The test of a person's sincerity is: how do they unconsciously compensate for what they do not and cannot know about why they are existing and why they are the particular who that is existing.
I see that even Curtis grants you some respect. Although in that BatGap interview with Rick Archer you convinced me of your sincerity with regard to Amma (in her role as your Guru), I have found, in nearly all my interactions with you, that you are provocative, insolent, insincere, and just plain wilful. Since in my belief system you cannot be God (the being who knows everything, who has created everything, who directs everything, who is immediately present to the infinite future), you must be categorized, like me, as a created being who is not in possession of all the facts which pertain to your origin, your existence, and your individual form. Not to say your special and unique destiny in the universe. This, it seems to me, is the problem, Ravi, for no matter what your agenda (excepting, as I say, this account of your experiences with Amma, which seem to me to be innocent and real) SEEMS to be, what I get is someone interested in only one thing: stirring the pot. I TRULY BELIEVE YOU HAVE NEVER ONCE, in any exchange I have read yet, OPENED YOURSELF UP (by your inward posture) TO THE PROPOSITION OF WANTING TO LEARN OR KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL. You are not serious in your relations with other human beings, Ravi. You are just dancing, playing, teasing, whirling, feinting, disguising, concealing, eluding, goading, posing. YOU WILL NOT AND CANNOT MAKE YOURSELF VULNERABLE TO ANOTHER HUMAN BEING. Not in any way whatsoever. What person who has loved you would testify that my description here does not accord with their experienceI mean in the end? Yes, you can take this post as insulting, demeaning, judgmental: but the real question is: AM I WRONG IN MY INTERPRETATION OF YOUR ACTIONS? I do not believe I am, because I don't think you are sincerely seeking to get anything from anyone. (Except, I must suppose, from Amma.) But your importunate hounding of me with various questions, those questions are merely a game you play. I sense NO DESIRE to have them answered. They representall your questions, challenges your way of trying to provoke me into responding, and as soon as I do, you will just keep playing with me. Nope. You are a trickster, a provocateur, a crazy gadflybut for what purpose? Perhaps only you know the answer to that, Ravi Yogi. Meanwhile I refuse to answer what you put to me, because I would be an idiot to do soand you would consider me secretly inside yourself, to be an idiot too. What is the proof of the truth of this judgment of you? That you will manifest not the slightest bewilderment, confusion, wonder, perplexity, concern over what I have saidBUT WILL COME BACK WITH A RESPONSE WHICH PERFECTLY DEMONSTRATES THE TRUTH OF WHAT I HAVE TOLD YOU HERE. Just watch: Here it comes. SEE? I told you. Even though as I write these last few words, I already know and see the future: and that future is a response which reveals that YOU COULD NOT IN THE LEAST BE INFLUENCED, AFFECTED, TOUCHED, SURPRISED BY ANYTHING I HAVE SAID. Realize, then, Ravi, that in every word you choose to write in a counter-post you will be exhibiting every one of the characteristics I have identified here in this post. Is this your cosmic fate, Ravi? I pray it is not. Because of how pointless this makes your life. Gauge the sincerity of this letter, then see whether there is any sort of reciprocity of sincerity once you have composed your post. There will be none, Ravi. There will be none. (And if this post gets me kicked off of FFL, so be it. I will not withdraw my comments for any reason.) --- In [email protected], "Ravi Yogi" <raviyogi@...> wrote: > > Dear MZ - I'm losing you. > I asked you for your experiences on becoming clean i.e becoming > enlightened or going beyond belief but instead I have is how you > switched from one set of dirty underwear (your beliefs on Vedic > philosophy/MMY) to another set of dirty underwear (Catholicism/Aquinas). > > > --- In [email protected], maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > Had I started to experience exactly what happened to me on that > mountain just above Arosa, Switzerland in September 1976having only > known (about) reality through the writing of Thomas Aquinasnow > realize, I am going to be totally honest hereI WOULD HAVE > IMMEDIATELY SENSED SOMETHING MYSTICALLY FOREIGN AND EVEN ANTITHETICAL TO > THE TRUTH I LEARNED FROM AQUINAS. > > > > Now you understand, authfriend, in this hypothetical situation, I did > not, before this moment, have any EXPERIENCE of realitybeyond my > ordinary waking state experience. That is, I am not, for purposes of > answering your question in the way that I believe draws out the meaning > and import that is behind the posing of this hypothetical situation, > assuming ANY contact with reality in any mystical or supernatural sense. > I have had, as it were, up until this decisive moment in my life, no > religious experiences whatsoevera very different antecedent > circumstance than what was the case when I historically (actually) went > through this enlightenment experience ('slipping into Unity'). > > >
