Re: Theos-World Re: To Mr. Wry
Jan 13, 2003 08:33 PM
Hi. I just read now read this post, which I inadvertently overlooked, as
well as some other posts that day. I thought YOU said this stuff, that's why
I was replying to you. I tried to look over the message to make sure, as I
was a little confused, and I thought I got it right. I am sorry I so
offended you. If I thought you did not write this, I never would have
responded such. You are too verbose, in my opinion. That stuff about your
father, for example. Sometimes it is hard to read all your material. I have
been thinking about this message you wrote quite a bit. I did not know you
had responded. Your quest to resolve a certain seeming conundrum about
locality of consciousness seems foolish to me. I do not believe it can be
done and I will write about this in the future. A few more comments below.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 12:24 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: To Mr. Wry
> CLARIFICATION BELOW
> Dear Mr. Wry,
> My comments are below at ///
> Message 10295
> From: "wry" <wry1111@e...>
> Date: Thu Jan 9, 2003 2:23 pm
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Brain-Mind and Consciousness Studies, some
> references from BA Goswami
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <bhakti.eohn@v...>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 1:23 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Brain-Mind and Consciousness Studies, some
> from BA Goswami
> Subject: re karmic preferences/tendencies manifesting as Theosophy,
> RC, Bhakti yoga, science, history, etc ...
> The History
> <<<The Bhaktivedanta Institute cherishes the privilege to have started
> the world's first graduate degree program (M.S./Ph.D.) in the rapidly
> emerging field of consciousness studies.>>>
> Wry; How can you "cherish the privilege" to have done something which
> have already done?"
> /// If you are so bothered by their grammatical error, or can not
> understand their meaning why don't you write to THEM and discuss it
> with them ? Why take a cheap shot at them on this site? You may be
> an expert polyglot, but sometimes others make grammatical errors when
> writing in a languge that is not their first / natal tongue. It is
> quite possible that this was written by someone from India. I can
> understand their meaning. Is it really SUCH a significant error?
> The B. I. group has produced much of excellence. Nobel Laureates
> have participated in their conferences, which have brought together
> many of the world's best neuroscience biophysics experts. Why make
> such a petty criticism here? If you think that this grammatical
> error is so important and you want to help, contact them and point it
WRY: It should not bother you so much. You are upset becasue people will
think that you said this (as I did) after reading my message. I would never
deliberately mislead anyone about this.
> ///To all that was contained in that post from me on the B. I. study
> of Consciousness Within Science, is this the kind of response here
> that you think is worthy and appropriate? In terms of clear
> communication, your use of the word "you" both above and below is
> inappropriate, as this letter is a response to my letter, and
> therefore would seem to refer to myself, Bhakti Ananda Goswami. You
> have not identified the writers you are responding to in this post,
> and therefore it appears that the the "you" you are addressing is
> myself. This IS a significant and misleading error.
> >>It is my
> opinion that though consciousness is a 'philosophical' problem, only
> by appealing to the foundational issues of theoretical physics, we
> might be able to solve it.>>
> Wry: Consciousness is not a problem. It is people who are not fully
> conscious but are functioning mechanically and from motives of which
> they are not even aware who are causing all of the problems of
> humanity. When a human being becomes fully conscious, his intelligent
> doing will reorganize material in such a way that many problems will
> be easily solved and others around him will do the same.
> //// So now you are debating with which graduate student? Does it
> matter to you who actually said what ? Do you think that it matters
> to the readers here ? Don't you want your readers to know who the
> person is that you are addressing here ?
WRY: Maybe there is no "you". Perhaps it is just thoughts triggered by an
adrenal response, a reaction pattern.
> >My research interest is the famous 'EPR
> Paradox', the problem of non-locality and how this relates to
> consciousness studies. The Bhaktivedanta institute has given me the
> opportunity to do this unique research on two very important aspects
> of scientific inquiry: EPR paradox and Consciousness. With its
> completely 'different' research approach, the institute is bound to
> emerge as one of the premier institutes within the frontiers of
> science, in the near future.>>>snip
> Wry: Which "you" will cherish.
> /// Who are you refering to with this "you" ? Why are you taking
> such an attitude to this fellow?
WRY: I thought this fellow was you.
> WRY: I am very interested in science, myself. The problem is that the
> only way a person can study consciousness is by studying himself AS
> HE IS and not as he THINKS he is. It is the "as he thinks he is"
> which creates a lag, by which not only does everything involving
> human relationship and housekeeping of the earth cease to function at
> optimum, but which skews any data, as all data will always be
> subjectively selected. Only by PAYING ATTENTION can questions about
> locality be fully resolved, as, at the peak of the pyramid, material
> reorganizes into a plane. I got a sense from a previous writing of
> yours about transcendence that you understood this (a little), but
> now I wonder. Sadly, scientists tend to miss this, no matter how
> brilliant and sincere they are, and I have seen this time and time
> again. Wry
WRY: The more we pay attention to ourselves as we are, the closer we will
be. Don't worry about so called slander, though this is not even that, as it
was unintentional. Try to turn the other cheek. If you are sick, you need
to heal. Let stuff like this go. I have had many Buddhist teachings on the
subject of slander. I have been deliberately slandered many times, and it
has been very hard for me to grasp this teaching. It is said in the Mahayana
teaching that people get VERY upset when they themselves are slandered, but
not upset if at all when someone else is slandered. It is, gererally
speaking, pretty true. If you are spiritual, people will know.
> /// I clearly labeled the section of my post that was an inclusion
> from the Bhaktivedanta Institute, and included in it the notes on
> their Graduate Students, just so members here could see what some of
> these young scientists are working on. Your above critical response
> seems so entirely inappropriate that I wonder if you actually
> understood what you were reading.
WRY: Even though I made a mistake and I am sorry, after reading your
response, it somehow seems appropriate that I wrote this.
I even stated "ps I am not
> affiliated in any way with the B.I." So why are you addressing me
> regarding the work of these B I students ? Why do you consistantly
> take such an attiude towards people ?
WRY: This is how (some) bees make honey. Hard to believe, I know, but stick
around and you will taste it.
> /// Many of your posts here are incredibly arrogant and insulting to
> people. You seem to like to analyze others, but have you analyzed
> why it is that you consistantly treat people here so badly ? Or are
> you oblivious to the fact that you often treat people in such a
> puffed-up offensive manner ?
WRY: This is how I LOVE. You just don't recognize it as such. These words
can't hurt you anyway. It is just your imagination, compounded by negative
> /// Normally people become defensive when they think that they have
> come under attack, but you seem defensive or combative a lot of the
> time when no one has even appeared to attacked you. I am not your
> enemy. The B I does not exist to annoy you. Some B I student does
> not require a critical response from you just for having stated a
> premise for his graduate work.
> /// I have been under relentless attack for years because of my
> activism in various human rights causes, and I realize that this has
> had an effect on me. I am now somewhat hyper-vigilant, but realizing
> this, I try to be extra careful not to make erroneous assumptions
> about people. Sometimes however I do make a mistake, for example
> when I did not understand why my personal yahoogroup profile was
> coming up on a link provided by D. Caldwell. As soon as I realized
> that I had made an erroneous assumption that this was his purposeful
> doing, I apologized.
WRY: I just now read this message. Something happened that day and I missed
this email. would never have found it and others, but I happened to be on
the list page looking to see if Dallas responded to me and I found his
message and yours and others. Then I went and found them in my email. I do
apologize. It was an honest mistake.
>> It was my mistake and I was wrong to take such
> a defensive tone with him. I even threatened to sue him, momentarily
> thinking that he was persisting in some kind of identity-damage
> campaign against me.
WRY: I know. I was going to respond to this message.and say what I have just
written above about slander. I have a hunch that negative emotions are
making you sick, ort at least greatly factoring into your illness.
>>However I was relieved and happy to find out
> that it was my error due to not understanding that it was a computer
> glitch that caused it.
> /// Now in your own case, is anyone here really your 'enemy' or
> someone who is trying to injure you in some way ? Is there any
> evidence of real ill-will against you ?
WRY: If there is, who even cares? Actually, I feel loved here.
>>Or are you just habitually
> offensive with people ? Grappling over and with IDEAS is not the same
> as fighting with people.
WRY: You are trying to fight with me, but that's o.k. This is honestly the
case. There are no ideas in your message. I feel compassion for you.
>>I am not personally offended by the honest
> humble opinion of atheists or agnostics, theosophists or new agers
> etc. Can you discuss ideas with people without insulting them ?
WRY: Each situation is unique. I did not even insult you if it is not true.
In any case, are you saying you do not cherish yourself too much?
> is uncivilized BEHAVIOR, which causes 'material' offence. For
> instance, if racists didn't BEHAVE like racists, at least their
> hatred would be confined. So whatever the members of this egroup
> THINK, if they are civilized, they will try to live/act by a certain
> standard of CONDUCT. Humility / respect, truthfulness in exchange,
> and avoidance of personal attacks are basic to communicating with
WRY: Unless I am bizarrely mistaken, you do not even know. I am
communicating to you with integrity right now, even though you are attacking
me. Maybe it is my karma to be attacked. Maybe it is yours. Take up the
cross and wear it.
>>This letter is not an attack on you.
WRY: Justr focus on your "God."
>>It is a response to
> observing your behavior with others for over an month now.
WRY: It is hard Work for something impartial that has no opinion to record
myself as a physicality, in present time, while "I" (it) is having a
reaction or whatever is going on, without analyzing it or even naming it.
>> Why are
> you so arrogant and insulting to people ?
WRY: Maybe I am a LIVING MASTER or maybe I am IGNORANT AND SUFFERING and
this is how I relieve my pain for a moment or two.Maybe I do not even know
why, or maybe I do, but if I do know, why should I tell you? This question
is infantile, like tearing the wings off a butterfly to try to find its
>>It is unneccessary.
WRY: Actually, it is NECESSARY. (May "God" help us all.). When we go on a
certain quest, we are given bread and whey. This is the making of the whey.
In any case, you are insulting me by calling me arrogant and insulting. If
you think I am such, have compassion for me and show me the right way to
act. I believe you are lacking a sense of perspective and too wrapped up in
yourself and what people think of you. You are busy defending yourself, whom
you perceive to have been attacked, but I do not see you out here defending
anyone else who has been so called slandered or attacked. Sincerely, Wry
> Lighten up.
> best wishes,
> BA Goswami
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Back to Top]
- Re: To Mr. Wry
- From: "Bhakti Ananda Goswami <firstname.lastname@example.org>" <email@example.com>
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application