Agreed 100%. If this is how it is, I'm going to start checking in here again 
every day.
Great post!

--- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <rick@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks for this Mark. Awesome post.
> 
>  
> 
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Mark Landau
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 1:22 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi's Sandals
> 
>  
> 
>   
> 
> Wow, are we one dimensional?  I believe it's the sign of a developed being
> that he or she can easily hold all the paradoxes.  Not only can I have it
> both ways, but I must have it both ways and, beyond that, have it all ways
> that were, are or ever will be, if I am to do any justice to truth and
> reality.  That's a lot of ways.  I also believe that, ultimately, we must go
> beyond all the paradoxes and polarities, including the polarity of good and
> bad (and that, of course, doesn't mean that we rush out to do all the "bad"
> things we possibly can ASAP).
> 
>  
> 
> The truth of the matter, if anyone cares, is that, like Judith Bourke, who I
> find to be a wonderful, honest person, I was in love with him (no, prurient
> ones, not that way, though there are things I could say about that, too) and
> the notion and seeming experience that TM could transform the world for the
> better.  Why else would I work seven days a week for the movement for nearly
> five years and pay significantly to do so?  Are we not all some blend of the
> three gunas?  Aren't there glorious and dark things about all of us?
> 
>  
> 
> M was no different.  One of the most glorious things about him was his
> energy.  I lived and basked in it pretty much straight for the seven months
> I was skin boy and for a lot of the five years I was with him.  I went
> through withdrawal for two years when I lost it.
> 
>  
> 
> That's my voice in the background of DWTF when David cut to the archival
> footage of M entering the hall with Jerry carrying the skin saying something
> like, "It was like divine air came down from heaven and I got addicted to
> it."  Is that so very negative?
> 
>  
> 
> In one other sentence I said something like, "Remember how I said he could
> get into you and help you sleep?  He could also get into you and completely
> pulverize you."  Is that both "negative" and "positive"?  Of course,
> one-dimensional believers would say having M pulverize you would be the
> greatest blessing.  It could only be all positive.  But what if he did it
> because he was pissed, out of sorts or sexually frustrated?  Yes, IME, he
> definitely got sexually frustrated.  In my total reworking of his own words,
> the only man in all of recored history that anyone knew about who lived
> beyond the libido was Sukadeva.
> 
>  
> 
> I also said in the movie, "It took me a while to put the paradox together.
> How could he be wonderful and awful at the same time?  Well, that's just how
> it was.  He was wonderful and awful at the same time."  David filmed me for
> over two hours and he used the several minutes that suited his purpose in
> segueing from the more positive part of the film to the more negative.
> 
>  
> 
> So I feel no conflict or contradiction in saying "In my experience, they
> still carry a lot of his energy, as if the atoms and molecules have been
> entrained in it. And, of course, in India, they would be holy objects to be
> revered. I have kept them very well protected and have handled them very
> little over the decades."  and 
> 
>  
> 
> M abused women, devastated people right and left and was more concerned with
> money than with treating people decently.
> 
>  
> 
> They're all simply true.  And so were all the other totally glorious aspects
> of that intense, complex man.
> 
>  
> 
> Was anyone else in the movie theater that night in Fiuggi, or wherever it
> was, when M's darshan got so strong that it made all the little, hanging
> crystals dance extravagantly and tinkle together as if there were a small
> tornado blowing through the hall?  And probably only I saw this, but when M
> first got to Murren, the three mountain devas came to greet him.  IME, which
> of course many of you would completely howl at, they had been waiting for
> someone for centuries and thought, because of his light, that it might be M.
> M went completely silent and looked up at them for several moments while
> they communed.  He wasn't who they were waiting for, they left and the
> lecture went on.  And you should have seen the angel stations that
> congregated in the intersections of the pathways between the puja tables in
> the halls where M made teachers.  That's why he didn't like people walking
> around then.  I had to bust right through one of them to get to him to tell
> him something urgent while he was giving out the mantras.  The five or six
> angels in that one station took off in all directions like they had been
> stung.  (There, three little stories...)  
> 
>  
> 
> For me, the truth holds a higher priority than rules about the truth or any
> rules that are more about control than the highest good.  Perhaps I am wrong
> about that.  Do my circumstances prove that, one way or another?  I think
> not.  In the actual words of the man himself, "Karma is unfathomable."  I do
> love some of his sound bites.  Another one that would be appropriate here is
> "There are no absolutes in the relative."
> 
>  
> 
> You're only confused because you're thinking one-dimensionally.  When you
> move beyond that, try watching my interview in the film again.  You may, or
> may not, see it slightly differently.
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you for eliciting this,
> 
>  
> 
> m
> 
>  
> 
> On Jul 20, 2011, at 7:28 AM, tedadams108 wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> I'm a little confused. Is this the same Mark Landau who spoke such unkind
> words about Maharishi in the film "David Wants To Fly."? When attempting to
> sell Maharishi's sandals there are no unkind words spoken, only glorifying
> words, probably as an attempt to increase the marketability of the sandals.
> I have compassion for Mark that he is having financial 
> challenges in this economy, like so many others. Apparently his
> involvement with Maharishi did not result in financial well being
> as it did for so many others (John Gray, Barbara DeAngeles, Deepak Chopra,
> etc., and the many wealthy meditators living in Fairfield and around the
> world. Maybe it's more difficult to get Nature Support when one cavils about
> the Master. I'm sure someone would
> appreciate having the sandals and would be willing to pay something
> for them. My guess is that the only value to Mark would be for firewood.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
>   _____  
> 
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3776 - Release Date: 07/20/11
>


Reply via email to