Perhaps you could ask yourselves: Do I actually enjoy another person’s company as I had believed? Do I actually live peace if I find myself getting a kick out of the one-up-man ship I find myself engaged in since stepping onto this ‘wide and wondrous path of peace and harmony’. This was exactly the reason why I saw through Richard’s ‘peaceful’ living; it was (and is) expressed in glee for winning yet another argument, especially the one-up-man-ship he is so proud of having eliminated.

Richard, do you see that your conversational style is confrontational? That a discussion quickly becomes a debate with requests for evidence, proofs, repetitious put-downs, requests for withdrawal of an accusation or allegation etc. Do you think that is a sensible way to discuss things? Or is it that you want to set the other person right, by verbal thrashing.

You are incredibly defensive. The fact is you display defensive behaviour; and that fact may be an indication that your motivation is indeed one of self-denial and protection. All that I hear from you and that I read from you confirms this to me. That is my point of view. The facts seem to support my point of view.

Could it be that you especially like winning against/beating up on supporters of enlightenment?

You took the opportunity to knock me down a peg or 2 in your special happy and harmless way.

... we are talking about your communication. I started by agreeing with another correspondent; who later changed his mind somewhat, that your communication is of a unpleasant nature. It is contemptuous of the point of view of others ...

I guess I must separate the teaching from the teacher just like your oft criticized punching bag, Jiddu Krishnamurti, said to his followers after screwing his best friends wife. And thus does all the games and gamesmanship of the supposedly Enlightened or those in a ‘state vastly superior to Enlightenment’ amongst us mere mortals, continue unabated.

In my opinion, for Richard to see the true meaning of your words will depend upon whether or not he ‘sincerely wants’ to. My bet is that he wants to debate it. Me thinks that the issue with you changes from one point to another point ... not in a discovering sort of way, but in a debating way. If you could make one point and stick with it until it was completed, you might be easier to understand. But, every step along the way, you appear to want to trap your ‘opponent’. For someone who says he wants peace on earth, you sure spend a lot of time in confrontation – setting verbal traps on everybody.

Richard seems to get a little squirmy when someone tries to pin him down. It makes me wonder why he exhibits so much defensiveness and denial, when he supposedly has no ego or self to defend. He gets accused of this frequently and he always denies acting defensively but Richard doth protest too much, methinks.

Then a shift occurred in my brain, in which I began to perceive the respondents on the list as more and more intelligent, while Richard appeared less and less so. I noticed that I could often see the intent of a respondent’s question, while Richard would react to some word or phrase and either wilfully ignore the intent, or simply not see it. I saw many perceptive questions and comments jettisoned by Richard and then I see Richard accuse his respondents of using the same tactics he uses. Does he live in denial? He exhibits intelligence in many ways, but when it comes to communication with his fellow humans he just seems lost. Perhaps happily so but still, you can’t start a revolution in human history if you can’t communicate your message. Dude. And by communication, I mean the two way kind, not the one way (my way) kind.