Thank you, I was afraid that having written that post of mine was a wasted effort. And I apologize.
--- In [email protected], azgrey <no_reply@...> wrote: > > But you see, Ann, my post was not even directed at you. > > Your name and words appear nowhere in this post, only > whose of RWC. > > I have neither ill will nor malice towards you. Perhaps it is > simply a case of you misreading? > > Perhaps if you re-read my post, and realize to whom it was > written, *you* will open your eyes, your mind and get smart. > > --- In [email protected], awoelflebater <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > You missed everything about my post. Read it again, open your eyes, your > > mind and get smart. > > > > --- In [email protected], azgrey <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > So you are going with a "The devil made me do it." explanation. > > > > > > n'est-ce pas? > > > > > > Lack of succinctness often results in obfuscation. > > > > > > Just sayin'. > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > How Robin Struck PeopleAnd 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 > > > > someonethat 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 implyingsurely you know thisthat 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 falseif it had been true, Vaj would be able > > > > to convince me very easily of thisand 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 > > > > peopleon rare occasionsinside 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 actedthey > > > > 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 contextI 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 creationseeminglyand what I was > > > > doing was merely a systematic, mechanical, and objective process > > > > whereby the truth of what was actually the casewith each individual > > > > soul intrinsically subject to this explorationbecoming 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 > > > > processconducted by powers beyond myself, but enabled to articulate > > > > themselves through this orchestration of reality through my Unity > > > > Consciousnessthe actual fallen being which had control over a given > > > > personobstructing, inhibiting, interfering with the ability of that > > > > person to truly individuate themselves within the authenticity of who > > > > they actually wereindependent of this fallen angelwould 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 enlightenmentconsciously as > > > > it were, or unconsciously colluding with the fallen angelI 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 inspiredand much resisted (I hated it)response in me in order > > > > to facilitate the process whereby a person could experience > > > > liberationeven momentarilyfrom 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 contextwhich was true: I did not strike anyone > > > > during a seminarwhile at the same time feeling an obligation to > > > > acknowledge that this indeed did in fact happenon rare occasionsin 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 > > > > > > > > > >
