--- In [email protected], "boo_lives" <boo_li...@...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
>  
> > I'm not a "tmo TB" by any stretch, although I
> > suspect you're including me here.
> 
> No I don't.  You use a different language generally
> and you use more objective logic.

Thank you.

  In fact my guess is that if you were to actually
> work for the tmo for a couple yrs you might get
> into trouble.

My guess too. One reason I never tried!

> I guess I would consider you a theoretical TM-SCI TB

Pretty close. I no longer remember how much of
SCI deals with issues other than the nature and
mechanics of consciousness, but as I said to 
Curtis, the N&M of consciousness is the only
aspect of MMY's teaching I'm committed to (and
that only as my working hypothesis).

, which is just
> fine, except I don't think actual life and
> practice within the tmo community has much to
> do with TM or MMY's thinking a la the early 70s.

>From what I read and hear, I'd have to concur,
sadly.


Reply via email to