---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote:
Yeah, but Barry did not mention Robin at all in his post, so why bring up a
tangential topic? It is very difficult for spiritual teachers to avoid some of
these traps because when surrounded by adoring wanna be disciples it is
difficult to avoid being forced into a very strange bubble that isolates them
from a more normal existence. Very few teachers even acknowledge there is this
effect. Now I think that even teachers that fall off the wagon sometimes
produce awakened students; more so one who does not. But what was the result of
Robin's teaching, where are his enlightened students?
I think this is a moot question given what we know about what Robin feels
about his time "enlightened" and his acknowledged effect on those who chose to
either become his wife, best friends or students. Robin renounced it all, made
huge efforts to divest himself of what he recognized as evil and unwanted
influences in his life. He ended his allegiance with those intelligences that
took over his life, his actions. Other teachers have not chosen to do that so
comparing Robin to other enlightened mystics or gurus is not really relevant
here. Consequently to ask who his enlightened students are is like asking where
Marilyn Monroe's grandchildren live. One thing I will say, however. I am a
product of my time around Robin in certain ways. I have seen and experienced
many things during my time around him and then banished from the group that
have enriched me, made me wiser, made me stronger and made me much more loving.
These are qualities which I feel I earned through fierce introspection, pain
and even suffering. Consequently I treasure the appearance of these things in
my life; I feel blessed or graced or lucky to have been branded, painfully,
with deep enough despair to have reached the place where this understanding and
vulnerability could take root within me. In this way I became "enlightened". I
changed. I matured. Nothing would ever be the same again. The details of why
this should be so will not be stated for you here because they are too personal
and there are too many on this forum who I wouldn't trust with knowing them.
Suffice to say, if "enlightenment" is half as precious as becoming a better
person through having been broken in half then it must be something.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote:
Yet more of Barry's insane obsession with NPD:
Granted that from what I've heard--including from Robin--this list does
characterize many of his behaviors with his group 30-some years ago.
However, we didn't see any of these behaviors while he was participating on
FFL, which is, of course, consistent with his insistence that he was no longer
enlightened.
Barry didn't know Robin 30-some years ago; all he knows of Robin is what he's
read by and about him on FFL.
Yet he claims Robin exhibited a "classic" case of NPD while he was here.
I wonder how Barry would explain this peculiar discrepancy. Does he even
recognize it?
Celebrating 47 years of being on a kinda, sorta spiritual path this month (and
a few years of being on less formal paths before that), I find myself thinking
back and wondering whether I actually learned anything.
One of the things that makes me wonder that is the difference with which many
people who call themselves experienced spiritual seekers view certain traits in
the teachers they align themselves with perceive those traits, and the way I
perceive them. With this in mind, here is a list of qualities that I've heard
expressed to me over the decades by people who are convinced (and often trying
their best to convince me) that the teacher they study with is enlightened.
Just for fun, notice that Barry loses track of his presentation of the point
he's trying to make after the first two items here. Those items are what one
might well expect to hear from a person who believes their teacher is
enlightened, as he stipulates above. But the rest are phrased increasingly
negatively; they aren't qualities that someone would proudly attribute to their
teacher.
This is just one more sign that as obsessed with NPD as Barry is, he's unable
to talk about it coherently.
* They radiate power or charisma. When you're around them, the intensity of
their aura or "vibe" is such that people often fall under the sway of it.
People speak of "getting high" from being around the person, and of changes in
their internal state of attention that they attribute to "darshan," and equate
with actual changes in their personal state of consciousness.
* They speak with "authority." When these teachers speak or write, there is a
*certainty* to what they say that many people associate with the presence of
Truth. The people themselves often speak in terms of "truth," suggesting that
the way they see things and the way they interpret the things they see *are*
"truth" or "reality."
* They seek followers. It's as if their goal in life *is* to find followers,
and to convince them of the "truth" of what they have realized. And there is a
clear demarcation between the teacher *and* the followers. You see it in the
hierarchical structure of their organizations, and even in the seating
arrangements of the rooms they speak in. The teacher is always in front of or
in the center of a circle of other people, the obvious focus of attention, and
he or she is often seated on a chair or dias raised above the level of the
followers.
* They feel entitled. Once these individuals have found followers, they
*expect* things from them. Like attention. They *like* to be focused on, and to
be complimented and told how great they are.
* They present elitism as a good thing. The teachers themselves often refer to
those who are "lesser evolved" than other people. They remind the followers
that they -- because they are wise enough to have recognized how elite the
teacher is -- are "more evolved" than this rabble, and thus have no
responsibility to treat them the way they treat others "in the org," meaning in
the circle that has grown up around the teacher.
* They have grandiose goals and think of themselves in grandiose terms. Very
few of the people I've ever been told by others was enlightened wanted *only*
to help a few people and live a happy life. They wanted World Peace. They
wanted to enlighten every sentient being on the planet, to make sure they were
living as exalted and elite a life as they are.
* They unashamedly use people. The requests for the followers' time, money,
energy, and attention start soon after they become followers, and never cease.
The grandiose goals, after all, are far more important than the issue of
whether the followers called upon to contribute to them are able to pay their
rent.
* They view other people as competition, and tend to turn interactions with
them into battles, which they always "win." In lectures, if a student either
disagrees with one of the teacher's pronouncements or even just agrees with it
half-heartedly, the teacher turns it into an "issue of faith," and *confronts*
the student until they submit, and admit how wrong they were. Thus "the truth,"
as seen by the teacher, always prevails.
* They don't deal well with doubt or criticism. Many of these teachers are
*famous* for how they react to their students having doubts about the way they
describe themselves, the things they teach, or their relative importance in the
world. Outbursts of anger and fits of "lashing out" can be common, and the
followers often just write these outbursts off as quirks or eccentricities, and
feel that the teacher is "entitled to them" because, after all, they're so
special.
* They have firm "It's my way or the highway" rules. It's very much *not* a
democracy. Those who allow their doubts to escalate into actual open criticism
of the teacher openly are dealt with swiftly and harshly, almost always by
excommunication and demonization.
* They seem detached from the emotions and problems of their followers. You
simply cannot imagine how often I have heard this presented as a "commercial"
for some supposedly-enlightened spiritual teacher. "I told him about the
problems I was having dealing with my father dying, and he just laughed. It was
*wonderful* to see how unattached he was to the petty problems that plague
lesser humans."
* They believe that "only the most special" can fully understand and appreciate
them. And they often encapsulate this belief into the structure of their
organizations, ensuring that only those who focus on them and accept everything
they say without question and pretty much non-stop ever rise to positions of
power in their orgs.
* They tend to react to other teachers -- including their *own* former teachers
-- with disdain, and with something that would look like envy and jealousy,
were they not so evolved and all.
* When challenged on these things, they assert that they are *entitled to
them*, because of who and what they are. They are "special," after all, and
others around them are not.
NONE of these characteristics can readily be found in the descriptions of the
enlightened we find in the planet's "core curriculum" of spiritual teachings.
Where they CAN be found -- ALL of the characteristics listed above -- are in
the psychological definitions of a condition called Narcissistic Personality
Disorder.
Go figure.
