--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Dear Lord Knows, > > First, congratulations on seeing through Robin's blatantly > obvious attempt to lure you into another of his "confrontations," > a tarbaby that once you interacted with it he would make nigh > unto difficult to escape from. As you so accurately described > w.r.t. his interactions with Curtis, that is exactly what he > was trying to do, and you wisely didn't fall for it.
Hilarious. Good grief, Barry, do you think nobody sees through this absurd characterization? Do you think anybody else here believes Robin should have remained silent in the face of Lord Knows's vicious post? It was cowardly in the extreme for Lord Knows to make such accusations in public and then refuse to engage with Robin, not to mention grossly disingenuous to defend this refusal as if it were some kind of virtue. But you, Barry, have been guilty of exactly the same cowardice for years, so I suppose it's understandable that you would approve of it in somebody else--at least if their accusations are directed at a person you don't like. Note the disingenuity in the rest of this post. Barry professes to want to know what Lord Knows has been doing, but in fact what he wants to do--and does at considerable length--is to tout what *he* has been doing as a way of portraying himself as having superior spiritual insight. As well, of course, as taking the time to dump on his critics and Robin's fans here. > Now, if the people whose lives revolve around confrontation > and argumentation will allow it, I'd like to try to shift the > tone and the content of interaction with you somewhat. I was > taken with both the clarity and the compassion of your first > post and its followups, and find myself wondering a little > about you and what you've been doing in the Time Since Robin. > > I will *completely* understand if you don't feel like getting > into such stuff, first with an absolute stranger (moi) and > second on a very public forum full of people who will attempt > to turn anything you say into an attempt to "get" you (this > place, FFL, the Funny Farm Lounge). > > But here's why I'm asking. As you may have surmised, if you > have been lurking here for a while, you may know that I too > had my run-ins with those of the Narcissistic Personality > Disorder persuasion. In particular, one Rama - Dr. Frederick > Lenz. Many of his antics and abuses made Robin's look like > the amateur wannabee guru poseur behaviors they were. It > was quite a ride. > > But, like you, I felt that I learned something from the ride. > I learned never to mistake charisma for enlightenment; the > former is often an occult thang, driven by the will of the > charismatic person (either consciously or subconsciously), > and often completely self-serving, which says a lot about > the charismatic person still having a lot of self. :-) In > my experience enlightenment is a much quieter, softer thing; > it doesn't seek to attract attention to its self, because... > duh...it no longer has much of a self. It just IS. You > either notice it or you don't, and IF you don't, the > enlightened being Just Doesn't Give A Shit. > > It is tempting, after a prolonged interaction with a spir- > itual teacher who fits the DSM-IV definitions for NPD and > hypomania, to become disillusioned with the spiritual path > entirely, and to walk away from the whole thing in disgust. > I know quite a few people who did just that after spending > some time with Rama. > > Me, I like to think that I took another path. I am still > more than open to the possibility of enlightenment. (How > could I not be? I've had flashes of it myself.) But what > I no longer accept are the many descriptions of it that > IMHO have nothing to do with What Enlightenment Is. Like > the enlightened person being "perfect," or "omniscient," > or even "capable of performing siddhis." The last one > doesn't compute *at all*, because Rama could perform > siddhis out the ying-yang, and I don't believe for an > instant that he was fully enlightened. Siddhis and > enlightenment are apples and oranges in my book, not > related in any way. > > One of the things I did "take away" from my experience > with him is a reluctance to ever feel as if I *needed* > a teacher again in this life to follow a spiritual path. > Instead, I kinda invent my own path. Where it leads may > be in question, but it is my path, and I follow it > wherever it leads without feeling that it has to lead > anywhere in particular. If I had to describe it, I would > be unable to do so any better than Lao-tzu: "A good > traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent upon > arriving." > > For me it's the journey that is important, not the goal. > I do not seek enlightenment, or even any particular > experience that most would characterize as "spiritual." > Instead I just walk, and deal with whatever I find along > the Way. Interestingly enough, by not seeking spiritual > experience, I find as much of it these days as I ever > did while studying with Maharishi or Rama or any of the > other teachers I've interacted with. Go figure. > > Anyway, I just wanted to go into some of this because > I'm interested in what your experience might have been > along these lines. It's a powerful thing to realize that > the charismatic teacher you were once overshadowed by > has a bit of a "shadow side," and quite possibly a bit > of a mentally ill side as well. So I'm wondering where > your path took you after dealing with all of that. > > Again, I ask this ONLY if you feel like getting into it, > and here, on an open forum in which several people are > likely to pounce on what you say because in their eyes > you've just dissed one of their heroes and pissed in > the punchbowl of the stuff he was trying to serve up > as soma. :-) But I'm honestly curious. In my life, the > people I can relate to the most are not those who have > been "one-pointed" on a spiritual path, but those who > have recognized that they had doubts, and then rather > than "stuffing" them and pretending that they didn't > exist, *embraced* them and come to their own conclusions > about things. There is a power in that, and it often > results in my experience in helping to craft a person > who is both easy and fun to be around, because they > can admit -- both to themselves and to others -- that > they still have things to learn. > > For me it's sort of a Beginner's Mind thang. Some can > encounter a teacher who turns out to be a charlatan > and come away from it thinking that *all* teachers are > charlatans. Some can avoid that simplistic temptation, > but at the same time realize that almost any of them > *could* be charlatans. Others can come away realizing > that the only teacher worth following is life itself. > That's where I'm at. Forgive this rap if you find it > intrusive, but I found myself this morning wondering > where your path since the Robin thang has led you.
