--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <geezerfr...@...> wrote: > > Yes...now that you mention it, there was that one post from > him saying he would eat Amma for lunch and Maharishi for dinner, > or words to that effect. > > But you know, the whole episode brings up a topic that has > long fascinated me; and that is the very fine line that > separates so-called "enlightenment" from borderline behavioral > disorders such as paranoid schizophrenia. > > I'm open to the possibility that "enlightenment" is just a > stamp of authenticity on certain behavioral disorders. When > I spent time around MMY I certainly saw behaviors that would > have sent most folks in for some mental retread time.
Bingo. That is *exactly* the point I've been trying to make. The much larger issue here is the seeming inability of many people to perceive the claim of enlightenment as in the same ballpark as any other claim made by any other crazy person. *It's all going on in their heads*. ALL of it. But for some people, because they have invested so much of their belief and so much money and so many years of their lives *into* believing that enlightenment is the "highest goal," they have to divorce their reaction to Ravi as a fairly obvious crazy person from having any wider implications, and resist taking a critical look at the claims of *other* persons who have made similarly solisistic statements and similar claims in the past. How many of *them* (people revered in the past or the present as enlightened "gurus") walked away from the responsibilities of wife and family and got *praised* for it, not badrapped? How many of *them* became as dismissive of those who didn't revere them as Ravi has, and treated them the way he does? How many of *them* had a similar inability to appreciate anyone else's point of view than their own, and consider it valid? My point is that people seem to be stopping at the surface of this whole tempest in a pisspot, and not looking beneath the surface at its implications. I'm merely looking at them, and bringing them up for consideration. Not that I think any of these things will actually be considered. In my experience, the allegiance to a long-held set of beliefs is almost always stronger than the allegiance to reality. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] > > On Behalf Of Joe > > Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:03 PM > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Conversation with Mr. Chivukula > > > > > > > > Yep, you wonder just how much of the whole story is bullshit and what isn't. > > Could it be some kind of over-the-top weird devotional to Amma? > > A very poor advertisement if so. > > Hardly one she would appreciate. Many of his posts, including in the Amma > > chat, proclaim his independence from her and his new status as guru in his > > own right. > > >
