|
|
|
|||
|
| responsibility and stuff |  | ||
| Forum | |||
|
As that thread is slipping down below I thought I'd bring it up here. I've been doing a bit of thinking these last few days about all this stuff, and certain things have come up. OK, there's this whole debate of - did M make us do it, or didn't he? How much free will did we have at that time? Well, from the start, he didn't make us do it. All of us who received K did it of our own free will. Those of us who did it before 1975 knew exactly what we were getting ourselves into, as no secret was made of the fact that M was widely thought to be the Lord incarnate etc. No one can possibly say they were made to do it - I can remember clearly the numbers of people I dragged to programmes, a few of whom did take K, and the vast majority of whom walked away saying it wasn't for them. And there was nothing I or anybody else could have done about that. So we have to admit that those of us who did receive K must have been susceptible in some way. We must have been able and willing to suspend disbelief and scepticism, and submit ourselves to a process. Why did we do that? Because we were 'seekers of truth'? There were plenty of 'seekers of truth' out there who went to programmes and smelt a rat. Why didn't we? Or why did we suspend our initial disbelief? And here's another thing - we've been saying here for a long time that M almost forced people into ashrams by saying it was the best way to be close to him. It's true - he did say that - loud and clear and often. However, there's one thing that rarely gets mentioned here, and it should get mentioned because it's true - M also often said (way back in the early 70's and all the way along until he closed the ashrams) - that you could 'realise the Knowledge' in or outside the ashram and that it made no difference - all you needed to do was satsang, service and meditation. It all depended on which of his utterings you chose to focus on. You could take a course of action and justify it either way. Ashram premie to non-ashram premie: "Why don't you move into the ashram? You know you can devote yourself to M completely there - he says so." Non-ashram premie: "So why does he also say you can realise Knowledge anywhere as long as you practise s, s and m?" Ashram premie: "Ah, but he doesn't really mean that... you should hear what he says to us ashram premies..." Non-ashram premie: "Well that may be so, but I've heard him continually say it doesn't matter, so I'm going to stay with my non-premie husband and my well-paid interesting job and keep practising K. I feel just fine as I am." Were some of is just naturally attracted to his ashram exhortations - whereas the rest took notice of the other stuff where he said it didn't matter? In other words, we all focussed on what we wanted to see, because of stuff within us. How about the idea that many of the ashram premies were people who lacked the confidence to make it outside, and so seized on the ashram content of what M said, making it their raison d'etre, for fear of not being able to find a raison d'etre anywhere else? Comments, anyone? Livia
|
| Previous | Recommend View All Current page | Next |
| Replies to this message |
|
