> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "Jason" <jedi_spock@> wrote: > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > Am I oblivious to the truth? Atleast tell me what the > > > > > > > > 'truth' is for whatever it's worth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Sorry, couldn't resist.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "Jason" <jedi_spock@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Why not? Is this your subjective or objective judgement? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > ROBIN: Did you read my two posts to you today, Jason? If you had, > > > > > that should give you pause before you choose to write something that > > > > > comes this easily--and doesn't indicate you even know how to go > > > > > towards what is the truth. The truth here being: Is authfriend right? > > > > > or did she misjudge you? > > > > > > > > > > That is the question she was posing to you. In order to have > > > > > something meaningful to say you have to enter into her indictment of > > > > > you, and discover, for yourself, whether it is true or not. In > > > > > typical Jason fashion you did anything but this. You refused to take > > > > > seriously the possibility that it might be true. That is, objectively > > > > > true. > > > > > > > > > > To have the satisfaction of knowing it is NOT true, you must within > > > > > yourself find some experience, some evidence on the record, which > > > > > would refute this judgment of authfriend. And if you do have some > > > > > experience of truth about yourself, and evidence in your posts, which > > > > > exonerates you from this charge, then you can express this > > > > > experience, present this evidence, Jason, and the reader will be able > > > > > to make some determination as to which judgment is the truer one, > > > > > authfriend's or yours. > > > > > > > > > > But certainly so far, given what you say here, authfriend has > > > > > rendered an objective judgment. Because if you could handle the truth > > > > > you would seek out the sources within yourself which would enable you > > > > > to know whether authfriend was right or she was wrong. > > > > > Do you follow this, Jason? It is necessary that you understand me, > > > > > first of all to weigh whether what I have said here is pertinent to > > > > > your question to authfriend; second, to be able to face authfriend > > > > > directly and either acknowledge the painful truth of what she has > > > > > said--or to effectually rebut her. > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "Jason" <jedi_spock@> wrote: > > > > > > > > You said that you disavow any love for him. But all that you > > > > said in the past months seems to have lot of emotions. This > > > > is where you and others differ in the outlook. > > > > > > > > The others when they look back down the 'memory lane' or > > > > 'history lane' never expresssed such sugary sentiments. > > > > > > > > > > --- "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@> wrote: > > > > > > ROBIN: You have nailed it, Jason. Authfriend has made a miscalculation: > > > it is not that you can't *handle* the truth; you blithely remain ignorant > > > that it is even around. I would like to see you *not* handling the truth. > > > That would be something rather refreshing. > > > > > > Barry wrote about the abnormality of this kind of love [love of > > > Maharishi]. I answered him in detail. And that post renders what you say > > > here irrelevant. The toothache response, remember? > > > > > > Your confidence in your own point of view, Jason, can be partly > > > explained--or so I conclude from your posts of today--by how deep you are > > > willing to go into some phenomenon, in order to understand it, see it, > > > experience. That is, as it really is. > > > > > > Life is going to have to surprise you but good to alert you to what is > > > going on when you post, Jason. I will be incredulous if a single thing I > > > have said to you today is there in your understanding. > > > > > > I will give you a simple thing to think about: The sense of the > > > personally tragic in the hidden interior life of Bevan Morris. > > > > > > > --- "Jason" <jedi_spock@> wrote: > > > > Well, never met Bevan but I do know that he is basicaly a > > vedic bureaucrat. > > > > --- "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@...> wrote: > > ROBIN: Is that what he amounts to in the end, Jason? You exemplify in this > judgment what I have been trying to get across to you in four posts. Does > Bevan, from inside, the experience he has of being the unique and > unrepeatable person Bevan Morris, sense he is "basically a vedic bureaucrat"? > > He attained a First Class at Cambridge [that means a lot more than you know]. > He lived in Maharishi's ashram in Rishikesh. He knew Maharishi probably as > well as anyone. He is a very smart and thoughtful person--he was once a > child, he had a loving mother. He knows from inside what Maharishi is all > about. He has made an irrevocable decision to bear it out to the end, as a > true apostle of Maharishi and all his Teachings. > > He has judged Maharishi from close-up, and decided he is the most remarkable > and powerful human being of his lifetime. *He believes in the truth that > Maharishi was It*, and that he has made a prudent and blessed decision to > throw his lot in with Maharishi--come what may. > > But he has been made aware--painfully, excruciatingly--of the many > contradictions of Maharishi, his Teachings, the fate of the Movement, the > sense he has of his own spiritual progress--the extent to which he realizes > he embodies the truth of everything Maharishi was and believed in. Bevan > cannot get out; his commitment is a religious one, and he feels a deathless > loyalty and devotion to Maharishi. > > Inside his own private space of being Bevan, he probably harbours all kind of > thoughts which would try to make sense of the terrible failure of his Master > to deliver on any of his promises. But he has accepted the mystery of this > martyrdom, and does his best to live according to the pattern laid down for > him by his Master. > > Bevan has a secret subjective life which no one knows about. I suspect only > Maharishi ever knew what it was like to be Bevan--But for sure Bevan knows > Maharishi a thousand times better than either you or I do. He will keep what > he knows till his death. Meanwhile he surely has thoughts about romance, > about loving a woman, about why he is not enlightened, about where Mother is > at Home has gone, about those who have deserted Maharishi, about the rumours > and allegations of Maharishi's un-Guru Dev behaviour: but he has stiffened > himself and, like a soldier perhaps even in a losing battle, is determined to > bring honour to his General to the very bitter end. Hoping, believing, > praying, that somehow this battle will miraculously turn, and everything he > once dreamed would come true--and which his Master promised him would come > true--does come true. > > Your characterization of him, Jason, as "basically a vedic bureaucrat" is the > very reason authfriend has declared: "You can't handle the truth". Handling > the truth means, no matter how much you may object to the despotic and > totalitarian behaviour of Bevan, that there is a soul in there, a soul who, > if I am correct, will live for eternity. And that soul is complex, > multi-faceted, and not ultimately to be judged solely on the basis of the > persona he has adopted under his sincere obedience to his Master. He believes > he is doing the will of the one person who he believes held the final truth > about Creation. > > Take in all of what I have said before you have some perfunctory and > isolated-from-the -totality-of-reality response, Jason. > > Bevan Morris is someone who knows what it is like to suffer and live a tragic > life. He has that distinct advantage over you. [Of course he must by virtue > of what he believes in deny the sense of the tragic; but everyone who loves > him knows he lives out a life of sorrow and hurt--I mean in addition to the > bliss and glory only he has known among all of us Teachers of Transcendental > Meditaiton. He holds the whole story inside of him, Jason.] > > I hope this helps, Jason. >
Could it be due to plain dumb fear? I remember Curtis telling something like that. There are millions of dogmatists like Bevan on this planet. I don't think Bevan seeks the truth. I meant 'bureaucrat' in that context. Don't you think Deepak Chopra would agree with me? > > > Have you ever found that suffering yielded up a truth to you, Jason, > > > about yourself, about life, which could be delivered in no other way than > > > through your having suffered? > > > > > > > I think if one suffers for the sake of the truth, yes. "ye > > shall seek the truth and the truth shall set you free". > > > > > > > Another simple thing to think about. > > > > > > Each person is a universe unto themselves. Life is a mysterious > > > experience. I am sure death is too. You are inside something awesome and > > > unbelievable, Jason: the universe. > > > > > > I will pray that somehow you end up actually handling the truth. But > > > first of all you have to know that it is somewhere nearby. > > > > > > Effortlessness is not the required technique here, Jason. > > > > > > I was thinking today who Maharishi might be as just a person had he > > > somehow found a way to become de-enlghtened--as I have claim I have. I > > > would like to meet that person. There is nothing like being in Unity > > > Consciousness for ten years and then eventually not being in Unity > > > Consciousness. I would not miss out on this experience. It made me. > > > > > > > I don't think there is a consenus on this if Maharishi was > > ever enlightened. > > > > > You can't put your life inside a teacup, Jason. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
