The independent TM-Teachers and Chopra and other spiritual teachers are a path of evolution. You can not stop the evolution because some Gurus stop teaching or die. If we have a real desire to give the knowledge that we have to other people, it would be a big crime not to do that. Ingegerd
--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SCI is not required to *learn* TM. And, unless the planis to never > teach TM to the masses again ever, it seems well, at least as > egotistical as everyone seems to be claiming MMY is, to be talking > about setting up a large-scale rival TM organization. Chopra's > organization has no chance of "teaching the masses" on the scale that > the TMO has done, and still can do, and yet, you guys think you can > do as well as, or better than chopra, and somehow do as well as > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. > > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On May 25, 2005, at 5:30 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: > > > > > Much of the impetus behind independent TM > > > teaching comes from making the knowledge > > > available at more affordable prices. But I'm > > > curious how people who've been following the > > > discussions here would handle other aspects > > > of the teaching that might be a bit more problematic. > > > > > > For example, we typically say the mantra is a > > > meaningless sound. Would you all stick with > > > that description? Or would some of you disclose > > > the provenance of mantras? > > > > > > Another issue: We say on the third night of > > > checking that cosmic consciousness is a state > > > in which one's every act is spontaneously life- > > > supporting. But a popular topic among us has > > > been the questioning of that dogma. What would > > > you say? Would you just skip that part of the teaching? > > > > > > And if we start fiddling with the teaching, are we > > > teaching TM, or something inspired by it? > > > > > > The larger subtext: does knowledge really get lost? > > > > This is a really good question. > > > > This is the question I was addressing when I talked the other day > about > > the upside of the pundits. It will really be these guys who will > > preserve the true tradition. Unless people take the time to train > > themselves in the texts behind this tradition, they would be > clueless. > > Why? Because when you were taught SCI you were not given the source > for > > these teaching. Nor were you given the source behind many of the > > advanced lectures. The science of the gap, the sandi, is all in > > Sanskrit. In other words, the real tradition has been hidden behind > a > > facade of scientific materialism and dispensed. The only real > option is > > to bootleg the SCI tapes and the advanced lectures, etc. > > > > And how will you train new teachers without all of the video and > audio > > tapes? > > > > Another issue is who will teach the advanced techniques? > > > > The very real upside of the pundits--even if it ends up being only > half > > of the number stated--the upside is they have the full knowledge of > the > > tradition AND the practices. So it's a good thing that they are > > learning what they are learning. The karma-kanda aspect of M.'s > > teaching really is only preserved by Brahmins--and that represents > a > > significant part since what he teaches is essentially karma yoga > for > > householders. 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/
