Robin, I'm snipping all the Vaj is-he-or-is-he-not stuff. I think most everything that needs to be said on that score this time around (it's come up on a regular basis for many years) has been said, at least to my satisfaction. Maybe something new and different will crop up next time, and we'll take it for another spin...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: <snip> > I was a little concerned about learning that I am a > "perplexing critter" and that "it is not surprising that > you throw people for a loop sometimes". I would hope that > if this is so, it does not occur when I am obviously > attempting to be the opposite of this. That would be my > fault clear and simple. Cheese, Robin, that wasn't intended as a criticism. You're a very unusual, complicated dude with a very unusual, complicated history. And from what you've said, you haven't been in communication with the TMer/former-TMer community for many years while you were putting yourself back together. You're not like anybody we've had on this group, at least since I joined it in 2005. TM apostates are a dime a dozen around here, but former cult leaders who used to be in Unity Consciousness just don't tend to drop by FFL too often, you know? Many of us have never encountered anybody with anything like your resume, so to speak, in our lives. No matter how much effort you put into making yourself transparently clear, at times it's going to go over/under/ to one side of some folks' heads. I've followed your posts as closely as, if not more closely than, anyone here, and *I'm* not always sure where you're at. (I've been wildly curious about you ever since I first saw you discussed on alt.meditation.transcendental back in the late '90s, so I was tickled when you showed up on FFL.) There are some big gaps in your story as you've recounted it as well, which you may or may not end up filling in (some of them came up in your earlier discussions with Curtis, and you said then you'd try to get around to them, hint hint). In this instance, I had in mind zarzari's perplexity concerning what he considers contradictions between what he sees as your "TB" view of Maharishi and your conviction that it was all a cosmic deception. We all know about the TB view, but the cosmic deception part is pretty much a WTF?? for most of us, TMers and TM critics alike. (I don't really get that part either, but it doesn't seem to me to be a contradiction.) You might want to take a gander at zarzari's response to me, and my reply, and see if there's anything you want to try to clear up. Anyway, that's what I meant about throwing people for a loop. It may be distressing to you not to be perfectly understood, but it comes with the territory; you really can't expect it 100 percent, even from those with the best will in the world toward you. You're doing well if you can convey glimpses here and there. Maybe with enough glimpses, it'll begin to come together as a whole. Who really understands any other person anyway? Ain't nobody here omnisubjective! > But if in the course of attempting to meet the challenge of > one of my critics, I resort to irony, well that just might > cause disorientationbut in this case, this would be my > intention. There are no Queensberry Rules for the boxing > that goes on here at FFL. Right, I wasn't referring to your use of irony, although that *does* confuse some people (most of whom had it coming, as you suggest). It can be quite delicious for those of us who tune in to it, so don't hold back. > Look at what has happened today: Bob Price writes a review > which is major league; Barry writes a review subsequent to > the Price review which, in comparison to the Price one, is > very much minor league. And yet Barry would have us believe > he has been brought up to The Show. Bob hits at about a 400 > average [in that review]; Barry, about 240. This difference > is noticeable to menot so much to Steve, though. He would > have Barry and Bob hit for the same average. Probably 280. Haven't seen any of the films or read any of the books, so I can't judge the quality. Bob's was certainly more intriguing, though. (I tried reading Spy Who Came In from the Cold many years ago and found it boring; saw the film and found it depressing. I should try tackling the Karla trilogy, perhaps, now that I'm older and presumably wiser.) > I will leave it there, Judyperhaps Steve would say the > percussion section. I hate to say this, but I think he needs > that 8th degree sometimes :-) We could all use another degree or three, I suspect. > Honesty, sincerity and intelligence: it's nice when they > all go together. This is my impression of your posts, Judy, > and they are a kind of necessary countervailing force at FFL. Gee, maybe Curtis was right. Maybe you and I *should* get a room. ;-)
