I think you are a little bit overshadowed by my metaphoric title, which for you seems to make the necessity of going into the details of my argumentation obsolete. But is this not taking the same line like that monosyllabic professor seems to do ? He reduces his simplifications, as if only exclaiming a sound like "ping !" and you immediately put me on the prejudicial track that I had been responding with "pong !". But funnily enough your own comment sounds like another version of "ping" and again I will try not to react with "pong !", trying to elaborate my arguments in a reasonable manner. But frankly without much hope, because against stupidity it is said seems to be no remedy.
And telling to me that I tried to cope with that, what "was only told to me" is as stupid as it only can be. Imagine a physicist would be insinuated to only being able to apply, "what he was told", because he is making some calculations, using some canonical formulas. Is this modus operandi already the proof, that he has been loosing the capacity of his own decision makings or creativity because of that. Not at all, or is he !? I tell you, if someone like you jumps in the same boat of this narrow gauged critic, it is hard for me to go with you for a tour parallely in another boat, because you have already been drowned due to the weight of your cloddishness. > The whole story is in the title of this post. > > What is happening is two people expressing their > OPINIONS. But the TM supporter feels compelled > to express *his* opinion while/by calling the > other person a liar. > > People have been looking for those things that > define Maharishi's spiritual legacy? This is it. Really, doesn't it just encapsulate the whole thing? Hagen's response is thoroughly steeped in the belief that he is RIGHT. Each of his arguments are presented as if they were fact, even though what they really are opinions based on stuff that was told to him, often presented here word for word AS they were told to him. But it's the "What about your lies" thing that is so telling. The fact that Michael Coleman disagrees with him indicates to Hagen not *only* that he is wrong, but that there is some nefarious intent involved. The fact that Coleman's beliefs are different than Hagen's indicate that Coleman is LYING. He "really" knows the truth but is lying about it. I'm sorry, but this really IS one of the defining characteristics of the TM True Believer. We've been seeing it here lately in the demonizations of Deepak Chopra, and of individual posters who have posted comments critical of TM and Maharishi. The baseline assumption of the TM TBs is that they are wrong. That's a given...they're TBs. But how they PRESENT things is that the critics are not *just* wrong, they're LYING. Be it Deepak Chopra or Paul Mason or Vaj or this Michael Coleman fellow, it's not *enough* for the TM defenders to declare that they are wrong. They also feel compelled to declare that these critics are LYING, that they have evil intent. Isn't that fascinating coming from a bunch of people who claim that they have the inside track to a tech- nique that creates inner peace and world peace and that theirs is the "highest teaching?"
