--- In [email protected], nablusoss1008 <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 16, 2009, at 9:14 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > > > > > > > sounds like HH the DL describes the Maharishi as an > > > > excellent and qualified teacher. good for him! > > > > > > Unfortunately for your skewed view of reality, it would > > > not appear to be the case. > > > > Unfortunately, it would appear to be the case > > that it's Vaj's view of reality that's skewed... > > > > > Errand boys and secretaries probably wouldn't fair so > > > well in spiritual matters, > > > > ...but maybe that's because he's such a snob. > > > > How about carpenters, Vaj? Would they "fair" [sic] > > well in spiritual matters? > > > > esp. as teachers possessing, at least, > > > relative knowledge. One wonders how to classify "having > > > sex with young members of the female gender" would fare > > > in such a synopsis? > > > > Oh, I don't think one wonders about this, do you? > > > > If you > > > can't meet the criteria of your "senses are > > > controlled. Otherwise your senses will be like wild > > > horses, pulling you into unfit actions", what does > > > that mean about lusting after young kids > > > > Notice how here Vaj fails to specify the gender or > > the age of the "kids." With any luck, those who read > > what he writes will think he means MMY was a > > pedophile alleged to have preyed on prepubescent > > boys, in addition to the young women he mentions > > above. > > > > Isn't that clever of Vaj? > > > > > and acquiring palaces in Holland (or wherever) > > > > Palaces?? Is Vaj referring to the old monastery > > at Vlodrop? > > > > to live in? And what's with the silk underwear? > > > Is that meant to restrain your senses? Where would > > > desire for world domination fall in all of this? > > > > Where would it fall in his silk underwear? > > > > ("World domination." Hilarious.) > > > > > Should we go through the criteria, one by one? > > > > > > I'd really enjoy that. Let's do it! > > > > Oh, yes, let's! Why don't we start with this: > > > > "If you cannot find anyone who has all of these > > attributes, at least find someone who has more > > good qualities than defects." > > Very few give any response to the posts by this Buddhist > fundamentalist Vaj. He is ignored yet year after year he spends a lot > of time here with his foolish propaganda and downright lies. I > suppose he must be retired to have so much time on hand. Doen't he > have better things to do, walking dogs for example ? ;-) > I find Vaj very interesting, at least it's usually info I've not come across before even if I don't agree completely.
What I actually don't get is why nabluss and the like post here. We've all been exposed to approved tmo doctrine for decades, we know all the perfect logic, spent 1000s of hours listening to mmy, even promoted it ourselves for years and years, but it doesn't work for us anymore and most of us here are looking to process our tmo involvement and freely explore alternative world views, or at least modify the approved doctrine to something that fits our reality (or some reality). WHY THE NEED for tmo TBs to try to enforce official tmo thinking here? I have no problem whatsoever doing it the way you do at all tmo functions formal and informal, that's your right. But why come here and just repeat the same language within the same belief system and get so upset that we're not in line? The reason we're not in line with your official worldview is not that we just need to hear the most perfect scientifically proven vedic concepts SOME MORE, it's that they don't work for us anymore. This site isn't filled with J.Knapp's who are out there as anti TM activists, we're just individuals generally with long "spiritual" histories working things out amongst ourselves -- that shouldn't be a problem for anyone, except those indoctrinated to view those outside their religious tribe as enemies.
