Dear Vaj,
Just for the record, you have not once indicated in your description of what I
was doing in those seminars that you have any idea of their realityand not one
person who read all of yours posts about what I was up to in those seminars,
would recognizeif they attended one of those seminarstheir own experience. It
is the same regarding RWC as it it regarding MMY: *You know nothing by direct
experience, Vaj*.
You are a very thorough and conscientious archivist. That's all.
What you (and now Barry) are speculating about as to what went down while I was
enlightened, it does not bear upon what really happenednot in the least. When
you talk about your flying experiences ('the touch of grace") it is the same as
when you talk about Robin Carlsen and his World Teacher Seminars. There is a
perfect demonstration of your ignorance about all this. And this saddens me,
Vaj. Had you been inside an initiation room and received your TM mantra, had
you actually met me in the flesh, or attended a real metaphysical theatre of
cosmic drama, well, I would know this.
I simply and categorically insist that, in terms of direct personal knowledge
of meand of direct personal knowledge of TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi,you are
a pure outsider, Vaj. I like how your mind moves at times in your postswhere
you are just arguing for some esoteric Buddhist truth; but when you play the
Walter Mitty card, you alarm mebecause I say to myself: this intelligent and
well-read and capable person, what, pray tell, is he doing masquerading as a TM
initiator, masquerading as someone who put Robin in his place?
It beats me, Vaj. And yet I intuit if you could get beyond this, you, as a
person, might very well produce some lively and edifying conversation. I look
forward to it.
But you will, I know you will, have some respect for the privacy and honour of
those persons who have formally and even profoundly disassociated themselves
from anything to do with Robin Carlsen.
And did you knowI have mentioned this beforethat I have spent the last 25
years in exile, sequestered from all but one person from my past. And this has
includes my family as well.
Gina Catena over at TM-Free Blog first got me to come out of the closet and
identify myself. I began to post at TM-Free Blogunder maskedzebra. I was outed
by one of the most sophisticated persons at TM-Free Blogso my cover was blown.
Subsequently Gina sent along an e-mail from Rich Archer inviting me to post at
FFL. And I took up this invitation based upon what I discerned to be the good
faith and honesty of Rick himself.
I should say right out that my motivation for posting at TM-Free Blog and now
at FFL is for further clarification of my past, and for strengthening my
understanding of myself. I write, then, at FFL, for purely therapeutic reasons.
And FFL has not disappointed in this regard.
I have been posting ever since. Grateful for the tremendous experience of
arguing with Curtis, and grateful since then for interactions with various
posters here. (FFL has not been the same since Curtis temporarily stopped
posting.) Curtis and I really got into it in those long (and for Barry tedious)
posts. But not once did Curtis go where you have chosen to go. There is a point
of personal honour here, Vaj. And I hope that you will not violate what I
thought was an unspoken code of understanding, in any further conversations we
might have.
People are not just objects you can manipulate at willand these innocent
persons from my past, what gives you the right to judge them, to hold them
accountable for what they did, to make of them fair game for scrutiny and
judgment?
This is appalling. But I understand what desperate straits you have reached in
my determination to get you to confess your Pinocchio-ness. If only we could
get past all this, and then perhaps we might surprise each other.
Alas, I think this is not to be. So, then, in the future, Vaj, I would ask you
to throw everything you can at me, but please, respect the integrity of those
human beings who do not deserve to be the subject of your need to get back at
me for being so uncompromising in my desire to make of you an honest man.
By the way to repeat, Vaj: You don't know the first thing about what the
context was metaphysically inside one of those seminars; and you have not the
least physical or mental notion of what it was like to transcend using
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's technique of Transcendental Meditation.
That said, I am sure you are a very interesting human being. Too bad you
couldn't respond to Ted Hughes, to Pascal, to Milosz, to Stevens, to Hopkins,
to Belloc, to Ignatius of Loyola, to Aquinasoops! you *did* respond to himbut
selectively and dogmatically.
Bring on the photos!
"When *I* use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means
just what I choose it to meanneither more nor less,"
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you *can* make words mean so many
different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be masterthat's all."
Robin
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@...> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 1, 2011, at 11:17 AM, turquoiseb wrote:
>
> > If you were there, or knew friends who were, what
> > *occasioned* him putting someone in the spotlight in
> > front of a room full of other people and telling everyone
> > that they were possessed by demons? What were the
> > "symptoms" that he cited? Or was the mere fact that
> > he declared someone possessed considered "enough."
>
> That's a question probably best answered by the man himself. A lot of
> it allegedly hinged on his "celestial perception" but IMO much of it
> had do with whether or not the person was liked and capable of
> reciprocating that affection back to the ego of the interrogator. I
> use the word interrogator because not only did RWC confront students,
> but other students confronted each other. Often students would feel
> the ability to be vulnerable in a more private setting, with someone
> they knew, than on a stage in front dozens of people with a stranger
> from Canada.
>
> > I guess what I'm wondering is if there was the same
> > trend we have seen here. That is, that those deemed
> > "demonic" committed the moral sin of not considering
> > him as much of a legend as he considered himself, in
> > his own mind? :-)
>
> I do believe that is part of the dynamic. I've seen the precise same
> dynamic occur in neoadvaita and satsang scenes.
>
