on 6/4/05 2:46 PM, guybanner2002 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Rick, I appreciate your comments... > My personal philosophy about rumors and inuendos is to only believe > that which I personally experience and know of first hand.
Although that would have been impossible in this case, since you're not a woman. Although you could have been one of Maharishi's secretaries, and at least half a dozen of these, who brought various women to his door late at night and talked with them some time later about what went on in there, don't regard this as rumor or innuendo. >(On > several ocassions I have heard things come back about me that were > said about me that were absolutely not true, yet believed with > certainty to be true by those who heard the rumors.) Sure. Me too. I'm not saying that all rumors should be believed. But at a certain point information reaches a "critical mass" and one tends to believe rather than disbelieve it. For me, that happened about 3 1/2 years ago, after 30+ years of being on the disbelieving side of the fence. So I didn't exactly rush to judgment on this issue. > > Here is some hearsay which I do believe: MMY's right hand man at > start of Movement(name withheld)asked MMY about one of the sex > accusations made against him by a lady. MMY replied to him that he > couldn't have sex if he tried because he was impotent. This was told > to me by MMY's right hand man. Sounds like Charlie Lutes, who also said bees come from Venus. Some say sexual and spiritual energy are one and the same. If so, Maharishi was anything but impotent. But I guess the implication is that his energy was so fully directed upwards that there was no chance of it's going in the opposite direction, as you said in your original post. Yet evidence suggests otherwise, so one has to seek alternative explanations. > > So, people believe what they want to believe, and see things from > the color of the glasses they wear. Not some people. Everyone. As for me, I'm happy to change glasses and do so constantly. I don't adhere rigidly to beliefs and am happy to have them revised by new evidence or understanding, which I asked for in my response to your post. > > Is it possible that the accusers were trying to get notariety? Is it > possible that the accusers were fantacizing and then believed their > fantasy? Is it possible that a compassionate stroke of another to > help clear their aura was misinterpreted as a come-on? All these were possible, but with regard to the last question, it went far beyond "a compassionate stroke" with many of these women. I guess you're referring to the Mia Farrow story in "Beyond Gurus." > > I would have to witness the incident within the context it occured > (if it occured) before making a determination. Impossible. You would have had to be a fly on the wall or one of the women, or to have installed a hidden camera. There was an incident in which one of the secretaries walked into M's room on some urgent business, uninvited, and Maharishi blocked the door before he got a good look at what was going on. The woman who was in there later told people what was going on, but that's just her word against everyone else's conception of how Maharishi would behave - hardly an even match. >Until then, I believe > no-way, and refuse to be part of rumor spreading. There won't be a "then" because these are events long since past. 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/
