--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, khazana108 <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: <snip> > > Howell, "Brahmi," and Lord Knows have claimed he has not > > changed. Why would Robin "own up" to what they claim if > > he believes he *has* changed? Why would he accept what > > he feels is an incorrect judgment? > > Wait, wait, you get it wrong. He offered this AFTER starting > to read CULT, and being dissatisfied with the way he was > portrayed there. CULT is only about his past, and being > dissatisfied with the perception of his ex-followers about > these past proceedings, he made this offer. I don't call that > owning up to it.
No, YOU got it wrong. The offer to meet with people was only about what he's like NOW. Here's the first paragraph of his first Open Letter to Howell: "I will just make one claim right from the start, Bill: Were I to come--*now*, in this moment, as of today, November 11, 2012--into the presence of *any one person from my past*--I exclude no one in this--I would not project anything upon them, nor would I find any justification to judge them, nor would that person experience--despite their past experiences with me--anything coming from me which would have anything to do with an experience that Robin is analyzing them, sifting them, arriving at some definitive idea of them. Each and every person who walked into this Starbucks, where I am right now, and sat down at my table--they would experience a person, absolutely non-judgmental, and entirely able to let that person be what they are. I am not living or experiencing my life on that plane which created the terror and violence and drama and intensity and confusion and trauma and beauty of those Ten Years when I acted as the enlightened man-- without any unambiguous contradiction of this fact by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/325770 This had not a thing to do with his dissatisfaction with how he was portrayed in "Cult." Different issue entirely. Are you big enough to acknowledge you got that wrong? I doubt it. > > It's entirely appropriate for him to *offer* to prove > > he has changed to anyone who doubts it. > > And it is just as appropriate for them to say: Sorry, we > are not interested, you stole us a major part of our > adult life, it took us years to get out, we need not invest > more time. Absolutely. Nobody ever said otherwise. Do you even know what "offer" means? It's something that is *made available* that you can take advantage of or not as you choose. > > And he has said *dozens* of times that he accepts the > > judgments of him from 25 years ago, so that was never in > > any kind of dispute. > > No, He didn't. Yes, he has. > Ask him yourself, or best read his posts, where he states > that he doesn't recognize himself in the book, and that > this is not the truth about him. That's *a different issue*. He has never denied that he did terrible things and harmed people. His objections to the book's portrayal are much more subtle. > For me that mean that he is in DENIAL. Nope, you couldn't be more wrong. "I was infinitely deceived, out-of-my-mind (in some fundamental way), and I unnecessarily and unjustifiably hurt and violated many innocent human beings (most all of whom I loved deeply), and therefore I fully deserved to go through a purgatory of extreme agony as a consequence of my naivete, blindness, fanaticism, and cosmic egotism. I was wrong, and what I did was wrong." That sound to you like denial, khazana? You know where that quote is from? From his initial post about the "Cult" book, the same post in which he says he didn't recognize himself in it. He's made many very similar confessions since he arrived here back in June 2011. He's been absolutely consistent about how he views the harm he did and that he deserved to go through terrible suffering as a consequence. If you had good English comprehension and had been paying attention, you'd have seen that what he did not recognize about himself in the book had NOTHING to do with what he did wrong. > And he still wants to influence them by 'proving' to them > how much he has changed. He has *offered* to prove to whoever is interested how much he has changed. Of course he would like them all to recognize he has changed, but he doesn't expect that to happen, and he's not trying to compel anybody to do so. > > Moreover, his own judgment of > > himself has been more severe than anyone else's. > > So you believe. Other's seem to think different. Cite the posts in which somebody says they think he hasn't been as hard on himself as he should have been, khazana. Have another look at the quote I provided above. > > > > Lord Knows had no fear of me--even ten years ago. He wanted > > > > to meet with me. I was not ready to meet with anyone at > > > > that time. He did not come for our scheduled visit in > > > > September not because he was afraid of me, but (I believe) > > > > because he disapproved of me, and was offended that I did > > > > not agree to the conditions which he set for our time > > > > together. > > > > > > > > I think he thought me unworthy of his company. > > > > > > I have no idea of course. I would say, whatever you meet > > > now, in the form of Lord Knows and others, is your karma. > > > Why not just accept it as it is? Why not just say: I am > > > sorry, i was wrong all along. > > > > What the *freak* is wrong with you, khazana? If he's said > > once that he was wrong 25 years ago, he's said it literally > > dozens of times. Again, that has never been in dispute. > > > Then what he wants the f*ck to prove? Why keep haunting > these poor people? Unbelievable. He wants to prove that *he isn't like that any more*. And he isn't "haunting" anybody by making a public offer to meet with them *if they want to see for themselves*. Don't be ridiculous. Nobody has to take him up on the offer. These egregious misunderstandings of yours are the result of your problems comprehending written English. You need to recognize how inadequate your comprehension is and ask questions to see whether you've understood something before you sound off about it. *Especially* if you're inclined to voice some kind of criticism.
