Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Thank you for your explanation and thoughts on irony, especially because I 
often am flat-footed in the post-modern world.
As I said, it was complex.  Something was evoked that went far beyond irony.  
And it was meant to draw one in.  Let's leave it at that for now and give it a 
little more time.  If you wish, I'll explain further down the line.
So, if we rate it, we couldn't rate it simply along the lines of irony.
It really was, I would say, more weighted on the side of what it evoked than it 
was on the side of irony.
And you won't need to wait for it (this kind of "irony" from me), because I 
don't think I'll come out with the likes of it again, unless it's somehow 
called for.
Regarding M and the sandals, I agree that he was an exceptional personality, 
though I'm not so sure he was the most such since Christ, perhaps I would say 
one of the most to make a significant imprint on world consciousness for some 
time.  I think of him, sometimes, as a rather small man standing on the 
shoulders of giants, but those giants were always more obscure world 
consciousness-wise.  But I don't think the world will exalt him much more than 
he is now, though I may be dead wrong in this.  I see him being relegated to 
near footnote status, somewhere, perhaps, along the continuum near William 
Randolph Hearst or some such person, at least in terms of "history's eyes."
And I think everyone here knows that I consider the sandals priceless, or at 
least worth 1, 2 or 3 million.  5 million seems like a lot to me, but hey, let 
someone put a higher price tag on them than me.  But, as things stand, I came 
up with the absolute lowest I would accept at this point in my life given my 
circumstances and have decided to go with it now.
And re the LW thing, please, don't let me crimp your style.  Always follow your 
own muse/guidance.  The way to heal a polarity is not to jump back from one end 
and try to get to the other, but to incorporate the whole thing and (forgive 
me) transcend it to find the ascension point.  That, I would say, includes all 
continuum/polarities, including the Eastern/Western one.
Love always, though, no, in this case, not the sexual kind,
m

On Sep 17, 2011, at 7:25 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> Well I choose to rate it. Because even I (who am a keen student of irony) 
> wondered for a while there. But must stop here: I don't want to become the 
> object of irony in my appreciation of how you nearly drew me in by 
> yours—first time, I think, I have seen it. I mostly resort to irony when the 
> point is too obvious to make non-ironically. For me, irony is the most real 
> thing left in the world—almost. Has the most potency. Religion can't touch 
> it. As in, when Letterman in his monologue says:"I registered my son for 
> Scientology camp." {And just lets the universe itself set up the feedback.]
> 
> There inside the Ed Sullivan theatre the acoustical potential for irony is 
> the highest—because of how much of a master of this mode Letterman is. I 
> don't think I have ever seen him without, at the very least, the immediate 
> contingency of irony. Without (unless somehow you are always in a state of 
> grace) irony at your disposal, you are pretty much flat-footed in the 
> post-modern world.
> 
> There. Getting pedantic about irony. But you see, I almost got fooled here 
> when you brought it out, Mark. I'll be waiting for it next time.
> 
> The more inwardly sincere you are, the more you have to have irony at the 
> ready. Like a sort of 21st century update on Christ's: You must be as 
> innocent as a dove, as wise as a serpent.
> 
> About those sandals: my own intuition is that sooner or later Maharishi, no 
> matter what, will be viewed as an extraordinary character in history—just not 
> the glorious saviour we thought he was. I consider those sandals potentially 
> worth much more than $70 000. But this is purely in the abstract world of my 
> imagination as I contemplate Maharishi's eventual reputation. Objectively, 
> then, I think them an authentic relic. Priceless.
> 
> After all, for what it's worth I think Maharishi the strongest and most 
> exceptional personality since Christ.
> 
> Whoops! LW setting in here. Gotta make a fast exit.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> >
> > Let's not rate. Let's call it a complex experiment that didn't quite gel. I 
> > did have some fun with it, though.
> > 
> > On Sep 17, 2011, at 5:26 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > 
> > > Did you just out-irony me or something, Mark? Seems so.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wow, are you kidding? So much for loyalty. You're gonna let Sal dictate 
> > > > our interaction and laud her to the skies? What kind of man are you? 
> > > > Canadian? Let's undo everything that happened between us right now. 
> > > > Ready, set, go back to your pre-Mark condition.
> > > > And where did sexuality come from in all this? Perhaps that was Sal's 
> > > 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Well, thanks.  I did try, but I think I over-reached.

On Sep 17, 2011, at 6:10 PM, authfriend wrote:

> I thought the whole thing, from both of you, was just
> hilarious, an FFL classic. And from two relative
> newbies, yet!
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> >
> > Let's not rate. Let's call it a complex experiment that didn't quite gel. I 
> > did have some fun with it, though.
> > 
> > On Sep 17, 2011, at 5:26 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > 
> > > Did you just out-irony me or something, Mark? Seems so.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wow, are you kidding? So much for loyalty. You're gonna let Sal dictate 
> > > > our interaction and laud her to the skies? What kind of man are you? 
> > > > Canadian? Let's undo everything that happened between us right now. 
> > > > Ready, set, go back to your pre-Mark condition.
> > > > And where did sexuality come from in all this? Perhaps that was Sal's 
> > > > intended innuendo, but it sure wasn't based in reality. Or are you 
> > > > saying that it was and then denying it in a subsequent post?
> > > > I, as you probably know from my earlier response, read it 
> > > > differently--the written word can be so hard to read, if you will, and 
> > > > I can be dense--sexuality didn't even occur to me till I read this. (Of 
> > > > course what could lend itself better to such an interpretation than 
> > > > "I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us.") It was more like 
> > > > FFL: unlimited vituperation always welcome, but please, anything cozy 
> > > > is barely tolerable... No lovefests (Why, oh Judy, is this not an 
> > > > accepted word or phrase? Isn't it common?) allowed, sexual or 
> > > > otherwise. But where does this come from? Those who crave only to vent 
> > > > their pain?
> > > > Anyhoo, piss ant, better back off. Someone else might not like it. And 
> > > > I'll withhold any insights I might have into you, too, as I have just 
> > > > done. Better all around that way.
> > > > (Sal, you are good. Wanna get a room together somewhere? But I'd better 
> > > > be careful here. As previously stated, I'm not even sure if you're a 
> > > > man or a woman...)
> > > > 
> > > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:53 AM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The 
> > > > > Brokeback thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. 
> > > > > Sad, really. But your fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am 
> > > > > pulling back on the Mark thing. I just have to remember: Go deeper, 
> > > > > Robin: remember: Sal is around. She plumbs the depths of things like 
> > > > > this. Be careful.
> > > > > 
> > > > > And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than 
> > > > > Michael's first moonwalk.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would you two like to get a room together
> > > > > > somewhere?
> > > > > > Sal
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us. But then what 
> > > > > > > comes next? I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your 
> > > > > > > posts. But if I do feel I see something in you, did you just give 
> > > > > > > me permission to post it here (not, necessarily, that it will 
> > > > > > > happen)? And I agree about Peter, all that you say here. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I 
> > > > > > >> like it.
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >> Robin 
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

Well I choose to rate it. Because even I (who am a keen student of irony) 
wondered for a while there. But must stop here: I don't want to become the 
object of irony in my appreciation of how you nearly drew me in by yours—first 
time, I think, I have seen it. I mostly resort to irony when the point is too 
obvious to make non-ironically. For me, irony is the most real thing left in 
the world—almost. Has the most potency. Religion can't touch it. As in, when 
Letterman in his monologue says:"I registered my son for Scientology camp." 
{And just lets the universe itself set up the feedback.]

There inside the Ed Sullivan theatre the acoustical potential for irony is the 
highest—because of how much of a master of this mode Letterman is. I don't 
think I have ever seen him without, at the very least, the immediate 
contingency of irony. Without (unless somehow you are always in a state of 
grace) irony at your disposal, you are pretty much flat-footed in the 
post-modern world.

There. Getting pedantic about irony. But you see, I almost got fooled here when 
you brought it out, Mark. I'll be waiting for it next time.

The more inwardly sincere you are, the more you have to have irony at the 
ready. Like a sort of 21st century update on Christ's: You must be as innocent 
as a dove, as wise as a serpent.

About those sandals: my own intuition is that sooner or later Maharishi, no 
matter what, will be viewed as an extraordinary character in history—just not 
the glorious saviour we thought he was. I consider those sandals potentially 
worth much more than $70 000. But this is purely in the abstract world of my 
imagination as I contemplate Maharishi's eventual reputation. Objectively, 
then, I think them an authentic relic. Priceless.

After all, for what it's worth I think Maharishi the strongest and most 
exceptional personality since Christ.

Whoops! LW setting in here. Gotta make a fast exit.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> Let's not rate.  Let's call it a complex experiment that didn't quite gel.  I 
> did have some fun with it, though.
> 
> On Sep 17, 2011, at 5:26 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > Did you just out-irony me or something, Mark? Seems so.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> > >
> > > Wow, are you kidding? So much for loyalty. You're gonna let Sal dictate 
> > > our interaction and laud her to the skies? What kind of man are you? 
> > > Canadian? Let's undo everything that happened between us right now. 
> > > Ready, set, go back to your pre-Mark condition.
> > > And where did sexuality come from in all this? Perhaps that was Sal's 
> > > intended innuendo, but it sure wasn't based in reality. Or are you saying 
> > > that it was and then denying it in a subsequent post?
> > > I, as you probably know from my earlier response, read it 
> > > differently--the written word can be so hard to read, if you will, and I 
> > > can be dense--sexuality didn't even occur to me till I read this. (Of 
> > > course what could lend itself better to such an interpretation than "I'm 
> > > glad you like it. That goes for both of us.") It was more like FFL: 
> > > unlimited vituperation always welcome, but please, anything cozy is 
> > > barely tolerable... No lovefests (Why, oh Judy, is this not an accepted 
> > > word or phrase? Isn't it common?) allowed, sexual or otherwise. But where 
> > > does this come from? Those who crave only to vent their pain?
> > > Anyhoo, piss ant, better back off. Someone else might not like it. And 
> > > I'll withhold any insights I might have into you, too, as I have just 
> > > done. Better all around that way.
> > > (Sal, you are good. Wanna get a room together somewhere? But I'd better 
> > > be careful here. As previously stated, I'm not even sure if you're a man 
> > > or a woman...)
> > > 
> > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:53 AM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The 
> > > > Brokeback thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. Sad, 
> > > > really. But your fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am pulling 
> > > > back on the Mark thing. I just have to remember: Go deeper, Robin: 
> > > > remember: Sal is around. She plumbs the depths of things like this. Be 
> > > > careful.
> > > > 
> > > > And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than Michael's 
> > > > first moonwalk.
> > > > 
> > > > Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Would you two like to get a room together
> > > > > somewhere?
> > > > > Sal
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us. But then what comes 
> > > > > > next? I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts. But if 
> > > > > > I do feel I see something in you, did you just give me permission 
> > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[authfriend]

I thought the whole thing, from both of you, was just
hilarious, an FFL classic. And from two relative
newbies, yet!


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> Let's not rate.  Let's call it a complex experiment that didn't quite gel.  I 
> did have some fun with it, though.
> 
> On Sep 17, 2011, at 5:26 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > Did you just out-irony me or something, Mark? Seems so.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> > >
> > > Wow, are you kidding? So much for loyalty. You're gonna let Sal dictate 
> > > our interaction and laud her to the skies? What kind of man are you? 
> > > Canadian? Let's undo everything that happened between us right now. 
> > > Ready, set, go back to your pre-Mark condition.
> > > And where did sexuality come from in all this? Perhaps that was Sal's 
> > > intended innuendo, but it sure wasn't based in reality. Or are you saying 
> > > that it was and then denying it in a subsequent post?
> > > I, as you probably know from my earlier response, read it 
> > > differently--the written word can be so hard to read, if you will, and I 
> > > can be dense--sexuality didn't even occur to me till I read this. (Of 
> > > course what could lend itself better to such an interpretation than "I'm 
> > > glad you like it. That goes for both of us.") It was more like FFL: 
> > > unlimited vituperation always welcome, but please, anything cozy is 
> > > barely tolerable... No lovefests (Why, oh Judy, is this not an accepted 
> > > word or phrase? Isn't it common?) allowed, sexual or otherwise. But where 
> > > does this come from? Those who crave only to vent their pain?
> > > Anyhoo, piss ant, better back off. Someone else might not like it. And 
> > > I'll withhold any insights I might have into you, too, as I have just 
> > > done. Better all around that way.
> > > (Sal, you are good. Wanna get a room together somewhere? But I'd better 
> > > be careful here. As previously stated, I'm not even sure if you're a man 
> > > or a woman...)
> > > 
> > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:53 AM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The 
> > > > Brokeback thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. Sad, 
> > > > really. But your fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am pulling 
> > > > back on the Mark thing. I just have to remember: Go deeper, Robin: 
> > > > remember: Sal is around. She plumbs the depths of things like this. Be 
> > > > careful.
> > > > 
> > > > And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than Michael's 
> > > > first moonwalk.
> > > > 
> > > > Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Would you two like to get a room together
> > > > > somewhere?
> > > > > Sal
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us. But then what comes 
> > > > > > next? I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts. But if 
> > > > > > I do feel I see something in you, did you just give me permission 
> > > > > > to post it here (not, necessarily, that it will happen)? And I 
> > > > > > agree about Peter, all that you say here. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I 
> > > > > >> like it.
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> Robin 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Let's not rate.  Let's call it a complex experiment that didn't quite gel.  I 
did have some fun with it, though.

On Sep 17, 2011, at 5:26 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> Did you just out-irony me or something, Mark? Seems so.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> >
> > Wow, are you kidding? So much for loyalty. You're gonna let Sal dictate our 
> > interaction and laud her to the skies? What kind of man are you? Canadian? 
> > Let's undo everything that happened between us right now. Ready, set, go 
> > back to your pre-Mark condition.
> > And where did sexuality come from in all this? Perhaps that was Sal's 
> > intended innuendo, but it sure wasn't based in reality. Or are you saying 
> > that it was and then denying it in a subsequent post?
> > I, as you probably know from my earlier response, read it differently--the 
> > written word can be so hard to read, if you will, and I can be 
> > dense--sexuality didn't even occur to me till I read this. (Of course what 
> > could lend itself better to such an interpretation than "I'm glad you like 
> > it. That goes for both of us.") It was more like FFL: unlimited 
> > vituperation always welcome, but please, anything cozy is barely 
> > tolerable... No lovefests (Why, oh Judy, is this not an accepted word or 
> > phrase? Isn't it common?) allowed, sexual or otherwise. But where does this 
> > come from? Those who crave only to vent their pain?
> > Anyhoo, piss ant, better back off. Someone else might not like it. And I'll 
> > withhold any insights I might have into you, too, as I have just done. 
> > Better all around that way.
> > (Sal, you are good. Wanna get a room together somewhere? But I'd better be 
> > careful here. As previously stated, I'm not even sure if you're a man or a 
> > woman...)
> > 
> > On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:53 AM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > 
> > > Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The 
> > > Brokeback thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. Sad, 
> > > really. But your fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am pulling 
> > > back on the Mark thing. I just have to remember: Go deeper, Robin: 
> > > remember: Sal is around. She plumbs the depths of things like this. Be 
> > > careful.
> > > 
> > > And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than Michael's 
> > > first moonwalk.
> > > 
> > > Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Would you two like to get a room together
> > > > somewhere?
> > > > Sal
> > > > 
> > > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us. But then what comes 
> > > > > next? I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts. But if I 
> > > > > do feel I see something in you, did you just give me permission to 
> > > > > post it here (not, necessarily, that it will happen)? And I agree 
> > > > > about Peter, all that you say here. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like 
> > > > >> it.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Robin 
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

Did you just out-irony me or something, Mark? Seems so.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> Wow, are you kidding?  So much for loyalty.  You're gonna let Sal dictate our 
> interaction and laud her to the skies?  What kind of man are you?  Canadian?  
> Let's undo everything that happened between us right now.  Ready, set, go 
> back to your pre-Mark condition.
> And where did sexuality come from in all this?  Perhaps that was Sal's 
> intended innuendo, but it sure wasn't based in reality.  Or are you saying 
> that it was and then denying it in a subsequent post?
> I, as you probably know from my earlier response, read it differently--the 
> written word can be so hard to read, if you will, and I can be 
> dense--sexuality didn't even occur to me till I read this.  (Of course what 
> could lend itself better to such an interpretation than "I'm glad you like 
> it. That goes for both of us.")  It was more like FFL: unlimited vituperation 
> always welcome, but please, anything cozy is barely tolerable...  No 
> lovefests (Why, oh Judy, is this not an accepted word or phrase?  Isn't it 
> common?) allowed, sexual or otherwise.  But where does this come from?  Those 
> who crave only to vent their pain?
> Anyhoo, piss ant, better back off.  Someone else might not like it.  And I'll 
> withhold any insights I might have into you, too, as I have just done.  
> Better all around that way.
> (Sal, you are good.  Wanna get a room together somewhere?  But I'd better be 
> careful here.  As previously stated, I'm not even sure if you're a man or a 
> woman...)
> 
> On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:53 AM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The 
> > Brokeback thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. Sad, 
> > really. But your fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am pulling back 
> > on the Mark thing. I just have to remember: Go deeper, Robin: remember: Sal 
> > is around. She plumbs the depths of things like this. Be careful.
> > 
> > And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than Michael's 
> > first moonwalk.
> > 
> > Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
> > >
> > > Would you two like to get a room together
> > > somewhere?
> > > Sal
> > > 
> > > On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us. But then what comes 
> > > > next? I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts. But if I 
> > > > do feel I see something in you, did you just give me permission to post 
> > > > it here (not, necessarily, that it will happen)? And I agree about 
> > > > Peter, all that you say here. 
> > > > 
> > > > On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > >> 
> > > >> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> > > >> 
> > > >> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like 
> > > >> it.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Robin 
> > > >>
> > >
> > 
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Wow, are you kidding?  So much for loyalty.  You're gonna let Sal dictate our 
interaction and laud her to the skies?  What kind of man are you?  Canadian?  
Let's undo everything that happened between us right now.  Ready, set, go back 
to your pre-Mark condition.
And where did sexuality come from in all this?  Perhaps that was Sal's intended 
innuendo, but it sure wasn't based in reality.  Or are you saying that it was 
and then denying it in a subsequent post?
I, as you probably know from my earlier response, read it differently--the 
written word can be so hard to read, if you will, and I can be dense--sexuality 
didn't even occur to me till I read this.  (Of course what could lend itself 
better to such an interpretation than "I'm glad you like it. That goes for both 
of us.")  It was more like FFL: unlimited vituperation always welcome, but 
please, anything cozy is barely tolerable...  No lovefests (Why, oh Judy, is 
this not an accepted word or phrase?  Isn't it common?) allowed, sexual or 
otherwise.  But where does this come from?  Those who crave only to vent their 
pain?
Anyhoo, piss ant, better back off.  Someone else might not like it.  And I'll 
withhold any insights I might have into you, too, as I have just done.  Better 
all around that way.
(Sal, you are good.  Wanna get a room together somewhere?  But I'd better be 
careful here.  As previously stated, I'm not even sure if you're a man or a 
woman...)

On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:53 AM, maskedzebra wrote:

> Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The 
> Brokeback thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. Sad, 
> really. But your fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am pulling back on 
> the Mark thing. I just have to remember: Go deeper, Robin: remember: Sal is 
> around. She plumbs the depths of things like this. Be careful.
> 
> And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than Michael's first 
> moonwalk.
> 
> Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
> >
> > Would you two like to get a room together
> > somewhere?
> > Sal
> > 
> > On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm glad you like it. That goes for both of us. But then what comes next? 
> > > I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts. But if I do feel I 
> > > see something in you, did you just give me permission to post it here 
> > > (not, necessarily, that it will happen)? And I agree about Peter, all 
> > > that you say here. 
> > > 
> > > On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> > >> 
> > >> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.
> > >> 
> > >> Robin 
> > >>
> >
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

Your objective sensitivity and discretion scares me, Sal—awesome. The Brokeback 
thing—I didn't realize it, but definitely it was there. Sad, really. But your 
fast (and functional) wit has saved me. I am pulling back on the Mark thing. I 
just have to remember: Go deeper, Robin: remember: Sal is around. She plumbs 
the depths of things like this. Be careful.

And so I will be from now on, Sal. You're most dazzling than Michael's first 
moonwalk.

Too much sunshine. Love ya, Baby Sal.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  wrote:
>
> Would you two like to get a room together
> somewhere?
> Sal
> 
> On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> 
> > I'm glad you like it.  That goes for both of us.  But then what comes next? 
> >  I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts.  But if I do feel I 
> > see something in you, did you just give me permission to post it here (not, 
> > necessarily, that it will happen)?  And I agree about Peter, all that you 
> > say here.  
> > 
> > On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> >> 
> >> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> >> 
> >> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.
> >> 
> >> Robin 
> >>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

 "But if I do feel I see something in you, did you just give me permission to 
post it here?"

Most definitely. Because I happen to know, by past experience, that it would be 
true.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> I'm glad you like it.  That goes for both of us.  But then what comes next?  
> I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts.  But if I do feel I 
> see something in you, did you just give me permission to post it here (not, 
> necessarily, that it will happen)?  And I agree about Peter, all that you say 
> here.  
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > "Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the 
> > window, too." This sentence caught my attention, And it seemed to go to my 
> > experience of the video. Not to account for my experience; but I think the 
> > stroke broke him down in some way which created a sense of physical 
> > humility. He was thrown upon his knees in a manner of speaking, and I think 
> > it perhaps released his best self. Peter Wallace himself might offer some 
> > insight here: I got the sense that he is very alert to metaphysical nuance; 
> > in fact what was most astonishing to me was the correspondence between his 
> > spiritual vocabulary and the reality to which this vocabulary referred to. 
> > He was in effect simply describing his experience. But that experience made 
> > itself known to us (for me at least) as an objective reality.
> > 
> > Mariana Caplan, I have to put off, since I am Eastern-phobic when it comes 
> > to books. I don't want to be reminded of my mystical past; it is still too 
> > dominant in my physiology. The Lee Zozowick episode put me in the mind of 
> > my seminars—again, something I have come view as part of the hallucination 
> > of my Unity Consciousness, even as there was extraordinary drama and humour 
> > and entertainment. But there was also pain and violence, and it was driven 
> > by the assumption—and inspiration—of my enlightenment.
> > 
> > Regarding myself, I already have a feeling that your "objective 
> > vulnerability" (the context which is structured in your nervous system) is 
> > recording its impressions of me, and sooner or later it will reveal some 
> > truth about me.
> > 
> > But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> > 
> > I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.
> > 
> > Robin 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> > >
> > > This gave me the grins. Thanks.
> > > I'm reading a few books by this wonderful woman, Mariana Caplan. She's 
> > > really made quite a study of it and has a great grasp and insight into 
> > > the whole spiritual path thing. I read Eyes Wide Open first. I heartily 
> > > recommend it. I'm reading The Guru Question now. In it she explicates all 
> > > about that, but also uses her own path as examples of what one might 
> > > encounter. Her description of her first encounter with her own teacher 
> > > when she met him in Thiruvannaamalai, an American madman named Lee 
> > > Lozowick of the crazy wisdom traditions whose teacher was Yogi 
> > > Ramsuratkumar, is great. Upon taking one look at her, he spent 40 minutes 
> > > vivisecting her with merciless but purely objective discernment which her 
> > > ego was horrified by, but her spirit perceived as pure love. Of course 
> > > there was an audience there, as well. First he asked her if she wanted to 
> > > know what was going on with her. When she said yes, he asked her if she 
> > > were sure. He only started in on her after her second assent. Later, a 
> > > bunch of people there invited her to meet with them and spent the whole 
> > > time talking about how horrible Lee was to her. She heard them out, but 
> > > already knew Lee was her teacher.
> > > I wish I could do that. But it seems I have to get to at least spend a 
> > > little time with a person first, though there often are things I believe 
> > > I can objectively see right away. It took me years with M.
> > > Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the 
> > > window, too. But, again, my experience of him was almost 40 years ago.
> > > A tiny bit re the LW. But you did pretty well...:-)
> > > m
> > > 
> > > On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:28 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I think I am going to return to my purported Unity Consciousness, make 
> > > > you my skin boy, and then years later, read what you have to say about 
> > > > me: this, so I can get a true insight into myself. Because I think you 
> > > > might be able to tell me something—if you knew me like you get to know 
> > > > others—that I as yet still don't know about myself. The way you 
> > > > objectively carve someone up, it seems to me like impersonal surgery; 
> > > > therefore true. I am already getting—at least from the past—a fuller 
> > > > picture of Peter Wallace. Again, that picture does not undermine my 
> > > > recent 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[merudanda]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU&feature=player_detailpage#t=1\
343s
http://tinyurl.com/3mxjown
here for the impatient 22:23min
ad: ..."the story were Ananda Mayi Ma explains Maharishi's role in the
world and his relationship to Guru Dev..."
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays dickmays@ wrote:
> >
> > Forwarded from a friend:
> >
> >
> > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as
> > well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> >
> > JAI GURU DEV
> >
> > WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
>
>
> Indeed !
>
> Pay special attention to the story were Ananda Mayi Ma explains
Maharishi's role in the world and his relationship to Guru Dev, in the
room full of so-called Pundits.
>
> Someone should interview Peter Wallace without interrupting this
saintly american.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

No buddying in public allowed?  Is that a written or unwritten FFL protocol?

On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:19 AM, Sal Sunshine wrote:

> Would you two like to get a room together
> somewhere?
> Sal
> 
> On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:
> 
>> I'm glad you like it.  That goes for both of us.  But then what comes next?  
>> I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts.  But if I do feel I 
>> see something in you, did you just give me permission to post it here (not, 
>> necessarily, that it will happen)?  And I agree about Peter, all that you 
>> say here.  
>> 
>> On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
>>> 
>>> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
>>> 
>>> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.
>>> 
>>> Robin 
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 





To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Sal Sunshine]

Would you two like to get a room together
somewhere?
Sal

On Sep 17, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Mark Landau wrote:

> I'm glad you like it.  That goes for both of us.  But then what comes next?  
> I won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts.  But if I do feel I 
> see something in you, did you just give me permission to post it here (not, 
> necessarily, that it will happen)?  And I agree about Peter, all that you say 
> here.  
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
>> 
>> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
>> 
>> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.
>> 
>> Robin 
>> 





To subscribe, send a message to:
fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
fairfieldlife-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
fairfieldlife-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

I'm glad you like it.  That goes for both of us.  But then what comes next?  I 
won't, I must must admit, be reading all your posts.  But if I do feel I see 
something in you, did you just give me permission to post it here (not, 
necessarily, that it will happen)?  And I agree about Peter, all that you say 
here.  

On Sep 16, 2011, at 11:57 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> "Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the window, 
> too." This sentence caught my attention, And it seemed to go to my experience 
> of the video. Not to account for my experience; but I think the stroke broke 
> him down in some way which created a sense of physical humility. He was 
> thrown upon his knees in a manner of speaking, and I think it perhaps 
> released his best self. Peter Wallace himself might offer some insight here: 
> I got the sense that he is very alert to metaphysical nuance; in fact what 
> was most astonishing to me was the correspondence between his spiritual 
> vocabulary and the reality to which this vocabulary referred to. He was in 
> effect simply describing his experience. But that experience made itself 
> known to us (for me at least) as an objective reality.
> 
> Mariana Caplan, I have to put off, since I am Eastern-phobic when it comes to 
> books. I don't want to be reminded of my mystical past; it is still too 
> dominant in my physiology. The Lee Zozowick episode put me in the mind of my 
> seminars—again, something I have come view as part of the hallucination of my 
> Unity Consciousness, even as there was extraordinary drama and humour and 
> entertainment. But there was also pain and violence, and it was driven by the 
> assumption—and inspiration—of my enlightenment.
> 
> Regarding myself, I already have a feeling that your "objective 
> vulnerability" (the context which is structured in your nervous system) is 
> recording its impressions of me, and sooner or later it will reveal some 
> truth about me.
> 
> But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).
> 
> I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.
> 
> Robin 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> >
> > This gave me the grins. Thanks.
> > I'm reading a few books by this wonderful woman, Mariana Caplan. She's 
> > really made quite a study of it and has a great grasp and insight into the 
> > whole spiritual path thing. I read Eyes Wide Open first. I heartily 
> > recommend it. I'm reading The Guru Question now. In it she explicates all 
> > about that, but also uses her own path as examples of what one might 
> > encounter. Her description of her first encounter with her own teacher when 
> > she met him in Thiruvannaamalai, an American madman named Lee Lozowick of 
> > the crazy wisdom traditions whose teacher was Yogi Ramsuratkumar, is great. 
> > Upon taking one look at her, he spent 40 minutes vivisecting her with 
> > merciless but purely objective discernment which her ego was horrified by, 
> > but her spirit perceived as pure love. Of course there was an audience 
> > there, as well. First he asked her if she wanted to know what was going on 
> > with her. When she said yes, he asked her if she were sure. He only started 
> > in on her after her second assent. Later, a bunch of people there invited 
> > her to meet with them and spent the whole time talking about how horrible 
> > Lee was to her. She heard them out, but already knew Lee was her teacher.
> > I wish I could do that. But it seems I have to get to at least spend a 
> > little time with a person first, though there often are things I believe I 
> > can objectively see right away. It took me years with M.
> > Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the window, 
> > too. But, again, my experience of him was almost 40 years ago.
> > A tiny bit re the LW. But you did pretty well...:-)
> > m
> > 
> > On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:28 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > 
> > > I think I am going to return to my purported Unity Consciousness, make 
> > > you my skin boy, and then years later, read what you have to say about 
> > > me: this, so I can get a true insight into myself. Because I think you 
> > > might be able to tell me something—if you knew me like you get to know 
> > > others—that I as yet still don't know about myself. The way you 
> > > objectively carve someone up, it seems to me like impersonal surgery; 
> > > therefore true. I am already getting—at least from the past—a fuller 
> > > picture of Peter Wallace. Again, that picture does not undermine my 
> > > recent experience; but I can sense, in terms of his personal history at 
> > > least, there were thing to overcome. Has he overcome them? That 
> > > fascinates me, because his performance on this video did not suggest the 
> > > things that were no doubt true about him in the past.
> > > 
> > > Got to cut it off here, Mark, as I mortify the longwindedness temptation. 
> > > Which is obviously now that it ha

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

 "Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the window, 
too." This sentence caught my attention, And it seemed to go to my experience 
of the video. Not to account for my experience; but I think the stroke broke 
him down in some way which created a sense of physical humility. He was thrown 
upon his knees in a manner of speaking, and I think it perhaps released his 
best self. Peter Wallace himself might offer some insight here: I got the sense 
that he is very alert to metaphysical nuance; in fact what was most astonishing 
to me was the correspondence between his spiritual vocabulary and the reality 
to which this vocabulary referred to. He was in effect simply describing his 
experience. But that experience made itself known to us (for me at least) as an 
objective reality.

Mariana Caplan, I have to put off, since I am Eastern-phobic when it comes to 
books. I don't want to be reminded of my mystical past; it is still too 
dominant in my physiology. The Lee Zozowick episode  put me in the mind of my 
seminars—again, something I have come view as part of the hallucination of my 
Unity Consciousness, even as there was extraordinary drama and humour and 
entertainment. But there was also pain and violence, and it was driven by the 
assumption—and inspiration—of my enlightenment.

Regarding myself, I already have a feeling that your "objective vulnerability" 
(the context which is structured in your nervous system) is recording its 
impressions of me, and sooner or later it will reveal some truth about me.

But you will understand why I must break this off here (LW).

I can feel even in this moment your consciousness upon me—and I like it.

Robin 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> This gave me the grins.  Thanks.
> I'm reading a few books by this wonderful woman, Mariana Caplan.  She's 
> really made quite a study of it and has a great grasp and insight into the 
> whole spiritual path thing.  I read Eyes Wide Open first.  I heartily 
> recommend it.  I'm reading The Guru Question now.  In it she explicates all 
> about that, but also uses her own path as examples of what one might 
> encounter.  Her description of her first encounter with her own teacher when 
> she met him in Thiruvannaamalai, an American madman named Lee Lozowick of the 
> crazy wisdom traditions whose teacher was Yogi Ramsuratkumar, is great.  Upon 
> taking one look at her, he spent 40 minutes vivisecting her with merciless 
> but purely objective discernment which her ego was horrified by, but her 
> spirit perceived as pure love.  Of course there was an audience there, as 
> well.  First he asked her if she wanted to know what was going on with her.  
> When she said yes, he asked her if she were sure.  He only started in on her 
> after her second assent.  Later, a bunch of people there invited her to meet 
> with them and spent the whole time talking about how horrible Lee was to her. 
>  She heard them out, but already knew Lee was her teacher.
> I wish I could do that.  But it seems I have to get to at least spend a 
> little time with a person first, though there often are things I believe I 
> can objectively see right away.  It took me years with M.
> Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the window, 
> too.  But, again, my experience of him was almost 40 years ago.
> A tiny bit re the LW.  But you did pretty well...:-)
> m
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:28 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > I think I am going to return to my purported Unity Consciousness, make you 
> > my skin boy, and then years later, read what you have to say about me: 
> > this, so I can get a true insight into myself. Because I think you might be 
> > able to tell me something—if you knew me like you get to know others—that I 
> > as yet still don't know about myself. The way you objectively carve someone 
> > up, it seems to me like impersonal surgery; therefore true. I am already 
> > getting—at least from the past—a fuller picture of Peter Wallace. Again, 
> > that picture does not undermine my recent experience; but I can sense, in 
> > terms of his personal history at least, there were thing to overcome. Has 
> > he overcome them? That fascinates me, because his performance on this video 
> > did not suggest the things that were no doubt true about him in the past.
> > 
> > Got to cut it off here, Mark, as I mortify the longwindedness temptation. 
> > Which is obviously now that it has been put into a post by *you* has to 
> > point up some compensation in me for insecurity about *something*. What, I 
> > am not sure. But with you I got to keep what's wrong with me hidden—at 
> > least until I'm ready to hear it.
> > 
> > No, so far it's pretty straight between us. That's my experience anyhow.
> > 
> > But that "pulverizing" insight you gave to David Sieveking (re: MMY), it 
> > stays with me still.
> > 
> > Amazing insight, that.
> > 
> > Meanwhile, my experience of Peter Wall

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Thank you, Steve.  It's good to be back, though I'm not sure how long I will 
last this time--that time-consuming thing...

On Sep 16, 2011, at 10:53 PM, seventhray1 wrote:

> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> >> Dear, dear, Robin,
>  snip
> 
> Bless your Catholic soul
> 
> Good to have you back Mark 
> 
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>> Dear, dear, Robin,
  snip

Bless your Catholic soul

Good to have you back Mark

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

This gave me the grins.  Thanks.
I'm reading a few books by this wonderful woman, Mariana Caplan.  She's really 
made quite a study of it and has a great grasp and insight into the whole 
spiritual path thing.  I read Eyes Wide Open first.  I heartily recommend it.  
I'm reading The Guru Question now.  In it she explicates all about that, but 
also uses her own path as examples of what one might encounter.  Her 
description of her first encounter with her own teacher when she met him in 
Thiruvannaamalai, an American madman named Lee Lozowick of the crazy wisdom 
traditions whose teacher was Yogi Ramsuratkumar, is great.  Upon taking one 
look at her, he spent 40 minutes vivisecting her with merciless but purely 
objective discernment which her ego was horrified by, but her spirit perceived 
as pure love.  Of course there was an audience there, as well.  First he asked 
her if she wanted to know what was going on with her.  When she said yes, he 
asked her if she were sure.  He only started in on her after her second assent. 
 Later, a bunch of people there invited her to meet with them and spent the 
whole time talking about how horrible Lee was to her.  She heard them out, but 
already knew Lee was her teacher.
I wish I could do that.  But it seems I have to get to at least spend a little 
time with a person first, though there often are things I believe I can 
objectively see right away.  It took me years with M.
Re Peter, maybe his stroke knocked some of his conditioning out the window, 
too.  But, again, my experience of him was almost 40 years ago.
A tiny bit re the LW.  But you did pretty well...:-)
m

On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:28 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> I think I am going to return to my purported Unity Consciousness, make you my 
> skin boy, and then years later, read what you have to say about me: this, so 
> I can get a true insight into myself. Because I think you might be able to 
> tell me something—if you knew me like you get to know others—that I as yet 
> still don't know about myself. The way you objectively carve someone up, it 
> seems to me like impersonal surgery; therefore true. I am already getting—at 
> least from the past—a fuller picture of Peter Wallace. Again, that picture 
> does not undermine my recent experience; but I can sense, in terms of his 
> personal history at least, there were thing to overcome. Has he overcome 
> them? That fascinates me, because his performance on this video did not 
> suggest the things that were no doubt true about him in the past.
> 
> Got to cut it off here, Mark, as I mortify the longwindedness temptation. 
> Which is obviously now that it has been put into a post by *you* has to point 
> up some compensation in me for insecurity about *something*. What, I am not 
> sure. But with you I got to keep what's wrong with me hidden—at least until 
> I'm ready to hear it.
> 
> No, so far it's pretty straight between us. That's my experience anyhow.
> 
> But that "pulverizing" insight you gave to David Sieveking (re: MMY), it 
> stays with me still.
> 
> Amazing insight, that.
> 
> Meanwhile, my experience of Peter Wallace remains what it was.
> 
> Robin
> 
> P.S. These further remarks about PW still have that signature objectivity. No 
> personal animus shows at all. Therefore the "objective vulnerability" thing. 
> LW = longwindedness: did it get me at the end here, Mark? Hope not.
> r
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
> >
> > Yes, loving the deep end and long windedness, but always appreciated, at 
> > least by me...
> > Yes, of course I considered the possibility that, over the years, the 
> > arrogance, assaultiveness and, even, in some ways, simple-mindedness that I 
> > perceived in him nearly forty years ago has been tempered or even fully 
> > released. And there is always the possibility that my judgmentalness and 
> > projection distorted my experience of him back then. I didn't spend a whole 
> > lot of time in his company. But, as I said, I would be surprised if he were 
> > fully the saint you seemed to be depicting. I experienced him, too, in this 
> > video, as being sincere and convincing and at rest within himself. But 
> > wholly benign? That's what we see in the video, but if that were really 
> > true of him now (Is anyone on the planet wholly benign?) then he really has 
> > gone through quite a transformation.
> > Anybody there know him personally now that can give more feedback?
> > And thank you for your kind words of me and your transmission. Always back 
> > at you as well. I will never need reminding of everything that happened 
> > between us, though I realize that some of what you wrote may here be for 
> > the benefit of others, as well.
> > m
> > 
> > On Sep 16, 2011, at 1:48 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear Mark,
> > > 
> > > Very grateful, as always, for this thoughtful and discerning post. I 
> > > searched for evidence (in general) of what you have told me here (of 
> > > course I k

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[whynotnow7]

Yeah, I enjoyed hearing him talk, a lot. The goofy looking guy, not so much, 
but he didn't interrupt very often.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
> Peter Wallace is a great, well spoken man of dignity and lessons in life. 
> Nice video shared here and comments. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> >
> > NOTE: I inadvertently referred to Peter Wallace as Peter Russell. I have 
> > amended this mistake, and I apologize—there is of course a Peter Russell TM 
> > teacher, but I doubt very much he is where Peter Wallace is. RC
> > 
> > P.S. Rick, any way you can delete that last post, the unamended version of 
> > this one?
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Dick Mays,
> > > 
> > > I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter 
> > > Wallace's talk here is the best thing that has ever come out of the 
> > > Movement. Him. His credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His 
> > > humility. His goodness. Quite an awesome experience, especially for 
> > > someone with my perspective on Maharishi and TM. No matter what: Peter 
> > > Wallace testifies to two things: God gave him a beautiful soul and 2. His 
> > > association with Maharishi and TM was unreservedly positive.
> > > 
> > > I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my 
> > > consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true 
> > > (about the East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a 
> > > personality that is authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He 
> > > compels us with the quality of his person and the quality of his 
> > > consciousness.
> > > 
> > > Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the 
> > > Movement, but everything that led me to make this break is disproven and 
> > > repudiated by the living personal performance of this human being, now 
> > > living in Fairfield.
> > > 
> > > Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the 
> > > promise of TM is.
> > > 
> > > I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would 
> > > rather have had Peter Wallace occupy the physical space alone, since 
> > > Peter Russell—at least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any 
> > > obvious flaws (I mean as an example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not 
> > > as subtle or innocently deft in his efforts to promote TM and MMY. 
> > > 
> > > I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) 
> > > of the good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Wallace's extraordinary spirit 
> > > here, as it expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems 
> > > almost a supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee 
> > > Maharishi's Movement now.
> > > 
> > > But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Wallace, out of the depths 
> > > of his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in 
> > > the universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience 
> > > that opened up in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching 
> > > his face and gestures.
> > > 
> > > Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.
> > > 
> > > And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.
> > > 
> > > How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to 
> > > Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person 
> > > Peter Wallace, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I 
> > > am to go by my subjective experience watching this video.
> > > 
> > > Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter 
> > > Wallace? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM 
> > > Movement—and prefer it to be this way.
> > > 
> > > As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another 
> > > human being, I have to say: Peter Wallace, he is the real deal. And he 
> > > got to be that way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.
> > > 
> > > Peter Wallace in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of 
> > > Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Wallace 
> > > himself, has ever made this claim; evidently he has not).
> > > 
> > > Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who 
> > > in his person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.
> > > 
> > > I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with 
> > > Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include 
> > > every single teacher of TM.
> > > 
> > > I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and 
> > > exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter 
> > > Wallace.
> > > 
> > > Robin
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Forwarded from a friend:
> > > > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

I think I am going to return to my purported Unity Consciousness, make you my 
skin boy, and then years later, read what you have to say about me: this, so I 
can get a true insight into myself. Because I think you might be able to tell 
me something—if you knew me like you get to know others—that I as yet still 
don't know about myself. The way you objectively carve someone up, it seems to 
me like impersonal surgery; therefore true. I am already getting—at least from 
the past—a fuller picture of Peter Wallace. Again, that picture does not 
undermine my recent experience; but I can sense, in terms of his personal 
history at least, there were thing to overcome. Has he overcome them? That 
fascinates me, because his performance on this video did not suggest the things 
that were no doubt true about him in the past.

Got to cut it off here, Mark, as I mortify the longwindedness temptation. Which 
is obviously now that it has been put into a post by *you* has to point up some 
compensation in me for insecurity about *something*. What, I am not sure. But 
with you I got to keep what's wrong with me hidden—at least until I'm ready to 
hear it.

No, so far it's pretty straight between us. That's my experience anyhow.

But that "pulverizing" insight you gave to David Sieveking (re: MMY), it stays 
with me still.

Amazing insight, that.

Meanwhile, my experience of Peter Wallace remains what it was.

Robin

P.S. These further remarks about PW still have that signature objectivity. No 
personal animus shows at all. Therefore the "objective vulnerability" thing. LW 
= longwindedness: did it get me at the end here, Mark? Hope not.
r

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> Yes, loving the deep end and long windedness, but always appreciated, at 
> least by me...
> Yes, of course I considered the possibility that, over the years, the 
> arrogance, assaultiveness and, even, in some ways, simple-mindedness that I 
> perceived in him nearly forty years ago has been tempered or even fully 
> released.  And there is always the possibility that my judgmentalness and 
> projection distorted my experience of him back then.  I didn't spend a whole 
> lot of time in his company.  But, as I said, I would be surprised if he were 
> fully the saint you seemed to be depicting.  I experienced him, too, in this 
> video, as being sincere and convincing and at rest within himself.  But 
> wholly benign?  That's what we see in the video, but if that were really true 
> of him now (Is anyone on the planet wholly benign?) then he really has gone 
> through quite a transformation.
> Anybody there know him personally now that can give more feedback?
> And thank you for your kind words of me and your transmission.  Always back 
> at you as well.  I will never need reminding of everything that happened 
> between us, though I realize that some of what you wrote may here be for the 
> benefit of others, as well.
> m
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 1:48 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > Dear Mark,
> > 
> > Very grateful, as always, for this thoughtful and discerning post. I 
> > searched for evidence (in general) of what you have told me here (of course 
> > I knew nothing about Peter Wallace, and naturally was entirely ignorant of 
> > specific more ambivalent takes on him by persons who were close to him—as I 
> > assume you were)—and missed it altogether. He (PW) came off as utterly 
> > sincere and convincing. But when I read your remarks here below, I must fit 
> > this counter-data into my software (the software of how my sensibilities 
> > operate in the world of experience and people). All I know is: the 
> > vibration coming off of this person struck me as wholly benign and 
> > deservedly earned (by his suffering, by the range of his experience, by his 
> > singular devotion to a Master). I am not going to press you for more 
> > details about how my impression of him (from this video) runs up against 
> > behaviour observed by other human beings (who have the privileged 
> > perspective of first hand knowledge). Is it possible he got beyond some of 
> > this "quirky, lunatic, dark side"? Or when you watched this 41 minute 
> > video, you felt, latently, the presence, still, of those traits consistent 
> > with what you tell me here.
> > 
> > I concur with much of what you say after this: viz. the significance of his 
> > [PW's] pre-Maharishi spiritual associations; the more supernaturally 
> > inspired performance of Maharishi in those earlier days; the idea of grace 
> > touching that whole [W] family (I don't know Keith Wallace at all, but he 
> > too has always struck me as gentle, intelligent, and sincere—without the 
> > distortions that seem to stick to so many leaders of the Movement, 
> > stubbornly resisting whatever efficacy TM has to smooth them out).
> > 
> > I will always reserve a special place of respect for and vulnerability to 
> > you, Mark, because—I know you don't forget this—you, through your 
> > e

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:10 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > If you will permit me to say so, vajradhatu, this judgment does not produce 
> > the experiential evidence (immediate, intimate, since it must be based upon 
> > *what you travelled through in watching that video*) of its truthfulness. 
> > Sure one can pluck the words PW uses *right out of the context within which 
> > they were uttered* and make them do what you want them to do. Certainly, 
> > someone else other than PW could say the very same thing, and the 
> > impression thus created justify what you charge him with here in this post. 
> > But that's not what I get off of this video. 
> 
> It would probably be impossible, IMO, for most hard-core TM teachers to not 
> empathize with Mr. Wallace. Such story-telling reawakens such tender, 
> long-lost ghosts of memory. It's the same kind of stuff TMers would stay up 
> at night talking about to the wee hours of the morn, story after story, on 
> course after course. So when such stories invoke that sentimental past, we're 
> often "hooked".
> 
> Of course, once he started waxing philosophically on Keith, who unbeknownst 
> to most hardcore TM fans, was exposed for staging the data in the Scientific 
> American article decades ago. Yep, that's right, Wallace staged the famous 
> "TM gives deep rest, deeper than sleep" canard. 
> 
> But of course now we know that most TM research data was massaged. Damned 
> statistics!

RESPONSE: These remarks don't represent the experiential context of TM. Are you 
a meditator? a former TM teacher? Not that (if you are not a TMer) this 
invalidates your point of view—but I feel as if I am reading about the 
experience and perspective of someone who did not submit himself to the 
Puja—nor to the transcendent movement within his mind, of TM itself. As far as 
TM is concerned, I intuit you are tone-deaf [when it comes to TM]. But standing 
apart from this, of course you are legitimately entitled to your evaluation of 
the merits of my impression of Peter Wallace.

If you have never gone down on your knees in front of the portrait of Guru Dev, 
your comments make much more sense to me. Just as Rick Archer's guests on 
BatGap (unless, like Phil Goldberg they are connected to TM and Maharishi) no 
nothing of what appears to be the unique context of spiritual reality one comes 
to know (and it stays with one) through TM—and most emphatically through 
initiating people into this practice.

All those, especially initiators, on this forum share a common metaphysical 
denominator: I think you would have to have join the club to really appreciate 
Peter Wallace.

But perhaps I am myself just failing to get the biological and psychological 
evidence of your association with TM. TM and MMY: these are realities which 
make themselves familiar to us in the deepest way; at least this is what I have 
found since I began to meditate. And then initiating people into TM—that takes 
things to yet another level.

If Keith Wallace did what you say he did, then that was wrong. But it (this act 
by Peter's brother) does not impugn the truthfulness of the impression that 
Peter Wallace made on me.

You seem held up on the level of *content* alone; seemingly lacking the quality 
of TM engrams in your nervous system which would make you really know what is 
going on. Not that I would recommend you take up the practice of TM.

If you are a meditator, much less a former initiator, then my intuition has 
failed me in a serious way. And this concerns me. You see, vajradhatu, the 
effects of TM (and even MMY)—and initiating—they go well beyond our conscious 
awareness.

At that level you seem an innocent.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Yes, loving the deep end and long windedness, but always appreciated, at least 
by me...
Yes, of course I considered the possibility that, over the years, the 
arrogance, assaultiveness and, even, in some ways, simple-mindedness that I 
perceived in him nearly forty years ago has been tempered or even fully 
released.  And there is always the possibility that my judgmentalness and 
projection distorted my experience of him back then.  I didn't spend a whole 
lot of time in his company.  But, as I said, I would be surprised if he were 
fully the saint you seemed to be depicting.  I experienced him, too, in this 
video, as being sincere and convincing and at rest within himself.  But wholly 
benign?  That's what we see in the video, but if that were really true of him 
now (Is anyone on the planet wholly benign?) then he really has gone through 
quite a transformation.
Anybody there know him personally now that can give more feedback?
And thank you for your kind words of me and your transmission.  Always back at 
you as well.  I will never need reminding of everything that happened between 
us, though I realize that some of what you wrote may here be for the benefit of 
others, as well.
m

On Sep 16, 2011, at 1:48 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> Dear Mark,
> 
> Very grateful, as always, for this thoughtful and discerning post. I searched 
> for evidence (in general) of what you have told me here (of course I knew 
> nothing about Peter Wallace, and naturally was entirely ignorant of specific 
> more ambivalent takes on him by persons who were close to him—as I assume you 
> were)—and missed it altogether. He (PW) came off as utterly sincere and 
> convincing. But when I read your remarks here below, I must fit this 
> counter-data into my software (the software of how my sensibilities operate 
> in the world of experience and people). All I know is: the vibration coming 
> off of this person struck me as wholly benign and deservedly earned (by his 
> suffering, by the range of his experience, by his singular devotion to a 
> Master). I am not going to press you for more details about how my impression 
> of him (from this video) runs up against behaviour observed by other human 
> beings (who have the privileged perspective of first hand knowledge). Is it 
> possible he got beyond some of this "quirky, lunatic, dark side"? Or when you 
> watched this 41 minute video, you felt, latently, the presence, still, of 
> those traits consistent with what you tell me here.
> 
> I concur with much of what you say after this: viz. the significance of his 
> [PW's] pre-Maharishi spiritual associations; the more supernaturally inspired 
> performance of Maharishi in those earlier days; the idea of grace touching 
> that whole [W] family (I don't know Keith Wallace at all, but he too has 
> always struck me as gentle, intelligent, and sincere—without the distortions 
> that seem to stick to so many leaders of the Movement, stubbornly resisting 
> whatever efficacy TM has to smooth them out).
> 
> I will always reserve a special place of respect for and vulnerability to 
> you, Mark, because—I know you don't forget this—you, through your experiences 
> of Maharishi, as described in one particular post, objectified Maharishi for 
> me (as Judith Bourque had done in a very different way in her book): quite 
> spontaneously, mechanically, even, allowing me to see him *as a man*, as a 
> human being. This comprehension of Maharishi was delivered, then, though an 
> entirely objective process: Mark Landau, without necessarily consciously 
> being right up to this truth, nevertheless took in who Maharishi really was; 
> and this truth was transferred to me (without, I think, you even realizing 
> this, Mark) such that I was able to see the man behind the mask. This was a 
> form of liberation for me. And it has stayed with me, even though, as I 
> discovered subsequently, there was still a ways to go in breaking down my 
> disciple-to-Master connection to Maharishi.
> 
> You got me free (or rather reality did through you) at the most fundamental 
> level though. Your words in that post, Mark, then, carried the subtext of 
> truth—and, as you know, I chalk this up to what I have referred to as your 
> "objective vulnerability"—in most people, vulnerability is mostly subjective; 
> in your case—although you obviously have the subjective form of this—you also 
> carry with you a faculty of sensitivity which is entirely independent of your 
> personal history—and maybe even operates mostly oblivious to your conscious 
> experience. But it is there, as proven by what was meta-psychologically 
> delivered up to me, who was held in a kind of mystical trance. You—via this 
> objective vulnerability—broke that trance.
> 
> Back to Peter Wallace: he did score big with me, Mark, and he still does. 
> That is to say, what you say about him here, although I intuit it is 
> accurate, has not qualified the impression he made upon me during that tape

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> >
> > Forwarded from a friend:
> > 
> > 
> > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> > well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> > 
> > JAI GURU DEV
> > 
> > WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> 
> 
> Indeed !
> 
> Pay special attention to the story were Ananda Mayi Ma explains Maharishi's 
> role in the world and his relationship to Guru Dev, in the room full of 
> so-called Pundits.
> 
> Someone should interview Peter Wallace without interrupting this saintly 
> american.
> 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU

No Rick, I was not suggesting you :-) My thinking was more Time Magazine. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Vaj]

On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:10 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> If you will permit me to say so, vajradhatu, this judgment does not produce 
> the experiential evidence (immediate, intimate, since it must be based upon 
> *what you travelled through in watching that video*) of its truthfulness. 
> Sure one can pluck the words PW uses *right out of the context within which 
> they were uttered* and make them do what you want them to do. Certainly, 
> someone else other than PW could say the very same thing, and the impression 
> thus created justify what you charge him with here in this post. But that's 
> not what I get off of this video. 

It would probably be impossible, IMO, for most hard-core TM teachers to not 
empathize with Mr. Wallace. Such story-telling reawakens such tender, long-lost 
ghosts of memory. It's the same kind of stuff TMers would stay up at night 
talking about to the wee hours of the morn, story after story, on course after 
course. So when such stories invoke that sentimental past, we're often "hooked".

Of course, once he started waxing philosophically on Keith, who unbeknownst to 
most hardcore TM fans, was exposed for staging the data in the Scientific 
American article decades ago. Yep, that's right, Wallace staged the famous "TM 
gives deep rest, deeper than sleep" canard. 

But of course now we know that most TM research data was massaged. Damned 
statistics!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
>
> Forwarded from a friend:
> 
> 
> There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> 
> JAI GURU DEV
> 
> WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.


Indeed !

Pay special attention to the story were Ananda Mayi Ma explains Maharishi's 
role in the world and his relationship to Guru Dev, in the room full of 
so-called Pundits.

Someone should interview Peter Wallace without interrupting this saintly 
american.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

If you will permit me to say so, vajradhatu, this judgment does not produce the 
experiential evidence (immediate, intimate, since it must be based upon *what 
you travelled through in watching that video*) of its truthfulness. Sure one 
can pluck the words PW uses  *right out of the context within which they were 
uttered* and make them do what you want them to do. Certainly, someone else 
other than PW could say the very same thing, and the impression thus created 
justify what you charge him with here in this post. But that's not what I get 
off of this video. I happen to believe in the principle you put forward here—I 
mean as applied (generally) to dyed-in-the-wool TMers; but in this instance at 
least, I think you wrong. Peter Wallace, does not just extol the virtues of 
Maharishi; what gets conveyed in this video is a life truly, deeply lived, and 
it is out of the depths of that experience that Peter Russell acquires his 
credibility—and which accounts for how his words fasten so felicitously upon 
one's consciousness.

I brought my necessary prejudice to viewing this tape; I was converted (not to 
TM, not to MMY; but to the radical truth that there can be exceptions to what 
has come to be true for me; namely, that TM and MMY are problematic in their 
influence over human beings). Peter Wallace—no matter what shaped him to be 
what he is—is a human being whose point of view I respect and trust. Of course 
I wonder how he deals with the facts which run counter to his conviction of the 
splendid loveliness of Maharishi; but however he manages to maintain his 
judgment of Maharishi, it is working for him. He is for me a remarkable human 
being period.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Another Kool-Aide-a-Holic fool.
> 
> On Sep 16, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Dick Mays wrote:
> 
> > Begin forwarded message:
> > 
> > Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> > 
> > Very precious, some of same material as MUM talk, but extra depth in other 
> > areas
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU&feature=relmfu
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

Dear Mark,

Very grateful, as always, for this thoughtful and discerning post. I searched 
for evidence (in general) of what you have told me here (of course I knew 
nothing about Peter Wallace, and naturally was entirely ignorant of specific 
more ambivalent takes on him by persons who were close to him—as I assume you 
were)—and missed it altogether. He (PW) came off as utterly sincere and 
convincing. But when I read your remarks here below, I must fit this 
counter-data into my software (the software of how my sensibilities operate in 
the world of experience and people). All I know is: the vibration coming off of 
this person struck me as wholly benign and deservedly earned (by his suffering, 
by the range of his experience, by his singular devotion to a Master). I am not 
going to press you for more details about how my impression of him (from this 
video) runs up against behaviour observed by other human beings (who have the 
privileged perspective of first hand knowledge). Is it possible he got beyond 
some of this "quirky, lunatic, dark side"? Or when you watched this 41 minute 
video, you felt, latently, the presence, still, of those traits consistent with 
what you tell me here.

I concur with much of what you say after this: viz. the significance of his 
[PW's] pre-Maharishi spiritual associations; the more supernaturally inspired 
performance of Maharishi in those earlier days; the idea of grace touching that 
whole [W] family (I don't know Keith Wallace at all, but he too has always 
struck me as gentle, intelligent, and sincere—without the distortions that seem 
to stick to so many leaders of the Movement, stubbornly resisting whatever 
efficacy TM has to smooth them out).

I will always reserve a special place of respect for and vulnerability to you, 
Mark, because—I know you don't forget this—you, through your experiences of 
Maharishi, as described in one particular post, objectified Maharishi for me 
(as Judith Bourque had done in a very different way in her book): quite 
spontaneously, mechanically, even, allowing me to see him *as a man*, as a 
human being. This comprehension of Maharishi was delivered, then, though an 
entirely objective process: Mark Landau, without necessarily consciously being 
right up to this truth, nevertheless took in who Maharishi really was; and this 
truth was transferred to me (without, I think, you even realizing this, Mark) 
such that I was able to see the man behind the mask. This was a form of 
liberation for me. And it has stayed with me, even though, as I discovered 
subsequently, there was still a ways to go in breaking down my 
disciple-to-Master connection to Maharishi.

You got me free (or rather reality did through you) at the most fundamental 
level though. Your words in that post, Mark, then, carried the subtext of 
truth—and, as you know, I chalk this up to what I have referred to as your 
"objective vulnerability"—in most people, vulnerability is mostly subjective; 
in your case—although you obviously have the subjective form of this—you also 
carry with you a faculty of sensitivity which is entirely independent of your 
personal history—and maybe even operates mostly oblivious to your conscious 
experience. But it is there, as proven by what was meta-psychologically 
delivered up to me, who was held in a kind of mystical trance. You—via this 
objective vulnerability—broke that trance.

Back to Peter Wallace: he did score big with me, Mark, and he still does. That 
is to say, what you say about him here, although I intuit it is accurate, has 
not qualified the impression he made upon me during that tape. Maybe you can 
explain this better than I could.

I am predisposed (by habit, by intention) to see the weakness in the effect of 
the Eastern paradigm upon the Western personality: in this case it went quite 
in the reverse direction: I saw the strength of what the East had done for the 
Westerner Peter Wallace—and I was amazed.

But at least factually I know more now, as I would never reject any impression 
you have formed of a given person, since the impression (that formed all by 
itself) carried inside of you of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi I believe to be the 
acutest of any person I have come across in the Movement. Who and what 
Maharishi was is inside the soul and nervous system of Mark Landau. This is a 
particular belief of mine—regardless of whether Mark Landau himself can always 
do justice to the depth and exactness of that impression.

I will shut up now, Mark—before FFL readers here start holding their noses. 
(Some of them don't like things to get too personal—can't blame them really.)

Sending you whatever love and positivity I have within me to wherever you are.

Robin



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau  wrote:
>
> Dear, dear, Robin,
> You so love the deep end (as, I must admit, I do, too)...
> My experience of Peter Wallace is confined to the seventies, but, back then, 
> he definitely had his quirky, lunatic, ab

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

Thanks. I was able to delete that first post, but not the second, since I have 
posted a third, which does not contain the introductory remarks annexed to the 
second post (and also corrects another reference to PR instead of PW). I'll try 
it again (getting rid of that second post); but if I can't, perhaps you guys 
can do something from there?

And then delete THIS one too!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> >
> > P.S. Rick, any way you can delete that last post, the unamended
> > version of this one?
> 
> You can delete your own posts off the FFL website.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Mark Landau]

Dear, dear, Robin,
You so love the deep end (as, I must admit, I do, too)...
My experience of Peter Wallace is confined to the seventies, but, back then, he 
definitely had his quirky, lunatic, abrasive, dark side just like the rest of 
us.  I would be very surprised if that has changed, though, I too, was moved 
and enjoyably surprised by a) how he seemed here and b) some of his 
disclosures, which I hadn't previously known.  (And remember, too, what 
spontaneously motivated him and what he did before he even met M.  Perhaps that 
whole family was touched by grace.)
I have always felt that the best of M was more in evidence at the beginning and 
from there things progressively deteriorated.  Peter was blessed to get more of 
that early stuff and it seems to have stayed with him quite gracefully.
I have no question that there are many who have found a significant degree of 
peace and grace through M and TM.
Bless your Catholic soul,
m

On Sep 16, 2011, at 12:24 PM, maskedzebra wrote:

> Dear Dick Mays,
> 
> I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter Wallace's 
> talk here is the best thing that has ever come out of the Movement. Him. His 
> credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His humility. His goodness. Quite 
> an awesome experience, especially for someone with my perspective on 
> Maharishi and TM. No matter what: Peter Wallace testifies to two things: God 
> gave him a beautiful soul and 2. His association with Maharishi and TM was 
> unreservedly positive.
> 
> I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my 
> consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true (about 
> the East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a personality that 
> is authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He compels us with the 
> quality of his person and the quality of his consciousness.
> 
> Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the Movement, 
> but everything that led me to make this break is disproven and repudiated by 
> the living personal performance of this human being, now living in Fairfield.
> 
> Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the 
> promise of TM is.
> 
> I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would 
> rather have had Peter Russell occupy the physical space alone, since Peter 
> Russell—at least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any obvious flaws 
> (I mean as an example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not as subtle or 
> innocently deft in his efforts to promote TM and MMY. 
> 
> I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) of 
> the good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Russell's extraordinary spirit here, 
> as it expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems almost a 
> supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee Maharishi's Movement 
> now.
> 
> But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Russell, out of the depths of 
> his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in the 
> universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience that opened 
> up in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching his face and 
> gestures.
> 
> Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.
> 
> And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.
> 
> How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to 
> Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person 
> Peter Russell, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I am 
> to go by my subjective experience watching this video.
> 
> Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter 
> Russell? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM Movement—and 
> prefer it to be this way.
> 
> As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another human 
> being, I have to say: Peter Russell, he is the real deal. And he got to be 
> that way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.
> 
> Peter Russell in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of 
> Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Russell himself, 
> has ever made this claim; evidently he has not).
> 
> Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who in 
> his person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.
> 
> I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with 
> Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include every 
> single teacher of TM.
> 
> I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and 
> exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter 
> Russell.
> 
> Robin
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> >
> > Forwarded from a friend:
> > 
> > 
> > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> > well a

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> Dear Dick Mays,
>
> I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter Wallace's
talk here is the best thing that has ever come out of the Movement. Him. His
credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His humility. His goodness. Quite an
awesome experience, especially for someone with my perspective on Maharishi and
TM. No matter what: Peter Wallace testifies to two things: God gave him a
beautiful soul and 2. His association with Maharishi and TM was unreservedly
positive.
>
> I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my
consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true (about the
East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a personality that is
authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He compels us with the quality
of his person and the quality of his consciousness.
>
> Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the Movement,
but everything that led me to make this break is disproven and repudiated by the
living personal performance of this human being, now living in Fairfield.
>
> Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the
promise of TM is.
>
> I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would
rather have had Peter Wallace occupy the physical space alone, since Peter
Wallace—at least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any obvious flaws (I
mean as an example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not as subtle or innocently
deft in his efforts to promote TM and MMY.
>
> I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) of the
good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Wallace's extraordinary spirit here, as it
expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems almost a
supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee Maharishi's Movement now.
>
> But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Wallace, out of the depths of
his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in the
universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience that opened up
in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching his face and
gestures.
>
> Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.
>
> And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.
>
> How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to
Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person Peter
Wallace, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I am to go by
my subjective experience watching this video.
>
> Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter
Wallace? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM Movement—and
prefer it to be this way.
>
> As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another human
being, I have to say: Peter Wallace, he is the real deal. And he got to be that
way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.
>
> Peter Wallace in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of
Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Wallace himself, has
ever made this claim; evidently he has not).
>
> Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who in
his person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.
>
> I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with
Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include every
single teacher of TM.
>
> I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and
exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter Wallace.
>
> Robin
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> >
> > Forwarded from a friend:
> >
> >
> > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as
> > well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> >
> > JAI GURU DEV
> >
> > WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> >
> >
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> >
> > Very precious, some of same material as MUM talk, but extra depth in
> > other areas
> >
> >
http://www.youtube.co\
m/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU&feature=relmfu
> >
>


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
>
> Forwarded from a friend:
> 
> 
> There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> 
> JAI GURU DEV
> 
> WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> 
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> 
> Very precious, some of same material as MUM talk, but extra depth in 
> other areas
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU&feature=relmfu
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[obbajeeba]

Peter Wallace is a great, well spoken man of dignity and lessons in life. 
Nice video shared here and comments. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> NOTE: I inadvertently referred to Peter Wallace as Peter Russell. I have 
> amended this mistake, and I apologize—there is of course a Peter Russell TM 
> teacher, but I doubt very much he is where Peter Wallace is. RC
> 
> P.S. Rick, any way you can delete that last post, the unamended version of 
> this one?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Dick Mays,
> > 
> > I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter Wallace's 
> > talk here is the best thing that has ever come out of the Movement. Him. 
> > His credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His humility. His goodness. 
> > Quite an awesome experience, especially for someone with my perspective on 
> > Maharishi and TM. No matter what: Peter Wallace testifies to two things: 
> > God gave him a beautiful soul and 2. His association with Maharishi and TM 
> > was unreservedly positive.
> > 
> > I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my 
> > consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true 
> > (about the East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a 
> > personality that is authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He 
> > compels us with the quality of his person and the quality of his 
> > consciousness.
> > 
> > Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the Movement, 
> > but everything that led me to make this break is disproven and repudiated 
> > by the living personal performance of this human being, now living in 
> > Fairfield.
> > 
> > Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the 
> > promise of TM is.
> > 
> > I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would 
> > rather have had Peter Wallace occupy the physical space alone, since Peter 
> > Russell—at least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any obvious flaws 
> > (I mean as an example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not as subtle or 
> > innocently deft in his efforts to promote TM and MMY. 
> > 
> > I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) of 
> > the good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Wallace's extraordinary spirit here, 
> > as it expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems almost a 
> > supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee Maharishi's Movement 
> > now.
> > 
> > But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Wallace, out of the depths 
> > of his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in 
> > the universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience that 
> > opened up in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching his 
> > face and gestures.
> > 
> > Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.
> > 
> > And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.
> > 
> > How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to 
> > Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person 
> > Peter Wallace, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I 
> > am to go by my subjective experience watching this video.
> > 
> > Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter 
> > Wallace? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM Movement—and 
> > prefer it to be this way.
> > 
> > As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another 
> > human being, I have to say: Peter Wallace, he is the real deal. And he got 
> > to be that way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.
> > 
> > Peter Wallace in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of 
> > Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Wallace 
> > himself, has ever made this claim; evidently he has not).
> > 
> > Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who in 
> > his person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.
> > 
> > I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with 
> > Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include every 
> > single teacher of TM.
> > 
> > I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and 
> > exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter 
> > Wallace.
> > 
> > Robin
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> > >
> > > Forwarded from a friend:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> > > well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> > > 
> > > JAI GURU DEV
> > > 
> > > WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Begin forwarded message:
> > > 
> > > Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> > > 
> > > Very precious, some

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[obbajeeba]

Peter Wallace is a great spoken man of dignity and lessons in life. 
Nice video shared here. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> NOTE: I inadvertently referred to Peter Wallace as Peter Russell. I have 
> amended this mistake, and I apologize—there is of course a Peter Russell TM 
> teacher, but I doubt very much he is where Peter Wallace is. RC
> 
> P.S. Rick, any way you can delete that last post, the unamended version of 
> this one?
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Dick Mays,
> > 
> > I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter Wallace's 
> > talk here is the best thing that has ever come out of the Movement. Him. 
> > His credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His humility. His goodness. 
> > Quite an awesome experience, especially for someone with my perspective on 
> > Maharishi and TM. No matter what: Peter Wallace testifies to two things: 
> > God gave him a beautiful soul and 2. His association with Maharishi and TM 
> > was unreservedly positive.
> > 
> > I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my 
> > consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true 
> > (about the East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a 
> > personality that is authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He 
> > compels us with the quality of his person and the quality of his 
> > consciousness.
> > 
> > Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the Movement, 
> > but everything that led me to make this break is disproven and repudiated 
> > by the living personal performance of this human being, now living in 
> > Fairfield.
> > 
> > Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the 
> > promise of TM is.
> > 
> > I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would 
> > rather have had Peter Wallace occupy the physical space alone, since Peter 
> > Russell—at least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any obvious flaws 
> > (I mean as an example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not as subtle or 
> > innocently deft in his efforts to promote TM and MMY. 
> > 
> > I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) of 
> > the good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Wallace's extraordinary spirit here, 
> > as it expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems almost a 
> > supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee Maharishi's Movement 
> > now.
> > 
> > But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Wallace, out of the depths 
> > of his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in 
> > the universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience that 
> > opened up in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching his 
> > face and gestures.
> > 
> > Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.
> > 
> > And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.
> > 
> > How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to 
> > Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person 
> > Peter Wallace, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I 
> > am to go by my subjective experience watching this video.
> > 
> > Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter 
> > Wallace? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM Movement—and 
> > prefer it to be this way.
> > 
> > As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another 
> > human being, I have to say: Peter Wallace, he is the real deal. And he got 
> > to be that way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.
> > 
> > Peter Wallace in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of 
> > Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Wallace 
> > himself, has ever made this claim; evidently he has not).
> > 
> > Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who in 
> > his person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.
> > 
> > I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with 
> > Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include every 
> > single teacher of TM.
> > 
> > I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and 
> > exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter 
> > Wallace.
> > 
> > Robin
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> > >
> > > Forwarded from a friend:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> > > well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> > > 
> > > JAI GURU DEV
> > > 
> > > WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Begin forwarded message:
> > > 
> > > Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> > > 
> > > Very precious, some of same material a

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[Alex Stanley]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> P.S. Rick, any way you can delete that last post, the unamended
> version of this one?

You can delete your own posts off the FFL website.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

NOTE: I inadvertently referred to Peter Wallace as Peter Russell. I have 
amended this mistake, and I apologize—there is of course a Peter Russell TM 
teacher, but I doubt very much he is where Peter Wallace is. RC

P.S. Rick, any way you can delete that last post, the unamended version of this 
one?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
> Dear Dick Mays,
> 
> I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter Wallace's 
> talk here is the best thing that has ever come out of the Movement. Him. His 
> credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His humility. His goodness. Quite 
> an awesome experience, especially for someone with my perspective on 
> Maharishi and TM. No matter what: Peter Wallace testifies to two things: God 
> gave him a beautiful soul and 2. His association with Maharishi and TM was 
> unreservedly positive.
> 
> I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my 
> consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true (about 
> the East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a personality that 
> is authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He compels us with the 
> quality of his person and the quality of his consciousness.
> 
> Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the Movement, 
> but everything that led me to make this break is disproven and repudiated by 
> the living personal performance of this human being, now living in Fairfield.
> 
> Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the 
> promise of TM is.
> 
> I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would 
> rather have had Peter Wallace occupy the physical space alone, since Peter 
> Russell—at least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any obvious flaws 
> (I mean as an example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not as subtle or 
> innocently deft in his efforts to promote TM and MMY. 
> 
> I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) of 
> the good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Wallace's extraordinary spirit here, 
> as it expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems almost a 
> supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee Maharishi's Movement 
> now.
> 
> But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Wallace, out of the depths of 
> his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in the 
> universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience that opened 
> up in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching his face and 
> gestures.
> 
> Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.
> 
> And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.
> 
> How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to 
> Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person 
> Peter Wallace, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I am 
> to go by my subjective experience watching this video.
> 
> Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter 
> Wallace? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM Movement—and 
> prefer it to be this way.
> 
> As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another human 
> being, I have to say: Peter Wallace, he is the real deal. And he got to be 
> that way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.
> 
> Peter Wallace in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of 
> Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Wallace himself, 
> has ever made this claim; evidently he has not).
> 
> Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who in 
> his person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.
> 
> I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with 
> Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include every 
> single teacher of TM.
> 
> I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and 
> exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter 
> Wallace.
> 
> Robin
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
> >
> > Forwarded from a friend:
> > 
> > 
> > There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> > well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> > 
> > JAI GURU DEV
> > 
> > WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Begin forwarded message:
> > 
> > Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> > 
> > Very precious, some of same material as MUM talk, but extra depth in 
> > other areas
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU&feature=relmfu
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: Recent video by Peter Wallace

[maskedzebra]

Dear Dick Mays,

I don't know you, but I am determined to let you know that Peter Wallace's talk 
here is the best thing that has ever come out of the Movement. Him. His 
credibility. His gentleness. His serenity. His humility. His goodness. Quite an 
awesome experience, especially for someone with my perspective on Maharishi and 
TM. No matter what: Peter Wallace testifies to two things: God gave him a 
beautiful soul and 2. His association with Maharishi and TM was unreservedly 
positive.

I like the tremendous dissonance this sets up in my heart and in my 
consciousness: to see someone embody so much of what is good and true (about 
the East, but even about the West too): Peter Wallace is a personality that is 
authentically wise, compassionate, and selfless. He compels us with the quality 
of his person and the quality of his consciousness.

Magnificent. I am a thorough-going apostate from MMY, TM, and the Movement, but 
everything that led me to make this break is disproven and repudiated by the 
living personal performance of this human being, now living in Fairfield.

Peter Wallace is the only [for me] really convincing exemplar of what the 
promise of TM is.

I understand the presence of Jim Mayhew (sp?) in this video, but I would rather 
have had Peter Russell occupy the physical space alone, since Peter Russell—at 
least to my intense scrutiny of him—is without any obvious flaws (I mean as an 
example of a TM teacher). Jim Mayhew is not as subtle or innocently deft in his 
efforts to promote TM and MMY. 

I am amazed and glad there is some evidence (embodied in a human being) of the 
good that TM and MMY can do. Peter Russell's extraordinary spirit here, as it 
expresses itself in words (memories of MMY and India), seems almost a 
supernatural anomaly juxtaposed to others who oversee Maharishi's Movement now.

But I take this event as a blessing. For Peter Russell, out of the depths of 
his soul, gave me something that I doubt I could get anywhere else in the 
universe. This, at least, is the verdict I pass on the experience that opened 
up in my whole nervous system just listening to him, watching his face and 
gestures.

Yes. I will say it. The first saint of the TM Movement.

And therefore a contradiction of everything I have come to believe.

How merciful for everyone there living in Fairfield who is still loyal to 
Maharishi, TM, and the TM Movement: the physical presence of this person Peter 
Russell, it may be about the best thing there is in Fairfield, if I am to go by 
my subjective experience watching this video.

Is it possible you could, Dick Mays, pass on this appreciation to Peter 
Russell? Even as I am, of course, persona non grata in the TM Movement—and 
prefer it to be this way.

As one human being witnessing the behaviour and personality of another human 
being, I have to say: Peter Russell, he is the real deal. And he got to be that 
way by an orthodox adherence to Maharishi and The Teaching.

Peter Russell in my judgment towers above anyone I have met (outside of 
Maharishi) who claims to be enlightened (not that he, Peter Russell himself, 
has ever made this claim; evidently he has not).

Anyway, Dick Mays, you get my point: this is a beautiful human being who in his 
person represents the wisdom of the East better than anyone I know.

I hope this video gets seen by everyone who ever had anything to do with 
Maharishi in a personal sense. That would, at the very least, include every 
single teacher of TM.

I am grateful to you, Dick Mays, for alerting me to something as rare and 
exquisite and real as this experience was that was given to me by Peter Russell.

Robin

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Dick Mays  wrote:
>
> Forwarded from a friend:
> 
> 
> There are some wonderful, rich stories in here about Maharishi as 
> well as Anandamayi Ma... Well worth listening to.
> 
> JAI GURU DEV
> 
> WE are so fortunate beyond our imagination.
> 
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> Subject: Recent video by Peter Wallace
> 
> Very precious, some of same material as MUM talk, but extra depth in 
> other areas
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOeh-dH97nU&feature=relmfu
>