Awe. That is cute. : )
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merudanda <no_reply@...> wrote: > > FFL THE PLACE TO HEAL > He came here hurt. > Loneliness--he walked through desolation > To share his fellowship. > Doubt--he wept through despair to seek his reality. > Fear-- he wrestled through darkness > To seize his freedom. > > Are we send to him to heal?. > To walk with the lonely--mask? > To share with him our fellowship. > To weep with his despairing-- > Seek with him his new-old reality. > Wrestle with him his/our fearfulness > Seize with him our /his freedom? > > And the Balm of FFL will flow > Into the depths of his soul. > It will cleanse; > it will soothe; > it will heal. > > Remember > > Hello darkness, my old friend > > I've come to talk with you again. > > But now You are picturing "Darkness" with a broom. > > Whoever and where-ever you are, no matter how lonely, the reality > offers itself to your imagination, calls to you like the wild geese, > harsh and exciting-- > over and over announcing your place in the family of things. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > The operative words here are "stability" and "simplicity". Having made > the odyssey Robin has and still, apparently, is, coming back to the > beginning does not imply some sort of having gone nowhere. Lots of us > come out of the womb better than we are twenty years subsequent to our > birth. All those mistakes, those transgressions, those trespasses are > what we are all guilty of and finding our way back to an innocence, a > deeper simplicity is very hard in my experience. It is not a sign of > stasis but a real of success after negotiating the land mines of just > living. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am perplexed. Who would want to go back to how they were before > their > > > journey started? The journey is an adventure, frought with tests > and a > > > lot of uncertainty that may or may not get clearer as we move along. > > > But usually some things do become clearer, and there are occassional > > > milestones that give us some confidence that we are on the right > path. > > > > > > So, this notion of retreating back to where we once were? I'm not > > > getting that. Perhaps you can elaborate a little. > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Susan, upon reading your response to Robin's open letter I think > your > > > sensitivity and wisdom shines out particularly in this statement: > > > > > > > > I wonder if there is any way of finding the stability and > simplicity > > > of how you were before > > > > all this "enlightenment" happened? For all I know, that could be > what > > > you are > > > > aiming for. I am just thinking out loud here........... but I > can't > > > morally > > > > judge you on this one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wayback71@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hey Robin, > > > > > > > > > > It took some bravery and guts to write what you did below. It > was > > > written in your signature Baroque style, but you dealt with some > > > difficult old events. > > > > > > > > > > I feel confused in my own response. On the one hand, I think you > > > went through a terribly disorienting process when you experienced > your > > > "Enlightenment" in Arosa. It sounds as if your brain/nervous system > got > > > pushed into a state that must have been a wild mix of religion and > > > spirituality, intense energy, huge confidence in your state and > > > abilities. Combine that with your already devoted involvement with a > > > belief system like TM, and you were primed for unusual times. The > usual > > > checks and balances on our behavior in society were not there for > you - > > > you were part of a small subset of spiritual seekers - out of the > > > mainstream. Not part of a grounded, traditional community that might > > > have gotten you back to the structure of the requirements of daily > > > living. I know that the TMO made some efforts to curtail your > > > activities, but I know they did not know how to handle your > situation, > > > and you did not have the personal guidance of Maharishi. Perhaps no > one > > > could have changed it. And you were around loads of eager seekers > who > > > had the means and time and mindset to suspend material concerns and > go > > > for for anything that would have given them spiritual growth. So you > > > found followers and played out your experiences with them. > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand, your followers found you and played out their > > > hopes under your belief system. From what little I know, it sounds > very > > > intense for everyone. Certainly some who were involved seem to look > back > > > with amazement and fascination, still. Others might have gotten > hurt. > > > > > > > > > > I know you then moved on to Catholicism with, again, great > certainty > > > and intensity of belief - all probably a carryover from your > > > Enlightenment changes. And then you moved on from that, too. I am > not > > > sure where you stand now. It sounds as if you like to write about it > all > > > to put it in its place. I wonder if there is any way of finding the > > > stability and simplicity of how you were before all this > "enlightenment" > > > happened? For all I know, that could be what you are aiming for. I > am > > > just thinking out loud here........... but I can't morally judge you > on > > > this one. > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > How Robin Struck PeopleAnd Lied About it: An Open Letter > to > > > Barry Wright > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Barry Wright, > > > > > > > > > > > > It is true that before I ever gave an official seminar I did, > in > > > fact, apply in a more Western sense, the Zen Roshi method of > shocking > > > someonethat is, I did on occasion, strike someone physically. > Vaj > > > said there was a video of my acting in this way. I know that no such > > > tape exists. And if it did (as Vaj claims) it would be a simple > matter > > > of contradicting my avowal here. You will naturally ask: But Robin, > by > > > denying that you did in fact strike someone during a seminar, you > are in > > > effect implyingsurely you know thisthat you *never* struck > > > anyone. This was your intent, right, Robin? > > > > > > > > > > > > It was not, Barry. For me to have on the one hand denied this > > > accusation knowing it was falseif it had been true, Vaj would > be > > > able to convince me very easily of thisand yet, then and there, > > > admitted that I did engage in this practise, or rather *had* engaged > in > > > this practise, would mean disclosing something about me which would > tend > > > to be interpreted in an entire vacuum of understanding of just what > the > > > context of this metaphysical theatre was. I chose, since you are so > > > hostile and prejudiced, to withhold admitting that in fact I had > struck > > > peopleon rare occasionsinside the other, more intimate and > > > personal context of what chronologically preceded the formal > seminars. > > > When almost all the persons who were convinced of my enlightenment > lived > > > in the same residence. By itself, separated from the spiritual > context > > > within which it is practised, the Zen Roshi's blow would seem > primitive > > > and brutal and outrageous. But we must assume even Leonard Cohen > > > accepted that this was part of the spiritual methodology to which he > was > > > subjugating himself in having determined he had a real Teacher. Now > what > > > I did resembled not at all what is the classic Zen Flesh Zen Bones > move. > > > See if you can stay with me while I try to explain the context > within > > > which this act did in fact occur. Inside a seminar setting, however, > it > > > was never necessary or appropriate. At least this is my sincere and > I > > > believe truthful recollection. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my purported enlightenment, as I came to understand it, > Barry, > > > came about through not just my own efforts, and my devotion to the > > > Master (Maharishi Mahesh Yogi); it was effected by the Vedic gods, > these > > > impulses of Creative Intelligence, the devas. This was shown to me > in > > > the form of a revelation once I realized that my enlightenment could > not > > > be compatible with the description of the universe and the human > soul as > > > taught to me by Thomas Aquinas and my learning of the Catholic > > > catechism. It was not that Catholicism forced this revelation upon > me; > > > it was more the tremendous shock of having the whole context I had > > > created [or had been created *through* me] since I returned from > > > Switzerland come apart, and eventually disintegrate. Once I realized > > > that certain invisible beings had had a hand in my ultimate > liberation I > > > immediately realized that these very beings were not beneficent, > were > > > not interested in my happiness. *They had deceived me*. > > > > > > > > > > > > From that point on, early in 1987, I became determined to > vanquish > > > my enlightenment, to destroy the biochemical and intellectual basis > of > > > my Unity Consciousness. I knew that if my enlightenment was an > > > hallucination, however real it was experientially, that my actions > > > flowing from this assumed state of consciousness, were also flawed, > > > defective, and problematic. And this included that infrequent > instance > > > where I would, seemingly under supernatural inspiration and > authority, > > > strike someone. Why strike someone, Robin? Well, here we get to the > crux > > > of the matter, Barry. > > > > > > > > > > > > These same celestial beings who created my enlightenment, and > then > > > pretty much inspired the context out of which I then actedthey > > > evidently knew both the inherent and unrecognized weaknesses of each > > > individual, as well as what the Western Tradition represented in > terms > > > of individuation of one's experience through a true existential > > > willingness to allow life to 'make' one's soul:Also*this > is > > > the key point, Barry*these same celestial beings made me see > each > > > human being as existing inside a context where actual fallen angels > > > warred with the good forces in the universe to take away a human > being's > > > innocence, determined as they were to make an individual a tool of > their > > > purposes by subtly inducing that person to compensate for some > weakness > > > or distortion inside of them *through behaving in a particular > mode*.The > > > mode so chosen was the creation of the fallen angel. Each person's > mode > > > was unique. 'Mode' here representing the inauthentic presentation of > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > The specific pattern of an individual's mode, then, revealed > the > > > influence of these fallen angels (or rather, one specific and unique > > > fallen angel) upon this person, and it was my evident destiny to > > > interrupt, to challenge, to confront the fallen angels as they > battled > > > with me, and the person's soul for domination over that person. > > > > > > > > > > > > You understand, then, Barry, that the beings who had created > my > > > enlightenment made me actually apprehend each human being who I > > > encountered as being subject to this fearsome temptation and > tyranny. > > > And those who had not passed through the seminar, or pre-seminar > > > experience, were dupes of this hegemonic power of these fallen > angels. > > > Now, as it happens, almost every person I knew was a victim to some > > > extent of unwittingly identifying with these fallen angels, falsely > > > assuming that what the fallen angel insinuated who they were, and > how > > > they had to act, was actually originating in the substance and > integrity > > > of their own individuality. The person, then, never suspected there > was > > > a preternatural conspiracy going on which was the attempt to force a > > > person to falsify themselves (and each person came to sense this > > > dissimulation deep from within themselves) such as to cover up and > > > conceal their weakness, their ultimate flaw. To transcend one's > > > compensatory mode became the desideratum. > > > > > > > > > > > > A seminar and before that the pre-seminar reality, was the > process > > > precipitated inside the context of reading off reality such as to > create > > > the actual metaphysical context within which *all that I have > described > > > here became a physical perception for everyone present*. This meant > that > > > the context was not actually under my control at all. It was a > > > contextI suppose like TM is subject to the mantras (or what > > > Maharishi refers to earlier in his history as the Vedic > gods)that > > > imposed itself on all of us. Even myself. What unfolded in front of > our > > > eyes was the actual opening up of creationseeminglyand > what I > > > was doing was merely a systematic, mechanical, and objective process > > > whereby the truth of what was actually the casewith each > individual > > > soul intrinsically subject to this explorationbecoming > intricately > > > and physically revealed before everyone. There were no individual > > > differences in what we all experienced. It was as clear and > unmistakable > > > as a change in perception effected by hallucinogens, only in this > case, > > > what happened to everyone's consciousness in that room was virtually > > > identical. Everyone experienced the same thing. Everyone saw, > > > understood, recognized what I was doing in confronting someone. It > all > > > occurred very naturally as it were, very intelligibly, with ultra > > > metaphysical clarity, and the process obeyed laws of its own. Far > more > > > compelling than even the laws which would have protected or > sustained > > > someone in that state which would presumably not be susceptible to > this > > > kind of context. > > > > > > > > > > > > We simply broke open the reality which was there. Once we did, > > > reality took over and conducted the course of the drama through my > > > enlightened state of consciousness, and presumed consummated > > > individuation. (As it would turn out, there was more wrong with me > than > > > anyone who "came to the microphone". But no one got to see this. But > I > > > did, during this 25 year ordeal of de-enlightening myself.) > > > > > > > > > > > > Now under the irresistible and inexorable inspiration of this > > > processconducted by powers beyond myself, but enabled to > articulate > > > themselves through this orchestration of reality through my Unity > > > Consciousnessthe actual fallen being which had control over a > given > > > personobstructing, inhibiting, interfering with the ability of > that > > > person to truly individuate themselves within the authenticity of > who > > > they actually wereindependent of this fallen angelwould > make > > > its presence known, even coming right out and making itself visible > in > > > the face of the person. > > > > > > > > > > > > This produced what became the classic state of "having gone > > > cosmic". And a person in this state was 'seen' unavoidably, > > > choicelessly, in terms of their unique problem in standing up to the > > > power and influence of the fallen angel which was attempting to keep > > > them from becoming 'innocent', becoming the person they actually > were > > > destined to be. Separated from that fallen angel. > > > > > > > > > > > > If the person seemed so identified with this deceitful > > > representation of themselves through the malice of this fallen angel > > > that they were in fact defending or upholding the integrity of > themelves > > > in resisting the beneficent and merciful inspiration of my > > > enlightenmentconsciously as it were, or unconsciously colluding > > > with the fallen angelI might, on occasion shock that person out > of > > > such an identification. And this took the form sometimes of striking > > > them. Maybe in total 4 or 5 persons were struck. I hardly think it > was > > > more than this. And this was not something that happened on a > regular > > > basis. It was in extremis. But we shall see if this testimony is > > > contradicted by someone who was there. > > > > > > > > > > > > This was not anger, punishment, retaliation, ritualistic > violence. > > > It was an inspiredand much resisted (I hated it)response > in me > > > in order to facilitate the process whereby a person could experience > > > liberationeven momentarilyfrom their trance caused by > their > > > being identified with the particular fallen angel which had been > chosen > > > somehow to present this formidable and ultimate existential > challenge to > > > this person's soul, and their whole sense of who they really were. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now I have come, in having repudiated and deconstructed my > > > enlightenment, to see that once I became enlightened on that > mountain > > > above Arosa, that my perception had been played such that I could > only > > > apprehend each human being in terms of this cosmic battle between > good > > > and evil. Now I am able to see each person absolutely on their own, > > > without respect to 'the demonic'. And therefore I am sorry for all > that > > > I did which amounted to being determined by this hallucination. > Which > > > especially included on occasion trying to shock the person out of > his or > > > her identification with the fallen angel which was tormenting and > > > deceiving them, even if they appeared oblivious to this truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course, you will realize from this analysis, that whenever > this > > > event happened, no one so much as winced. Not because they were > > > brainwashed, but rather became everyone present sensed the > intelligence > > > and inspiration behind this act. The act, then, simply occurred with > a > > > complex process which made itself understood as being inevitable and > > > salutary in the extreme. It was harrowing, it was exhilarating, it > was > > > dangerous, it was mysterious, it was terrifying. But for everyone > > > present it was very very real. And, I have to say it: right. > > > > > > > > > > > > Although of course everyone realizes in retrospect it was > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > When Vaj first accused me of hitting someone at a seminar, I > knew > > > it was not true. After all, many persons were there for the first > time. > > > Had I done what I was accused of, a majority of those who had never > > > before attended a seminar would have walked out. I don't remember a > > > single person leaving a seminar. > > > > > > > > > > > > It was just not ripe for me to explain all this. I did not > deny > > > something I knew was true. I denied what I was accused of. And knew, > > > probably, eventually the truth would come out, which might have the > > > appearance of my having at the very least equivocated on this > matter. > > > But my conscience is clear. I never hesitated for a moment in > knowing it > > > was premature of me to on the one hand deny having done what I was > > > accused of in one contextwhich was true: I did not strike > anyone > > > during a seminarwhile at the same time feeling an obligation to > > > acknowledge that this indeed did in fact happenon rare > > > occasionsin a quite different and more intimate context. > > > > > > > > > > > > I will leave it to the readers of FFL to determine whether I > am > > > morally culpable in having acted as I have. > > > > > > > > > > > > Robin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
