--- In [email protected], ruthsimplicity <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > > > > I do. I am not against kids having a moment of silence but the > > indoctrination into the belief system of TM is too much to support for me.
> > Being very clear about where our beliefs come from is critical for our > > survival. Blurring this line is dangerous because it makes harder to rank > > the probability of beliefs if religious concepts are blended with more > > rigorously supported beliefs. I don't follow that. I don't need to know the long (or short ) history of a bad (invalid) concept that has entered my awareness. I can reject it on its merits -- or lack of. And TM, or meditation generally, by itself -- which is the issue, in my view, is a method / technique. It works or it doesn't. I don' need to know about Maxwell's equations to utilize the benefits of flipping the light switch on. It works or it doesn't. I don't nee to know that Newton was heavily into alchemy and occultism to benefit from his laws. To propose that our very survival is at stake if we do not fully know these things has such a huge chasm to jump across -- I can't make that leap. You may say "well its not TM that is being proposed to give to students, its rajas and SCI and yagyas." I disagree. There is no requirement or necessity to spew a lot of words, hot air or otherwise, to do TM. SCI has nothing absolutely nothing to do with the actual practice of meditation. (Other than I suppose to be a cautionary tale -- that is -- if a mind so soaked in meditation comes up with this crap -- the technique clearly has it s limits.)
