--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], grate.swan <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > You [Curtis] may say "well its not TM that is being > > proposed to give to students, its rajas and SCI and > > yagyas." I disagree. > > But the dogma "explaining" what "really" > happens when they transcend, and what that > "means," will most definitely be given.
Your statement points out the fundamental difference of TOPIC between us. We are each talking about a different thing. You are predicting what the DLF will do. I don't give a rats ass about what the DLF will do. If they teach an ontology based on notions about the universe they should not be allowed in schools. And If they try to teach SCI -- they should be laughed out of Dodge. SCI is quite the mumbo jumbo of foggy minds. The fact that SCI is associated with TM does indeed speak badly for TM as a method to produce a clear mind. Yet, I find it enlivens my mind so thats what I am going on here. My experience -- devoid of any mumbo jumbo speculative philosophy. What I am focussed on is on the abstract merits of TM or other meditation (OOM) in schools. I am saying TM OMM doens't need a bunch of mumbo jumbo to work and be effective. And if taught JUST as TM OOM it is secular, it does not conflict with the Constitution (even if TM was a church. The court rulings allow federal funding to religions organizations when the funds are used for secular activities) -- and the practice will help students and the overall atmosphere of schools. It will enhance learning. For that, i support it being taught to students. On an elective basis. So if the TM folks and DLF are so anal about their personal world view that they can't teach the technique without adding crap simplistic irrational notions (can't even call it a philosophy, its way inferior to philosophy) then they are morons. And schools should have nothing to do with them That however, doesn't detract from the merits of TM OOM being practiced by students as a foundational method to clear their minds and juice up the interconnectivity functions of the brain. Provind a pure meditation method is what I am discussing and proposing. >And > that is Hindu dogma, with a search on "gods > and goddesses" to replace them with "laws of > nature." TM *itself* is based on Hindu teach- > ings, from the puja onwards. And I, for one, > cannot see any court in the land not seeing > that and deciding on the basis of that. > > > 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.) > > I have to ask, since if it's been mentioned > before I missed it -- are you a TM teacher? > If not, I can see how you might believe that > "there is no requirement or necessity to > spew a lot of words." > > But this program will not be *implemented* > by people who think like you do. Ya never know. > It will be > implemented by FANATICS. By definition, anythin gtaught by fanatics should not be allowed in public schools. We can agree on that. That is NOT what I am referring to. > By definition, TM > cannot be taught these days except by > "recertified" TM teachers. That means that > these people were SO fanatical that they > agreed to pay for TM Teacher Training TWICE > (once to become teachers originally, and then > again later, when Maharishi said to). They > had to sign pieces of paper agreeing to give > up their jobs and work for the TM movement > full time as teachers, for a pittance. > > Such people are fanatics, evangelists. I do > not see how there is an icicle's chance in > Hell that they WON'T be "spewing lots of > words." That's just what evangelists DO. > > JUST as they could never even *conceive* of > teaching TM without a puja, they could never > even *conceive* of not spouting a lot of words > about the "laws of nature" and "enlivening" > them, and doing non-stop commercials for butt- > bouncing for peace. I don't have big problems with teaching traditional techniques in the traditional way. It has a role in promoting multi-culturalism imo -- if its presented in that light. > The situation you propose for teaching TM as > purely a technique and leaving it at that > DOES NOT EXIST. If true, then thats sad. But I am not wed to TM. I am sure there are other method can can be isolated from someones speculative notions. If this is the case with TM, Someone with sense should "throw out the money changers from the temple" -- that is throw out the charlatans of mumbo jumbo and reform the practice to THE practice. Water the root. Don't try to dictate how the tree will grow. > The people who will be teach- > ing these kids are incapable of allowing it > to exist. To do so would violate the *need* > they feel to evangelize. > > These people who say that they're going to > teach "TM and only TM" are LYING. > > And you saw evidence of that in one of the > posts today, saying that the Rajas are going > to attend the McCartney concert dressed not > as Rajas, but as "normal people." > > If they're so proud of what they do and what > they are and what being a "king" allows them > to wear, WHY ARE THEY HIDING IT? > > They're LYING. They want these kids as fodder > for the next generation of TM cultists, and > they hope to find it in thousands of young, > impressionable kids. >
