[FairfieldLife] How Robin Struck People—And Lied About It: An Open Letter to Barry Wright

[maskedzebra]

How Robin Struck People—And Lied About It: An Open Letter to Barry Wright

Dear Barry Wright,

It is true that before I ever gave an official seminar I did, in fact, apply in 
a more Western sense, the Zen Roshi method of shocking someone—that is, I did 
on occasion, strike someone physically. Vaj said there was a video of my acting 
in this way. I know that no such tape exists. And if it did (as Vaj claims) it 
would be a simple matter of contradicting my avowal here. You will naturally 
ask: But Robin, by denying that you did in fact strike someone during a 
seminar, you are in effect implying—surely you know this—that you *never* 
struck anyone. This was your intent, right, Robin?

It was not, Barry. For me to have on the one hand denied this accusation 
knowing it was false—if it had been true, Vaj would be able to convince me very 
easily of this—and yet, then and there, admitted that I did engage in this 
practise, or rather *had* engaged in this practise, would mean disclosing 
something about me which would tend to be interpreted in an entire vacuum of 
understanding of just what the context of this metaphysical theatre was. I 
chose, since you are so hostile and prejudiced, to withhold admitting that in 
fact I had struck people—on rare occasions—inside the other, more intimate and 
personal context of what chronologically preceded the formal seminars. When 
almost all the persons who were convinced of my enlightenment lived in the same 
residence. By itself, separated from the spiritual context within which it is 
practised, the Zen Roshi's blow would seem primitive and brutal and outrageous. 
But we must assume even Leonard Cohen accepted that this was part of the 
spiritual methodology to which he was subjugating himself in having determined 
he had a real Teacher. Now what I did resembled not at all what is the classic 
Zen Flesh Zen Bones move. See if you can stay with me while I try to explain 
the context within which this act did in fact occur. Inside a seminar setting, 
however, it was never necessary or appropriate. At least this is my sincere and 
I believe truthful recollection.

Now my purported enlightenment, as I came to understand it, Barry, came about 
through not just my own efforts, and my devotion to the Master (Maharishi 
Mahesh Yogi); it was effected by the Vedic gods, these impulses of Creative 
Intelligence, the devas. This was shown to me in the form of a revelation once 
I realized that my enlightenment could not be compatible with the description 
of the universe and the human soul as taught to me by Thomas Aquinas and my 
learning of the Catholic catechism. It was not that Catholicism forced this 
revelation upon me; it was more the tremendous shock of having the whole 
context I had created [or had been created *through* me] since I returned from 
Switzerland come apart, and eventually disintegrate. Once I realized that 
certain invisible beings had had a hand in my ultimate liberation I immediately 
realized that these very beings were not beneficent, were not interested in my 
happiness. *They had deceived me*.

>From that point on, early in 1987, I became determined to vanquish my 
>enlightenment, to destroy the biochemical and intellectual basis of my Unity 
>Consciousness. I knew that if my enlightenment was an hallucination, however 
>real it was experientially, that my actions flowing from this assumed state of 
>consciousness, were also flawed, defective, and problematic. And this included 
>that infrequent instance where I would, seemingly under supernatural 
>inspiration and authority, strike someone. Why strike someone, Robin? Well, 
>here we get to the crux of the matter, Barry.

These same celestial beings who created my enlightenment, and then pretty much 
inspired the context out of which I then acted—they evidently knew both the 
inherent and unrecognized weaknesses of each individual, as well as what the 
Western Tradition represented in terms of individuation of one's experience 
through a true existential willingness to allow life to 'make' one's 
soul:—Also—*this is the key point, Barry*—these same celestial beings made me 
see each human being as existing inside a context where actual fallen angels 
warred with the good forces in the universe to take away a human being's 
innocence, determined as they were to make an individual a tool of their 
purposes by subtly inducing that person to compensate for some weakness or 
distortion inside of them *through behaving in a particular mode*.The mode so 
chosen was the creation of the fallen angel. Each person's mode was unique. 
'Mode' here representing the inauthentic presentation of themselves. 

The specific pattern of an individual's mode, then, revealed the influence of 
these fallen angels (or rather, one specific and unique fallen angel) upon this 
person, and it was my evident destiny to interrupt, to challenge, to confront 
the fallen angels as they battled with me, and the person's soul for domination 
over that person.

You understand, then, Barry, that the beings who had created my enlightenment 
made me actually apprehend each human being who I encountered as being subject 
to this fearsome temptation and tyranny. And those who had not passed through 
the seminar, or pre-seminar experience, were dupes of this hegemonic power of 
these fallen angels. Now, as it happens, almost every person I knew was a 
victim to some extent of unwittingly identifying with these fallen angels, 
falsely assuming that what the fallen angel insinuated who they were, and how 
they had to act, was actually originating in the substance and integrity of 
their own individuality. The person, then, never suspected there was a 
preternatural conspiracy going on which was the attempt to force a person to 
falsify themselves (and each person came to sense this dissimulation deep from 
within themselves) such as to cover up and conceal their weakness, their 
ultimate flaw. To transcend one's compensatory mode became the desideratum.

A seminar and before that the pre-seminar reality, was the process precipitated 
inside the context of reading off reality such as to create the actual 
metaphysical context within which *all that I have described here became a 
physical perception for everyone present*. This meant that the context was not 
actually under my control at all. It was a context—I suppose like TM is subject 
to the mantras (or what Maharishi refers to earlier in his history as the Vedic 
gods)—that imposed itself on all of us. Even myself. What unfolded in front of 
our eyes was the actual opening up of creation—seemingly—and what I was doing 
was merely a systematic, mechanical, and objective process whereby the truth of 
what was actually the case—with each individual soul intrinsically subject to 
this exploration—becoming intricately and physically revealed before everyone. 
There were no individual differences in what we all experienced. It was as 
clear and unmistakable as a change in perception effected by hallucinogens, 
only in this case, what happened to everyone's consciousness in that room was 
virtually identical. Everyone experienced the same thing. Everyone saw, 
understood, recognized what I was doing in confronting someone. It all occurred 
very naturally as it were, very intelligibly, with ultra metaphysical clarity, 
and the process obeyed laws of its own. Far more compelling than even the laws 
which would have protected or sustained someone in that state which would 
presumably not be susceptible to this kind of context.

We simply broke open the reality which was there. Once we did, reality took 
over and conducted the course of the drama through my enlightened state of 
consciousness, and presumed consummated individuation. (As it would turn out, 
there was more wrong with me than anyone who "came to the microphone". But no 
one got to see this. But I did, during this 25 year ordeal of de-enlightening 
myself.)

Now under the irresistible and inexorable inspiration of this process—conducted 
by powers beyond myself, but enabled to articulate themselves through this 
orchestration of reality through my Unity Consciousness—the actual fallen being 
which had control over a given person—obstructing, inhibiting, interfering with 
the ability of that person to truly individuate themselves within the 
authenticity of who they actually were—independent of this fallen angel—would 
make its presence known, even coming right out and making itself visible in the 
face of the person.

This produced what became the classic state of "having gone cosmic". And a 
person in this state was 'seen' unavoidably, choicelessly, in terms of their 
unique problem in standing up to the power and influence of the fallen angel 
which was attempting to keep them from becoming 'innocent', becoming the person 
they actually were destined to be. Separated from that fallen angel.

If the person seemed so identified with this deceitful representation of 
themselves through the malice of this fallen angel that they were in fact 
defending or upholding the integrity of themelves in resisting the beneficent 
and merciful inspiration of my enlightenment—consciously as it were, or 
unconsciously colluding with the fallen angel—I might, on occasion shock that 
person out of such an identification. And this took the form sometimes of 
striking them. Maybe in total 4 or 5 persons were struck. I hardly think it was 
more than this. And this was not something that happened on a regular basis. It 
was in extremis. But we shall see if this testimony is contradicted by someone 
who was there.

This was not anger, punishment, retaliation, ritualistic violence. It was an 
inspired—and much resisted (I hated it)—response in me in order to facilitate 
the process whereby  a person could experience liberation—even momentarily—from 
their trance caused by their being identified with the particular fallen angel 
which had been chosen somehow to present this formidable and ultimate 
existential challenge to this person's soul, and their whole sense of who they 
really were.

Now I have come, in having repudiated and deconstructed my enlightenment, to 
see that once I became enlightened on that mountain above Arosa, that my 
perception had been played such that I could only apprehend each human being in 
terms of this cosmic battle between good and evil. Now I am able to see each 
person absolutely on their own, without respect to 'the demonic'. And therefore 
I am sorry for all that I did which amounted to being determined by this 
hallucination. Which especially included on occasion trying to shock the person 
out of his or her identification with the fallen angel which was tormenting and 
deceiving them, even if they appeared oblivious to this truth.

Of course, you will realize from this analysis, that whenever this event 
happened, no one so much as winced. Not because they were brainwashed, but 
rather became everyone present sensed the intelligence and  inspiration behind 
this act. The act, then, simply occurred with a complex process which made 
itself understood as being inevitable and salutary in the extreme. It was 
harrowing, it was exhilarating, it was dangerous, it was mysterious, it was 
terrifying. But for everyone present it was very very real. And, I have to say 
it: right.

Although of course everyone realizes in retrospect it was wrong.

When Vaj first accused me of hitting someone at a seminar, I knew it was not 
true. After all, many persons were there for the first time. Had I done what I 
was accused of, a majority of those who had never before attended a seminar 
would have walked out. I don't remember a single person leaving a seminar.

It was just not ripe for me to explain all this. I did not deny something I 
knew was true. I denied what I was accused of. And knew, probably, eventually 
the truth would come out, which might have the appearance of my having at the 
very least equivocated on this matter. But my conscience is clear. I never 
hesitated for a moment in knowing it was premature of me to on the one hand 
deny having done what I was accused of in one context—which was true: I did not 
strike anyone during a seminar—while at the same time feeling an obligation to 
acknowledge that this indeed did in fact happen—on rare occasions—in a quite 
different and more intimate context.

I will leave it to the readers of FFL to determine whether I am morally 
culpable in having acted as I have. 

Robin