Dear Vaj, Seems definitive to me. I only wish you had posted this before all the posts I wrote today.
I am a busy man; and I have wasted my time. But, better late than never. You are a total enigma to me, Vaj, so even if there is merit in all that you say here, you say it as if disembodied from your flesh and blood. Sure, that's an easy way out for me; but believe it or not, I resist all this cosmic-enlightenment-Maharishi-TM thing. With a vengeance. So, if I seem to be making myself over into another disguise which differs little from the one when I passed myself off as enlightened, well that is kind of tragic, isn't it. You are existing and writing behind a massive and impenetrable wall, Vaj; and if I am to respond honestly and sincerely to your post hereregardless of its validity in terms of the information and point of viewthen, forgive me, I will have to ask you to reveal yourself. Because a ghost would be more prepossessing to me as an arbiter of the truth about myself than you, in your present persona, can be. I know: I am just being paranoid hereas you have said in the past when I have asked you to unmask yourself. Nevertheless, until you humanize yourself I will choose to not deal straight-on with what you say here. Although, believe me, I have pondered it very carefully. If in my long dialogues with Curtis there is the slightest sense of lording it over on people; if there is anything but a human being giving it his bestwithout once reverting to the authority of his state of consciousness (which presently is extremely fallible and imperfect), then I have committed a grave error of judgmentabout myself. I have felt I was just a person, a thinker, a friend throughout the entire course of my posts with Curtis. And I think anyone on the outside, who did not know I once thought i was enlightenedif you deleted all references to this factwould never imagine what you say is so easily projected onto me. In other words, Vaj, if I never did disclose that I was once in Unity Consciousnessand there were no references to thisI defy anyone to have an experience of me [based upon my posts] that says: Oh boy: this guy is acting like some disgraced former guru. And he *has* an agenda, See for yourself. He is trying to *influence* us. True or not true, Vaj? If you are right and I am wrong, that of course means something. I shouldn't dare to show my face if I am still at the business of giving out my darshan of perfect individuation (or whatever BS I put in that book you refer to). Appreciate your dropping me a line. But the context of your presentation of yourself still seems to me to be the occultation of the personality. That said, I do read very carefully all that you say. As have here. As you see I started off ironic here, but I have ended up being the real Robin. At least I hope I have. This at least was my firm intention. Thanks for the thoughtful reflection, and implied counsel. Maskedzebra --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@...> wrote: > > > On Oct 31, 2011, at 2:53 PM, maskedzebra wrote: > > > Robin2: "Full-on aggression". Again a terrible and inaccurate > > characterization of what Barry did when he criticized me. Tell me > > one thing, Curtis (hey, I'm always doing this, n'est-pas?): did > > Barry *ever* say anything by way of criticizing me which indicated > > he was willing to answer to that criticism; that is, stand behind > > it? Did he demonstrate in his silence he was confident about what > > he said such that further discussion was pointless? Barry would > > never get caught in "full-on aggression". I invite him to deal with > > me with "full-on aggression". WTF are you doing here, Curtis? You > > are aiding and abetting Barry in being arrested in his post- > > Frederick Lenz fall-out, something which he does not understand, > > but which he is, in my estimation, a victim of. Don't get it, > > Curtis; don't get it at all. > > (large snippage) > > I think a blindspot you may be missing is that we've seen and > experienced a good number of self-proclaimed TM "enlightened" folks > here already, often acting out in some stereotypical fashion. I > suspect given your own verbosity and long-windedness this simply > highlights the pain we've already experienced here from having to > deal with such individuals. A simple look at one of your posts is > probably enough to set off this type of person. > > I mean I've read the Discovery of Grace and even I cannot bear to > read through your often lengthy posts the whole way. It's like nails > scraping against the akasha. Really, you've changed little from your > early days as a hypomanic over-rounder/writer. I'm not saying this to > be mean, but simply to point out how you may be pushing other > people's buttons without even realizing it. > > You've probably heard the words "those who talk, don't know" but > somehow Lao Tzu was silent on those who cannot STFU. ;-) >
