1998/06/05 10:07
kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #427
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 427
Today's Topics:
Barbie [ "Sharon Webb" <shawebbATnospamyhc.edu> ]
Re: Barbie [ lorianna <loriannaATnospamintrlink.com> ]
AutoPost from Kundalini Resource Cen [ Richard Sheehan <rcscoATnospamearthlink.ne ]
Re: Barbie [ David Bozzi <david.bozziATnospamsnet.net> ]
Re: Barbie [ vcooper <madammumATnospamptialaska.net> ]
Moving the list.. was Re: Barbie [ Mystress Angelique Serpent <serpent ]
Re: Subconscious pressure [ "Jose Arroyo" <jm_arroyoATnospamhotmail.co ]
Re: Subconscious pressure [ Danijel Turina <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.te ]
RE: too damned many posts lately and [ "jb" <hc19436ATnospamautovia.com> ]
Responding or not to a lie (was Re: [ "Jose Arroyo" <jm_arroyoATnospamhotmail.co ]
Dear Barbie [ sassiATnospamworldnet.att.net (Jack) ]
Re: Moving the list.. was re: Barbie [ Nancy <NancyATnospamwtp.net> ]
RE: sublime joy [ UweJohannATnospamaol.com ]
Re: kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #426 [ "Debora A. Orf" <dorf01ATnospammail.win.or ]
Re: Responding or not to a lie [ Danijel Turina <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.te ]
Re: kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #426 [ "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamhotmail. ]
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:56:06 -0400
From: "Sharon Webb" <shawebbATnospamyhc.edu>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Barbie
Message-ID: <008101bd903e$403db580$b5d11fa8ATnospamsharonwe>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi,
So...did the rest of you get spammed by hotsy totsy love-hungry Barbie via
the kundalini list? I know k energy inflames the libido, but it seems like
this is just a wee bit excessive. :-)
Sharon
shawebbATnospamyhc.edu
A new fractal gallery and screensaver was posted to this site, 4/3/98:
http://www.fractalus.com/sharon/
USA Today Hot Site; Cosmic Site of the Night: Cool Central Site of the Day;
ENC Digital Dozen; Enchantment Award; ArtSearch Featured Site;
NetTech NeatTech: Web Best ; Eye Candy Award; Studyweb Featured Site;
Lotus Light Award; Wave of the Day; Hot Site Award; Critical Mass Award;
Best of the Planet, People's Choice Award, 1998; WS Award; Treasured Site
Award
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 01:23:14 -0400
From: lorianna <loriannaATnospamintrlink.com>
To: "Sharon Webb" <shawebbATnospamyhc.edu>, <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: Barbie
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980605012314.00bb1368ATnospammail.intrlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Yeah...Barbie just got me too....funny...i dont have any
balls...well...maybe brass ones when wriled up...i wonder how things like
that get thru emailing lists sometimes.
Love and Light
Lady Enchantment
At 12:56 AM 6/5/98 -0400, Sharon Webb wrote:
>Hi,
>
>So...did the rest of you get spammed by hotsy totsy love-hungry Barbie via
>the kundalini list? I know k energy inflames the libido, but it seems like
>this is just a wee bit excessive. :-)
>
>Sharon
>shawebbATnospamyhc.edu
>A new fractal gallery and screensaver was posted to this site, 4/3/98:
> http://www.fractalus.com/sharon/
>USA Today Hot Site; Cosmic Site of the Night: Cool Central Site of the Day;
>ENC Digital Dozen; Enchantment Award; ArtSearch Featured Site;
>NetTech NeatTech: Web Best ; Eye Candy Award; Studyweb Featured Site;
>Lotus Light Award; Wave of the Day; Hot Site Award; Critical Mass Award;
>Best of the Planet, People's Choice Award, 1998; WS Award; Treasured Site
>Award
>
>
>
>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 19:44:20 -1000 (HST)
From: Richard Sheehan <rcscoATnospamearthlink.net>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: AutoPost from Kundalini Resource Center
Message-Id: <199806050544.TAA06017ATnospamhaleakala.aloha.net>
Not sure it's Kundalini. Felt like a length of rebar was dropped down my
spine and landed at the base with a thud.
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 02:02:59 -0400
From: David Bozzi <david.bozziATnospamsnet.net>
To: Kundalini <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: Barbie
Message-ID: <35778A13.50577AFCATnospammail.snet.net>
Sharon Webb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So...did the rest of you get spammed by hotsy totsy love-hungry
Gosh, I thought she really liked me.Can't trust anyone! : )
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 22:07:02 +0000
From: vcooper <madammumATnospamptialaska.net>
To: david.bozziATnospamsnet.net
CC: Kundalini <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: Barbie
Message-ID: <35771A7F.41DBATnospamptialaska.net>
> >sw: Hi,
> >
> > So...did the rest of you get spammed by hotsy totsy love-hungry
>
>db: Gosh, I thought she really liked me.Can't trust anyone! : )
vc: If she's the REAL barbie, than her website is really at
http://www.barbie.com/
if not - she cannot be trusted!
;-)
ps (go ahead & go there! think of the *thrills* of becoming another
vampire...)
*lolol*
************************
"Some mornings, it just doesn't seem worth chewing through the leather
straps." -- Emo Phillips."
Valerie Cooper * http://geocities.com/SoHo/7982/
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 01:49:15 -0700
From: Mystress Angelique Serpent <serpentATnospamdomin8rex.com>
To: david.bozziATnospamsnet.net
Cc: Kundalini <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Moving the list.. was Re: Barbie
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980605014915.009a3d80ATnospamdomin8rex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Barbie cracked me up.. I needed a good laugh, photoshop just ate my
evenings work.. :(
I can always use another female slave.. I have many sets of balls.. they
are part of the men I own.. heh heh.. c-mere barbie.. here kitty, kitty,
kitty... here pussy..
19 is really young for my tastes tho.. women's sexuality get's more
potent with age. ;p
I passed her email onto abuseATnospamhotmail anyways.. they will tell her to
take her spam
and stuff it up her hot, juicy .... then they will tell on her to her
home provider, who will also tell her and all of her henchmen to cram it
down their...
Well, just today I was asking Goddess if it is time to move the list
and duck the spammers.. I don't wanna but this looks like a sign of things
to come.. LOL! Punny..
Spammers have new technology that lets them search all of the addresses
at a domain and spam them all.. getting all kinds of weird crap at
domin8rex.com.. and folks who respond to "Barbie" to tell her to.. whatever
.. are adding their addresses to a spam list.
How they are getting thru, is easy.. the only spam protection on the
K-list is a spell.. and it seems to be wearing thin.
The reason for this lack of technology is that the K-list is mostly run
by a program called "smartlist".. and smartlist thinks folks like me, who
send mail from a different address than the "from" field sez, are all
spammers.
Sometime last fall, it got so that I was forwarding about half the
traffic from the list, coz many members posts were being diverted to me as
possible spam. We all got very tired of this, and smartlist wasn't getting
any smarter.. so I switched off the spam filters and replaced them with a
"hiding in plain sight" spell.
Folks who tried to spam the list almost always tried to do it thru the
"request" address.. so it only came to me, hee hee.. but now they are using
shotguns..:( aiming at everything to collect addresses to resell to other
spammers..
Moving the list to majordomo will help a little.. I have postponed doing
it coz it is a hassle for everyone.. even updating the links everywhere..
Sigh.. slave to Goddess.. off I got to Esosoft to move the list.. updates
to follow..
any objections??
Blessings List Mystresssslave Serpent...
crawling off on my belly to hide from spammer technology..
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 02:43:47 PDT
From: "Jose Arroyo" <jm_arroyoATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Subconscious pressure
Message-ID: <19980605094348.9035.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Hello Paul,
>Hello.
>
>I have strong subconscious pressures which I can barely control. I've
>been this way all my life.
The way you see yourself now may be quite different form how you see
yourself tomorrow. Nothing is fixed. Perceptions do change...
<snip>
>Or, on the other hand, if a person were to say something like "aren't
>you going to do such-and-such then?", with a kind of preconceived
>notion that I have decided against something, I will see their
>suggestion that I will not - it is a negative question - and this
>negativity will come up inside me and I will shake my head.
>
>I find it immensely difficult, if possible at all, to control this. It
How to react to negativity? This is something personal. Most people will
react with (more) negativity for they see this as a "normal" reply under
the circumstances. Others, do (almost) not react to this for they are
aware this external event is something they can not control for it is
not theirs. One can also respond in a friendly loving way ...
One can only control one's own actions/thoughts using the free will...
And yet, there can be so much calmness, sense of freedom, in just not
trying to control (so many) things...
>doesn't matter wether the thing is positive or negative, whatever it's
>nature I seem to reflect it. You could describe it as a subconscious
>desire to keep people happy. It is part of my disliking of risk or
>unpleasantness. I will generally do whatever is necessary to just keep
>the person happy. It is through this, perhaps /as/ this, that these
There might be a big difference between "liking to see people happy" and
"keeping people happy".
"Liking to see people happy" is just WONDERFUL!
"Keeping people happy" may include a way of life where one will
sacrifice a lot for making another person happy.
If for example, you keep other people happy by telling a lie, are YOU
really happy with the lie you have told? Or, would you like that the
other person would face (more) reality?
Another example; if one does everything what another person asks and in
this way one keeps the other person happy, are YOU really happy with
this kind of relation? (A slave does everything his master asks him/her.
Do you think that the slave is really happy with that situation?)
<big snip>
>
>For me though, on a personal level, being sensitive isn't that much
>fun. I feel almost like I am reacting all the time rather than
>responding, like I have little control or `self'. It makes my identity
>change so much that I just don't know if I really have any single
>personality. Although part of that is my own moodyness.
>
Wether one "responds" or "reacts" is up to him/her. It is simply a
choice. Everything one imposes oneself as limiting is an illusion of
one's own mind.
<snip>
>and more and more sensitive. He wasn't saying anything particularly
>bad or offensive, but he was doing it in a rather unspiritual manner
What is a (un)spiritual manner?
<snip>
/actually/ doing. I don't ask other people to be insensitive, and I
>don't make them have the hostile attitudes that they do. I know they
Their (un)sensitiveness/attitudes are theirs. You can only change the
way you react to them ( and maybe indirectly they might change as well
towards you :-) )
>have them, I see them, I feel them. They offend me with them. It's not
>just that I am taking offence at something that doesn't exist. One
Once I read something about how to react/respond to a lie.
It was said that because a lie is something that is just not real, why
would one have to react/respond to it (in the first place!)
Reacting/responding to it is like acknowledging the existance of the
unreality. (Isn't this weird? :-) )
>shouldn't be expected to have to talk to someone who is being
>offensive as if that person were lovely and gentle. I know that is
>perhaps the ultimate goal in realising that God is all, but it is not
>happening for me in my life. By default I do not believe there are
Yet. Who knows what tomorrow will bring :-)
>many very nice people in the world. Either this is a wrong attitude I
(It could have been worse, you could have had the idea that there
weren't nice people at all!)
You might maybe concentrate more on the the few nice ones and be happy
about that than be dissapointed of the so-many not nice ones. In this
way, a very little spark of 'niceness' will make you happy...
It's a question of how to look into it. By the way, ones that might seem
not so nice might change...
Anyway, we are ALL beautiful beings...
>have about things, or it is simply a fact of reality. Perhaps it is
>partly both. But that doesn't remove the subconscious pressure.
>
>One of the worst aspects of this subconscious pressure, which might be
>surprising to you, is how it makes me feel obliged to smile. That's no
>fun at all. It's the suggestion that a person who is offending you has
>to be treated as though they are not offending you. I do this because
There is no fun in doing something forced. But if one has the choice,
then, why is one smiling if one doesn't file like?
Isn't one fooling himself/herself then? It is like telling a lie to
oneself :-)
If one feels offended, that is a choice. With all choices there are two
options ...
>I am quite a nice person and I am sensitive, and as such I treat most
>other people with respect and value. But it's just that they don't
>seem to be returning the favour, and it can really hurt.
>
>--
>Paul.
Love and Joy,
Jose
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:27:10 +0200
From: Danijel Turina <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Subconscious pressure
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980605122710.00939bc0ATnospampop.tel.hr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 02:43 1998.06.05 PDT, you wrote:
>>have them, I see them, I feel them. They offend me with them. It's not
>>just that I am taking offence at something that doesn't exist. One
>
>Once I read something about how to react/respond to a lie.
>It was said that because a lie is something that is just not real, why
>would one have to react/respond to it (in the first place!)
>Reacting/responding to it is like acknowledging the existance of the
>unreality. (Isn't this weird? :-) )
Lie is a statement that describes the nonexistent reality, but the lie
itself exists. If I say I have a million $$$, it would be a false
statement, describing non-existing reality (or non-reality, whichever you
choose), but the statement itself would exist. Saying that a lie doesn't
exist means having problems with definitions of terms. Object of a lie
doesn't exist, or exists in a different form than the lie indicates. The
lie can be the perversion of existing reality. For instance saying that my
keyboard is yellow and made of butter is partially true, since the keyboard
exists but its nature is different, it isn't yellow and it is made of
plastic. I can also lie by adding non-existent attributes to the existing
reality - by saying the computers are evil, for instance. The computers
exist, but their nature is neutral.
In every single case, the false statements existed, they were real, and
something had to be done with them. One possible choice is to ignore them
completely. But the very fact that I choose to ignore them is the proof of
their existence. Other possible choice is to go into an argument about the
statements or the one making them, and the other is to make your own
statement and say it is the correct one.
For instance, when someone says the computers are evil work of satan, I can
1) laugh or say nothing
2) "you must be born again in Christ, am I right? ;>"
3) "computers exist, and they are neither good or evil, they just are"
I hope this helps to clear things out. ;)
-----
E-mail : sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr
Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1377
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:20:12 +0100
From: "jb" <hc19436ATnospamautovia.com>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com>, <Hofe1ATnospamaol.com>
Subject: RE: too damned many posts lately and manipura
Message-ID: <000001bd907c$4a2dc560$126335c3ATnospamjb>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Dave wrote:
>
> What is the complete form of Vajroli Mudra? Please be
> specific. Inquiring
> minds want to know. Also I read from a book by a spiritual teacher that
> withholding ejaculation and transforming it for men can cause
> prostate cancer.
> Me thinks it's bull, but I am open to debate on the subject.
Jan:
No, it iasn't bull, it is worse - the complete form will at least guarantee
an infection of the bladder. The simple form can be found at:
http://www.newage.com.au/library/tantexercise.html
Somewhere on the web I came across a funny story about the complete form:
Western asceticism promoted celibacy for reward in Heaven. Eastern
asceticism uses tapasya, rigorous piety and sexual abstinence, to enhance a
person's intellectual powers. It endows yogis with supernatural power over
other humans and nature. This sublimation of the sexual impulse has given
rise to bizarre folklore in our country which would fill volumes. Hath Yoga
ghas the Vajroli Mudra which enables a man to suck milk, water and mercury
through the penis. This mix taken in reverse makes a man immortal. Ancient
texts say that those whose sperm travels upwards are like gods. Semen
ejaculated into the woman and drawn back also ensures immortality. Women
cannot perform these remarkable feats because they are defectively designed.
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 05:37:38 PDT
From: "Jose Arroyo" <jm_arroyoATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Responding or not to a lie (was Re: Subconscious pressure)
Message-ID: <19980605123739.11579.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Danijel, thank you for your view about this.
>
>Lie is a statement that describes the nonexistent reality, but the lie
>itself exists. If I say I have a million $$$, it would be a false
>statement, describing non-existing reality (or non-reality, whichever
you
>choose), but the statement itself would exist. Saying that a lie
doesn't
It is the statement that exists...
>exist means having problems with definitions of terms. Object of a lie
>doesn't exist, or exists in a different form than the lie indicates.
The
>lie can be the perversion of existing reality. For instance saying that
my
>keyboard is yellow and made of butter is partially true, since the
keyboard
>exists but its nature is different, it isn't yellow and it is made of
>plastic. I can also lie by adding non-existent attributes to the
existing
>reality - by saying the computers are evil, for instance. The computers
>exist, but their nature is neutral.
>In every single case, the false statements existed, they were real, and
>something had to be done with them. One possible choice is to ignore
them
>completely. But the very fact that I choose to ignore them is the proof
of
>their existence. Other possible choice is to go into an argument about
the
>statements or the one making them, and the other is to make your own
>statement and say it is the correct one.
>For instance, when someone says the computers are evil work of satan, I
can
>1) laugh or say nothing
>2) "you must be born again in Christ, am I right? ;>"
>3) "computers exist, and they are neither good or evil, they just are"
I'm afraid we are mixing the validity/reality of a part of a statement
and that what is meant by the statement as a whole. :-)
That a statement exists, is not a prove for a lie to exist as well as
whole meaningful reality to the person that hears the statement.
What I meant with the part of lying was:
example,
If I told you that you are a martian and speak English
a/ the statement exist for otherwise how could one talk about it?
b/ you perceive the whole content of the statement as a lie for that
is simply not true (lets assume it)
c/ You may react/respond to the lie or simply ignore it for you may
think what the use is of responding/reacting to something that
simply is not real/there...
(which brings us more or less where we started)
>I hope this helps to clear things out. ;)
Sometimes when trying to clarify things it just becomes more unclear
dear one, but, I understand your view. Could it be possible that we are
looking into the same thing from a different angle? What is, remains the
same, but described differently :-)
Love and Joy,
Jose
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:42:55 GMT
From: sassiATnospamworldnet.att.net (Jack)
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Dear Barbie
Message-ID: <3578e7cc.6539867ATnospammailhost.worldnet.att.net>
Dear Passion Slave,
While I appreciate the affection shown in your kind message I
must admit to a bit of confusion at some of your termonology. Also,
you seem to have quite a bit of experience for one so young.
Let me remark on your posting point by point. First of all I
would caution you about writing stark naked. What if you caught a
cold? Kinda gives new meaning to your term 'cover it with drool', if
you catch my drift. And as for 'going crazy on my cock', well, seeing
as I have just the one, and I need him to service the hens, I would
appreciate it if you would not mention wrapping your mouth around him
and cover him with drool. He gets upset, especially around holidays,
with language like eat, feast, pluck and drool if you see where I'm
going there.
Another thing I would like to point out. If your going to lick
me from head to toe and slather your tongue all over my sensitive
spots and especially lick my feet! Please try and do this before I go
Firewalking rather than after.
I am also concerned over your request to 'stab your pussy with
hot throbbing meat.' My cat is very aloof and particular about
strangers picking her up never mind stabbing her! And I have to take
exception to feeding her meat. She is a strict vegetarian.
Finally, your request to 'ram you with my duck' is rather on
the violent side, especially considering what a peaceful soul my duck
is........... oh wait..........I seem to have misread duck for dick.
Well, none the matter, that goes for my brother-in law Dick also.
I should also warn you of the nasty rumor, circulating around
the internet about this message being a forgery written by Ken under
your name. While I know better, others may not. And I need not remind
you of that nasty little altercation between Ken and G.I. Joe last
year. Joe was quite pissed when told he needed to take tetracyclin for
several weeks to cure that little clapping problem.
I hope this message finds you well.
Regards,
Spawn
P.S. You left your slingshot under the couch, last time you were over.
It's marked B-32 so I know it's yours. Sorry to hear you had to
replace it with the inferior D model.
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 06:53:11 -0600
From: Nancy <NancyATnospamwtp.net>
To: kundalini-1 <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: Moving the list.. was re: Barbie
Re: Moving the list.. was Re: Barbie
Re: Moving the list.. was Re: Barbie
Re: Moving the list.. was Re: Barbie
Message-ID: <3577EA35.2A7157C7ATnospamwtp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Oh come on, Angelique. Do we really have to move the list? These
spammers are really making me laugh my ass off. The hair removal spam
was funny. Barbie was down right hilarious!
Amazing that people would actually respond to people Barbie. Hey, maybe
I'm using my writing skills in the wrong medium. I hadn't even
considered Barbie's line of work. Hmmmm. :-)
Nancy
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:50:00 EDT
From: UweJohannATnospamaol.com
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: RE: sublime joy
Message-ID: <82b3cd4e.3577e979ATnospamaol.com>
>>may all beings know freedom from suffering and its causes,
>>be joined to true happiness and its causes
>>be filled with equanimity, not holding some close and others afar.
>>
>>and achieve the sublime joy.
>>
>>--jhampa tsomo
>What an incredibly beautiful prayer! As i read/prayed this i felt this
>incredible inrush of energy through the top of my head.
<snip>
>--Signalfire
I love this emails. It's more than the words, what is transfered and I feel
touched through a breeze of relieving energy.
Stay on, radiating the love and energy, it's needed in this time on different
places.
Love
Uwe
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:28:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Debora A. Orf" <dorf01ATnospammail.win.org>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #426
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980605082200.12505A-100000ATnospamwinc0>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
hehehehehe,
that last digest had a surprise ending ;).
Someone firing too much from that second chakra????
It was interesting reading about 'wing pain'. been there, done that! Still
have it. Altho for myself, my heart felt 'pregnant' at the same time.
Its interesting, if one thinks of fairyfolk/dakinis, winged human-form
beings. i've a feeling this is all in our subconcious, of course where
else could it be coming from.
Speaking of feet/leg chakras, why is it when one sits in lotus posture it
seems like there is energy radiating up from the soles of the feet?
And i gotta ask the obvious, but is a 'satguru' the same sort of concept
as 'tsawai lama', or root teacher? (no jokes about standing gurus
please...i know u want to :) )
i almost signed off this list...getting myself confused, but u guys are
too much fun sometimes.
green laser beams at ya!
maitri,
--jhampa tsomo
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 15:45:34 +0200
From: Danijel Turina <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Responding or not to a lie
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980605154534.00b641f0ATnospampop.tel.hr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 05:37 1998.06.05 PDT, you wrote:
>Danijel, thank you for your view about this.
:)
>>Lie is a statement that describes the nonexistent reality, but the lie
>>itself exists. If I say I have a million $$$, it would be a false
>>statement, describing non-existing reality (or non-reality, whichever
>you
>>choose), but the statement itself would exist. Saying that a lie
>doesn't
>
>It is the statement that exists...
The statement _is_ the lie. :) The lie doesn't exist outside the statement. ;)
>>1) laugh or say nothing
>>2) "you must be born again in Christ, am I right? ;>"
>>3) "computers exist, and they are neither good or evil, they just are"
>
>I'm afraid we are mixing the validity/reality of a part of a statement
>and that what is meant by the statement as a whole. :-)
The point was: is a lie real? Yes, it is real, but it is still a lie. You
can ignore it or reject it or disproove it, but it exists. The object of
the lie is what doesn't exist. :)
>>I hope this helps to clear things out. ;)
>
>Sometimes when trying to clarify things it just becomes more unclear
>dear one, but, I understand your view. Could it be possible that we are
>looking into the same thing from a different angle? What is, remains the
>same, but described differently :-)
Maybe we should better stick to K, I'm not sure that my English is up to
the phillosophical terms needed here. :)
-----
E-mail : sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr
Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1377
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:53:08 PDT
From: "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #426
Message-ID: <19980605165308.12668.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
I have a general question to ask of other digest readers, particularly
any who get their copy through hotmail.com.
In the past few weeks do you seem to get some really graphic text porn
mixed into the posts on the list?
It may sound strange but I just opened #426 and it ended with a post
that is as graphic as one can get without a video, or a lot of pictures
(assuming one isn't involved in the doing). I don't know where it is
coming into the digest version, hence the questions.
I'm not a prude and in the right time and place I would enjoy it. It is
just when reading the list it doesn't seem the not the right place or
time. Besides, I would like it not to be mixed in, I might overlook it
and miss it entirely.
Namaste,
Joe
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.