koji zna kad nesto kaze Bog, a kad je
falsifikat? ;)) Jako skromno. :))

>Odgovori mu Isus: "Ja sam Put i Istina i Život: nitko ne dolazi Ocu osim po
>meni.

Kad bih ja htio napisati lazni sveti spis, koji zvuci da je od Boga,
napisao bih to isto. Obican falsifikat. :)

(da ne bi netko pomislio da pricam ozbiljno (morao bi za to biti jako
bedast, ali s obzirom na to sto vidim zadnjih dana na konfi, nista ja
ne znam:), napominjem da to samo zajebavam Vicka, koji stanuje u
stakleniku a nabacuje se kamenjem)

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Petar

"Petar" wrote:
>Draga Zeljka, pretpostavljam da ti nisi "zapadnjak", i bavis se "The"
>yogom.Jesi li sigurna da na zapadu nema "prave" yoge? Pozdrav, Petar
>(petar.sakic@fsb.hr)

Khm, if I just respond to this, it'll have a limited audience, so I'll
translate first (please, stick to English on alt.* hierarchy, we're
not in Croatia):

--
>Dear Zeljka, I guess you're not "from West", and that you practice
>"The" yoga. Are you sure that there is no "real" yoga in the West?
>Greetings, Petar.
--

:))
Yes, well, I guess that a real yogi should come from India, wear funny
clothes, talk bad English, read some rare books written on palm
leaves, that almost nobody else can read, and charge nothing. That's
because everybody knows that God lives in India, and so everybody
outside India, who claims to have realized God, must be a fake.
Chakras, nadis, prana and Kundalini also exist only in India, and
nobody else can figure them out unless he reads about them in ancient
books.
Also, a real guru would never accept money. Guru daksina is, of
course, invented by the Westerners; rumors that it's an ancient custom
in India to reward the guru with money in order to honor his effort is
of course a malevolent lie. One should never accept money for anything
spiritual; money should be accepted only for the bad things, done
against the laws of nature and one's feeling of rightness. So, if you
have enough hard time working against your will, you can accept the
money, but not if you really enjoy what you're doing. One should pay
the doctors for keeping you sick, not for keeping you healthy. If so,
why would one pay the guru for showing the way to liberation? One
would of course only pay a fraud. The good things should never be
rewarded, because only the bad guys should have the money and rule the
world. If someone spiritual attempts to create enough might on the
planet to make a real difference, we should immediately stop him and
recognize him as a fake; real spiritual people should live in caves,
letting the bad guys rule undisturbed. God of course wants the world
to be governed by polluting industry and Microsoft, not by the yogis.
Yogis should stay out of the way. They can preach things only if they
have no real power to implement them. They should also restrain from
sex, because if they have sex, they could also have children, and if
they have children, they would give them the education inconsistent
with our perfect society, and society doesn't want enlightened
children, who practice sadhana from early youth. Children should learn
how to fit the society, how to become a well serving part of the
machine. They should not think, examine, criticize, or, even worse,
change anything. We should therefore keep the gurus poor and celibate,
we should render them powerless, and say that the only ones worth
something are from India; God forbid that anyone thinks that the
principles of yoga are as universal as the laws of physics, here for
anyone to discover. Yoga should be restrained to Indian folklore, with
all the funny rituals. We can even make a TV show about them, or put
them in the ZOO, when they become an endangered species.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Zoran Znidari?

"Zoran Znidari?" wrote:
>> Osim toga nisam cuo da bi curicama stabilizirao donje cakre, samo
>> deckima, valjda one nemaju problema s donjim cakrama. ;>>
>
>Ne znam, nisam ni ja. Kupio sam si kazetu iz tantra kluba, i na njoj se
>govori da su cure suptilnije.
>Cure jako puno pricaju, lako se iznerviraju. One "cure" na srcanoj i grlenoj
>chakri, a mi decki vec na preve tri.
>Mozda bi im trebalo malo "zavezati" jezik Hahahahaha

Ti si fakat bedast.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

"Kunal Singh" wrote:
>Sahaj Yogi wrote in message
>news:G0OL5.377435$i5.6247349@news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com...
>> If
>> you wish to talk about Janaka, I for one would like to hear more, but
>> perhaps you could do that by starting a different thread?
>
>
>I don't want to talk about Janaka anymore. I think I'll leave you to your
>various kinds of yoga. Remember, if you stare at your nose, it is nose
>yoga. And if you stare at your finger, it is finger yoga. And Gandhi
>invented diarrhea yoga and pedophile yoga and incest yoga. And Sivananda
>seems to have discovered cholera yoga.

Jesus Christ, this is becoming absolutely boring. Pedophile guru this,
homosexual guru that, sexual abuse here, student abuse there. It's
like that thing with sexual abuse in America, where everybody's
suddenly been sexually abused in childhood. The earlier thing was
being abducted by aliens. Now it seems that pedophile gurus are the
trend. What's gonna be next, pedophile gurus complaining about being
abducted by aliens? :))
It looks like the best thing one can do to attack someone is to claim
that (s)he's a victim. Victims are always right. Victims can
retaliate. Victims don't get blamed. Gee, I should find myself some
guru to sexually abuse me, then I'll be really cool. I could make my
own crusade, fueled by righteous anger. Never mind that it's only a
diversion, a ploy meant to divert attention from the real problems.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org