--- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> wrote: > > > I've had an active relationship with His Holiness for many > > many years. > > Is it out of the norm? Sure! Yes! Of course! > > Is it absolutely real? Sure! Yes! Of course! > > > > Should I deny it, or not speak about it, or doubt my > > direct perception for the last 25 years, just because > > those who haven't had such an experience cannot > > comprehend it, or doubt it? > > The same question must have confronted Maharishi, when he > was equally inspired by visions of Guru Dev in 1955. With > the slight difference, that he had known him (and his vibe) > in body, and was very well in a position to judge the > validity of his experience. Easy for anybody to dismiss > this, take an old lecture of GD out of context. Besides > that, we all know how often masters contradict themselves. > Even Guru Dev could have changed his mind, once he had > left his brahmanical body and his Shankaracharya position.
And "besides that," :-) if I have such an experience and dismiss it because of something my teacher told me just doesn't happen in nature, I'm just a nobody. Whereas if I believe that what my teacher said was not true, and Just Another Guru Contradiction, I can believe in my experience, which allows me to be a lot more special than "those who haven't had such an exper- ience and cannot comprehend it." :-) Just to clarify, I am *not* saying that everyone who has ever had a visionary experience was deluding themselves out of a desire to seem "important" and "special." But that *IS* true about many people, and I think it's a good thing to keep in mind when evaluating their claims. In almost every case, the claims themselves cannot possibly be either verified or disproven. So my personal "litmus test" when dealing with such claims (*especially* claims of communicating with the dead teacher) is to watch the *overall* behavior of the person who is making the claim. Do they treat the experience they had matter-of-factly, as if it was no more important than any other experience they've had in their lives, or do they make it into A Really Big Thing, one that makes them unique and special? Do they use the experience itself as a mechanism for setting themselves up as some kind of "expert" or someone who is more capable of passing along "the latest message from the dead teacher" to others? Or as "the next great teacher" themselves? Just to clarify, I think Jim's handling his report- ing of his own subjective experiences fairly well. But I have seen other folks, in the Rama trip and others, who *definitely* used their "visions of the now-dead teacher" to set themselves up as "the new teacher," and to develop a fanatical following who hovered around them waiting for the next "message from the teacher." And often to pay them a great deal of money for "delivering" these "messages." It is this last phenomenon I expect to happen a LOT in the TM movement when Maharishi finally dies. I expect there to be at least half a dozen folks who start hearing "messages from Maharishi" and that mini-cults will develop around each of them. On the one hand (as a sociological phenomenon) it'll be fun and fascinating to watch. On the other hand (as an exercise in mind control and charlatanry) it's IMO likely to get really ugly. Then again, maybe I'll be surprised and no one will start claiming to be in almost daily "communi- cation" with Maharishi after he dies. Yeah, right...like *that's* gonna happen... :-) 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/
