I'm guilty of using other people's money too. I sought investors in various business ventures. I asked folks to "believe" in a future of a project. That's pretty spiritual, if you ask me. I thought that I had the right to ask them for the dough, cuz I DID believe in the future -- I was, depending on who looks, a huckster, a seer, a true believer, entrepreneur, etc. So, I can't throw a stone at a Purusha who is selling his "future" to others.
Then too, isn't every stock offering such a deal? Believe in us, company, product, etc. -- this is all spiritual/religious to me. If you want to hear a religious sermon, attend any company meeting in Fairfield, hell make that any company anywhere, and I'd bet you get some sort of prognostications requiring that the workers to mood make about, outrightly declare true, have faith in, whatever. It's all "my mind will lead yours" stuff if you ask me, and ya pays yer buckazoids and takes yer chances. Hard to throw a stone at any Purusha for shucking and jiving, eh? And what is "Democracy" or "War on Terror?" -- nothing but religious beliefs in the future that a dogma, concept, army, can deliver. Every politician is a Purusha type, right? "I have special vision, follow me in this darkness." Every product sold says, "Believe in this future: buy this product and obtain ________________ (fill in blank with a word for a wonderful feeling.) "Oh, Brudders O'Mine, ya can buy happiness in a can." And most horrid of all, babies are promises we make to the world. "I will deliver one fully responsible kid." Just another promise no one in the entire world can expect to be fulfilled in the ways imagined. Some futures require less belief than others. If a thug has a gun barrel poking an inch into my neck in a dark alley, I'm a big time believer in certain concepts -- even though, hey, I could get blessed from beyond, and the thug could convert to Hinduism right on the spot cuz I happen to say my mantra aloud -- whatever. Anything's possible anytime. No future is 100% guaranteed. Not a one. You can hear the hammer click down on the firing pin, but that bullet might be a dud. There's that true story of that guy who got struck by lightning seven different times in his lifetime, and he finally killed himself. I guess he had a strong belief none of us ever had, eh? I buy a lottery ticket every now and then. (Michael Porter in FF told me that the lottery was a tax on the stupid, but I told him that the slight thrill I get just when I'm checking the numbers is worth a buck.) Future schmuture. I say, take all the priests who promise futures to be stood up against a wall and blasted with cream pies. If everyone agrees, I'll start stockpiling pies for future use. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > I was on Purusha for years and received thousands of dollars > > of support from "sponsors," as did most other Purusha guys. > > There were times when I and others on Purusha were really > > earning our keep, and other times when we probably weren't. > > I really grew tired of the "taker" lifestyle. It polluted > > my psychology and tarnished my friendships. I couldn't walk > > into a room of TM people without scanning it for potential > > sponsors. Over time, the attitude that the world owed me a > > living because I was doing something important became more > > and more deeply ingrained. After I left Purusha and got > > married, it took a few years to uproot that attitude. > > I can only imagine. I've been writing a little > about the narcissism thing here because that's > one of the 'tudes I'm trying to uproot from > myself, after decades of being around Maharishi > and Rama and picking up the narcissist mindset > from them. > > > Doing so was very healthy. > > I think so. > > > It may be the best thing for Dakota's spiritual progress to > > get a job in the real world and stop depending on others. > > It may be hard for him to do that now, because he is older > > and probably doesn't have marketable skills. So he may be > > a dharma bum for the rest of his life. I think you are > > justified in feeling reluctant to support him. If you do > > so, a realistic justification should probably be compassion > > for someone who is too flakey to support himself, rather > > than a sense that you are supporting some sort of spiritual > > warrior. I'd let him go to Thailand to teach English. He'd > > be doing seva and getting a taste of self-sufficiency, both > > of which might be more spiritually beneficial for him than > > hanging out in an ashram. > > I was really musing rather than asking for advice. I'm > not really one of his supporters at this point. I would > have felt better about his path if he *had* gone to > China to teach English for a while. But the decision to > stay at the ashram and continue studying rather than do > what he convinced all his supporters he was going to do > originally is really the kicker. > > If Dakota were really in trouble, *of course* I'd be right > there for him. That's just what friends do for friends. > But to enable him to stick around and suck guru energy > just because he wants to doesn't really feel like helping; > it feels like being an "enabler" to someone who's got a > heavy drug habit. > > In my musings, I was just extrapolating from the immed- > iate situation to a more general one -- the pervasive idea > in spiritual circles that because you're following what > you feel is a spiritual path, the world owes you a living. > Or God owes you a living. Bottom line is, someone *owes* > you for doing what you want to do anyway. > > This concept has come up for me when listening to Ron > shill for his teacher, and when hearing the pitches for > more money for butt-bouncing and rent-a-pundits. For the > latter, the clear implication is that if you *don't* > contribute, something is badly wrong with you. You're > "withholding funds" from the truly spiritual people whose > vision is clear and know that there is a better use for > your money than what you might have imagined. For the > record, Rick, this feeling has *never* come up for me > when hearing you speak about Amma, or on the rare occas- > ions when tr3nity talks about Mother Meera. I'm sure > there is a push to have devotees contribute there, too, > but it doesn't seem oriented towards "Support *me* because > I've decided to lead a spiritual life and you haven't." > > And when I listen to many people in many different > spiritual traditions talk about enlightenment, and what > life will be like for them *when* they're enlightened, > I often hear a bit of this same concept. It's like > underneath all the other stuff like "I won't be able > to do anything wrong because I'll be in tune with the > laws of nature" there is this undercurrent of "I won't > have to worry any more because my life will be perfect. > I probably won't even have to work because people will > pay my bills just to hear me expound wisdom to them." > > It all just makes me think that somewhere along the > line someone really missed the point. It may well have > been me, and if so I can live with that. But I'll be > paying my own way *as* I live with it. >
