RESPONSE: I am grateful to you for pointing out some of my misattributions, Judy. I have made the appropriate corrections below. By the way, you were right: I was not planning on posting again at FFL. But I couldn't help acting when I saw the post to which this is a response. I appreciate your conversations with Emily about first person ontology and John Searle. You attempt always to give the fairest and most just reading of the posts at FFL. I was tempted to jump in there when you were interpreting me in my stead; but I had determined it was over for me at FFL. And now that I am back in here for a while I suppose I should try to respond to several persons who have directed their posts to me. Consider this me being just nice and chatty as I always am :-)
Robin --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > Zarzari: According to Maharishi and according to tradition this > [losing Unity Consciousness] is not possible. In this > case it wasn't fully established. > > Barry: Either that or it never happened in the first place. > > That is, from everything that has been reported here > that I've read, the entire episode sounds like a > classic case of NPD/hypomania augmented by moodmaking > and a desire to become the focus of other people's > attention. > > Vaj: There's more evidence to suggest this, as a common 'bragging claim' of > Carlsen followers was the fact that he wrote "The Discovery of Grace" with > commentary (I believe, or one of his tomes) by staying up all night and > simply dictating it, in one go. To us rabid TMers this was just more evidence > of "enlightenment" when, in 20/20 retrospect it was more evidence of > hypomania run amuck. > > Robin: There is no "commentary" in The Discovery of Grace. And I never > dictated anything. I wrote in a state of inspiration, but always alone. It > felt (in writing anything while in Unity) as if this must have been > Maharishi's experience of writing The Science of Being and Art of Living. > Everything was written in longhand. And the writing was always very neat. I > consider those books an indictment of my enlightenmentthat is to say, proof > of the final non-objective (not congruent with reality) status of my Unity > Consciousness. > > Barry: I've seen it happen before to other "gurus" who set > up shop based on self-announced (and never verfied, > even by their own teachers) "enlightenment." > > Vaj: While some passing remarks of Maheshiji were at first used to prop up > his claim of "Unity", later this was not enough. This culminated in RWC's > court case against M. where it was required that M. respond on tape declaring > or denying RWC's "enlightenment. This was done and a tape was delivered to > the court in Ottumwa, as with baited breath they awaited the final verdict, - > which consisted of Maheshiji grunting a "noew" to the tape recorder. > > Robin: Maharishi summoned me to Seelisberg several months after acting out my > meta-theatre of enlightenment and 'individuation'. There I talked to him > personally, and while he did not exactly say: Go to it, Robin Boy! he > nevertheless said nothing that would indicate that I should attempt to stop > what I was doing. About six months later he sent one of his secretaries to > observe and reflect upon what was going on among the TM teachers in the city > where I was acting out my role as the enlightened man, and causing such > fierce controversy among the teachers there. Once again there was no move to > inhibit me in what I was doing. Maharishi's secretary stayed at the same > residence where I and a number of initiators were living. We got along > famously. > > There were other phone calls from Seelisberg, other messages from > Maharishimeanwhile the show went on. Without any formal interference > whatsoever from Maharishi. He had seven years in which to put a stop to this > enlightenment nonsense, and he scrupulously withheld any censorious comments. > > I forced him to confess not only the validity of my enlightenment, but > evenhere is where I went too far [not to say that I was in a hallucinatory > state to begin withbut then, so was Maharishi himself]the superiority of my > own version of the Sidhis. His back was up against the wall, and he did > indeed make these gruff sounds nixing my enlightenment and my innovative > updating of the Sidhis. But the ambiguity surrounding all this was too > obvious. There was no sense of triumph for the MIU establishment; nor was > there any sense of having learned Maharishi's true estimate of my > enlightenment. It was all very murky, and I just continued to do what I was > doing. > > Vaj: So the claim from his guru is that "no, he was not enlightened". > > Robin: There was nevereven in the mind of Bevan, who played the audio tape > of Maharishi in court that dayany clear cut evidence that actually altered > anyone's understanding of what was going on. Maharishi it is true, did not > endorse me as I was certain he would; but at the same time his actual words > on that tape did nothing to clarify or resolve anything. As everyone realized > who heard the tape or subsequently found out about its contents. > > Vaj: His behaviors continued to escalate and I believe, to this very day, if > RWC sets foot in the state of Iowa, he would be detained for 40 days in the > Jefferson Co. prison - possibly longer, since he skipped off to Victoria to > escape his fate. > > Robin: There is a complex legal history to all of what followed after > Maharishi's audio tape. Which included the conscious ignoring of the ruling > that I must not hold my seminars within a certain geographically defined area > deemed by the judge to constitute a violation of the territorial rights of > MIU. I was found in contempt of court; there was an appeal. The contempt of > court ruling was narrowly upheld, and the legal consequence of this was that > I should be detained in the manner in which Vaj has described here. Plus pay > court costs. > > All this occurred within the inexorable spontaneity of my experience of a > cosmic drama, over which I had no sayeven in my own actions [I have > discussed this principle before in various posts]. I was a pure witness to > all that was happening around me. This is what it is like to be in Unity > Consciousness. > > Barry:: The thing that causes me to believe in this theory > is the fact that RWC refuses to even consider it, > even as a possibility. *His* subjective view is the > only possible explanation. That's pretty much classic > NPD/hypomania. > > Robin: Judy has done a pretty good job of demolishing this diagnosis. > Zarzari, right from the beginning when you came to post at FFL you had an > intense bias; you waited until taking your leave of absence, to come out with > it directly; but it was always there in everything you wrote. You have > escaped detection in this regard, for your motives were always under a > compulsion which would vitiate any claims of fairness or objectivity in this > matter. You were only about saying what you finally said: this MZ guy, he is > a nutcase. Interesting that the credibility of Turq immediately trumped > everything that Judy had been explaining to you: in that moment you revealed > your uncontrollable agenda. You have impeached yourself, zarzari. > > Vaj: Yep. > > Robin: One of Vaj's more authoritative remarks. Carries with it the serene > and magisterial disinterestedness which reflects how active and dominant is > the good conscience of our pal Vaj. > > Vaj: I wonder what his mother Norah - an esteemed and groundbreaking Ph.D. > psychologist - would have said? I cannot help hear her voice in the > psychobabble of Robin interspersed in his lingo back then. But if IIRC, she > did not approve. She may have even been declared "demonic" - a certain, real > shunning for anyone in the World Teacher Seminar. She left this world however > in 2000, so we may not ever know, but it's an interesting part of the RWC > story: boy raised by glass ceiling breaking female psychologist. > > Robin: All of this is simply ridiculous. Vaj attempts to do a striptease with > respect to the incomplete and fragmentary and desultoryand often > falseinformation he has about this Robin guy. But when he starts to tease > us, we soon discoverthis admittedly is an intuitionhe is a eunuch, so there > really is nothing to get aroused about: he is sexually irrelevant. The idea > of bringing in one's deceased mother in order to score points: how gauche and > morally grotesque is this? > > But Vaj, he knows no shame. He is the would-be Wikipedia for Robin; but his > facts are all askew and his perspective fatally incoherent. He knows much > less about me than he knows about being a TM initiator. I categorically > reject the context within which he presents his unreliable information about > me. Walter Mitty archivist and fantasist to the very end. > > Vaj: And I wonder how many present day psychologists she inspired? Perhaps > many. IMO, Dr. Norah Carlsen, Ph.D. is the more interesting story I'd like to > hear. My belated condolences on the passing of this incredible woman. > > Robin: Vaj: will you just shut up about my mother? You know nothing about > her. You know nothing about me. You never met me. You are a victim of a > disturbing obsession, and I wish you would get over it. There are standards > of decency and taste, Vaj: You are bereft of what is required as the most > minimal sense of discretion in order to have a civil and civilized > conversation with an adult human being. I wish you would stop it. What can I > do to touch your conscience, Vaj? > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 26, 2011, at 7:12 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, zarzari_786 <no_reply@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > According to Maharishi and according to tradition this > > > > [losing Unity Consciousness] is not possible. In this > > > > case it wasn't fully established. > > > > > > Either that or it never happened in the first place. > > > > > > That is, from everything that has been reported here > > > that I've read, the entire episode sounds like a > > > classic case of NPD/hypmania augmented by moodmaking > > > and a desire to become the focus of other people's > > > attention. > > > > There's more evidence to suggest this, as a common 'bragging claim' > > of Carlsen followers was the fact that he wrote "The Discovery of > > Grace" with commentary (I believe, or one of his tomes) by staying up > > all night and simply dictating it, in one go. To us rabid TMers this > > was just more evidence of "enlightenment" when, in 20/20 retrospect > > it was more evidence of hypomania run amuck. > > > > > I've seen it happen before to other "gurus" who set > > > up shop based on self-announced (and never verfied, > > > even by their own teachers) "enlightenment." > > > > While some passing remarks of Maheshiji were at first used to prop up > > his claim of "Unity", later this was not enough. This culminated in > > RWC's court case against M. where it was required that M. respond on > > tape declaring or denying RWC's "enlightenment. This was done and a > > tape was delivered to the court in Ottumwa, as with baited breath > > they awaited the final verdict, - which consisted of Maheshiji > > grunting a "noew" to the tape recorder. > > > > So the claim from his guru is that "no, he was not enlightened". > > > > His behaviors continued to escalate and I believe, to this very day, > > if RWC sets foot in the state of Iowa, he would be detained for 40 > > days in the Jefferson Co. prison - possibly longer, since he skipped > > off to Victoria to escape his fate. > > > > > The thing that causes me to believe in this theory > > > is the fact that RWC refuses to even consider it, > > > even as a possibility. *His* subjective view is the > > > only possible explanation. That's pretty much classic > > > NPD/hypomania. > > > > Yep. > > > > I wonder what his mother Norah - an esteemed and groundbreaking Ph.D. > > psychologist - would have said? I cannot help hear her voice in the > > psychobabble of Robin interspersed in his lingo back then. But if > > IIRC, she did not approve. She may have even been declared "demonic" > > - a certain, real shunning for anyone in the World Teacher Seminar. > > She left this world however in 2000, so we may not ever know, but > > it's an interesting part of the RWC story: boy raised by glass > > ceiling breaking female psychologist. > > > > And I wonder how many present day psychologists she inspired? Perhaps > > many. IMO, Dr. Norah Carlsen, Ph.D. is the more interesting story I'd > > like to hear. My belated condolences on the passing of this > > incredible woman. > > >
