boo_lives wrote:
> --- In [email protected], sgrayatlarge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> www.intentblog.com
>>
>> Deepak posts a blog usually two times a week. In the past years that
>> I have read and commented on Intent, not once did Deepak give any
>> credit or even mention MMY's name. Plenty of what he says comes right
>> out of movement dogma; here is more on Intent, take a look, make
>> comments, most adore Deepak, however, recently I was banned for being
>> a bit too critical of Chopra. He gets very political and tends to
>> make unquestioning statements without examples... his gospel. His
>> previous posts are all listed, have fun!
>>
>
> All of mov't dogma comes out of certain sects of indian philosophy,
> but MMY-TMO promote it as cognized copyrighted wisdom from "the
> greatest sage to have ever walked the earth" (the way MMY is now
> referred to on their global broadcasts). MMY took loads of help from
> the early leaders of the movt in the west who were essential to making
> TM accessible and most of them were dumped unceremoniously. The
> MMY-Deepak partnership was beneficial to both, and Deepak is under no
> obligation to credit MMY every time he says something about
> consciousness, in fact as I understand it the TMO lawyers get upset if
> Deepak does mention the mov't in any way.
So true and you see what happens if you tell some of the folks here that
the TM methods are nothing new. I actually enjoyed looking up stuff
back in the 70's when I was a teacher to confirm I was teaching some
stuff that was somewhat traditional (outside on the no OM thing and the
single use of bij mantras). Of course I never mentioned that outside
of a circle of teacher friends that did the same thing often
recommending certain books. Even if I pointed to page 239-240 in "Mind
Mysteries" which was published by Swami Sivananda way before MMY even
joined the Shankaracharya these people would say it is not the same
thing as TM though in concept it certainly is.
