--- In [email protected], awoelflebater <no_reply@...> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
>> But somehow Barry is shocked, shocked that Ann's >> perspective on her time with Robin would have >> undergone this type of development. >> >> This is especially interesting given that Barry's >> guru committed suicide, whereas Robin embarked on >> a grueling 25-year course of self-rehabilitation, >> emerging as a person many of us here find sane and >> admirable. > > I would have to say that of all of the things that Judy as written this last > paragraph is, for me, the most poignant and powerful. It is testimony to her > and to Robin. If suicide can and often does indicate hopelessness, weakness, > crushing despair then for Robin to have resisted, avoided, never contemplated > let alone succumbed to the suicide route then he is a man of great faith, > courage and strength. And Judy's perfect wording here conveyed the truth of > this like no other. Frankly, it was almost a revelation. As we do not have any records of Robin being evaluated by professionals as to his sanity or otherwise, I doubt we could say that Robin's 'rehabilitation' was grueling, as it is known only on his testimony, not independent observation. For those on FFL, some feel he is rehabilitated and some feel he is not, and again we have no objective evidence, only the evidence of what he writes, which of course we must interpret according to our own devices. I have no judgement on the relative value of suicide or avoiding such. Robin at some point was involved in two main paths of truth from what has been posted here. Transcendental Meditation, and Catholicism. He says he has disavowed both, that they were not the truth. He says he is still seeking truth. That means he has not found it. Yet he sets himself up as the arbiter of truth in his arguments, at least with me. I take a similar stance sometimes, having had certain experiences which I would call 'truth', and I base my positions on my interpretation of those experiences. Yet having rejected two versions of what truth is, and not yet finding the goal that he calls truth, Robin certainly cannot by these admissions take the position that he can determine what is truth or not. Therefore Robin, whom I might quixotically call in jest 'Mr Reality', seems to be at the very least manipulative in his arguments based on those footings which he has rejected and on those at which he has not arrived. But one thing is sure, you cannot base an explanation of reality on what you consider to be false, yet Robin frequently refers back to these as if they would bolster his argument, that perhaps, somehow, those experiences would somehow be relevant to what truth might be for him now. I do not think he has established in any clear sense where he is working from now. Further, a good teacher makes one's experiences clear or at least clearer and moves a student along. Yet Robin eventually comes to put down everything one thinks is real without clarifying the real issue or moving the student along to a more expanded experience of truth. Basically you end up in his view, as plain wrong, period. It appears to me to be a process of subtle and increasing intellectual intimidation as he goes along, which at least in the past became physical as well. [And for Robin, if he reads this, it is interesting here at FFL that we sometimes talk of someone in the third person as if they were a spacial object not somehow involved in what is going on. Clinical observation. Yet we have no training in this I am supposing.]
