Any guru who prefaces public statements
with "my children..." loses me pretty quickly.

I don't have any deep knowledge of Amma's
gig, but the very distant view I have is of a
pretentious attitude toward those who
approach her. As I recall, for instance,
someone here quoted her as having 
commented on Maharishi and Muktananda
that she "created them." Whoa.

Maharishi is not unguilty of pretention
(particularly if the post about his plans
to create rajas having dominion over the
whole universe and other universes is true),
but it's not a pretention directed at "us,"
and consequently I find it acceptable/
workable.

Maharishi, in general, treats other people
like adults, not as subservient children,
at least in the way he addresses them.

I also question the ethics of any of the various
gurus who have set up outposts (or inposts)
in Fairfield. If they truly respected Maharishi,
I think they would discourage such 
encroachment on the spiritual community
he founded. 

At the same time, I understand the laws of
supply and demand. Maharishi's community
is not immune to competition, and such is
inevitable. In the long run, perhaps this 
competition will grow strong enough to 
effect some serious improvement at MUM
and its environs and possibly put FFL
out of business.

That is not to say that enlightened gurus
have to give in to the laws of supply and
demand so readily. I cannot imagine, for
all that Maharishi has been accused of,
that he would ever set up shop next to
some other guru's community just because
it could be a ready source of students.

If his devotees tried to do such a thing,
I am certain he would condemn it, both
out of a sense of ethics and a desire to
protect the integrity of his own teaching,
which these other gurus don't seem to 
care much about.

Skewer away.

--- In [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> Any discussion of a spiritual group should include, somewhere near the 
> beginning, the 
> obligatory disclaimers about Kali Yuga.
> 
> Don't get me wrong:�I am not lobbying for a fundamentalist interpretation of 
> HIndu 
> cosmology. Just the same: we live in a materialistic, corrupt age and we 
> shouldn't be 
> surprised to find corruption and materialism ANYWHERE.
> 
> Still, such allegations are disappointing, whether true or untrue. They are 
> disappointing 
if 
> true because we expected better from the organization (and by association, 
> the guru), 
and 
> they are disappointing if false because it is discouraging to consider the 
> motivations of 
> those who post.
> 
> Let me just address two aspects of the allegations brought up so far.
> 
> Regarding the "hijacking" of Amma's movement by the Hindu fundamentalists 
> (RSS, BJP, 
> etc): 
> 
> The marriage of religion and politics seldom works out well in any modern 
> culture. It is 
an 
> unholy alliance, and co-dependant to boot. It is always about power; it is 
> usually driven 
by 
> the politicians, because power is such a natural part of their working life. 
> But the 
religions 
> want the power as well; they feel that they deserve it because, after all, 
> they are the 
> representatives of the One True God. Historically, religion seems to suffer 
> more in the 
> downside than the politicians, but there will always be exceptions.
> 
> It's difficult for TM people and other New Agers to see Hindus as 
> fundamentalists; we 
are 
> more accustomed to thinking of them as spiritually advanced. And besides, 
> many of us 
> adhere to fundamentalist beliefs ourselves. Nevertheless, the Hindutva 
> movement in 
India 
> is quite powerful, and a good deal of blood has been shed there as a result 
> of its 
activities.
> 
> On the other hand, I have met intelligent, good hearted Sannyasins who think 
> the BJP 
and 
> RSS are the Good Guys. That is to say, among the religious, many favor them.
> 
> It is not surprising, therefore, to hear that they have a presence in Amma's 
> movement. 
> Indian politicians are constantly seeking to expand their power base; India's 
parliamentary 
> and electoral systems necessitate aggressive cultivation of "vote banks". 
> Since Amma 
has 
> such a large reputation, it is a no-brainer to conclude that political 
> implications abound.
> 
> This is an unfortunate thing for Amma's movement, to whatever extent it is 
> true. At 
some 
> point there will be a change in the political climate, and the blowback will 
> be painful.
> 
> However, I would like to make one other point about the politics. My 
> perception is that 
> Amma is not about politics. That it could have wormed its way into her 
> organization is 
> understandable, perhaps inevitable, but I don't hear Amma herself preaching 
> the values 
of 
> Hindutva. Her message is much more universal, and that is what I see people 
responding 
> to in her presence.
> 
> Now the second thorny issue: possible misrepresentation of "charitable" 
> activities. I 
think 
> that many among us find this to be the more difficult and painful allegation 
> to deal with. 
> Old-time TMers, for example, typically got disgusted with TMO commercialism 
> years 
ago 
> (if not decades), and have been comfortable, if not gleeful, in making the 
> comparison 
> between the two organizations (or cults, if we are really going straight up 
> here). The loss 
> of moral superiority is a bitter pill to swallow.
> 
> Based on previous experience, it is predictable that most of what has been 
> alleged here 
> will be denied by some and rationalized by others. Parts of it may also turn 
> out to be 
> bullshit, pure and simple. Some will claim that Amma didn't know about it, 
> others will 
say, 
> "Are you nuts? She knew about EVERYTHING that happened in her movement!" We 
> have 
> heard all this before.
> 
> Frankly, the only part that surprised me personally was the misrepresentation 
> of the 
> charitable activities, which I now accept as a possibility but not as a 
> proven thing. This 
will 
> shake out for awhile and eventually I will decide for myself what I think the 
> truth of it is.
> 
> I'm sure that many of you will have noted a certain irony in the situation. 
> This chat 
group, 
> viewed by many TM faithful as anti-TM in nature, is now seeing criticisms 
> raised against 
a 
> group that many in the TM fold regard as the TMO's biggest local competitor. 
> Perhaps 
that 
> accounts for the slight aroma of "Gotcha!" that permeates some of the posts.
> 
> I think we have to accept that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the 
> gander. While 
I 
> find these allegations disappointing (notice that I don't call them 
> "disclosures" because I 
> don't think we have enough info here to reach sweeping conclusions), I think 
> that in the 
> big picture it is better to have the discussion than not to have it. 
> 
> L B S





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/
 



Reply via email to