[FairfieldLife] Re: Summa Wrestling

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@...> wrote:
>
> Welcome back, Robin :-

RESPONSE: I sense the positive and sincere thoughts you send my way, Rory, and 
I believe your doing this makes a perceptible difference to my confidence in 
posting on FFL. I refer here to their effect beyond that of my subjective 
appreciation of them.
> 
> --- 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 with—are 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 pronounced—and 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 immediately—for what 
> > purpose I don't know, since you have soured on him—although I am sure he's 
> > got some rationalization to explain this: part of his peculiar sense of 
> > irony—you 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 thing—even 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 Maharishi—when 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 
> > believe—although I can't entirely explain why—your 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 him—and 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 life—even just in 
> > this officially dialectical form.
> >
> <snip>
>