Welcome back, Robin :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
> Re: Summa Wrestling
>
> ME:
>
> First a meta comment thank you for taking the time to give a detailed
> response.
> A conversation about a topic dear to us that we may disagree about in profound
> ways in the context of rapport and respect is a privilege and a blessing. It
> is
> a rare event because it requires a framework of trust to hold it up. Trust
> that
> the other person is going to be charitable and kind and will not take your
> disagreement to reveal some character flaw. Somehow you have set the perfect
> tone for discussion Robin, and it is much appreciated!
>
> RESPONSE II: Well, in the case of yourself, I find that the ideal protocol
> reveals itself quite naturally in the intensely felt good-guy-ness whose
> consciousness I am writing into. I just followed my instincts here, and
> connect withare you ready for this?the love that is there somewhere. Look,
> for Christ sake, how many posters at FFL get birthday salutations from
> everyone? No one except God (think metaphor, Curtis) knows exactly what this
> Curtis M phenomenon is, but I can assure you, no matter how it feels from the
> inside being you, from the outside, the vibe is just too lovely and real not
> to recognize that you are (this is the at-the-ready panegyric) "the real
> deal".
>
> I sure wouldn't want to embarrass you, Curtis, but your sense of honour and
> generosity is quite pronouncedand need I say it, rare. There just is an
> exceptional maturity and sense of justice that makes itself known in your
> every act (I am extrapolating here: I assume in person you correspond to the
> context of how you write). I don't know if this came with the genetics, or
> was taught to you by your parents, or was the achievement of your simple
> yearning to *be a good person*, but whatever the provenance, the cause, of
> this characteristic that is so quintessential to being Curtis M, it is a
> Positive.
>
> I am not saying anything other than that which is the judgment of multitudes.
> So, I must presume you are not entirely unfamiliar with someone actually
> verbalizing (or attempting to verbalize) this truth about you. God (metaphor!
> Remember) wanted you to be liked deeply and immediatelyfor what purpose I
> don't know, since you have soured on himalthough I am sure he's got some
> rationalization to explain this: part of his peculiar sense of ironyyou
> can't evade his ultimate design of course; and therefore the ingredients
> which make up Curtis M are what you might choose if you were the divine Chef
> of creation and all the beings inside of it.
>
> A one-off recipe.
>
> (Curtis M to himself: Is this guy ever going to shut up? Really, this is
> verging on the ultra.)
>
> Well, just at the beginning I want to insert one more thingeven though it
> might perhaps fit better later on in this post-counterpost conversation. And
> it is this: I am very interested in your take on Maharishiwhen you were the
> deepest you were in, when you went to India, when you were taken with
> Maharishi as the embodiment of truth (Perennial Philosophy), when you would
> do anything to protect and uphold his Teachings. What constituted your unique
> and private sense of what he amounted to, Curtis? Because I believealthough
> I can't entirely explain whyyour personal experience of Maharishi to be of
> more interest to me than almost anyone else's that I can think of.
>
> Why so? Because it is my intuition that something happened to you when you
> first encountered Maharishi in person that remains an experience outside of
> and different from the context within which you have experienced * everyone
> and everything else in your entire life*. Am I wrong about this, Curtis? It
> just seems that that first interface: MMY and CM, produced a biochemical and
> metaphysical event in the universe that I would like to know about.
>
> My hunch: Maharishi seemed in the beginning to get past all your doubts, your
> presuppositions about what any human being could be capable of being, in
> person. That you felt a certain extraordinary agreement in your soul, and
> which, until you began to doubt himand TM,made you secretly and suavely
> content in defending MMY, in sacrificing yourself for him and his cause.
>
> I'm stopping here. Don't worry. But that connection between CM and MMY, it
> intrigues me greatly. Remember, I am only interested in your very *personal*
> impression of this man.
>
> But to your point: It's all good communicating with you, Curtis. I feel
> privileged somehow that I have been received into your lifeeven just in this
> officially dialectical form.
>
<snip>
