well said, Rick. As it turns out, I had a similar
conversation with a former Rama student recently. 
Like your friend, this gal was trying to "save" me
from my backsliding ways and "help me" return to a
"proper and correct" understanding of who and what
Rama (Frederick Lenz) was.

I tolerated it for a few moments, making jokes the
whole time, trying to get her to lighten up. But
lightening up just wasn't in the picture, because
she had decided that I really needed to be "saved,"
and that she was just the one to do the "saving."

So finally I said to her, "Look...here is where I'm
at with regard to any of this. Anything I think or
believe about Rama is just a theory, and one that I
am not particularly attached to. I am willing to 
state at any time that I could be completely WRONG
in my ideas about who and what he was. Can you say
that about YOUR beliefs about him?"

She hemmed and hawed and dodged the question for 
some minutes, but I kept repeating it, saying that
if we were to have any kind of meaningful discussion,
we should start off on the same footing, both of us
with ideas about the man we were discussing, but both
of us willing to admit that these ideas might be 
WRONG. She kept dodging. I kept repeating the ques-
tion. Finally she flew into a purple-faced rage,
yelled at me for a few minutes, and stormed off, 
hopefully never to darken my door again.

The thing is, she was UNABLE to say the words, "I might
be wrong." She couldn't get them out of her mouth. To 
do so would have opened a Pandora's Box for her that
she wanted no part of. Her faith was based on the abso-
lute *certainty* that she was right, and she could not,
even for a moment, admit even the *possibility* that she
might be wrong.

I kinda suspect that the friend who wanted to "help you"
would have reacted the same way...


--- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> He said:
> 
> If you sincerely want to know the truth, I'll help you come to 
terms with
> Maharishi and the Movement. But Ricky, if your heart is already 
set and I
> would be wasting my time, then, you can go on with the negative 
judgements
> and good luck.
> 
>  
> 
> I said:
> 
> I thought a lot about this and kind of "felt" my way into it during
> meditation, and here's what I think (and feel). I love you, Bobby, 
Paul
> Morehead, Craig Pearson, my old Purusha buddies, and the many good 
souls in
> the movement. Most of the people I just mentioned love what 
they're doing
> and seem to be thriving doing it. Bobby (to whom I'm Cc-ing this 
note)
> absolutely glows with love, energy, and enthusiasm. I consider him 
a genuine
> saint, (although, being a genuine saint, he wouldn't admit or even 
know that
> he is). So many of the people I just mentioned are brilliant at 
what they
> do. I couldn't hold a candle to them. My heart recoils at the 
thought of
> engaging them in a conversation in which I would be obligated to 
bring out
> things that might dampen their enthusiasm and devotion. If it ever 
becomes
> more evolutionary for some of these people to leave the movement 
than to
> stay in it, then probably that's what they'll do. Most of those 
who stay in
> the movement will see them as having fallen or become deluded, 
because
> seeing their course of action as perfectly acceptable might shake 
the
> foundations of their own motivation. But those who leave can live 
with that.
> 
>  
> 
> The conditions you've set up for our discussion are not equitable. 
You
> clearly imply that you possess "the truth" and that I am mired 
in "negative
> judgments" from which you might extricate me. I don't regard you 
or anyone
> as having a monopoly on the truth. If some of my own judgments are 
overly
> negative, I'd certainly like to revise them. Others may be 
insightful or
> well-informed, but for you to see them that way would be to start 
a crack in
> the cosmic egg, and as I said above, I don't want to do that. I 
don't mean
> to sound condescending, but chicks have to peck their way out. 
Helping them
> from the outside can be injurious.
> 
>  
> 
> My guiding principles are pretty well expressed by the quotes on 
the home
> page of FairfieldLife:
> 
>  
> 
> "What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find 
out, which
> is the exact opposite." ~ Bertrand Russell
> 
>  
> 
> "The healthy mind challenges its own assumptions." ~ The I Ching
> 
>  
> 
> "Whatever you think, it's more than that" ~ Incredible String Band
> 
>  
> 
> "Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not 
believe what
> your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But
> whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be 
kind,
> conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings -- 
that
> doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide." ~ 
Dharma-pada,
> Buddha Shakyamuni
> 
>  
> 
> "Take what you need and leave the rest." ~ The Band
> 
>  
> 
> I do not claim to know the truth. I hope my judgments, if I am 
making any,
> remain open to revision as new information presents itself. And I 
try never
> dismiss any information out of hand. "Pretty much any topic is 
fair game."
> (Another line from the FFL description.) We don't live in a black 
and white
> universe and a fundamentalist, holier-than-thou attitude, whoever 
expresses
> it, is a reflection of individual ego, not of the true nature of 
things. It
> reveals a failure to appreciate God's infinite, all-embracing, 
compassionate
> nature.
> 
>  
> 
> So I hope we always remain friends, and can spend some fun time 
together, as
> I often do with the Moreheads, without friction over our different
> orientations. Perhaps a few years from now we'll each see things 
from
> different perspectives, and long discussions will be appropriate 
and
> fruitful.
> 
>  
> 
> Your pal,
> 
>  
> 
> Rick
> 
>  
> 
> P.S. The Vikings say they're coming for you next.
>


Reply via email to