"I Hate Church of the Churchless!" blog

Wow, I"d be really upset with the jerk who just started up an I Hate Church of the Churchless! blog...if that guy wasn't me.

I spent as much time, effort, and money on this new anti-blog as it seemed to demand. Namely, about 30 minutes, not much, and zero (respectively).

I'm expecting -- no, demanding -- that those who want to rant about the uselessness of churchless discussions, and/or insult me, post their comments over on I Hate Church of the Churchless!

There's no reason to clog up comment conversations on this blog with that stuff.

I can't understand why someone takes the time to visit a blog, read what's on it, and then write a complaint that says, basically: "This blog is stupid!"

I always think: Well, if it is so stupid, what are you doing visiting it, reading it, and commenting on it? Isn't it stupid to pay so much attention to stupidity?

Anyway...I feel bad when a Church of the Churchless hater uses up their store of creative insults on a lengthy comment that ends up being deleted. I've rescued some of these and started I Hate Church of the Churchless! off with a good sampling of rants.

From now on, unhappy fundamentalists, use that blog for your complaints. Click on the link in the right sidebar, in the "Welcome" section, and you'll be transported to hateful heaven.

Thanks in advance from your churchless unpastor.

Comments

[+@o]

I HATE all of you Haters of the Church of the Churchless.

YOU SUCK.

Come on over to "I Hate Church of the Churchless" and get your fat pig butts whipped.

Here is your chance to show the real mystic power and the truth of your religion and your slave-master.

Here is your chance to prove how great and right and saintly you and your pig-face guru are.

Come on and show me how afraid you really are underneath your phony false bravado.

You are all a bunch of shalow little asswipes, and you know it.

Come on, lets see how smart and tough you are.

I will place bets that punks like you haven't got the guts to post even one tiny wimper.

Come on, here's your big chance to show how right you are...

...over at Brian's new "I Hate Church of the Churchless" blog:

http://hatechurchless.blogspot.com

Lets see what you got! I bet that you will all crawl away like the wee wimpy worms that you really are.

[The Rambling Taoist]

You crack me up!! This is such a brilliant idea. It may spawn a movement. :D)

[mary lou]

I came over from Rainy Day Thoughts, and I think I LIKE you! ;)

[George]

+@o

Ah, i see you true character is out finally.
Who do you think u are actually fooling?
Forget all this spirituality and learning and trips to India. You are the same as every standover thug that has ever existed, which can be found on every darkened street corner of the world, and is actually a whimpering coward when faced with something they've never really contemplated, someone bigger, fiercer and willing to stand up to them.

Free thinker my arse, you don't know the meaning of the word. You are an amateur and fake in every sense of the word.

Brian,
Its quite simple, as soon as the personal insult is allowed against other ppl then one should expect the same back.

If on the other hand, you wish to establish some sort of forum, which is one-sided and wont tolerate an opposing viewpoint or ppl giving some 'what-for' back to those that deserve it - well then its really just a farce.

Rather just call its Church of the Fascist Thugs.

[George]

PS: How do I post on that other site? i've just provided a long post on the matter, which has been lost.

I think the vitriol towards Brian is not right, since he has not gotten personal with anyone so far as I can see, but this tAo character has done so repeatedly.

So lets get this straight, tAo is allowed to carry on like some belligerant sailor from marseille having a full go at every passer by he wishes, but others are trolls? this obsequious thug is never admonished in the slightest.

Absolutely, no sense of fairplay.

[Paul]

I think that Brian is a reasonably fine fellow, within certain limits. He's up there in Oregon with his well and the trees and all, so let's keep that in mind.

You boys out there spilling coffee all over your keyboards should get up and go out and walk your dog around the block once before getting all hot at poor Brian.

After all, he's sitting there with all these thoughts whirling in his head all day and he sends them out on his blog to keep a steady pressure. We wouldn't want him to come apart and then not be able to write back to this blog of his now would we?

Can't we all just get along?

[mystic power]

+@o ... such hatred .. so much bitterness, gonna take a lot of power to heal ..

[George]

My problem is not with Brian or the Church of the Churchless.

Its with one particularly rude jumped-up intolerant individual, who seems to have this contrived identity which is a cross between Rambo, Stephen Hawking, the Dalai Lama and a host of beautiful poets.

But all of that bravado, profanity, machismo and pseudo-science one can tolerate. What is more difficult to let pass is that this selfsame individual however clamours for the higher ground to lecture everyone else on fundamentalism and intolerance.

Here's a selection of tAo taken from the one thread yesterday:

"Just take it from me... a guy who has most certainly done more drinking, and more sex drugs and rock & roll, than anyone you have ever known or will ever know."
--- Rambo part IV more blood, wow, what a man.

"These are just words Shin. God (or "higher being") is just a word, and an idea that you entertain, that you project as being somehow meaningful."
--- What gives you the right to determine what is meaningul to someone or not?

"You are now on the path to discovering your own living path, your own spiritual life, your own reality. Whatever is real, you can never lose. You will only lose that which you do not need, and that which is inhibiting your growth. The guru and path is Life itself... your own unique life. You WILL find your way. Just trust in the mystery of your existence."
--- ah the dalai lama returns in sheeps clothing preaching a whole lot of spiritual dogma.

"You are just a shallow sack of shit who has no wisdom or insight or knowledge into anyone else."
--- Is this Byron or Milton?

"And btw shithead, I HAVE walked the walk, and so I've earned the right to talk the talk"
--- Rambo crossed with Wordsworth

"That is disingenuous bullshit. Go pick a fight with someone where you have something legitimate to argue about."
--- Hawking cross with Wilde

"You obviously want to use your own distorted interpretations to pick a fight with me."
--- Dalai Lama

"David, I still sense a particular tone or attitude or edge to your comments and responses. Are you in a bad mood much of the time?..."
--- Sigmund Freud crossed with the Dalai Lama

"I don't give a damn about your supposed "scriptures". I have read and studied them all"
--- rambo's tolerance and certainty, cant be many who've studied them all. wondrous.

"That is absolute bullshit. BULLSHIT. Jesus is a myth"
--- TS Elliot with the certainty of Rambo.

"You are a stupid asshole Harinder."
--- Chaucer

"I already know myself. I already am myself. There is nothing more that I need to gain or to know about myself."
--- Wondrous is it not?

"Harinder, to put it simply, YOU are mentally ill."
--- Sigmund Freud.

"You are one SICK dude Harinder. Your God is a tyrant. Your God is a pig. And your God, is a god-damn illusion."
--- A smatterubg of Freud, Hawking, Rambo and Whitman.

"The fact that you seem to doubt me and to challange me on this matter"
--- God forbid, challenge such an ego.

"Someday you'll try to pull that shit-ass attitide on some dude like me, and he'll beat the living crap out of you. And punks like you, deserve it."
--- Rambo and the Dalai Lama

"Your personally derogatory remarks (especially towards me) are cheap and sleazy"
--- LOL, the sheer irony.

"From this comment, I can see that you are somewhat mentally disturbed. Do you even know who it is that you are spewing your ridiculous judgements at? ... The basic problem here Harinder, is your over-all condescending and negative attitude."
--- Freud again at his hyprocrytical best

"...please dispense with your condescending attitude and preaching of dogma and bogus personal criticisms."
--- I have just fallen off my chair with laughter.

"you don't deserve another moment of my time... so go fuck yourself and the lame horse you rode in on, you stinking piece of rotten pig-shit."
--- not from yesterdays thread, but truly beautiful ... from Shakespeare's 18th sonnet?

[Brian]

George, you leave comments on the other site, not a "post." Hopefully it is possible for you to do that by clicking on the "__ Comments" link after the post I put up. If not, let me know and we'll figure out the problem.

[George]

I tried to post a comment, but it would not accept it.
Anyway, I've said all i wanted to here.
Quite clearly, it takes two to tango as they say.

[Brian]

George, I just realized that Blogger, the free blog service I used, has as its default comment setting a requirement to log in with one of the profiles such as OpenID, Google, etc.

I've changed the comment setting to allow anonymous comments. So this should take care of your problem. Sorry. I'm not very familiar with Blogger, this being the first time I've used it in quite a while.

[George]

No worries Brian. You are performing a very good service here. Your responses are invariably polite and measured.

I just feel there is an unrecognised poet in our midst.

[Rain]

Interesting... So let me get this straight-- no disagreements here or just no I hate church of the churchless? Since I like church of the churchless but sometimes do disagree, I want to be clear on the rules now... If this seemed like a question I should have understood, in my defense, I have had a busy month which tends to lead to brain fade

[Brian]

Rain, the distinction here is between someone saying (1) "you shouldn't be discussing such and such on this blog, and I hate you for doing it" versus (2) "I disagree with such and such that's been said here."

I want (1) sorts of comments off of this blog, because they are aimed at shutting down discussion and comment conversations. (2) is what blogging is all about (along with agreeing, of course).

Hope this clarifies things. Disagreement is great. But those who keep on posting comments along the lines of "you and this blog suck" are tiresome and boring -- like a crank who goes up to a group having a pleasant conversation at a coffee shop and starts screaming, "get out of here, dummies!"

[Roger]

Rain,

To be a member of this thread, you must have an intense hatred of churchlessness!!!!!!!

Sense, imo, you are a very kind, loving and thoughtful person, it is my duty to banish you, for life, from these premeses(sp?).

I know, kinda cruel, but it is my duty to god and blogging.

Yours truly,
Roger

[Catherine]

Not even in the same league as the cruelty experienced when guruji flicks his head to the right and one brother gets elected as worthy to be an initiate and then a flick to the left and the other brother is rejected.

[JJQ]

I think you were inspired by Pharyngula's "I get email", those posts are always fun to read. Although the latest is a bit far out.

[Brian]

JJQ, astute observation. I've read about the trials and tribulations with crazed commenters over at Pharyngula. That blogger, Myers, came up with a creative "vote them off the island/blog" approach. I also want them off the island, but i"m more into transplanting the rants to a separate blog isle where they can hate away all they like without disturbing other folks.

[George]

i'm quite happy to dissapear off the island, just say the word.

but i'm not going to sit idly by while our resident genius Rambo/Hawking/Lama identity proceeds to attack everyone.

[Rain]

lol Roger :)

[+Ao]

George's problem is not with tAo or tAo's incisive comments.

His problem is actually with one particularly rude intolerant and fundamentally dishonest individual (HIMSELF), who seems to have a hugely inflated ego in which he feels that he is superior to others, and so is justified to police this blog and harass anyone who opposes dogma, fundamentalism, cultism, and/or intolerance.

Moreover, here is one of many examples of how twisted and insincere George is in his comments and responses:

In a past previous comment, tAo had offered the following rather broad-minded and benign suggestion to someone:

"You are now on the path to discovering your own living path, your own spiritual life, your own reality. Whatever is real, you can never lose. You will only lose that which you do not need, and that which is inhibiting your growth. The guru and path is Life itself... your own unique life. You WILL find your way. Just trust in the mystery of your existence."

However, it is curious and quite revealing how George interprets the above suggestion that tAo had made, by distorting it and labeling it as:

"preaching a whole lot of spiritual dogma."

George's misplaced response reveals just how warped and flawed George's mentality actually is, and how extremely confused George is about the basic nature and attributes of 'dogma'.

George also misinterprets and distorts in another instance by saying this to tAo:

"What gives you the right to determine what is meaningul to someone or not?"

However, quite interestingly, tAo had never made any such determination or told anyone what should be "meaningful" to them, or what is "meaningful" to them. If anything, tAo had merely indicated that what that person was saying was not meaningful to tAo.

Therefore this is yet another example of how George deliberately and quite dishonestly attempts to twist and distort tAo's statements into something that they are not, in order to try turn them against and discredit tAo... which is all part of George's continued and repeated personal attacks against tAo.

Conclusion: George, you should take your twisted, personally derogatory vendetta against me elsewhere... such as over to Brian's other new 'hate' blog, where that kind of crap belongs.

[+Ao]

"Dogma" as defined in the Dictionary:

Dogma: [Noun]

> A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church, a religion, or a philosophy.

> An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one presented as, or considered to be absolutely true.

> A principle or belief, or a group of them.

[Etymology: Latin, from Greek -- opinion, belief]

========================================

"Dogma" as presented in the Thesarus:

Dogma:

> A principle taught or advanced for belief, as by a religious or philosophical group: doctrine, teaching, tenet.
(see Belief)

[Name withheld because otherwise God will punish my ass]

I hate the "I hate Church of the Churchless blog".

[George]

The only distortion and twisting is going on in tAo's little mind, and whats more he keeps doing it when ppl disagree with him. This is when Freud needs to assess himself.

The quotes l listed above were made by tAo to a range of different people on a single thread.

Having nrowsed the archives i see the same trend which is tAo fighting and insulting anyone who disagrees with his pronunciations. The same words are used ppl are sick, pigs, stupid, arrogant, twisted, etc.

Now there is a possibility that tAo is in fact the sane one and we are indeed all sick pigfucks, but its statistically more likely that this is in fact the troll with problems. This guy simply has no tolerance and for him to preach to others about their intolerance is an absolute joke. If he cant see that, well its about time someone pointed out the obvious.

Free thinker my ass, his opinions have been formed a long time ago and anyone that disagrees experiences a rude fascist thug wrapped in his own dogma.

[George]

I think Freud actually called it projecting:

"Just take it from me... a guy who has most certainly done more drinking, and more sex drugs and rock & roll, than anyone you have ever known or will ever know."
---- self-conceited arrogance

"You are just a shallow sack of shit who has no wisdom or insight or knowledge into anyone else."
--- rude arrogance

"And btw shithead, I HAVE walked the walk, and so I've earned the right to talk the talk"
--- rude conceited arrogance

"You obviously want to use your own distorted interpretations to pick a fight with me."
--- aggressive twisted arrogance

"Someday you'll try to pull that shit-ass attitide on some dude like me, and he'll beat the living crap out of you. And punks like you, deserve it."
--- aggressive arrogance, nice hey.

"you don't deserve another moment of my time... so go fuck yourself and the lame horse you rode in on, you stinking piece of rotten pig-shit."
--- unnecessary arrogance

What a totally unpleasant iindividual. And this guy likes to holds himself out as some sort of wise been it all and done it all character, get serious, what an utter joke.

[rakesh bhasin]

I often visit this blog but that does not mean that I like. But I do not dislike it.

I have very often been thrashed on this blog but that thrashing has always helped me to learn things better. I have got insight and that has buttressed my contentions.

If a person like Brian could not succeed in more than 35 years of meditation. Who else can? But those who have got keep mum. Then how can I say that some have succeeded. I know only one person that was my father. He has been the source of my inspiration. Even after his death, I am constantly reminded of his way of life spiritually and mundanely.

I wish this blog to continue…………………………

[Robert Paul Howard]

Dear George,

Thanks for your clear analyses posted above.

Robert Paul Howard

[+Ao]

George's following comments (which all represent and reflect his personal vendetta against me) are quite erroneous and misplaced:

"Now there is a possibility that tAo is in fact the sane one and we are indeed all sick pigfucks"

-- Wrong. Your allegation/implication is incorrect. To my knowledge, I have never called anyone "pigfuck". That term was used by someone else (possibly your buddy Ashy). If you are going to make such an insinuation, you should indocate the quote, otherwise you are falsely misrepresenting me.

And that is my contention about you... that when push comes to shove, you George are basically a devious and dishonest person. That was obvious from the get-go in your ridiculous bogus defense of Ashy's obvious trollish fundamentalist rants.

"but its statistically more likely that this is in fact the troll with problems."

-- Again George, you are basically a dishonest person. This was obvious from the get-go in your ridiculous and bogus defense of Ashy's obvious trollish rants and agenda.

"Free thinker my ass, his opinions have been formed a long time ago and anyone that disagrees experiences a rude fascist thug wrapped in his own dogma."

-- You still don't understand the correct definition and meaning of "fascist". And as for being a "rude thug", well imo, that's very much how you come across here George.

"Just take it from me... a guy who has most certainly done more drinking, and more sex drugs and rock & roll, than anyone you have ever known or will ever know. ---- self-conceited arrogance"

-- Incorrect. I was just telling/relating some facts about myself, compared to others. There was nothing "conceited" or arrogant about that.

"You are just a shallow sack of shit who has no wisdom or insight or knowledge into anyone else." ---- rude arrogance"

-- No, it was simply my honest personal opinion. If you don't like that, then thats your problem.

"And btw shithead, I HAVE walked the walk, and so I've earned the right to talk the talk ---- rude conceited arrogance"

-- Again, I HAVE in fact spent over 40 plus years of my life deeply involved in extensive spiritual sadhana (practice)... and that gives me the experience and perspective to be able to talk about it, and to have a critical viewpoint.... which is neither rude, nor conceited, nor arrogant.

"You obviously want to use your own distorted interpretations to pick a fight with me. ---- aggressive twisted arrogance"

-- No, that was simply a statement of personal opinion, based upon my own perceptions and direct observations of another indiviudal's comments. My observation was neither "aggressive", nor "twisted", nor "arrogance".

"Someday you'll try to pull that shit-ass attitide on some dude like me, and he'll beat the living crap out of you. And punks like you, deserve it. --- aggressive arrogance, nice hey."

-- No, it was simply a candid response. I was saying that you can only get away with a bad attitude like you have on the internet, because I doubt that you would act the same way to some guy (like me) face to face. You'd mostly likely get your cowardly dishonest impudent ass kicked. You would be too cowardly and afraid to talk to me that way in person.

"What a totally unpleasant iindividual."

-- No doubt, I am sure that I must seem very unpleasant to some folks. But you take yourself and all this far too seriously George. I say what I say for various reasons, and I say things in different ways according to the emphasis I choose to give. But I am honest about it, not devious like you. You may not like my bluntness and my language, or approve of my style (and you don't have to), but thats just tough. I don't like your style either. I think you are a pretentious and devious little fraud.

"And this guy likes to holds himself out as some sort of wise been it all and done it all character"

-- That is inocrrect. I do not present myself as being any such "character". You are again distorting the facts to suit your agenda, your personal vendetta. I am tired of your obsession, and I believe Brian is too. This kind of crap does not belog here anymore. So why don't just go on over to Brian's other blog and post all your personal hate comments against me there, (along with your troll-buddy Ashy).

[Rose]

Well, this is the 2nd time I've ever posted on this blog even though I follow discussions regularly. I'm going to go out on a limb here and stick my nose into this exchange between George and tAo. Maybe I shouldn't butt in but oh well..

I actually like tAo. Sure, he's not the most diplomatic person in the world but he's consistent in the way he looks at each and every statement or assumption made, and while his language may be a bit colourful that is just his style. I also don't think his comments about his years of life experience are arrogant. Compared to me he's probably pretty old (sorry tAo :P)so if he says he's had more sex than anyone or more spiritual experience then I buy that.

I also just wanted to say that you seem to be going on a bit of a tAo bashing campaign recently, George. Maybe you don't like him. You seem to have stated that already. But where is the need to consistently repeat your negative views about him?

As for respecting other people's beliefs and how tAo does not do that, I'm all for respecting people's beliefs and religion. But if some commenter wants to avoid their beliefs being taken down or analysed then they should not visit a blog like Church of the Churchless where everything is open to debate. About tAo's language and tone, well I can see how one can easily get frustrated sometimes when some Sant Mat followers post. This blog has numerous posts about Sant Mat and how it's claims are dogma, and are just religious statements without any actual evidence as opposed to scientific fact. It really isn't a "Science" of the soul as one of the names for the organisation seems to claim. Therefore it's obvious that unfounded dogma, or the kind of stuff they repeatedly drill into people's heads in satsangs and in books, will not be accepted as evidence for a point someone is trying to make. What's my point here? Well I'm just saying that if someone who's belief in Sant Mat is unwavering comes here and starts up a debate but when people respond to him or her, this person just spouts out the kind of dogma found in satsangs and scripture, then is it not expected that regulars of this blog will get annoyed? Regulars expect strong argument with backed up claims and exact responses. If that doesn't happen people get angry. Furthermore, in the case of Harinder, he consistently went on and on assuming that people's views and experiences, especially that of Brian, were meaningless. I can see how people can get angry in that situation too. I think the quotes you mentioned above are taken out of context. They need to be looked at in terms of the context of the discussion.

That's all I wanted to say really and if I offended you in any way George, for whatever reason, I apologize. I just, for some reason, like tAo and feel that your consistent tAo bashing is unnecessary. If I shouldn't have butted in and you think that what you're doing is not tAo bashing, then well I'm sorry. But to be honest, that is the way it seems. tAo is just being tAo. I don't think you should take offence at someone else's personality.

[zenjen]

Rose,

You say to George: “I don't think you should take offence at someone else's personality”.

I don’t know how long you have been reading this blog but I have noted that tAo often attacks people in a very personal manner. Once in a previous thread tAo called someone “a stupid ugly bitch” or words to that effect. I for one found this a very offensive, rude and unkind personal attack on this person whose comments have always been fair and reasonable.

I’m glad George has a sense of ‘fair play’ and is a good match for tAo. Why should only one person be abusive and critical and able to say exactly what he thinks and not another?

[the elephant]

On the one hand, George is 'bashing' tAo according to you.
On the other hand, " tAo is just being tAo" ... whatever he says, even if he goes initially overboard, like with Catherine a while back ...

Passing quick judgments on one side, quite 'understanding' and 'forgiving' on the other! Your opinions are skewed for reasons that your last comment failed to explain.

[Rose]

Hey Zenjen

Well I have been visiting this blog every so often since 2006 when I went through the process of renouncing RSSB. Admittedly, I don't remember everything that's been said and I was stating my perception of things. But I do remember that some of the things tAo says definately registers a "wow" factor on the anger scale. Personally, it takes a lot to offend me so maybe I place that erroneous expactation on other people and expect them to be laid back too, I dunno. Certainly, offensive language is not ok but I guess I don't take offence when reading because I try to understand where people are coming from, why that comment was made. What the underlying feeling or meaning is behind it.

As for 'fair play'. When George first commented about tAo's language I thought ok, yes, fair point. I guess as a reader it gets a little annoying to see the same point about tAo being repeated. George's intentions are good, I think, and you are very nice to try and stand up for the little guy George. But yeah, I guess the argument gets a bit old and tired if stated a lot.

Well, I'm George is a nice person in real life and I'm sure tAo must be nice in real life too. I like to see people get along :)

I don't read this blog everyday though so if my perceptions are wrong and other people feel that they gave more in depth knowledge about the situation then I apologize for my assumptions.

[Brian]

Rose, excellent points. You expressed the situation almost exactly as I see it.

zenjen, here's the reason why abuse and criticism shouldn't be answered with more abuse and criticism: (1) it's boring, (2) it's useless.

As the blogger, I am emailed every comment. Most, I find interesting. But back and forth name-calling and swearing at each other I find extremely boring. I feel like I'm back in a high school locker room.

I can understand why people feel the need to defend themselves or their position from what seems like an unfair attack. But once a response has been made, why not let things be? Responding in kind just makes more of the same kind.

The first rule in martial arts is: whenever possible, walk away from a fight. That's the smartest thing to do. Not the most macho, but the smartest. You won't get hurt; the other person won't get hurt.

So they've called you names. So what? Walk away. The same can be done on the Internet. Don't feed a fire with more fuel. If it seems like someone is acting like a jerk, don't act like a jerk in response.

Pretty simple. Nobody is going to have their personality or world view changed by some comments on a blog. Let them be if they annoy you. At least, that's my advice.

[Rose]

Typo there. I mean't I'm SURE George is a nice person not I'm George. I'm not George lol.

[Rose]

Sorry for the triple posting here but I probably should not have butted in or taken sides. I am a bit of a biased judge I guess beicause of my personal assessment of Sant Mat so the best people to take it from here and/or sort out my assumptions are tAo and George themselves!

Sorry guys! This is why I should go back to lurking haha. That is what I am going to do because I realise this whole thing was a bit of a bad idea.

Before I go though I would definately like to say that I enjoy reading the posts and comments here. I mostly read the RSSB posts because that is what I can best relate to. The debates and information posted there helps me out a lot and keeps me informed.

Taking sides never really results in anything good so yeah. Bye bye everyone! I am looking forward to reading more interesting posts and comments from you guys in the future.

[zenjen]

Okay Rose, I agree, shouldn't take sides. Maybe I'm looking for kindness and fairness, which is all too rare.

[tucson]

I think Rose's comments regarding tAo are good ones. I have been reading tAo's remarks for a few years and regardless of style I find that he frequently and accurately gets to the heart of the matter. He calls a goat a goat and sometimes people don't like to look in the mirror when all along they thought they were a horse.

When you have someone arrogantly presenting dogma as irrefutable fact and speaking condescendingly on the basis of that belief sometimes you have to get a little rough with them to snap them out of their fixation. Even then it doesn't always work, or it even puts them on the defensive and makes matters worse. People don't like their world rocked. But in the end it is for their own good.

Nevertheless, I have found that tAo is more than willing to be helpful and constructive when these people get off their high horse and come down to earth for some honest discussion. Otherwise, they're fair game in a blog forum.

[zenjen]

tucson, how about you not taking sides as well ... just for a change .. and btw regarding goats and horses, what happened to looking in the mirror and seeing no-thing?

[tucson]

Zenjen,

I'll take whatever side I like, and you have yet to understand 'no-thing'.

[zenjen]

tuscon, well maybe thats because it is your understanding, which doesn't necessarily make it right ... but hey, you and tAo rule this blog so I will just say ... over and out.

[1%]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity

http://makemineamojito.com/2009/04/01/cussing%E2%80%A6good-for-the-soul

[George]

Rose,

Fair enough, that is your opinion. I am not offended in the least. You probably make some very good points in your defense of tAo.

I have gone over the top here, but mostly i have just given quotes to speak for themselves. I have not sworn or threatened anyone, unlike someone else.

One thing Rose, while Sant Mat may not be close to your or my heart, there are many that actually would like to discuss it without them or their gods being called all sorts of poo-poo names. Now there may well be that some Sant Mat fellas are deserving of a bollocking, but tAo crosses way over the line at times, and its gratuitous unecessary bashing which incites extreme responses.

Zenjen encapsulates my feelings very neatly.

Anyway, thats it from me on this matter. If my point has not been made, it never will be and i understand tAo is part of the old guard and probably a good guy and all that and just has a hard time showing it. I hope so cos mostly all i've seen so far is intolerant abuse.

[Catherine]

I like the idea of looking around the room for the third person or the quiet person when tiffs break out. Often these people are the cause.

Also some folk are just potential trouble sources. In a school for instance, the pts will always have an unhappy little stir happening around them.

[George]

tAo,

Sorry am not going to let this go just yet.

Your quote:
"Just take it from me... a guy who has most certainly done more drinking, and more sex drugs and rock & roll, than anyone you have ever known or will ever know."

I called: "this self-conceited arrogance"

You said: "Incorrect. I was just telling/relating some facts about myself, compared to others. There was nothing "conceited" or arrogant about that."

You simply have no idea and this is a common problem. You inherently assume that only you have walked the walk, have intelligence and have had experiences. How do you know what others on this blog have or have not done.

In my experience there's always someone bigger, better and has done more. Also, invariably its those that don't talk-up or bragg about their experiences, which are often most qualified to speak on a subject.

"But I am honest about it, not devious like you. ... I think you are a pretentious and devious little fraud."
--- How have i been devious or dishonest?

I have called a spade a spade without resorting to gutter talk. I have called you for what I believe you to be, which is why we are having this ridiculous personal tiff. I may be wrong about you, but its my honest opinion based on your own statements.

As for your assertions about me, they are plain nonsense. Firstly, i bet that i am a more honest individual than yourself, but thats neither provable or not. As for 'little', i'm 6'3, weigh a little under 250 pounds, do powerlifting and box to keep fit and so long as i draw breath will never be intimidated by thugs like you either on the net or in person.

But what really irritates me, and has set me off here, is all your bullying bravado, intimidation and intolerance. You are a fascist thug and my definitions of these terms are perfectly correct and you have proved it yet again.

[Roger]

Rose,

Stick around, and write more comments. Not necessarily about RSSB, but other topics, you have interest in.

Roger

[Brian]

George, like I said in an earlier comment, you're sounding like a teenager in a high school locker room. You're free to keep on with your "I'm a bigger bad-ass than you are!" but I don't know what this is accomplishing.

I find this sort of give-and-take on the Internet, which is disturbingly common, boring. I don't frequent bars, but it must be what goes on when guys have had too much to drink and get into loud shouting matches that they must think are of great importance and of interest to other people, but really aren't.

You criticize tAo for his bullying bravado, then you put up a comment full of bullying bravado. Huh? Why don't you try acting like you would like tAo to act, showing the differences between you rather than the similarities?

[the elephant]

Brian,

I don't share your perception of the situation. I don't think George sounds like a Teenager in a locker room. As far as I know, and I may be wrong, George never goes as far as to tell absurdities like "Just take it from me... a guy who has most certainly done more drinking, and more s*x dr*gs and rock & roll, than anyone you have ever known or will ever know." Most certaintly ... Sure ...

I personally don't call writing
"As for your assertions about me, they are plain nonsense. Firstly, i bet that i am a more honest individual than yourself, but thats neither provable or not. As for 'little', i'm 6'3, weigh a little under 250 pounds, do powerlifting and box to keep fit and so long as i draw breath will never be intimidated by thugs like you either on the net or in person."
bragging so much as just responding to an 'obvious' :) observation/threath made by tAo. The is 6'3. What should he say? That is 4'10? But it is just me.

Regarding the current exchange with tAO. George mostly critized tAo. He does not talk much about himself. Actually, he simply points out the reasonably obvious. tAo has told a lot on this blog over the year. Things and events big and reasonably inconsistent enough that you may doubt of some of them. According did two Ph.D. in Ivy league Univeristies, AND SIMULTANEOUSLY, nonetheless, being a wanderous Yogi in India. In addition of 40 years of practice, and all the s*x, dr*gs and rock and roll. All that, and he ends up a wash out 60+ year old man, without much money, into body building and pick up fights on the internet (I don't about elsewhere), abusing and insulting others on the net. All very admirable things.

Calling tAo's inconsistencies, 'stories', and 'facts' he tells about himself to us (btw calling a 'fact' a statement about himself about a reality that cannot be verified or validated is ridiculous) is perhaps just trying to help him, just like tAo tries to help others (despite the fact that they have not requested is help) according to Tucson. If George is a bit rough, and the truth hurt, then, like Tucson says "
Perhaps, George is simply calling "a goat a goat and sometimes people don't like to look in the mirror when all along they thought they were a horse."

George has not baosted (explicitly) that much compared to tAo in his past few comments. So I see you comparisons between the two as being greatly unfair and missing the points. Moreover, George does not tell others how they should use words or not. If you look back George's attitude towards others has been quite polite and reasonable. There is no big drama or paranoia that we are all trying to get him, etc.

I believe George has heard your opinion on the issue, and if he decides to post that is his choice. You keep repeating yourself: either, you forbid him to do it as administrator, or just let it go and let them have it so to speak.

[Robert Paul Howard]

Dear George,

Again, I find your observations quite accurate on this topic.

Dear Brian,

Why do you reprimand George for doing in such small measure what you have generally allowed that thug who hides behind the false name "tAo" (with variants) do for years? I do not regard your judgment in this as being free from bias.

Robert Paul Howard

[Brian]

the elephant and Robert, my observations on this subject flow, in part, from being married to a psychotherapist. I've heard Laurel talk a lot about how to deal with difficult people -- including advice she's given to clients when she was doing private practice counseling.

If a parent screams at a child, "You're playing too noisily! Be quiet!", this won't teach the child much. It may have an effect, but the child thinks (maybe unconsciously) "Mom is acting just like me."

LIke I said before, I don't consider that we're out to change people's personalities or belief systems on this blog. Or anywhere else in life, really. All we can do is behave toward others as we would like them to behave toward us and other people: modeling rather than preaching.

Sometimes it is necessary to defend ourselves, verbally or physically. But when we do this with the same attacking energy as the person we're dealing with, it doesn't work very well. Your experience might be different. This is just what I've learned from my in-house psychotherapist, and also from my martial arts instructor.

Who (the instructor) frequently has said to me in training, "Brian, watch out for those wild eyes." Meaning, in sparring or a drill, I have a tendency to over-react and not remain internally calm when responding to an incoming threat. Again, what works best is to accept aggressive energy non-aggressively: calmly yet strongly.

What I see happening in these comment conversations (and I've been guilty at times of doing this myself) is that people get sucked into a repetitive tit for tat, back and forth, that doesn't go anywhere until one party or the other has the maturity to recognize, "this is ridiculous" and defuses the situation -- with humor, acceptance, going on to productive commenting, ignoring, or such.

All I'm doing is saying how I see things. I've called out tAo in the past, and I'm calling out George now. I feel a responsibility to maintain a moderately harmonious atmosphere for commenters on this blog. Occasionally I get emails from people who are bothered by the anger and emotionality in some comments. That bothers me, in return.

When I see people adding fuel to the fire, I want to say "Guys, let it be."

I fork out my $135 a year to TypePad to host my blogs, and spend a couple of hours a day (usually) maintaining them with new postings and responding to comments because I believe in discussion -- not because I want to provide a forum for people to insult and bash each other.

When the insulting and bashing is related to a discussion of some issue ("You don't know crap about X!"), that's somewhat understandable. But when it degenerates into mere name-calling: "You don't know crap!", that's when my patience starts to fray.

[Robert Paul Howard]

Dear Brian,

I am aware that you have "called out tAo in the past" - but this has been very rarely engaged in. I suggest that you enforce that practice a bit more regularly.

Robert Paul Howard

[tucson]

Well, Brian makes a lot of sense but I have to warn all you pigfucks. I am 6', 165 lbs. of raw power honed to fighting fitness by throwing the frisbee for the dog and bicycling. Also, four decades ago I achieved the lofty status of yellow belt in Tae Kwon Do. That was only three or four ranks away from blackbelt, so you can see I'm no one you want to tangle with. Be forewarned.

[Brian]

tucson...scary. I watch Dimitri Martin's show on Comedy Central once in a while. Dimitri has a recurring segment where he shows what he, also a yellow belt, can do when he gets angry. I've seen him kick over a stool with one blow (or maybe a couple of them; he might have missed the first time).

Obviously you are a big bad dude, not to be messed with. Church of the Churchless visitors, be warned! Argue with something tucson says and he might ride up to you on a bicycle and toss a frisbee in your direction. Would you survive? Maybe. But do you want to take the chance?

[pAo]

tao - please, please talk to us about love.

brian - have no fear - tucson is a 50's-ish skinny little woman

[tAo]

Posted by the elephant:

"George never goes as far as to tell absurdities"

-- That itself is an absurd and false statement. Because if you are going to imply that tAo does "tell absurdities", then you necessarily must indicate exactly what those "absurdities" are that tAo has told.

"George mostly critized tAo. He does not talk much about himself."

-- That is incorrect. If one goes back and reads many of George's previous comments of the past month or more, you will find that he not only mentions, but boasts quite alot about himself and his superior scientific and academic background.

"tAo has told a lot on this blog over the year. Things and events big and reasonably inconsistent [...] did two Ph.D. in Ivy league Univeristies, AND SIMULTANEOUSLY, nonetheless, being a wanderous Yogi in India."

-- tAo has only related a few basic facts about his academic background and his spiritual journey and sadhana in India. And there is nothing in any of those few personal facts and history that tAo has shared about himself which are "big" or "inconsistent". There is nothing inconsistent about pursuing an academic degree and also traveling to India. Many people have done the same.

I am now sorry that I ever trusted to share anything personal about myself and my background, as I now see that there are some people here (like the elephant and George etc) who are not honest and are deliberate and intentional troublemakers.

"All that, and he ends up a wash out 60+ year old man, without much money, into body building and pick up fights on the internet [...] abusing and insulting others on the net."

-- That is totally incorrect and distorted information as well. tAo has never indicated that he is "washed out", or that he is "without much money". In fact I am retired and I am quite well off financially. I am also very healthy, physically fit, and quite strong and agile, and I am also married to a very wonderful and intelligent and wise woman who is a doctor. And that's about as much as I am going to say about myself. My personal background and family is none of anyone's business.

"Calling tAo's inconsistencies, 'stories', and 'facts' he tells about himself to us [...] is perhaps [the elephant & George] just trying to help him"

-- tAo is not in need of any such "help". And there are no such "inconsistencies" anyehere in what little I have related and shared about myself personally.

"If George is a bit rough"

-- George is mostly rather pretentious, and quite boastful and egotistical. He is also basically an immature man who feels a compulsion to assert himself as the top-dog in a situation, if and when he encounters other men whom he perceives as being an intellectual and/or physical challenge to him. It is as Brian obsevered, typical high-school behavior. And the "bully" is really George, not tAo. tAo actually doesn't take any of this personal shit seriously.

"George has not baosted (explicitly) that much compared to tAo in his past few comments."

-- That too is incorrect. tAo has not "boasted" at all in any of his comments, and especially not "in his past few comments". tAo had quite some time ago shared a little bit of honest info about his own personal history (which the elephant has repeatedly attempted to discredit in vain). All of those old comments made by tAo about himself were quotes that have been recently re-posted by George, not by tAo. Also (as mentioned above), George has indeed "boasted" quite a moderate amount about his scientific and academic background, as well as his 'big' physical stature, weight, etc. etc. It is obvious that George is wanting to appear intimidating and threatening and superior... the very same "thug" that he so falsely accuses tAo of being. George is looking for a fight, and that has been obvious for quite awhile now.

"Moreover, George does not tell others how they should use words or not."

-- Wrong. tAo has not told anyone "how to use words". If you disagree, then show exactly what instance/s that you are referring to.

Moreover, George's recent use of the term "fascist" in describing tAo is in fact quite faulty and incorrect. If you don't see, know or believe that, then simply go look up the proper definition of the terms "fascism" and "fascist". Fascism actually refers to a union of the State with the Corporate. Go study your history if you doubt that.

"If you look back George's attitude towards others has been quite polite and reasonable."

-- It has only been "polite" and seemingly reasonable when George wants an ally, or doesn't want to offend someone. George's politeness is superficial and is is used to manipulate. Other than that, George is really out to dominate others, and he is willing to deliberately pick a fight with anyone (such as myself) who represents any challenge to that, to him.

"There is no big drama or paranoia that we are all trying to get him"

-- tAo has never ever indicated any such "paranoia" that "all" or anyone is "trying to get him". That is absolute unfounded bullshit, a lie that is being dishonestly fabricated by the elephant.

[To Brian]: "I believe George has heard your opinion on the issue, and if he decides to post that is his choice."

-- It may be George's "choice", but that does not alleviate George from his obvious intention to willfully and repeatedly attack tAo and perpetuate George's immature personal competition and vendetta against tAo. But tAo is not intersted in reciprocating.

George has already revealed his underlying agenda by his blatantly ridiculous defense of the fundamentalist dogma and preachings of Ashy and Harinder, and by attacking and ridiculing anyone who argues against such preaching of religious dogma and fundamentalism.

[George has even gone so far as to falsely try to label the realization of dzogchen as a "belief", when in reality dzogchen has nothing whatsoever to do with entertaining or adhering to any type of belief.]

tAo has no interest to debate any of this any further. The elephant and his ilk don't deserve any more of my attention anyway. I have said more than enough on all the issues.

My intent here was always and only in the spirit of honest and upfront and lively debate, and never to be truly "abusive" as some have wrongly alleged.

It is all up to Brian to deal with those whose less than honest intentions are to make trouble and discord.

So for now, I will say my heart-felt good-bye and good-luck to all of my sincere good friends... and to the others (who no doubt, will show their true colors eventually), simply silence.

[pAo]

pAo REQUESTS A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR THE PASSING AWAY OF OUR DEAR DEVOTED FRIEND, tAo.

pAo WILL SORELY MISS HIM OR HER.

[Brian]

tAo, hope you will be back visiting this blog soon. You have a lot to offer. I enjoy your comments more when you aren't engaged in personal give and take with somebody, but you're always entertaining and interesting.

Don't be a stranger for too long. You've got a good philosophical mind, with extensive knowledge of matters Eastern'ish. My only wish when I read your comments is that you'd share more of your meditation and mystical ideas, and engage in less personal arguments -- which can distract from the Big Questions I most enjoy pondering.

[tAo]

PS: One more thing...

Dear Rose,
Thank you for your kind and sensible support. I just wanted to let you know that I do appreciate your thoughtfulness in stepping up to comment on my behalf. My sincere best wishes to you.

Thanks to my friend Tucson for his wisdom, insight, and honesty.

Thanks to my friend Roger for his inquiring questions and humor.

And while I'm at it, my thanks to everyone else who visits and particpates here with good intentions.

And of course, my sincere thanks and deep appreciation to my friend Brian for his patience and understanding, and for all the time and energy, thought and research he puts into writing and maintaining this excellent blog-site.

You know, I'm a Californian.

So I'm just 'checking out' for a time... but I'm 'never leaving'.

[tAo]

Thanks so much Brian, and I will try to avoid any engaging (like I have so many times) with others on a personal level. I feel much like you do, in which that kind of interaction is indeed rather boring.

For whatever little I have shared here, you haved shared so much much more. I feel honored to be acquainted with you. I hope we can meet up in person some day, and go down to that mystic coffee shoppe together.

I'd bet that we very likely may even have already met at the Dera sometime during Charan's era. If you were to list the years and sessions that you were there, then we might be able to determine if it was possible.

All the best to you my friend.

[Brian]

tAo, I only went to the Dera once while Charan Singh was alive: for two weeks in December 1977. I enjoyed the experience, though it wasn't as earth shattering as I'd hoped. That was the first (and only) time I saw the guru after having been initiated for six years. I was impressed by him, but didn't experience fireworks.

[George]

ok Brian, i will stop all this now and will simply not respond to tAo since, believe it or not, i don't want to make your blog unpleasant, but more than anything, i seem to be boring myself with all this nonsense.

i'm not sure your take on this whole situation is fair, but thats your business. i know whats happened here and ppl can spin it any way they want, but its not honest.

[George]

I see old tAo has given up the ghost.
That was not my intention.
I will rather dissapear and let you carry on.

[Catherine]

Ah, good, now everyone's gone? So, it's just me in the spotlight then? We'll erm, ehem, ah... Ladies and gentlemen... er... unaccustomed as I am to holding centre stage... ummm...( small figure does a wobbly pirouette, opens arms and bows). I do hope that you have enjoyed the show. You are all welcome to join us for drinks after the show at the Verge Inn across the road. There we'll commence our discussion on How to Save Ourselves, the World and The Rest.

At 2am we usually break out into a large fight in the street outside which is most entertaining. Never-the-less after a few days of nursing our wounds we will be interviewing for the next play.

[the elephant]

history is repeating itself through a tight script once again.
-- Tao has made the same announcement many times in the past: always back.
-- Tao, when the heat has been turned up on him, will become very nice, polite, warm and fuzzy. A pale ghost of his habitual self. It happened after Catherine introduced herself on this blog and TAo went 'tAo commando' on her with verbal abuses and insults. He became real nice after he realized he went probably too far. It happened many times before that again ...
-- I won't reply to tAo directly since if anyone takes the time to read my passages he cites and put them back into their original context they will see how the distortions are obvious and comically desparate; I won't waste my time explaining them. tAo is an intelligent man (too intelligent for his own good unfortunately), no doubt about that, but this is way below the habitual standard we are used too. If that is all he got from my commment, it is pretty sad ...

I am not trying to be ashhole here -- if I am then I am just that (I will live with that) but for all the deceptions and delusions this blog is 'fighting' and 'exposing' regarding some guruish and religious beliefs and attitudes, the latest warm and fuzziness is inherently 'fake', although sincere for some; it is simply life repeating itself. Not all harmony or peace is of the same nature. Any peace based on denials of some sorts is bound to crumble ... I don't doubt of the 'good' intentions and sincerity of some but sometimes life finds way to resist even the best intentions ...

There is a certain naivity (the same naivity that is often exposed here regarding other matters) in all that, a deception of some nature, but what should I expect from some people who joined for decades, or still are in, a sect that is obviously, just one among many, and like the others a big lie of some sort.

[Roger]

Tao and Tucson,

Maybe, I can get one of your e-mail addresses? If you so desire. From time to time, I recieve some interesting e-mails from other friends, I could share with you guys. If so, send your e-mail thru Brian.

Best wishes,
Roger

[Brian]

Catherine...nice image, the wobbly pirouette. For some reason I'm reminded of a cross between the Beatle's Sergeant Pepper album --"we hope you enjoyed the show" -- and early Bob Dylan. Didn't he sing something about Maggie not being on her farm any more?

the elephant, your comment makes me think of how seriously we take things, including thinking. And commenting. Almost everything, Except when the Cosmic Big Grin breaks through our consciousness clouds and makes us smile at our pretensions to knowing What It is All About.

Serious - lightness. Dark -- light. Angry -- happy. Yes, the world seems to come in two's. Realizing that there's always another side, even to what I just said, helps us embrace The Big Grin.

That's how I see it, at least. There's always another way or seeing.

[tAo]

"Tao has made the same announcement many times in the past: always back."

-- Unfortunately elephant, you are quite wrong again. You have a nasty habit of twisting things to suit your game. And thats the same devious game you have always played here - hiding in the shadows until you think that you have an opportunity to discredit me - but only proving again what a disingenuous jerk you really are.

I did NOT say that I was leaving. I simply said that I was merely 'checking out' for awhile... giving it a break. Which is something that YOU seem unable to do, to let go of.

"Tao, when the heat has been turned up on him, will become very nice, polite, warm and fuzzy."

-- I am not nice warm and fuzzy at all. But I meant what I said to Rose Tucson and Brian, and its really none of your damn business. But you just can't help yourself elephant, because you're a sick twisted little punk with nothing better to do... and you're an asshole.

"I am not trying to be ashhole here -- if I am then I am"

-- Yes, you certainly are. And you prove it every time that you post another bogus twisted attack against me, trying in vain to discredit me... another load of your devious and dishonest bullshit. Your devious little game is all about keeping a battle going against me. But everyone else is sick and tired of that elephant. So give it up.

"the latest warm and fuzziness is inherently 'fake'"

-- No elephant, YOU are the one who is the "fake". You are the one who is up to no good. Because this is all you ever post about - your numerous futile attempts at discrediting me. You never contribute anything positive or participate in any other sbjects or discussions. Your sole motive and game is to lurk in the shadows and then attack me when you think you have some chance, some opening. Irtas so obvious. And doing that, makes you no better than a troll, which is pretty much what you are.

"There is a certain naivity [...] but what should I expect from some people who joined for decades, or still are in, a sect that is obviously, just one among many, and like the others a big lie"

-- And who are you to judge people who are or were members of RS? Or judge anyone who gave Santmat a serious go for "decades"? Who are you to judge a spiritual path and a sect that you were never part of? I don't recollect you ever saying that you were an initiated RS satsangi. So were you? or were you not? If you were, then you are entitled to criticise. But if not, then you are merely an outsider whose opinion is far less relevant.

[tAo]

Roger,
Just send an e-mail to Brian who probabaly still has my address, and then he can forward it on to me. Put your e-mail address in the body of the message. I don't think he will mind doing that on a one time basis. Then I can and will contact you directly. I can also give you Tucson's address too, just as long as Tucson says thats OK with him.

[JJQ]

alright, ya'll stop being so melodramatic,...

[tucson]

tAo...OK re: above