If I may interject here, AAB -- AFAIK I am neither MZ, nor William of Occam --
but just for the record, I also found at a certain point that CC, GC, and UC
were both experienceable at will and were essentially ephemeral: that is, they
too were simply experiences which had a beginning and an ending, being waves or
manifestations of a much "larger" That, or Us -- which is a priori and is a
kind of indescribable perfection which simply IS and has always been here and
now, but which we had conveniently managed to overlook by virtue of being
unconsciously attached to the idea of a separate experiencer: an I-particle
which was addicted to the idea of growth, of being in spacetime, which
consequently rejected that Us as being its own death.
Perhaps not coincidentally, it was RC himself who in "confronting" me delivered
one of the coups-de-grace which finally shook Us loose from that particular
identification. (For which, thank you again, Robin.) But it appears many others
have come to the same realization. One such was Jay Latham, who wrote in Galaxy
of Fire of this Understanding and of his confronting Maharishi with his
realization that CC, GC, and UC were essentially BS (my paraphrase) and of
Maharishi's vehemently enthusiastic endorsement of his realization ("YES! YES!
YES!").
And in retrospect, it appears self-evidently obvious that MMY knew this state
well and spoke of it as Brahman or as the "pathless path from here to here,"
but we hadn't ears to hear here :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "at_man_and_brahman"
<at_man_and_brahman@...> wrote:
>
> Hi. I didn't receive answers to my last two questions, but I'll pose a third.
> AFAIK, you're the only person in recorded history to have achieved a
> unity-type state of consciousness or any other flavor of "enlightenment" and
> then denounce it as false. Are you aware of anyone else who has done so, and,
> if not, do you think you're the first and why? As I'm sure you'll agree,
> there is a long tradition of enlightenment in the East, and it would be
> surprising that no one else would have ever made the same claim, assuming
> your current consciousness reflects reality.
>
> "Yeah, I went through that Brahmi chetana thing. It was a big hoax. Sure wish
> I could convince the other six Sapta Rishis so they could move on with their
> lives. They were such nice Hindu boys before getting mixed up with yoga and
> Vedic cognition."
>
> I'm not judging you or your assertion, just trying to get clarity as to your
> claim. I'm aware of people, like Krishnamurti, who renounced a guru position,
> and people who were on a path and rejected the path. Siddhartha Gautama comes
> to mind, when he rejected asceticism and veered off toward the Middle Way.
> Someone like Hindu-turned-Christian Rabindranath Maharaj, who wrote Escape
> into the Light, had a revered renunciate yogi as a father and himself grew up
> to become a yogic adept, complete with temporary "enlightenment" experiences
> that he eventually renounced, but he didn't consider himself to have
> *arrived* before he turned to Christianity.
>
> Do you still experience unity consciousness but have learned to disregard it
> or have you over time worked your way back to ordinary waking consciousness?
> Or, was the de-enlightenment as sudden as the enlightenment? To my
> understanding, you claim you were being used by Vedic gods. How did you get
> them to relinquish control?
>
> The claim that unity can be gained and then overcome and exposed as a lie is
> an even bigger mind-intercourse for TB's than FFL's shocking expose that
> Maharishi had sex. Or David Kaplan's wife coming aboard several years ago and
> claiming there were no Maharishi pandits and that, consequently, none would
> ever arrive in Fairfield (arguably, she was proven wrong on that one). Ergo,
> I think this is worth a bit more discussion, even if it is boring to some
> people. They don't have to read those posts, do they?
>
> If your claim is false, and unity can't really be dismantled, then you must
> be:
>
> * an impostor who can convincingly appear to be RC (who rumor had it had
> committed suicide, anyway) and who wants to mess with TB's minds by making
> claims on his behalf
>
> or
>
> * RC, still in unity, but wanting to claim otherwise for some cosmic purpose
> (how could it not be cosmic, if he's in unity?)
>
> or
>
> * RC, who was in a temporary false unity, rather than THE WHOLE THING, THE
> REAL THING, and Maharishi was incapable of distinguishing between the two,
> which raises its own questions
>
> If your claim is true, OTOH, then a vast fabric of Eastern traditions and
> writings spanning thousands of years and untold numbers of "saints" and sages
> is the biggest spoof in history and should receive at least passing
> acknowledgment on the Drudge Report.
>
> I see no empirical way to distinguish between these options, just as there is
> no way to prove that the universe wasn't created just five minutes ago,
> complete with all its apparent history and all our memories of it.
>
> I used to be a TB. I now am too much of a skeptic to deny the possibility of
> anything, even everything I used to believe.
>
