--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote:
Share2 on a rainy Sunday morning almost autumnal in feeling very sweetly mournful this morning From: Robin Carlsen <maskedzebra@...> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:47 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM, the Dome Badge, and Religious Practices snip Share1: Could it be that your knowledge is valid within the context of your enlightenment but maybe not useful to Maharishi and his vision? My own experience was that I realized that the emotional healing was not a priority within the TMO. So I went elsewhere for that. Robin2: Not exactly sure what you mean here, Share. No, if you are asking me to speculate on the reasons for why Maharishi, after seven years of never criticizing me--despite the clamour from his governors--finally uttered four sounds which did not indicate he approved of what I was doing there in Fairfield--that is a question that merits a separate post. What you are not taking into consideration is: *This was not a personal desire of Robin's* that Maharishi officially recognize my enlightenment and its immediate and profound application to every TM Governor--and therefore to Maharishi's very Teaching; no, Share, the intelligence which had created my enlightenment and which had control over my actions, that intelligence was pushing me into this confrontation and resolution with Maharishi. I had the sense, throughout those seven years, that Maharishi and I were performing a kind of dance of very subtle mental intelligence; but finally, I forced him to commit himself. And then there was a form of superficial peace--even though the reality remained the same--and my connection with Maharishi was what it had always been. I was not seeking "emotional healing"--although I admit I don't quite see the connection of this comment to what I said in what I have said to you. Share2: Well it's ok RC but you do seem to contradict yourself in some subtle way. I can't speak to a Unity experience, but I can address the internal logic or absence thereof. You say it was not a personal desire. Then you say you forced Maharishi to commit himself. This sounds personal. Robin3:"Personal coercion is just concentrated universal coercion". My dear Share: Pray, tell me what act that you have ever seen performed by a human being was not 'personal'? Tell me one. The sense I had was that the cosmic intelligence that was computing my actions was inexorably driving this show-down with Maharishi, and the personal Robin was just a witness to this drama. The cosmic intelligence in me was forcing the cosmic intelligence in Maharishi to commit himself. "This sounds personal". Well *that* certainly--your comment--sounds personal. Because it *is* personal. But you see, Share, the intelligences behind making me enlightened--and, I would contend, making Maharishi enlightened--*these intelligences are very personal*. There is no impersonal intelligence or reality in the universe. *Everything is infinitely personal*--from where I see it. So, in a sense, your intuition was correct; the intelligences behind Maharishis Unity Consciousness were doing one thing, whereas the intelligences behind Robin's Unity Consciousness were doing another thing--*even though these were the same intelligences*! But there is one thing we are leaving out here: The creator of all these intelligences, even the mischievous ones that make persons enlightened--or think they are enlightened. That being too (being very personal) has his reasonsbut then, as Paul said: "Who has ever known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?" I only say, Share, that my actions vis-a-vis Maharish--at all times--were subject to and subjugated by my Unity Consciousness--and this was always experienced to be, ultimately at least, under the aegis of cosmic intelligence. I would say things, do things, that I would never dream of doing before I was enlightened--I literally had no control even over my body: if cosmic intelligence wanted me to stand up, I would find myself standing up. If I was supposed to speak, I would speakand the words that came out of my mouth were not experienced to have been thought out first by myselfand how many times I was shocked by what I said! Robin2: Furthermore, if that intelligence was impersonal, then Maharishi, indeed the whole cosmos, would have been subsumed in it including the clamouring governors. In the emotional healing comment I was expressing why my personal agenda was no longer compatible with the movement's. Perhaps you were seeking some other kind of resolution. snip Share1: St. Paul! Tho my birthday falls on his feast day, I sometimes wonder if he wasn't responsible for the early church becoming, well, less about Christ and more about rules and structures. Robin2: Is this a discussion you really want to have, Share? I will just stipulate that Paul baby didn't get Christ wrong--Christ made certain of that by knocking him down and blinding him on the Road to Damascus. Before this he was standing around urging his brethren to make those stones draw blood from Saint Stephen's uncovered head. Admittedly he would be a somewhat strident poster on FFL; but he was brilliant, brave, and true--Good choice by Christ to forcibly recruit him to the good side. Christ destroyed his boundaries and his prejudices in a lightning moment; after that he was aggressive as a missionary, but secretly docile to his Master. I hope we both get to meet him some day, Share--he chose not to reincarnate by the way: He wanted the heaven thing, solidly inside his first-person ontology. Too bad we can't e-mail him right now. :-) But I will grant you that Paul, he was pretty big on them there "rules and regulations--but for us fallen souls, they were, until you got to heaven, pretty indispensable. Who have you seen achieve anything without obeying rules and regulations, Share? The only rationale for ignoring rules and regulations is to be beyond those rules and regulations and in direct contact with Natural Law, with the intrinsic laws and regulations of the universe--like physics. Like mathematics. Like astronomy. Like architecture. Like--let me say it--love. Hi, Share: did you see Emily's comment today? I wonder how your philosophy will allow you to both take in the truth of what she has said--unless the person to whom it is directed chooses to address her, which he will not--and at the same time, preserve your ambition, which is to make everyone act in a life-supporting fashion. By the way I never forget Maharishi at Humboldt (I wasn't there by the way; I only listened to the audio tapes--all of them--over and over again while teaching school) talking about never "speaking ill of others"; how doing so "pushes that person down--indicating that anything negative thought, let alone spoken about someone, has an injurious effect on that person--while pulling oneself down as well. Fascinating and powerful idea--which I adopted all the way--until I got enlightened [at graduate school--before UC--I was thought to be "pathologically positive"!]. Then I let her rip--or was forced to let her rip. No rules and regulations when you're enlightened. None at all. Share2: That part about my ambition to make people act in life supporting ways made me laugh at first. Then I asked if it could be true. Oy! Yes, when I feel vulnerable, as I do right now, I wish I could make or inspire certain people to act in certain ways. Robin3: Nothing to say here to this, Share. I think your statement/confession: "Oy! Yes, when I feel vulnerable, as I do right now, I wish I could make or inspire certain people to act in certain ways" a perfect testimony to the realness of the truth of how you live out your life. This very desire--to have persons be more loving or generous or positive--that itself is a spontaneous (or I have come to regard it as so) expression of the person that God created to be Share Long. IMO. It just--when I read it on the page (screen)--came out as something intrinsic to being Share Long. So I like it and thank God he made you this way. :-) snip Robin2: Your philosophy, it will defeat me, Share. :-) How can someone be as fanatically devoted to being loving as you are--and still be making it here on FFL, where there is much smash-mouth football--it is a contact sport. You are on the field of play giving out flowers, rather than tackling and bloodying your knees. One thing for sure, Share, you haven't betrayed your principles yet--but I am still riveted watching you above those falls. There is no getting to the other side (of the Falls). Your walk it seems must continue. I wish you only good things, Share. I am glad you did not have to kill wild prey in order to stay alive. You would have prayed for the birds to leave something for you on your window-sill. Share2: I'm thinking of taking that high wire in my hands and making my way to the side in hand over hand fashion. And it is not the smash mouth football that will have mainly contributed to my retreat. You've already survived so much. I'm sure you'll do the same re my "philosophy," whatever the heck that is (-: Robin3: I like what motivates your philosophy, Share--and you have already survived some heavy sidewinds without toppling over and plunging down into the swirling waters (did you see that guy walk across Niagara Falls?). I don't think you will fall--or if you do, you will be airborne. I don't know how you do it, but I am becoming convinced it is inside your DNA. If you can experience that reality, nature, or even your very biology is predisposing you to be loving and positive, then it seems to me you can still walk that tightropebecause you are harnessed. No "hand over hand fashion" necessarynot so far at least. I'll continue to watch you and what happens when those gusts come up. snip Robin2: But hold it, Share: I *was* no heretic. I was just someone (I thought) who was seeing into another level of Creation through having been made enlightened by Maharishi. So I did not bring some new set of beliefs to my status as a TM teacher. I only brought some fresh perceptions, perceptions that I was able to make alive and true for those who came along with me. There were not beliefs as such during those entire ten years. None. Just experiences, perceptions, events. It was all experimental knowledge.--I am fond of saying that, I think. May 1, 1944 *around* 10 o'clock in the morning. That's when I started taking my fresh new reincarnation seriously, Share. Share2: Heretics aren't necessarily bad people. OTOH seems a might fine line between new set of beliefs and fresh perspectives. Robin3: Maharishi intuited I was no heretic, but then I pressured him into saying something that, for meta-political (and other) reasons he could not possibly say, without a catastrophic consequences--here is where reality saved me, because when I look upon what Maharishi said in that audio tape played in the courtroom in Ottumwa, I shudder to think *What my life would have been had Maharishi--which now was impossible from every point of view--endorsed what I was doing. I would be in a fix that would have meant the extinction of providence--as it could possibly apply to me. But, I insist, Share, I was no heretic: I was being perfectly obedient to the cosmic intelligence which was running my life. Share2: Ah, May 1, exalted sun. That explains the charisma factor. And, people with strong suns prefer to be their own guru. I have something similar and don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Robin3: I decided to incarnate in the Month of Mary. It was very simple. I wanted to get it rightmake my birth, as Maharishi would say, "auspicious". :-) I don't know nuttin about dat der astrology stuff. Except someone once starting reading my chart (I believe it was Maharishi's astrologer who had drawn it upnot at MMY's behest by the way; somebody paid good money for this service) to me, and I immediately sensed the subtle intelligences which were behind this analysis of meand I asked them to stop reading. Which frustrated them--but I was a newly minted and devout Catholic and I had learned to stay away from the demons of astrology. :-) But I ain't no guru to myself--or anyone. No created being can ever be a guru. God is the only guru--the Personal God, that is. :-) R2:By the way, can you tell me how astrology has ever made any difference to the exercise of an individual's free will throughout his her lifetime. If the planets can influence our free will, how would we know this--I mean in the very act of this happening? Astrology seems a form of determinism which is contradicted by the force of our experience of our own freedom. If I read a perfect analysis of myself as constituting my astrological chart--how would this have any effect upon me? Now if astrology could read *the moment*, the immediacy when one actually acts--if it could be this fast; that would interest me. But I always have the impression of powerless and ironic it is that some created human being is telling me about myself--meanwhile that same human being is himself or herself subject to the same deterministic implication of his own chart. How was Maharishi in any way subject to the stars? How is this moment we are sharing here in Creation, Share, subject to anything that astrology could tell us? What about your philosophy? Is *that* explained by your Jyotish chart? Tell me. Oh, by the way, I like you, Share. :-) Share2: I like you too. When I'm not afraid of you. I believe and have had it confirmed in a student meeting with Bevan, that we can and do "vibe up" our charts. This is subject to intentionality. Meaning, we must want to do it in order for it to happen. Negative aspects of a chart can be vibed up so that the exact same aspect become a positive influence. I also believe that our soul chooses every thing about the planets in our lives, from our birth chart to the moment to moment transits. I really like jyotish a lot for its showing of patterns and possibilities rather than predictive accuracy. Robin3: Sounds reasonable to me. Those TM folks at the top, though, they have a lot of "vibing up" do to, methinks. If Bevan has had his chart done, I can assure you, he cast a cold eye upon it from his Cambridge-trained mindand from the point of view of his inimitable and unknowable first-person ontology. Bevan Morris, he seems to me the quintessential Westerner trying to become Vedic. He'll never make it. He is a person, an individual. All the way. He can't really become mystically enthralled by the Easthe is too rational in his nature. I remember seeing his mother crying softly when I addressed some pointed questions to him in a lecture he was giving in Chicago back in 1982 [we began, as they say "to have words"]--Then he was "Bevan from Heaven" as you will remember. Bevan could have been a Cambridge don. Very remarkable intelligence there--and I believe character. But he fell in love with Maharishi, and has never been able to become who he really is because of this. I just never could let someone like that boss me aroundwhich he wants to do. Share1: As for James Holmes, I'm sure there are souls way more evolved than me who are praying for him, etc. Robin2: This goes right over my head--You mean souls "on other levels" or something? Who, pray tell, who lives on the earth, is praying for James Holmes, and what do they expect to achieve by their prayers? His contrition? His admission that he did evil? His conversion to born-again Christianity? The salvation of his soul? And, Share, *are they making any progress with their prayers*? I think you duck the question by invoking these "more evolved" souls. I am quite sure your prayers are plenty good enough, Share--if I am to judge by how you have survived what Marek recognizes as the murderous violence lurking beneath the surface of posters here at FFL. You would, by your love and positivity, transform that violence into what? No matter, Share: I like watching you in action, and so far, I am loving the show. Besides, you have the grace of a perfect sincerity. Share2: I can imagine lots of Catholic nuns praying for him. Maybe Buddhist ones too? Robin3: If you follow me in all that I have said, Share, then I don't believe in the efficacy of prayer per se. I do believe in the positive influence of feeling and sending love towards someone--heart touching heart. But in a supernatural sense, no--except in the rarest and most exceptional cases--I don't believe prayer works anymore. Not in the postmodern age. For prayer to be efficacious means that it is, ultimately, an act of God. Or at the very least mediated by the only uncreated being in the universe, the being who created you and me and creation. There used to be an objective difference metaphysically between the prayers of the Catholic nuns and those of the Buddhist nuns. Now, I that difference to be negligible. What a hard and cynical and skeptical person I have become, Share! Pray for me. :-) Robin1: Shall I return to our big conversation, Share? You are walking that tightrope across Niagara Falls and it doesn't seem as if you are going to fall--and I see no safety harness. Pretty amazing feat there, Share, baby! Share1: Waaaaaaaaaaa! Baby wearing water wings I hope (-: Robin2: Nope. You may perceive that it's water wings, but for me, I see how high you really are--and how you balanced yourself when that gust of "STFU" came at you today. You kept your feet on the tightrope in a way I would not have believed. If you make it through the next few months never being a traitor or enemy of your own philosophy, Share, I will have to say that Nietzsche got it all wrong. I got my first intellectual thrill from reading that guy--poor fellow; I think him tragically mistaken, but he would have been the kind of poster on FFL who would have taken your measure. "Baby wearing water wings" that was not Freddy. But with you, it fits somehow. Best moment in your post for me, Share. Share2: Well that STFU actually had me giggling like a teenager during both yogic flying sessions on Friday. Robin3: *This impresses me. "giggling" when someone gets--incongruously--ugly with you. That's some feat there, Share. Giggling has just for me become (at least in the exemplary instance of Share Long) the postmodern form of turning the other cheek. Share1: Then, RC, have your criteria been met for returning to personal love universal love chat? Hmmm... Robin2: I think it has. And I shall return to that conversation. Just as long as I am convincing you of the truth of every one of my words. Or at least that there is this potential. :-) Share2: FWIW I do believe you. Share1: Ok, off to first weight training. Osteo in hips just diagnosed. Must do preventative stuff. Robin2: Look, Share: I am going to have loving thoughts about you today. Instead of seeking to mix it up with some of the adversaries here on FFL. What are the rules and regulations which go with your philosophy? Do you take pupils?--disciples? Would it be possible for me to give an Introductory Lecture on the Love Imperishable/Share Long view of Creation? And by the way, Share, will you be wearing your water wings when you eventually play chess with Death? Share2: What if next death is by another element? Will water wings really help? Robin3: *Yours* will, Share. You should patent them. Share's Water Wings = guaranteed to get you through every jam there might be on the road to heaven. But let me know when you come to play chess with Death. The guy in the Seventh Seal, he is a pretty serious player. He says (from what I know): "I never lose, baby". Robin2: I am loving it. Let's keep it going, Share. :-) I will remember the osteo--I wish you well, Share. You are being successfully preventive on this forum too. Share2: Not sore today which is amazing given Friday workout. Ok, off to Dome Robin3: Just always have those water wings with you, Share. Take them with you into personal immortality, something almost no one on this forum is the least bit interested inthey are all going for something higher, better. But do you know what, Share? I think them wrong about that. Heavenit sounds pretty good to me. Although I don't believe in heaven anymorenot after the ABMC. But *something* has got to be up'God', he's doing *something*!if I am any judge of reality. But what it could be, I have no idea. Keep being nice in the Share with Water Wings Way, and we will all love you. (And get nicer ourselves.)
