--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I have *no problem* with what you're both > saying -- they're *your* experiences...what have > I got to say about them? -- I might throw out a > question in response. > > Have you ever considered the possibility that you > *project* the Self that you are feeling and seeing > in Maharishi *onto* Maharishi?
Yes, of course; that's one way of looking at it. That would certainly describe my general feeling about the matter until this last course, the first I'd been on in 24 years: IOW the first I'd been on since I Woke up and realized we were all the same, and went on my own "rebellious" non-path of continued Self-discovery and Self- unfoldment. On this latest course his incredibly detailed and highly personal omniscience, and his unbelievable Presence of Being, showed me directly that he was clearly occupying and illuminating whole other layers of my Self that I hadn't known were there; that in fact this *I* was a projection of *him*, who is a projection of Guru Dev, who is a...and so on. And yet yes, it's all very ordinary, very simple, simply the Self. Anyhow this basically blew me away, into *intensely* rich, overwhelmingly enjoyable devotion, and I have not normally been a bhakti kind of guy. So yes, you might say I am projecting all of this, but all I can say for sure is it is not the level of "I" that was my normal hang-out spot, where it *is* pretty clearly MMY's, or at least MMY's and mine when he is attending to me and I am attending to him :-) At any rate, the Self is showing the Self some wonderful Selves! > I think it is safe to say that you have "invested" > in Maharishi over the years. Been there, done that, > thrown away the T-shirt, but I get it. This is, in > a sense, another derivative of the same Latin root, > "investiture." You elevated Maharishi by giving him > the gown of authority, the symbolic robe that can > only be worn by those speaking from the goal that > you seek. Again, no problemo...as I said, been > there, done that. Oh, trust me, I had been there, done that, given away the T-shirt, and gone on my own merry way. But with the Self having already realized the Self, I *had* no goal, other than to simply BE there. I knew that was all that was required of me. :-) > So when he speaks, is it possible that what you hear > in his words is not necessarily what is really there, > but what you *project* onto it because you are focused > on the goal, and you "see" that goal in him? Well, that's a perfect description of Creation as a whole, of course. It's applicable to everything. (Except that I wasn't focussed on a goal, having no goal other than to simply BE there.) Let's take your case: when Judy speaks, is it possible that what you hear in her words is not necessarily what is really there, but what you *project* onto it because you're focused on your goal (whatever it may be for you) and you "see" that goal in her? I think the answer to that is obvious to most of us here.:-) But what if Judy were speaking back word for word what you had just spoken to your closest friend that morning, or were thinking in silence a moment earlier, and furthermore went into those words in more and more detail until you saw *exactly* where you were coming from, in far richer, deeper detail than you had known was there, showing you layers and layers of intimacy, splendor, richness, simplicity, unity, love? And this happened over and over and over and over and over and over...? Let me tell you, whatever I was expecting (and I wasn't expecting much, that's for sure, having been there and done that and given the T-shirt away), *this* was *not* what I was expecting from the old fellow or from myself or from the other course participants. :-) > I guess what I'm saying is, "Does the fact that the > student 'sees' enlightenment in the teacher mean that > the teacher is really enlightened, or does it merely > mean that the student has had a breakthrough in being > able to 'see' enlightenment, and sees it wherever he > looks?" Absolutely to both; I *was* able now to see new depths of enlightenment both in MMY and myself and in his supremely intimate identity with me, as in one sense the very source of my conscious I. And I was able to enjoy deeper enlightenment wherever I looked: even the Dome, that poor old hospital for the walking wounded was now my most glorious "particle accelerator," a true siddhapura of fully enlightened beings, every one of Us one of the perfect particles in my bodymind. Is MMY "really" enlightened, outside of my appreciation of him? Are you? Who knows, and who cares? Thanks to my Being on his course I am deriving a new and intensely rich enjoyment and appreciation of the simplicity and power of my Creator/cresture selves, of MMY and of everyone else. Since he was the obvious source of my learning to BE, I consider him to be my primary teacher. Now I also know him to BE my own BEING. Yes, BEING is everywhere, but it also has an immense torrent at its source -- it's like an ocean that also has an underwater fountain, and Guru Dev and MMY are two source-points deep in that fountain, and I tend to hang out or identify with an I in that same fountain, somewhat closer to the surface... It's all me, but then so are you, so why am I writing this at all? :-) *L*L*L*
