Dear Robin, What a beautiful letter from a beautiful soul; the clarity and integrity of your love feels as sweet and gently pervasive as ever -- moreso even. I never dreamed you would someday read my account of our interaction; what an odd feeling of self-recognition that is! And the occult complexities were just for fun, a work of art, an attempted self-portrait, its details (I hope) easily ignorable if they don't resonate. I was also at the time still working things out, trying to fine-tune a hypothesis which accounted for all the raw data. Things have simplfied considerably since then.
I feel I do understand your need to integrate or account for all of us who interact with you. FWIW, sometime within the first few years of my posting here, Tom Pall expressed a fervent desire that Homeland Security would take me away and shoot me (and please correct me if I am misrepresenting you here, Tom), I suspect because I had just described my strong feeling that 9/11 was an inside job. But the effect of his posting was beautiful. I felt gut-punched, eviscerated, and actually did refrain from posting for a few days while I integrated "his" anger and wish that I would die -- in fact, "I" died yet again, internally, for those three days. And the result was that I found I had been repressing or ignoring my "Tom-persona" while identifying with a "compassionate persona" which appeared to be anti-Tom. (In my parlance, I had been ignoring my Red Man or Warrior while overemphasizing my Green Man or Compassionate Caregiver. The shadow-side or "demonic" of our Red Man is thwarted desire, fury, bullying and even indiscriminate killing, which when reintegrated ripens into zeal and a sense of divine timing or chronological order). In reintegrating my idea of Tom I found my unconditional love for him-Us again, and we have gotten along OK since then. (In my world, at least.) :-) Of course this may be of no value to you and have nothing whatsoever to do with you or your world, but who knows? I thought I would share it anyhow. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@...> wrote: > Dear Rory, > > Thank you very much for this. There is more of a loving intelligence that > comes through your writing (and that description of your encounter with me > back in 1982, well, it's so fair and objective and generous, I have always > appreciated how you attempted to get at the truth (or the reality) of what > was going on between us then). > > When someone responds positively to one, and there is real feeling there, it > seems as if the universe itself is being friendly. In what you have said > here, there is nothing but a true person speaking unaffectedlyyour sincerity > gets through to me. > > The question remains, however, whether Tom Pall's judgment of me is equally > sincere, not to say objectively true. I can't doubt his sincerity, but, if I > felt what he said reflected reality's judgment of me, I certainly would have > no choice but to leave off posting here. > > So, naturally, I am going to let myself be influenced more by what you have > said to me, Rory. If, however Tom's feelings have some real justification, > then I will have to hear him out. Meanwhile, it would be hard for me not to > experience that what you have told me hereand the love that carries your > wordsto be more congruent with the person that I am. > > I must suppose that my antipathy towards and disillusionment with my Master > is perhaps part of the explanation for Tom's reaction? Yes, the Romance of my > relationship with Maharishi was, so far, the greatest event of my life. At > its height, had I been told that Maharishi was not what he seemed, nor that > my experience of TM was metaphysically valid, I would have felt pity for the > person who told me this. > > But having renounced Maharishi, his Teaching, and TM in the comprehensive way > I have, I can understand Tom Pall's aversion to me and my posts (assuming he > is still loyal to Maharishi). If I, in the intensity of my love and adoration > of Maharishi had read anything like what I am now posting, well not > responding like Tom is, I would nevertheless be determined to counter-attack > in the fiercest and most uncompromising way. The critic of Maharishi and TM > would get my very best shot. It would, after all, be my religious duty to > respond this wayand I would believe I was only defending ultimate truth in > doing so. > > But perhaps in Tom's case it's more than this, or something other than this. > > Meanwhile I can believe that your more loving intention is the appropriate > one, and that Tom is fighting a rearguard action on behalf of Maharishi and > the TMOof course I don't know this. I don't know anything about Tom Pall. > But before reading what you wrote to me, Rory, I had very seriously > contemplated not posting again until the 9th of Julyat the earliest. Just to > let Tom's judgment have some effect. > > But you have persuaded me (love is like that, isn't it) to abandon this > tentative plan, and so I remain open to posting, even though I must respect > the experience of Tom's which gives him no alternative but to express his > intense disapproval of me. > > Who knows, perhaps God deems his judgment the more appropriate onein > comparison to yours. But I am praying this is not the case. > > If I may say it, in beginning to read your autobiography online I sense the > virtual symphony of feelings, intuitions, visions, inspirations which > musically and mystically play inside your consciousness. It is a little much > for me to follow you in all this, especially when it starts to get complexly > occult and mysterious. But your motives are transparent and authentic, so I > must believe you have acquired some grace and wisdom in your intricate > interface with religious truth. And I never sense someone dogmatic or > deceived, or disconnected from realityno matter how esoteric your ideas are. > I will persist in my attempt to read through to the end, although, as I say, > it is much easier (for me) in the beginningfor example your account of the > India course in 1980. That riveted me. In fact ANYONE'S careful reflections > on their experiences with Maharishi are always of extreme interest to me. > > Rory, I didn't set out to write at such length as I have. Perhaps I just > started to realize subconsciously that I somehow owed you the gratitude of > your unbiased reporting of your experience with me, when I was performing out > of the experience of my putative enlightenment (which has a place in your > autobiography). > > In any case I will just express my thanks once more for the support you have > given me by writing as you have. Because, believe me, Rory, it produced the > desired effect. > > MZ > > > > > > >
