--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardatrwilliamsdotus" <richard@...> wrote: <snip> > [Barry wrote:] > > I think that anyone who claims to be enlightenment > > has a lot to live up to... > > > You are not making any sense. Live up to what - your > expectations? > > Besides, you once said that you thought anyone who was > 'enlightened' was really just like any other ordinary > guy, nothing special, just a 'big whoop'. Go figure.
Nailed. Except that he's said it far more than once. I want to quote a bit more of the post you're responding to because it embodies another whopping contradiction: > Call me crazy, but for 30-to-40-year followers of a trad- > ition ostensibly founded by the guy who wrote a book called > "The Crest Jewel of Discrimination," I don't see much dis- > crimination in this scenario. It's as if the only thing > people look for in an enlightened being is that he or she > claims to be enlightened. That's perceived as *enough*. (In fact, there aren't any 30- to 40-year TMers on FFL who are on the record as "buying into" any FFLer's claim to enlightenment, current or former. This mistake of Barry's is a function of his refusal to read the posts of the folks he's characterizing.) > I don't think it's enough. Given the claims made *about* > enlightenment over the centuries, I think that anyone who > claims to be enlightenment has a lot to live up to. If they > do not, and in fact display behavior that is 180 degrees > opposite of how we've been told the enlightened would act, > I think it's perfectly legitimate to question whether the > claimant is or ever was really enlightened and look into > other explanations for their behavior. Such as insanity. The contradiction here is one I pointed out recently in another post of Barry's: He has over and over mocked any "appeal to authority" that anybody else makes, but now that it's in the interests of getting back at the folks who have seen through his fraudulence, all of a sudden it's "perfectly legitimate" to accept "how we've been told the enlightened would act" as gospel truth and hold any claimant to enlightenment to the standards of those authorities. And *this* isn't to mention the fact that the Gita, one of the foundational documents of Maharishi's teaching, states *unequivocally* that you CANNOT judge enlightenment on the basis of behavior. Man, if *anybody's* thinking on this forum is incoherent, it's Barry's.
