Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Purification Gone Awry

Expand Messages
  • Gene Poole
    To tell the difference to know the difference allows us to put things in categories We have categories of good and bad When we try to purify we put things
    Message 1 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      To tell the difference
      to know the difference
      allows us to put things
      in categories

      We have categories of
      'good' and 'bad'

      When we try to purify
      we put things in those
      categories, based on
      our assumptions of what
      is good or bad

      But what if our assumptions
      are mistaken?

      What if we put something
      good in the category of
      something bad, or put something
      bad in the category of good?

      What then?

      Is it not true, that if we initially
      mis-categorize something, that
      the category itself becomes
      corrupted, and that is a 'bad' thing?

      So we have to put the entire category
      of either 'good' or 'bad' into its opposite
      category, and that leaves us with only
      one category!

      Now, if that is the case, what good is
      judgment? If that is the case, who cares
      if we can tell one thing from another?

      'Categorical thinking' is what they call
      it, and it is a desperate attempt to purify
      what is corrupt; but really, it is just making
      what was bad, even worse, and as it gets
      worse, things go even more wrong, and so
      then it becomes even more important to
      purify even more... and so the cycle goes!

      "Pain!" ---> "If pain, purify!"

      Purification 'inflames' = pain ---> more purification


      Purity itself, needs the impure, for its own
      existence;

      The judge needs to posses samples of error,
      by which to detect truth;

      Possession of error, is painful; but those whose
      duty it is to purify, must know error, so that by
      comparison, truth may be known! Thus, error
      becomes the standard by which the highest
      realities are appreciated... because, they are
      'not that'!


      What is purified by five cycles of distillation
      (alchemy) is 'quintessential'

      "Absolute" means, that there is no 'solution',
      just _one thing_ (chemistry)


      What is impure, is immoral; it leads to death,
      and therefore, must be killed!

      If mind contains impurities, it must be destroyed!

      If judgment is in error, it must be halted!

      Let us judge judgment!

      Now let us judge the judge!

      In this chaos of inevitable impropriety,
      let us erase consciousness itself!

      Only life can err... thus, life is deadly!

      Therefor, let us purify the universe, by
      killing all life!

      (Cut to: Scene of goose-stepping soldiers... )


      [click: Channel changed]


      ==Gene Poole==

      Define: "YGYHOB"
    • stringsdream6
      ... Ya got yer head on backards! maybe? David
      Message 2 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
        <gene_poole@q...> wrote:


        > ==Gene Poole==
        >
        > Define: "YGYHOB"

        Ya got yer head on backards!

        maybe?

        David
      • Gene Poole
        ... Yep... correct! ==GP==
        Message 3 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          > "stringsdream6" <oz54zard@y...> wrote:
          > > "Gene Poole" > <gene_poole@q...> wrote:

          >
          > > ==Gene Poole==
          > >
          > > Define: "YGYHOB"
          >
          > Ya got yer head on backards!
          >
          > maybe?
          >
          > David

          Yep... correct!


          ==GP==
        • Onniko
          ... That was a harsh judgement on goose stepping soldiers, I thought. Don t criticise it unless you can do it. Those Korean soldiers do an awesome goose step,
          Message 4 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
            <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
            > To tell the difference
            > to know the difference
            > allows us to put things
            > in categories
            >
            > We have categories of
            > 'good' and 'bad'
            >
            > When we try to purify
            > we put things in those
            > categories, based on
            > our assumptions of what
            > is good or bad
            >
            > But what if our assumptions
            > are mistaken?
            >
            > What if we put something
            > good in the category of
            > something bad, or put something
            > bad in the category of good?
            >
            > What then?
            >
            > Is it not true, that if we initially
            > mis-categorize something, that
            > the category itself becomes
            > corrupted, and that is a 'bad' thing?
            >
            > So we have to put the entire category
            > of either 'good' or 'bad' into its opposite
            > category, and that leaves us with only
            > one category!
            >
            > Now, if that is the case, what good is
            > judgment? If that is the case, who cares
            > if we can tell one thing from another?
            >
            > 'Categorical thinking' is what they call
            > it, and it is a desperate attempt to purify
            > what is corrupt; but really, it is just making
            > what was bad, even worse, and as it gets
            > worse, things go even more wrong, and so
            > then it becomes even more important to
            > purify even more... and so the cycle goes!
            >
            > "Pain!" ---> "If pain, purify!"
            >
            > Purification 'inflames' = pain ---> more purification
            >
            >
            > Purity itself, needs the impure, for its own
            > existence;
            >
            > The judge needs to posses samples of error,
            > by which to detect truth;
            >
            > Possession of error, is painful; but those whose
            > duty it is to purify, must know error, so that by
            > comparison, truth may be known! Thus, error
            > becomes the standard by which the highest
            > realities are appreciated... because, they are
            > 'not that'!
            >
            >
            > What is purified by five cycles of distillation
            > (alchemy) is 'quintessential'
            >
            > "Absolute" means, that there is no 'solution',
            > just _one thing_ (chemistry)
            >
            >
            > What is impure, is immoral; it leads to death,
            > and therefore, must be killed!
            >
            > If mind contains impurities, it must be destroyed!
            >
            > If judgment is in error, it must be halted!
            >
            > Let us judge judgment!
            >
            > Now let us judge the judge!
            >
            > In this chaos of inevitable impropriety,
            > let us erase consciousness itself!
            >
            > Only life can err... thus, life is deadly!
            >
            > Therefor, let us purify the universe, by
            > killing all life!
            >
            > (Cut to: Scene of goose-stepping soldiers... )


            That was a harsh judgement on goose stepping soldiers, I thought.
            Don't criticise it unless you can do it. Those Korean soldiers do an
            awesome goose step, btw. I saw them on tv the other day and I was
            very impressed especially at the way they could all turn their heads
            at the same time. That was cool.



            > [click: Channel changed]
            >
            >
            > ==Gene Poole==
            >
            > Define: "YGYHOB"
          • Gene Poole
            ... Oniko... Aside from your perplexing propensity for projection (which readers will note in archives), you command to me (which I find obnoxious) Don t
            Message 5 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              >"Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:
              > > "Gene Poole"
              > <gene_poole@q...> wrote:

              > > To tell the difference
              > > to know the difference
              > > allows us to put things
              > > in categories
              > >
              > > We have categories of
              > > 'good' and 'bad'
              > >
              > > When we try to purify
              > > we put things in those
              > > categories, based on
              > > our assumptions of what
              > > is good or bad
              > >
              > > But what if our assumptions
              > > are mistaken?
              > >
              > > What if we put something
              > > good in the category of
              > > something bad, or put something
              > > bad in the category of good?
              > >
              > > What then?
              > >
              > > Is it not true, that if we initially
              > > mis-categorize something, that
              > > the category itself becomes
              > > corrupted, and that is a 'bad' thing?
              > >
              > > So we have to put the entire category
              > > of either 'good' or 'bad' into its opposite
              > > category, and that leaves us with only
              > > one category!
              > >
              > > Now, if that is the case, what good is
              > > judgment? If that is the case, who cares
              > > if we can tell one thing from another?
              > >
              > > 'Categorical thinking' is what they call
              > > it, and it is a desperate attempt to purify
              > > what is corrupt; but really, it is just making
              > > what was bad, even worse, and as it gets
              > > worse, things go even more wrong, and so
              > > then it becomes even more important to
              > > purify even more... and so the cycle goes!
              > >
              > > "Pain!" ---> "If pain, purify!"
              > >
              > > Purification 'inflames' = pain ---> more purification
              > >
              > >
              > > Purity itself, needs the impure, for its own
              > > existence;
              > >
              > > The judge needs to posses samples of error,
              > > by which to detect truth;
              > >
              > > Possession of error, is painful; but those whose
              > > duty it is to purify, must know error, so that by
              > > comparison, truth may be known! Thus, error
              > > becomes the standard by which the highest
              > > realities are appreciated... because, they are
              > > 'not that'!
              > >
              > >
              > > What is purified by five cycles of distillation
              > > (alchemy) is 'quintessential'
              > >
              > > "Absolute" means, that there is no 'solution',
              > > just _one thing_ (chemistry)
              > >
              > >
              > > What is impure, is immoral; it leads to death,
              > > and therefore, must be killed!
              > >
              > > If mind contains impurities, it must be destroyed!
              > >
              > > If judgment is in error, it must be halted!
              > >
              > > Let us judge judgment!
              > >
              > > Now let us judge the judge!
              > >
              > > In this chaos of inevitable impropriety,
              > > let us erase consciousness itself!
              > >
              > > Only life can err... thus, life is deadly!
              > >
              > > Therefor, let us purify the universe, by
              > > killing all life!
              > >
              > > (Cut to: Scene of goose-stepping soldiers... )
              >
              >
              > That was a harsh judgement on goose stepping soldiers, I thought.
              > Don't criticise it unless you can do it. Those Korean soldiers do an
              > awesome goose step, btw. I saw them on tv the other day and I was
              > very impressed especially at the way they could all turn their heads
              > at the same time. That was cool.

              Oniko...

              Aside from your perplexing propensity for projection
              (which readers will note in archives), you command to
              me (which I find obnoxious) "Don't criticize"...

              Was I criticizing? Nope.

              I was creating an image,
              which in your typical way,
              you attempt to smear.

              What prompts such attempts?

              Mind which way your head
              is turned.


              ==Gene Poole==

              What is the fulcrum
              of political leverage?
            • Onniko
              Oh some on, Gene. Didn t you find that even a little bit funny? Why do you always think I m being saying something to you, you shouldn t like when I m just
              Message 6 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Oh some on, Gene. Didn't you find that even a little bit funny? Why
                do you always think I'm being saying something to you, you shouldn't
                like when I'm just teasing you or even asking serious questions?
                That wasn't a serious comment, of course, but one allowed to be left
                open to many individual interpretations. One person is going
                thing, "Hey, maybe, I should judge what's going on just a little"
                another will think, "Oh, the warriors of the world are just as good
                and as bad and as neither as everyone else" and so on. Gene will
                say: Onniko is attempting to smear an image I was trying to create.
                ONNIKO DO NOT DRAW ON MY PAINTING!!! Could be a masterpiece.....




                --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
                <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
                > >"Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:
                > > > "Gene Poole"
                > > <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
                >
                > > > To tell the difference
                > > > to know the difference
                > > > allows us to put things
                > > > in categories
                > > >
                > > > We have categories of
                > > > 'good' and 'bad'
                > > >
                > > > When we try to purify
                > > > we put things in those
                > > > categories, based on
                > > > our assumptions of what
                > > > is good or bad
                > > >
                > > > But what if our assumptions
                > > > are mistaken?
                > > >
                > > > What if we put something
                > > > good in the category of
                > > > something bad, or put something
                > > > bad in the category of good?
                > > >
                > > > What then?
                > > >
                > > > Is it not true, that if we initially
                > > > mis-categorize something, that
                > > > the category itself becomes
                > > > corrupted, and that is a 'bad' thing?
                > > >
                > > > So we have to put the entire category
                > > > of either 'good' or 'bad' into its opposite
                > > > category, and that leaves us with only
                > > > one category!
                > > >
                > > > Now, if that is the case, what good is
                > > > judgment? If that is the case, who cares
                > > > if we can tell one thing from another?
                > > >
                > > > 'Categorical thinking' is what they call
                > > > it, and it is a desperate attempt to purify
                > > > what is corrupt; but really, it is just making
                > > > what was bad, even worse, and as it gets
                > > > worse, things go even more wrong, and so
                > > > then it becomes even more important to
                > > > purify even more... and so the cycle goes!
                > > >
                > > > "Pain!" ---> "If pain, purify!"
                > > >
                > > > Purification 'inflames' = pain ---> more purification
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Purity itself, needs the impure, for its own
                > > > existence;
                > > >
                > > > The judge needs to posses samples of error,
                > > > by which to detect truth;
                > > >
                > > > Possession of error, is painful; but those whose
                > > > duty it is to purify, must know error, so that by
                > > > comparison, truth may be known! Thus, error
                > > > becomes the standard by which the highest
                > > > realities are appreciated... because, they are
                > > > 'not that'!
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > What is purified by five cycles of distillation
                > > > (alchemy) is 'quintessential'
                > > >
                > > > "Absolute" means, that there is no 'solution',
                > > > just _one thing_ (chemistry)
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > What is impure, is immoral; it leads to death,
                > > > and therefore, must be killed!
                > > >
                > > > If mind contains impurities, it must be destroyed!
                > > >
                > > > If judgment is in error, it must be halted!
                > > >
                > > > Let us judge judgment!
                > > >
                > > > Now let us judge the judge!
                > > >
                > > > In this chaos of inevitable impropriety,
                > > > let us erase consciousness itself!
                > > >
                > > > Only life can err... thus, life is deadly!
                > > >
                > > > Therefor, let us purify the universe, by
                > > > killing all life!
                > > >
                > > > (Cut to: Scene of goose-stepping soldiers... )
                > >
                > >
                > > That was a harsh judgement on goose stepping soldiers, I
                thought.
                > > Don't criticise it unless you can do it. Those Korean soldiers
                do an
                > > awesome goose step, btw. I saw them on tv the other day and I
                was
                > > very impressed especially at the way they could all turn their
                heads
                > > at the same time. That was cool.
                >
                > Oniko...
                >
                > Aside from your perplexing propensity for projection
                > (which readers will note in archives), you command to
                > me (which I find obnoxious) "Don't criticize"...
                >
                > Was I criticizing? Nope.
                >
                > I was creating an image,
                > which in your typical way,
                > you attempt to smear.
                >
                > What prompts such attempts?
                >
                > Mind which way your head
                > is turned.
                >
                >
                > ==Gene Poole==
                >
                > What is the fulcrum
                > of political leverage?
              • Gene Poole
                ... Thank you for so painstakingly conveying your interpretation of this situation . ==Gene Poole== What is the fulcrum of political leverage?
                Message 7 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  > "Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:

                  > Oh some on, Gene. Didn't you find that even a little bit funny? Why
                  > do you always think I'm being saying something to you, you shouldn't
                  > like when I'm just teasing you or even asking serious questions?
                  > That wasn't a serious comment, of course, but one allowed to be left
                  > open to many individual interpretations. One person is going
                  > thing, "Hey, maybe, I should judge what's going on just a little"
                  > another will think, "Oh, the warriors of the world are just as good
                  > and as bad and as neither as everyone else" and so on. Gene will
                  > say: Onniko is attempting to smear an image I was trying to create.
                  > ONNIKO DO NOT DRAW ON MY PAINTING!!! Could be a masterpiece.....


                  Thank you for so painstakingly
                  conveying your interpretation
                  of 'this situation'.


                  ==Gene Poole==

                  What is the fulcrum
                  of political leverage?
                • Onniko
                  You re welcome. Maybe, you ll be able to take things more in stride, now.
                  Message 8 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    <Thank you for so painstakingly
                    conveying your interpretation
                    of 'this situation'.>

                    You're welcome. Maybe, you'll be able to take things more in stride,
                    now. Is this a situation? Oh, if that's the case, then maybe you
                    prefer that people do not respond to what you write except to say
                    they enjoyed it? Because, if that's the problem all you have to do
                    is say so...I live to please...



                    --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
                    <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
                    > > "Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > Oh some on, Gene. Didn't you find that even a little bit funny?
                    Why
                    > > do you always think I'm being saying something to you, you
                    shouldn't
                    > > like when I'm just teasing you or even asking serious questions?
                    > > That wasn't a serious comment, of course, but one allowed to be
                    left
                    > > open to many individual interpretations. One person is going
                    > > thing, "Hey, maybe, I should judge what's going on just a
                    little"
                    > > another will think, "Oh, the warriors of the world are just as
                    good
                    > > and as bad and as neither as everyone else" and so on. Gene will
                    > > say: Onniko is attempting to smear an image I was trying to
                    create.
                    > > ONNIKO DO NOT DRAW ON MY PAINTING!!! Could be a masterpiece.....
                    >
                    >
                    > Thank you for so painstakingly
                    > conveying your interpretation
                    > of 'this situation'.
                    >
                    >
                    > ==Gene Poole==
                    >
                    > What is the fulcrum
                    > of political leverage?
                  • Gene Poole
                    ... [top-posted by Oniko] ... Can you say condescension ? Moral critic always, her petrified form perfectly fills her niche. ==Gene Poole==
                    Message 9 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >"Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:

                      [top-posted by Oniko]

                      Gene had written:

                      > <Thank you for so painstakingly
                      > conveying your interpretation
                      > of 'this situation'.>
                      >
                      > You're welcome. Maybe, you'll be able to take things more in stride,
                      > now. Is this a situation? Oh, if that's the case, then maybe you
                      > prefer that people do not respond to what you write except to say
                      > they enjoyed it? Because, if that's the problem all you have to do
                      > is say so...I live to please...



                      Can you say 'condescension'?

                      Moral critic always, her petrified
                      form perfectly fills her niche.


                      ==Gene Poole==


                      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
                      > <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
                      > > > "Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > > Oh some on, Gene. Didn't you find that even a little bit funny?
                      > Why
                      > > > do you always think I'm being saying something to you, you
                      > shouldn't
                      > > > like when I'm just teasing you or even asking serious questions?
                      > > > That wasn't a serious comment, of course, but one allowed to be
                      > left
                      > > > open to many individual interpretations. One person is going
                      > > > thing, "Hey, maybe, I should judge what's going on just a
                      > little"
                      > > > another will think, "Oh, the warriors of the world are just as
                      > good
                      > > > and as bad and as neither as everyone else" and so on. Gene will
                      > > > say: Onniko is attempting to smear an image I was trying to
                      > create.
                      > > > ONNIKO DO NOT DRAW ON MY PAINTING!!! Could be a masterpiece.....
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Thank you for so painstakingly
                      > > conveying your interpretation
                      > > of 'this situation'.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > ==Gene Poole==
                      > >
                      > > What is the fulcrum
                      > > of political leverage?
                    • Onniko
                      ... stride, ... you ... say ... do ... C O N D E S C E N S I O N there, I said it. I missed the moral part, though. It seemed pretty straight forward
                      Message 10 of 10 , Jul 9, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
                        <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
                        > >"Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:
                        >
                        > [top-posted by Oniko]
                        >
                        > Gene had written:
                        >
                        > > <Thank you for so painstakingly
                        > > conveying your interpretation
                        > > of 'this situation'.>
                        > >
                        > > You're welcome. Maybe, you'll be able to take things more in
                        stride,
                        > > now. Is this a situation? Oh, if that's the case, then maybe
                        you
                        > > prefer that people do not respond to what you write except to
                        say
                        > > they enjoyed it? Because, if that's the problem all you have to
                        do
                        > > is say so...I live to please...
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Can you say 'condescension'?
                        >
                        > Moral critic always, her petrified
                        > form perfectly fills her niche.
                        >
                        >
                        > ==Gene Poole==

                        C O N D E S C E N S I O N there, I said it. I missed the moral part,
                        though. It seemed pretty straight forward condescension to me. If
                        you keep it up, I might have to replace you with a lava lamp.




                        > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Poole"
                        > > <gene_poole@q...> wrote:
                        > > > > "Onniko" <onniko@y...> wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > > Oh some on, Gene. Didn't you find that even a little bit
                        funny?
                        > > Why
                        > > > > do you always think I'm being saying something to you, you
                        > > shouldn't
                        > > > > like when I'm just teasing you or even asking serious
                        questions?
                        > > > > That wasn't a serious comment, of course, but one allowed to
                        be
                        > > left
                        > > > > open to many individual interpretations. One person is going
                        > > > > thing, "Hey, maybe, I should judge what's going on just a
                        > > little"
                        > > > > another will think, "Oh, the warriors of the world are just
                        as
                        > > good
                        > > > > and as bad and as neither as everyone else" and so on. Gene
                        will
                        > > > > say: Onniko is attempting to smear an image I was trying to
                        > > create.
                        > > > > ONNIKO DO NOT DRAW ON MY PAINTING!!! Could be a
                        masterpiece.....
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > Thank you for so painstakingly
                        > > > conveying your interpretation
                        > > > of 'this situation'.
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > ==Gene Poole==
                        > > >
                        > > > What is the fulcrum
                        > > > of political leverage?
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.