Personally I think that MDG is a moodmaker who feels compelled to tell us all how great he is (repeatedly and ad nauseum)
--- In [email protected], "Irmeli Mattsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I liked this post a lot. It is an honest account of Goodman's personal > path and of his own insights and discriminations. I find Goodman's > relationship to MMY have similar qualities than the TM-teacher I meet > every now and then at lunch. That teacher has done the > re-certification course. All the apparent absurdities in the movement > don't bother him. He is somehow happily beyond them. There is > something very beautiful and innocent in his relationship to MMY. The > absurdities of the movement seem to have had a softening and moulding > effect on his earlier quite rigid beliefs and attachments. I respect > his devotion very much and I consider him to be doing fine. > > To be a `true believer' in this way is a fine and beautiful thing. To > be a TB in a way as to using one's only right belief as a > justification to morally low actions, and abuse and control of others > is an distorted form, but quite common. This form of the TB phenomenon > has mostly been discussed here and this discussion is very important. > > My main criticism is of Goodman's post is that he tries to make > wrong this kind of discussion. Or at least he claims reasoning in > those lines to be at the same level as the fundamentalist's reasoning, > only from the opposite direction. I disagree. Sometimes > fundamentalism can become wrapped in rigid rationality or > rationalisations and use of science as religion. In those cases his > criticism is appropriate, otherwise not. > > I also disagree with the idea that no one is objective until they are > re-established in the Self. I claim that we cannot even then be fully > objective, to be representing the absolute truth. The absolute is > beyond the manifest phenomenal world. When the I becomes established > in the transcendental, it becomes very stable and dis-identified with > ideas of oneself, gross or subtle emotions etc. This I has no form, > not even truth as we understand it. > > This kind of I does not so easily identify with subjective states and > therefore it is capable of looking at also internal phenomenon from a > stable and calm position. It is very difficult to hurt this kind of I. > Still it also always looks at things from a perspective, maybe from > several perspectives, but never from all the possible and valid > perspectives. > > I agree fully of the importance of surrendering the gross level > calculating intellect as an ultimate guiding light. We cannot evolve > to higher ways of being, or stages of development by relying on our > intellect. Our intellect can create only variations of structures > familiar to us. If we want to evolve we have to surrender and let > ourselves to be guided. But simultaneously our discriminative capacity > and sound judgement are great assets in avoiding pitfalls while > surrendering. Otherwise surrendering may insidiously change to > regression. And we start using intellect to find justifications to our > morally low actions. However the reality is usually more complicated > than this division because often surrender and regression are both > present and we are not capable of discriminating them from each other. > > I also personally feel to be strongly guided. Not by any single being > in physical form, present or past, rather by all of them. I have also > surrendered to and am also guided by the transcendental that is > beyond my understanding and intellect. > > Irmeli > > > > --- In [email protected], Michael Dean Goodman > <Tantra@> wrote: > > > > THE STRUGGLE OF INDIVIDUALITY TO PERPETUATE ITS ILLUSION > > > > I feel compassionately sad whenever I meet those who still cling > > to the idea that their individuality (individual intellect) can > > guide them to the goal of realization, of remembering, of waking > > up again to Reality. They're sure that they don't need a guide > > on the path, don't need to surrender control, don't need to ask > > for help, and don't need to embrace their intellect's incompetence > > and impotence to handle the job. > > > > They are sure that their relative, finite intellect, bound in the > > world of space and time, can grok and master infinity, the field > > without boundaries, far beyond the ken of the relative intellect. > > That is delusion, that is arrogance of the deepest kind, that is > > the very essence of ignorance. Their individual ego/intellect has > > convinced them to trust it (not only to trust it, but to actually > > believe that they ARE it), and to never entertain the idea that the > > ego/intellect's assertion of its importance and ability to guide > > them "back home" IS ITSELF THE VERY CRUX OF THE PROBLEM, the very > > core of the ignorance. > > > > HIRING THE THIEF TO CATCH THE THIEF > > > > It is like hiring the master cat burglar (albeit in his clever dis- > > guise as the 'great detective') to solve the string of (his) burglar- > > ies. The great detective (master burglar) will will NEVER EVER turn > > himself in, never participate in his own exposure, but instead will > > always have some encouraging progress report, and some inspiring vi- > > sion of possibilities, to "string us along" as long as possible, as > > he secretly continues his life of crime. > > > > It is a very similar thing, to entrust our spiritual awakening to the > > ego/intellect consortium. They ARE the problem, and putting them in > > charge of solving the problem is lunacy. [Technically, the problem > > is our identification with them, our belief that we ARE them, that > > they are "in charge", that they are "all that there is".] The real > > solution is not to "hire" them to guide us to realization, but to let > > go of them and remember our true status as the infinite field that is > > beyond them. Instead of following them, we have to step out of their > > realm entirely, beyond where they can go, into the unbounded field of > > the Self. Then they revert back to their real status as our servants, > > as managers of the relative field of life - and let go of the delusion > > that they are "hot stuff", "in charge", "the boss". > > > > DISCRIMINATION - THE PATH TO CC > > > > The path from ignorance to awakening IS a path of discrimination, > > but not discrimination by the relative intellect. It is the waking > > up of the cosmic intellect from its immersion in illusion, from its > > identification with boundaries, with individuality, from its belief > > that it ever was (solely) the relative intellect. It is the path > > of the infinite Self "waking up", curving back on its Self, and stop- > > ping its old habit of getting stuck in the finite boundaries. It is > > the path of separating what is Real from what is not. And the rela- > > tive ego/intellect is in the field of "what is not real", and there- > > fore hardly fit to lead us to the Real. It is the path of the cosmic > > intellect regaining its settled, even state of being established in > > its own, infinite Self (sama-dhi = evenness of intellect). > > > > BASED ON MY OWN EXPERIENCE - > > INDIVIDUAL INTELLECT TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT > > > > I can say this so boldly, about the struggle of the individual ego/ > > intellect to perpetuate its illusion and never admit it needs help, > > because I was very, very much there once; I know how that feels. I > > have a very strong, powerful relative intellect. I have a deep ten- > > dency in my relative personality to believe in self-sufficiency, to > > hold that I can/must take care of myself, be vigilant, figure it out, > > protect myself, etc. > > > > So I tried figuring it out on my own (for many lifetimes, and for many > > years in this lifetime), sorting through the myriad philosophies, spi- > > ritual traditions, techniques, teachers... I tried "interviewing" > > various teachers, testing them, evaluating them. Until I met one that > > chose me. I thought I chose him; I thought I poked and prodded with > > my intellect and discovered someone where I couldn't find any "holes", > > any inconsistencies, any weaknesses. But looking back, in hindsight, > > that belief was still part of my delusion of independence and power > > of my ego/intellect. In reality, it was just grace that he was offer- > > ed to me, it was just that I was ripe and being harvested by something > > so much beyond me, beyond the delusion of who I thought I was, that I > > couldn't conceive of It, much less evaluate and judge It. > > > > So It presented me brilliantly with just the right qualities in a > > teacher that allowed my ego/intellect to feel safe, to relax, to let > > the armor down just enough that the inexorable process could begin > > [or move into its final phase after all that preparation time]. > > > > INDIVIDUAL INTELLECT RELAXES, AND FINALLY SURRENDERS > > > > And even then it didn't happen all at once, my belief in the power > > of my relative ego/intellect didn't crumble, I didn't jump off the > > edge of some cliff. I just started sliding down a very inviting > > but apparently gentle slope. I kept getting seduced by It, so that > > the hold of my belief in the power of my relative ego/intellect faded > > over the course of a couple of years in stages. Layer by layer, I > > struggled, but I let go. I shifted from identifying with my indivi- > > dual ego/intellect to identifying with the Self, with cosmic ego/in- > > tellect. I trusted something bigger to guide me. And that "something > > bigger" was shown to me through the vehicle called "my teacher", "my > > Master", Maharishi. > > > > 3 LABELS THROWN ABOUT ON THIS LIST > > > > LABEL #1 - TRUE BELIEVERS > > > > People on this list sometimes call me a "true believer". I was once. > > In the beginning, in the 70s, I spoke and taught based on faith, on > > belief. But that was a long time ago. Now, most of my speech and > > behavior spontaneously arises from direct personal experience/under- > > standing, and from the source in cosmic mind - from awareness cur- > > ving back on its Self. This makes life SO much simpler, so much > > easier. ;) > > > > When we live in a universe apparently ruled by the relative ego/in- > > tellect, then everything feels like it has to be "figured out", > > "checked out", evaluated, vigilantly watched and decided. Discrimi- > > nation rules - our very existence feels like it depends on it. One- > > upsmanship is the way - to make ourself "more OK" by making others > > "less OK", to "prove" ourselves "right" by making others "wrong", to > > bolster our sense of existence and safety and solidity by taking that > > away from others. Certainly, handing over that personal discriminat- > > ing power to someone feels like danger, like foolishness. We must > > avoid being "taken advantage of", being fooled, letting our guard > > down. So its a great put-down to call each other "true believer" or > > "true non-believer", to imply that someone is blindly and indiscri- > > minately following a path. And it puffs us up to position ourself > > as the "objective", "clear-minded", "logical" one. > > > > But it's just a big illusion - no one is objective until they are re- > > established in the Self. That is the only uninvolved, neutral, free- > > from-desire, free-from-fear vantage point. Everyone else is just un- > > knowingly supporting their deep beliefs (which are often based on un- > > conscious traumas and the resulting constrictions), by cherry-picking > > among the available "evidence". What's called "objective", "truthful", > > "right" by many turns out to be merely that which supports their exis- > > tence, comfort, safety...that which supports their relative, and often > > skewed, world-view. > > > > To the relative intellect, concepts like intuition, feelings, devotion, > > surrender, submission, homage, bhakti, etc. feel so foreign - more than > > foreign, they feel dangerous. They threaten the intellect's carefully > > held-together illusion of stability and safety. > > > > In my experience "true-belief" is a stage - to carry you on the path > > until direct experience and understanding catch up and take over. When > > the Self comes back to its Self, and the universe "ruled" by the rela- > > tive ego/intellect is seen objectively, then there is no more need to > > be a "believer" of any stripe, to take someone else's word for it. > > Then you can take your own word for it, the word of the Self; you speak > > from The Truth, rather than from your individually-colored truth or > > beliefs. > > > > And only at that point, established in the Self, do those words like > > "devotion", "surrender", "bhakti" actually start to have any real > > meaning. Only at that point is there something real to actually sur- > > render. Our surrender of the relative intellect to step into the > > field of the Self was the surrender of an illusion, of a "shadow". > > But to surrender who we really are to God - to transform Self-reali- > > zation into God-realization - that is surrender worthy of the name. > > Only at that point does the real opening of the heart take over, > > does the path of discrimination (separating) turn into the path of > > love (merging). > > > > Most people who've not realized the Self know, somewhere deep inside, > > that no matter how strongly they present their views, and how much > > one-upsmanship they foist on others to try and make their own position > > look solid and right by making others wrong, their whole thing is built > > on quicksand - there is nothing solid, stable, true anywhere in their > > world. They know that everything is relative, slippery/slidey - and > > that the only way to find any slight stability is to use the intellect > > to build a structure of beliefs that looks solid. > > > > So those who haven't had that real, objective experience of living > > from the Self, and who haven't directly experienced that there is > > non-relative, non-slippery, non-changing absolute Truth - often as- > > sume that anyone who speaks clearly and firmly must have been "brain- > > washed", taken in, hypnotized...OR they must be an ego-maniac. The > > idea that someone could be speaking from direct, personal, innocent > > experience of unchanging Truth is difficult for them to grok. And > > the concept that someone would be willing to take that absolute Truth > > and "give it up" for something greater, for some urge of the heart, > > is even more baffling. > > > > LABEL #2 - INSIDER > > > > People on this list sometimes call me an insider in the TM Movement. > > I was once. I founded and ran one of the biggest TM Centers in the > > country (Chicago), helped create the corporate TM Program (AFSCI), > > taught credit TM/SCI classes at colleges, was trained as a Special > > Techniques teacher, led international ATRs and TTCs and AEGTCs, > > edited Maharishi knowledge tapes, ran the International Film and Tape > > Library in Switzerland, spent years on deep meditation courses under > > Maharishi's personal guidance, searched out and bid on multi-million > > dollar real estate projects for Maharishi (Capitals Project), headed > > up one of the three divisions at the National Headquarters at Living- > > ston Manor while doing Minister Training, helped organize the big > > Amherst course that ultimately brought all the people to Fairfield, > > lived in Fairfield for almost 20 years (I still own a house there), > > served on the board of the MIU "chamber of commerce" that helped bus- > > inesses move to Fairfield, renovated MIU's dorms when their condition > > threatened MIU's accreditation (and didn't lose my shirt in the pro- > > cess!), created a multi-million dollar business that was one of the > > top 10 sidha employers in Fairfield in its day, taught on MIU's Con- > > tinuing Ed faculty, helped inspire and research the huge Taste of > > Utopia course that brought over 7000 to Fairfield, did my years of > > tapas in the Golden Domes... > > > > And for 20 years now I've done NONE of that - no direct ties or re- > > sponsibilities to the TM Movement. I left the "student phase of life" > > and became a householder, as Maharishi urged. I'd "run that gauntlet" > > of life within the Movement - sometimes gracefully, sometimes pain- > > fully. My time inside the TM Movement did its job, bore its fruit, > > and wasn't needed anymore. > > > > So I've long been my own man - doing many things that get some peo- > > ple into very hot water with the Movement - I run satsangs and I talk > > about experiences, I publicly discuss knowledge on the internet, I > > teach tantra, I do counseling, I run spiritual workshops, I've stud- > > ied and taught many healing techniques, I've brought teachers to Fair- > > field that have affected hundreds of meditators lives, I interact with > > many spiritual teachers, I read "forbidden" books, I expound contro- > > versial views, I teach about sexuality and am at home with my own and > > with its place on the spiritual path, I explore and lecture about and > > do counseling with people living alternative relationship styles - > > controversial styles such as polyamory, bdsm/fetish, swinging, tantra, > > lgbt, etc.)... > > > > So, based on my current interests/activities, you could say I am very > > much an outsider in relation to official TM Movement positions, but > > still very much an insider to my Master. He is inside me; I am inside > > him. Where could I go that he isn't? And he introduced me to my God, > > and brought Him/Her to sit down inside me and begin expanding. I bow > > down to Maharishi for all that. > > > > If you have a teacher, who is a conduit for the Self, the infinite, to > > shine through - and if you still think that has much of anything to do > > with that teacher's relative body, relative personality, relative be- > > havior - then you are still at a very immature level of relationship > > to your teacher, and a very immature level of utilizing that conduit > > to the infinite. Maharishi is my "worm-hole" to the Self, to God, to > > That. > > > > TRUE DEVOTION - REAL BHAKTI - WHO HAS IT? > > > > 1. THE PERSONAL-CONTACT RULE FOR TRUE BHAKTI > > > > Someone commented that I couldn't claim devotion to Maharishi if I > > haven't seen him (his relative body) in person for a long time. (So > > I'm curious, where does the boundary line come that distinguishes real > > devotion? Does seeing Maharishi far off across a big lecture hall > > count? Does it count if he's in the next room, speaking over a sound > > system? What about seeing him live on TV - but from the next room, > > the next town, the next continent? What about streaming live internet > > video? Or videotapes/CDs - how recent do they have to be? Do audio- > > tapes count - you're not literally "seeing" him? What about telephone > > calls, letters, etc.? How close in time/space do I have to get to him > > to qualify as a "true devotee"? How often do I have to get that close? > > Does it count if he's thinking of me, or if I'm thinking of him? How > > often?) Obviously, from my laughing sarcasm, in my experience this > > person's comment reflects a very limited, relative, basic-level view > > of devotion. > > > > It's not Maharishi's relative body that I relate to much anymore; it > > is his expanded reality, his cosmic presence, his omnipresence, the > > awareness that he is. He lives in me, as my Self. I live in him. > > It's his thinking, in his role as a reflector/conduit of That, that > > I attune myself to and become ever more deeply. Our relationship is > > on that level. > > > > 2. THE WELCOME-IN-THE-MOVEMENT RULE FOR TRUE BHAKTI > > > > Someone commented that, with all my activities, I'd never be welcome > > anymore in the Movement, or to represent it, and wondered how I could > > be devoted to Maharishi and yet not able to participate in his Move- > > ment. > > > > First, that actually isn't what I find. Just two years ago, living > > in Fairfield, I was invited to do knowledge presentations for a cam- > > pus advanced lecture program for students. And because I have no > > major power issues - with the Movement, or with masculine authority > > in general - I get a program badge when I apply, without hassle. Also, > > I'm on the Movement's various e-mail lists (national and local), and > > I go to TM Movement events in my local area occasionally; I am respect- > > fully welcomed as an experienced teacher/leader and even asked to take > > on responsibilities now and then (which I rarely have the time or in- > > clination for). > > > > Second, even if I couldn't do these things, they are irrelevant to my > > devotion to my Master. There was a time, when I was more identified > > with the field of boundaries, that my involvement or not in activities > > on that level was important, made me feel connected... When I didn't > > have Maharishi established inside me, as the Self, than contact with > > his "trappings", his Movement, offered some solace, some comfort. > > > > But my relationship to Maharishi now transcends these specific rela- > > tive activities. The TM activities that I can or can't participate > > in neither add to nor diminish my love for Maharishi, or my connec- > > tion to the Self (for which he acts as my conduit, or touchstone). > > > > To me, the TM Movement, with all its activities, is a kind of train- > > ing facility, a place to test yourself, temper yourself, strengthen > > yourself; it's also a place to take refuge when you need to escape > > the world, and for some a place to hide; it's definitely a place to > > burn up karma. The TM Movement is a kind of a spiritual "game" - a > > gauntlet to run - and you'd better be awake and know what you're get- > > ting into if you choose to enter that arena. It's Maharishi's Move- > > ment - and a big mirror of the world's karma - but it's certainly not > > the only path to Maharishi. > > > > 3. THE FOLLOW-EVERY-INSTRUCTION-TO-THE-LETTER RULE FOR TRUE BHAKTI > > > > Someone commented that I couldn't claim devotion to Maharishi if I'm > > not following every "instruction" that he gives. Again, this is a > > very narrow, immature view of the relationship to a Master. If only > > it were that simple. ;) > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give apparently contradictory instructions? > > A: Often. > > > > Q: How do you resolve those? > > A: By tuning into the Self, to Maharishi's thinking as That; so these > > contradictions become an invitation to further attune yourself to > > the Self - much more important on that level than on the level of > > performance, of action. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give individuals instructions which contradict > > his general public instructions? > > A: Often. > > So, based on outer appearances/behaviors, you can't really tell > > if someone is following Maharishi's instructions or not. That's > > a very personal, private thing that you'd likely not have access > > to. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give individuals direct instructions to ignore > > some of his public instructions, no matter how that "looks" to > > others? > > A: I've experienced this personally. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give one group of people one instruction, and > > another group an apparently contradictory one? > > A: Often - causing them to either have a huge conflict, or to act as > > "checks and balances" on each other. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give an instruction, and later completely re- > > verse it? > > A: Of course - we've discussed that here many times. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give so many instructions (for various daily > > practices, routine, study, etc.), and then other instructions > > (for activities to accomplish, family duties, etc.), that there > > would not be enough hours in the day to do them all? > > A: Of course. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give instructions that have different mean- > > ings at different levels of consciousness, at different places > > on the path - or that may appear to mean one thing, but on deep- > > er investigation mean something different? > > A: All the time. > > > > Q: Does Maharishi ever give instructions to test you - test your > > attachment to something, or your devotion, or whatever? > > A: Sure - not for his sake, but to point out to you where you're > > stuck, or attached. And once you've had that insight, he some- > > times retracts the instruction, and doesn't make you go through > > with the difficult thing. > > > > This whole question of "following the Master's instructions" is much > > richer, much deeper than your question implies - than the simple idea > > of mindlessly following orders. It is a field ripe with possibilities > > for attuning your mind to cosmic mind, for alert, wide-awake devotion. > > It's as complicated, or simple, as life itself. > > > > So, since you don't know what instructions I've been given - public- > > ly or privately - what my "program" is, what my responsibilities or > > assignments in life are, etc., you really have absolutely no way to > > tell how well I'm following Maharishi's instructions, do you? Nor > > would you have any need to; that would be a very private thing between > > Master and devotee. > > > > The only thing of any value for you to do in this arena, is to focus > > your attention on YOUR instructions, YOUR understanding of them, and > > YOUR success in following them. > > > > Here's a story that illustrates the ease with which we can misinter- > > pret another's path: > > > > YOUNG GURU DEV AND THE CAVE > > > > Maharishi tells the story of a young Guru Dev, who may have been > > around 11 or 12 years old at the time, and was a newcomer to the > > ashram of his Master: > > > > The Master had given young Guru Dev instruction in meditation. And > > he quietly told him to leave the hustle and bustle of the ashram and > > go practice in silence, in the caves in the hills nearby. So for > > some time, young Guru Dev was not seen much around the ashram. > > > > The Master's ashram had many people in it, including some senior > > disciples who had been with the Master for decades, and were very > > learned in the Vedas. They had some subtle ego about their posi- > > tion, and some resentment of the obvious deep relationship young > > Guru Dev, a mere boy, had developed so quickly with their Master. > > So, when he disappeared from the ashram, they were secretly pleased, > > assuming that he'd done something to displease the Master, or was > > found to be too young and immature to handle the ashram life. > > > > One day, after many months had passed, a holiday approached and > > the Master expressed to his senior staff a desire to take a re- > > treat of silence in a cave up in the hills. He sent his top dis- > > ciple to the hills to seek out and prepare a proper cave for him > > to reside in. He reminded the disciple that young Guru Dev was > > living in one of those caves, and because of his familiarity with > > the area, he should be consulted about the cave selection. > > > > So the chief disciple arrived at the caves in the hills, and sought > > out young Guru Dev, finding him meditating in his cave. > > > > The chief disciple said: "I am on a very important mission for the > > Master. He has sent me here to find him an empty cave in which to > > reside. Please help me to find one suitable for him - unoccupied, > > clean, large, dry, etc. - since you are familiar with this area." > > > > After a brief hesitation, young Guru Dev said: "Please tell the > > Master: 'There is no empty cave here'". > > > > The chief disciple, thinking that the young boy was not taking the > > mission seriously, said: "Of course there are empty caves here; I > > passed some on my way to find you. Please help me to find a suit- > > able one! The Master has commanded it." > > > > Quietly, but firmly, young Guru Dev said: "Are you not here on a > > mission for the Master? Are you not his messenger?" > > > > The chief disciple answered: "Yes, but..." > > > > "No 'buts'" said young Guru Dev. "You may be the chief disciple, > > but today your role is that of a messenger. You were instructed > > to bring me a question, and now your job is to take my answer back > > to the Master. Respectfully, I ask that you please do just that, > > do your duty. The question from the Master, to be asked of me, was > > 'Is there a suitable empty cave there?' The answer I'd like you to > > deliver, word-for-word, is: 'There is no empty cave here'." > > > > The chief disciple, astounded at the audacity of this young boy to > > speak to him this way, left. He surveyed some caves on his own and > > then went back to the ashram to report on his mission, and especial- > > ly this arrogant boy's behavior, to the Master. > > > > But first, he discussed this rudeness with the other senior disci- > > ples. They agreed that it would be most instructive (and embarras- > > sing), to young Guru Dev, and to other young disciples, to have this > > issue raised in the ashram-wide satsang that happened with the Master > > each afternoon. They knew that young Guru Dev came down from his cave > > each Friday for supplies, and attended the satsang, and they waited > > patiently overnight, since the next day was Friday. > > > > Overnight, the ashram was abuzz with rumors of the young boy who had > > disrespected the chief disciple, and the Master. Everyone made a > > point to attend the afternoon satsang to see what the Master would > > do to this insolent boy. > > > > At the appropriate time in the satsang, the elder disciples moved > > to broach the subject. But rather than appear blatantly accusatory, > > they instead chose to bring up the subject in the form of a hypo- > > thetical knowledge question. They asked: "Master, is it not a great > > sin for a disciple to disrespect or disobey the Master?" "And is > > that sin not extended to the senior disciples of the Master, acting > > on his business?" "Master, is not the punishment for such a serious > > offense, banishment from the ashram?" > > > > To all of these, the Master responded "yes". > > > > Having set the stage in this way, the senior disciple then related > > the behavior of young Guru Dev the previous day, and the members > > of the ashram were shocked. > > > > The Master strongly said: "Young man, step forward and explain your > > behavior to the whole ashram." > > > > Young Guru Dev stepped into the center of the gathering, directly > > in front of the Master, clasped his hands in devotion, and pros- > > trated to the Master. When the Master directed him to rise, he > > calmly spoke these words: > > > > "Master, when your chief disciple found me, and asked me that ques- > > tion from you, I knew that it had a deeper meaning than the appar- > > ent surface one. Surely, with all these great, long-time disciples, > > with all their wisdom and experience, and with all those here who've > > spent much time in those caves, and some who live there now, and > > with your own great spiritual vision, I knew that you did not actual- > > ly need my advice on picking a physical cave. So the meaning of your > > question was immediately obvious. You were asking me something much > > deeper, about the condition of my spiritual practice that you had > > assigned me and sent me to the hills to do. > > > > "And when I looked inside, and surveyed the situation, I realized that > > somehow you had been very successful in your work with me, because > > when I looked into the only cave about which I had any valuable infor- > > mation, my heart cave, I found that it was completely full - full with > > you. No matter where I looked, there was not a bit of vacant space > > there; there was no place that you were not already. So I respectfully > > told the chief disciple: please report to the Master, and tell him > > 'There is no vacant cave here'. It was the simple, obvious, truthful > > answer to your real question." > > > > With that, the whole ashram was astounded, for they saw that where > > they had perceived an insolent young boy, there was a devotee who > > had innocently accomplished what they dreamed of, who had become > > the true reflection of the Master. Everyone, from the chief disci > > ple to the barest beginner in the ashram, felt the wave of love that > > connected the Master and young Guru Dev, and were reminded how im- > > portant it is to put their attention on the depth of things, rather > > than let their attention get caught in the boundaries. > > > > LABEL #3 - IGNORING MAHARISHI'S FAULTS > > > > People on this list sometimes accuse me of ignoring all the talk > > about Maharishi's "relative behaviors, flaws, faults, inconsistencies, > > mistakes, harmful actions"... It's amazing how people who don't know > > me can project so much onto me. I read this list, and many others > > about TM and Maharishi, pretty religiously, and with clarity and alert- > > ness. I could repeat your stories and complaints and arguments better > > than some of you can. I stay alert to discriminate what is fact, what > > is opinion, what is rumor. I pay attention to the motives and feelings > > of those who raise these issues. I watch for the degree of obsession/ > > attachment of the reporters. I use all this as opportunities to exa- > > mine my own feelings, to open my heart even more, and to attune to > > cosmic intelligence. > > > > But even more relevant, I lived around and reported to Maharishi for > > years, more than most (not all) of you, saw many things, and could add > > stories to yours - not rumors or 3rd-hand accounts, but stories that > > powerfully impacted on me and my feelings and caused tremendous upheav- > > al and soul-searching. I know what it's like to face that fork in the > > road in relationship to Maharishi/the Movement: (1) be deeply hurt, > > yield to anger, blame something "out there", close up, become a victim; > > vs. (2) feel the pain, dive into it, embrace the karma, explore the > > lesson, thank Master/Nature for that purifying fire, expand. > > > > The thing is, I've come to realize that none of these discussions > > about Maharishi's individual personality and behaviors, taken on the > > relative level, are important to me. Maharishi was presented to me > > to be my conduit to the Self, to God, to That. "Tat padam dharshitam > > yena - by which the sign of That has been revealed." He serves that > > role beautifully. I am blessed to have that conduit, and selfishly > > make use of it. > > > > I can direct my attention toward that conduit in such a way that I > > invite it to open and pour its blessings on me more and more and > > create more connection/unity (that kind of attention is called > > devotion/bhakti); or I can direct my attention toward that conduit > > in such a way that I invite it to close and shut down and create > > more separateness/fear (that kind of attention is called doubt/ > > criticism). We each have that choice of how to approach a conduit > > to infinity. > > > > CONCLUSION ABOUT LABELING > > > > So when people try to paint me with their broad brush of "true be- > > liever" and "insider" and "intellectually weak devotee and ignorer > > of the facts" - it just makes me laugh and laugh. The things we > > try to project onto others is often a mirror of what we don't want > > to admit to in ourself, or fear in ourself, or censor in ourself. > > Lovingly I say to you, the next time you call someone a "true > > believer", see if you aren't just as much a "true non-believer" - > > just as stuck, blinded by your own emotional traumas, etc. The > > next time you call someone an "insider", see if you aren't resent- > > ing being an "outsider" - unloved, unbelonging, abandoned. The > > next time you call someone an "unthinking, deluded bhakti", see > > if you aren't an over-thinking believer in individuality, afraid to > > let down your guard, to open up your heart. These labels only re- > > veal your own doubts and cynicisms. > > > > In my next post I'll address self-doubt and cynicism, and the role > > of profound trust and surrender, not as the negation of intellectual > > inquiry, but as the true foundations for alert and meaningful ques- > > tioning. > > > > Namaste, > > > > Michael > > > > PARA - THE CENTER FOR REALIZATION > > Michael Dean Goodman Ph.D., D.D., Director > > Boca Raton (Palm Beach County) Florida > > 561-350-3930 (24 hours) * tantra@ > > > > Counseling * Private Educational Sessions * Spiritual Guidance * Satsang > > Classes * Workshops & Retreats * Group Presentations * Articles & Essays > > Clients and programs throughout the United States, Europe, and India > > Working in person or by phone > > Free initial consultation to discuss your needs and goals > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
