LBS, please summarise and minimilize your point for short attention 
span people like me....thanks.



--- 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