What if the books are still right?

[Trish]

What if Richard wasn't wrong?

I really don't think he ever was. I read the books, and I read about the divorce.

One of the quotes that I've read from him in his divorce was his insistance that he forgot to tell people that everything in his books could be wrong. BUT what if, even with the divorce, the books are STILL right.

I can hear some folks saying that the books are still right, with Richard and Leslie making a mistake. I'm not saying that either. I don't think they were wrong to divorce either.

It may seem like the divorce and the book One are incompatible, but there is a perspective where they are irrelevant to each other and therefore both right. Doesn't anyone else see this perspective?

I just wish I could show him that he wasn't wrong. If anyone knows a way to reach him, please send him the following link. Read it if you wish. It begins to explain in his language.

tavernmagic.com/personal/art/Bachs.doc

It's only a beginning of the story...

[alyssa]

Trish, I haven't read your story yet, but I am touched by your post here. I agree, it isn't wrong, none of it. In another parallel existance, Richard and Leslie may well live happily ever after, or "by the book," if you will. In this one, they came together to move on.

I think to assume otherwise is not only passing judgement on another but invalidates those of us who have been touched, at our own and varied levels of understanding, by Richard's writings. They were "right," if their paths led them, honestly, to this place, this choice. That soulmates find one another in a lifetime is unquestionably profound, but there is no cosmic or karmic law that demands how they re-connect, how long or whether they stay together. A soulmate, in the truest sense, is always connected; it is simply the phyiscal, space-time manifestation of that which shifts and changes with the tide. And that's ok, too.

[Webmaster]

Firstly, who said the books were wrong? (well, except for the mass of Richard Bach's fans who are too stupid to understand half of what he was trying to convey in his books, because if they understood even that much they would not criticize his divorce)

Secondly, somehow I am quite certain that R. Bach doesn't need you to tell him that he wasn't wrong. So you can relax about trying to reach him.

[jaa]

Thanks Trish,

I liked the story, think it's quite relevant to what I happen to observe sometimes - lots of teories and teachings with only real sense in making money with them. I don't condemn this sort of business (at least try to) but it's not as good an oservation as I would like to have .

[Tristan]

Webmaster, i believe that you are a really flat mind person, who has mitified Richard Bach into some kind of god beyond good and evil. Richard Bach ows everyone an explanation on his divorce, WHY? Simple, all he has earn with his books is because of us. We are the ones who made his way of life posible, we bought his books, we believe in his words. And he is a lie. Not what he says in his books. He said not long ago in an interview, and i quote, "...soul mates are not defined by a legal married...".
Well not long ago i met a girl who has lost her father from cancer. Her mother got married when she was 24 and she lost him at the age of 53. She once told me it was an honour for me to be with him all this time, there will never be someone like him for me again, and every time she speaks of him love just overflows the room, and when you see that kind of love you get speachless. My aunt lost her husband 20 years ago, she was 55 then. And she still get her eyes dim every time she speaks of him, not with pain, but with love. She told me once, He was the man for me and he is waiting on the other side.
Well dear webmaster, i think he is a lie, Richard is a lie, a father who run away from his home, leaving 6 childreen behind, and a wife, in pursuit of true love, who he told us has found, but truth, true love, soul mates, exists. In reall life not in Tv or fiction book, but with reall people, everyday people. People who still believe, who shops for books in which they see people fall in love, and stay forever together, Why? Because LOVE EXISTS but its too damn difficult to make it work, rememeber the concerto.
You dont care what i think, i dont care i just wanted to tell him, you are still a child running from compromises, and what then Richard, what then?
And Webmaster, the book said "all that is written in here may be a lie" the book said everything could be wrong.

[Webmaster]

That is really funny! You are the one who has taken his words as THE DIVINE TRUTH, and me, when I do not seek any other human being to be a higher authority on truth that my own self, me, I am the one who has made Richard into a God? I don’t care about Richard and what he does. I care about him, and his books only inasmuch as they help me discover and clarify my own truth.

I really have a lot to say, but I don’t feel like getting into it. I’d like to tackle something much more fundamental. I want you – or someone – to please show me any quotes from The Bridge Across Forever that somehow stand in contradiction with Richard’s divorce. I have sold my own copy, but from what I remember, he never said that his love for Leslie was FOREVER (not that he could truthfully say that anyway). So please, just show me something concrete – show me those lies you keep talking about.

[Michal]

Dear Tristan,

The common definition of "soul-mates" would be 2 people who have 'found each other' and fell in love, and spend their rest of their lives together in complete synch and peaceful sharing.

The actual definition of "soul-mates", or its lack thereof, is simply 2 (or more) individuals whom have a certain connection--which type would be solely defined by said people--between them, but that doesn't mean they have to be involved romantically, involved at all, or if they are involved romantically--or in some other manner--it doesn't mean that they will (or Have to) stay together forever.

People share, and grow apart from each other. It's life. And it's that simple.

Shredding Richard Bach's writing isn't valid. He wrote what he believed in at the time, and people took from him what they needed to make their lives better. And they still do. The fact that he himself did not follow his own words is pretty natural, when you think about it; people often give advices that they themselves do not follow. And why should you, or any other person, criticize him for that?

You make it sound like you thought he was God. Like his personal choices shattered any hope you had for a better life. My opinion? You're silly.

Idolizing a person or a piece of paper with words in it is an act of silliness, and many people are infected with it. The only thing there IS to do is to take those words under consideration, see if they can apply to your own life in order to make them better somehow, and the person behind those words? Has a right to live however he/she pleases with or without regard to their own saying.

All these books, the Main idea in them is that they are just a collection of ideas. Not lectures, not holy sayings, just ideas. And You, and any other person out there, has the choice to accept them or not, and maybe even apply them to yourself.

People like you are a shame to spirituality, because you miss out entirely the main concept: agree/disagree, not Idolize.

[a huge fan]

Guest-Tristan said:

And he is a lie. Not what he says in his books. He said not long ago in an interview, and i quote, "...soul mates are not defined by a legal married..."

Tristan you contradict yourself here. If you quote RB as defining soul mates as something NOT defined by legal marriage then the status of their marriage license or divorce papers does not, in any way, invalidate the truth of the connection that Richard and Leslie had or have. Spiritual soul connections have little, if anything, to do with legal documents, Tristan. Nowhere in 'Bridge' was it stated that marriage, even their marriage, was forever .... and in fact, the truth remains that in another parallel life, Richard and Leslie remain together .... while in another, they explore their own personal paths -- having come together for the very reasons they did: to grow, to love and to learn from one another.

I agree with other comments that you seem to have placed RB on some sort of illusive pedestal and you sound very disillusioned. Richard owes no one an explanation other than that which has been given ... that he and Leslie have honored their love and each other's process by following the next steps along their respective paths.

I have no doubt that the decision made between them was difficult and part of yet another process for each one of them. To assume anything else is disrespectful and insensitive, Tristan. Yes, there are great loves and people who feel so blessed by it that it is enough for them to hold onto that memory when their partner passes away. Then again, that could be a case of denial and living in the past -- sure the passion of it is beautiful and awe-inspiring ... but I believe there are many people we encounter and connect with in our lives, for various reasons at various times ... who can offer us so much more than we can discover on our own (or even with just one significant other).

Yes, Bridge was an amazing tale of the kind of love we all should be so blessed to find. But their's was never a lovey-dovey, red roses and candlelight sailing off into the sunset romance novel ... rather these two soulmates found each other, challenged each other, pushed each other to the very depths and heights of self-awareness to continue their individual and collective growth process ....

They continue to do so ... even without a marriage license between them.

[jonathanfan]

Sorry there seems to be pain in this post. It is right, the books are still right and okay.

Neither Richard nor Leslie have EVER said anything was wrong
they simply realized after they had accomplished their work together that they had different ideas for the rest of their lives.

They were brought together, to teach us all some things, period. That accomplished, their souls in this universe needed time apart and yes in a parallel universe they most certainly are together living the "dream" lives they taught us all that we could accomplish, when we find our soulmates.

BTW - it's okay to be upset because they divorced, I was at first, because I liked the "IDEA" of soulmates finding each other, especially them, because I loved Leslie as an acotor and Richard as one of my teachers into my soul. But none of us should attack the integrity of the teachers. They did what they were supposed to do, and are still doing that.
We all have certain things we are meant to do and when that part of our destiny is complete, we continue on with the rest of it. And sometimes things are just meant to change from what we first thought they should be.

The feelings you are feeling, and the thoughts you are pulling from the experience are what you are supposed to be feeling right now - and your learning from this, even if you don't understand it - yet. When I first started my spiritual journey, I was confused, terrified and reluctant - I now know that all of that is part of the learning process, so just learn all you can and try not to pass judgement on others, as they shouldn't upon any one of us.

Blessings and love to you all - remember the complete title of Illusions - "THE RELUCTANT MESSIAH" (a teacher and that's what Richards books have always done - for himself, Leslie and all of us - TEACH).

Bonnie
(jonathanfan)
Thank you Richard for all you have taught me, through sharing your lifes lessons with us all.

[JamesBach]

When a pilot crashes an airplane, is that proof that flying is bad, wrong, or impossible? Of course not. We separate the facts of aeronautics from the application of those facts in a particular instance.

Richard Bach fell in love. He wrote about that love. Many people in history have written about love-- falling in love and falling out of love. What he wrote about was true, I believe, and everything important about it is still true, today. It's true not because he SAYS so, but because it resonates with my own grasp of how the world works. It's true for me. You can choose if it's true for you.

Tristan, I think *you* owe *yourself* an explanation about why you have harnessed your happiness to someone else's love life. Doesn't that diminish you? Aren't you more important than that?

As far as I know, my father has never told a lie. I think he's congenitally incapable of it. Some of his children wish he would tell us a lie now and then, I suspect. Dad writes what is true for him, period. You don't have to believe me, of course. I don't ask you to believe me. Just consider the possibility that the little details of life can ebb and flow, shift and spin, without changing what is essentially true.

Richard Bach doesn't stand for everlasting stasis; he stands for liberation. This is what he has taught his children, and what he offered them.

Richard wants you to decide for yourself what is true. He is no guru. Follow your own path.

-- James Bach (child #4)

[Dwayne]

James offers:

"As far as I know, my father has never told a lie. I think he's congenitally incapable of it."

Am one who can imagine Richard attempting to lie & his tongue disappearing from the shock of it.


James also states:

"Richard Bach doesn't stand for everlasting stasis; he stands for liberation.
Richard wants you to decide for yourself what is true. He is no guru. Follow your own path."

Spot on imo.


~Dwayne~

[snowyh]

Well said, Webmaster!

[Divorce Weasel]

Well there are soul-mates, and then there are ex soul-mates. Aum shanti shanti shanti! ;D

[eponine1971]

I think it is amazing that someone can read Bach and claim to know and love his books but still have the nerve to demand explanations on the choices he has made. I love Bach's books. Nothing he said was that much of a shock for me. It just extended the philosophy I had already begun to form. Authors and poets don't owe us explanations of their life. We read their words and the emotions and ideas touch us in some way. How they touch us is up to our own spirituality. When you buy the book, you pay for those words. You do not buy the person writing them.