--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
<anartaxius@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "anartaxius" <anartaxius@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jedi_spock" <jedi_spock@> wrote:
> > > > --- "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > > > I also think Robin does not present a consistent picture
> > > > > of his sense of reality, with his constant use of irony
> > > > > vacillating between having been in unity or not having
> > > > > been. People, if they are to 'pursue' reality need a
> > > > > consistent picture of it even if the picture is false. The
> > > > > picture is never truth, it is just a signpost that points
> > > > > you in, hopefully, a useful direction, and once it has
> > > > > served its purpose, the picture is discarded. TM is a
> > > > > pointer. It shows one on the basis of experience that
> > > > > there is more to experience than what one thinks.
> > > > >
> > > > > In general the complexity of Robin's speech, I think,
> > > > > obscures understanding for most people, and does not
> > > > > represent a useful way to teach most people about reality.
> > > > > So, what is your understanding of the sentence of Robin's
> > > > > I quoted? Because you said 'I suspect this is a manner of
> > > > > speaking' in referring to the quote, I would suppose it is
> > > > > not entirely clear in your mind either.
> > > >
> > > > Again, it's this kind of vacillating and contradictions that
> > > > he expresses over and over again that worries me. At times
> > > > he seems to say simultaneously that he was in Unity and not
> > > > in Unity at the same time.
> >
> > Did you read what Xeno wrote? Let me quote it for you again:
> >
> > "I also think Robin does not present a consistent picture
> > of his sense of reality, with his constant use of irony
> > vacillating between having been in unity or not having
> > been."
> >
> > Obviously Xeno finds Robin's use of irony about having
> > been in unity confusing, but he does recognize that it's
> > irony. There's no "vacillating and contradictions" when
> > Robin isn't speaking ironically, so no need to worry.
>
> I think I left out a word:
>
> I also think Robin does not present a consistent picture of
> his sense of reality, with his constant use of irony *AND*
> vacillating between having been in unity or not having been.
>
> Sorry about that. I usually copy a post into a text editor, but
> this I typed directly into FFL and clearly did not check it
> before posting.
>
> When Robin is not speaking ironically I disagree that 'There's
> no "vacillating and contradictions".
Well, it would be very silly for you to disagree, Xeno.
> > > Well the duality is still there even in unity, one can have
> > > duality in unity if one wants it - it is not really a thing
> > > one can describe. But I get your point. I do not think Robin
> > > is making use of paradox as a teaching tool to get us to see
> > > beyond the paradox.
> >
> > That's right. He's using irony as a tool of personal
> > expression. No paradox involved, no teaching involved.
> >
> > > That is, his thinking (as I am seeing it by surmise), does
> > > not see through the paradox, but vacillates, as you say,
> > > between the two poles of the paradox which is thus not
> > > resolved.
> >
> > No, Xeno, as you said to start with, it's irony, self-
> > deprecating. There's no paradox. He *was* in unity 30-some
> > years ago; he no longer is. He has been very, very clear
> > about that when he speaks nonironically.
>
> The problem is discovering when he is talking ironically.
Yes, it's quite obvious you have a problem discovering that.
> > > As a result, illumination from listening to Robin does
> > > not occur, only confusion results that *seems* to have an
> > > aura of illumination about it because of his skill in
> > > weaving the tangled mess together.
> >
> > If you don't realize when he's being ironic and when he's
> > being serious, it's no wonder you're confused. There's no
> > "aura of illumination" and no "tangled mess," just your
> > inability to tell when he's being ironic.
>
> One could use that as an excuse for any confusing argument.
> Oh!, I was speaking ironically!
One could. In this case, however, it isn't an excuse.
> > Here's how to tell: If he seems to be saying he's in unity
> > now, he's being ironic. Really very simple.
>
> So, when he wrote this was he was being ironic or lying?:
>
> [post #321491]
> {to Ann} How can we be friends if you will let one of your
> other friends hold an opinion about me which is incompatible
> with my being in Unity Consciousness?'
That's irony, obviously.
> A question to ask here is what action of person x will make
> person y fall out of Unity Consciousness?
That might be an interesting question if we had an example
of same, but sadly, we don't.
> [Robin post #321377]
> 'I don't forgive Ann for what she did, Lord Knows. And had Ann
> not done what she did I believe I would still be in Unity
> Consciousness. I think it really comes to that. But I forgive
> her in another way--because I still think of her as my enemy.
> (And one must love one's enemies: I really believe that.)'
Were you thinking Robin was saying Ann had made him fall
out of Unity Consciousness, Xeno?
Really?
You'll forgive me if I don't, um, enlighten you. It's too
much fun watching you flail around cluelessly, sure you've
nailed Robin at last.
> At any rate, the jury is out on Robin's having been in Unity
> in the first place.
I don't think there's a jury involved, Xeno. You're welcome
to your opinion, of course.
> There was MMY's statement that he was somewhere in the layers
> of wholeness, which says nothing about which layer. There is
> nothing to back it up. This I admit is a difficulty, but
> Robin's manner of expression does not seem consistent with the
> expression of others who have been acknowledged to be in unity.
Acknowledged by whom?
You know what would make me suspect someone who claimed
to be in unity consciousness really wasn't?
If they had trouble recognizing irony.
