--- In [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> , TurquoiseB <no_re...@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> , "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> , TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> , "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> , TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > What is WRONG with "subtle or minimal effort?"
> > > > > What is WRONG with TM being slightly intentional?
> > > > > Is it WRONG because it conflicts with the sales
> > > > > brochure? That's what it looks like to me.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, you've misread what I said as far as I can tell.
> > > >
> > > > And MMY's own words that I recall are "least effort in the
> > > > direction of less effort."
> > >
> > > For the record, sparaig, I don't give a flying
> > > fuck what "MMY's own words" were -- about this
> > > or about anything else.
> > >
> > > I don't consider him an expert or authority
> > > about much of ANYTHING, including TM.
> > >
> > > That's what you guys don't seem to understand
> > > in this discussion. WE DON'T CARE how Maharishi
> > > describes TM. We are providing our OWN descrip-
> > > tions of TM, based on our own experience of
> > > not only TM but a wide range of meditative
> > > techniques, and not only the experience of
> > > practicing them but of teaching them.
> > >
> > > I am quite comfortable with "least effort"
> > > or "minimal effort" or even "almost nearly
> > > effortless" to describe the process of coming
> > > back to the mantra in TM. What I am not
> > > comfortable with is "effortless."
> > >
> > > What Maharishi says based on HIS "analysis"
> > > doesn't mean shit to me.
> > >
> > > What I'm talking about is what I say, based
> > > upon MY analysis.
> > >
> > > You can use the word "effortless" if you want.
> > > I cannot. It is not true, based on either
> > > theory or my own experience.
> >
> > But it is true based on theory AND my own experience.
> >
> > That you don't see this as relevant in a discussion of whether or
> > not you actually practice TM as taught by MMY is quite telling
> > to say the least.
>
> Jesus, man...go take a fuckin' pill.
>
> I *DON'T* practice TM. I did once, and unlike
> you I taught other people how to do it.
>
> Maharishi contradicted himself ALL THE TIME.
> He was also WRONG, quite often. He also LIED,
> not quite as often, but often enough that I
> and others here have seen him do so.
>
> So what do I CARE how *he* describes TM?
>
> What's that got to do with ANYTHING? Just
> because he said something, does that make it so?
>
> YOU are the one who is all hung up on there
> being one and only one "correct" way to describe
> TM. And frankly, because you will never find
> your OWN descriptions of how it works for you
> in the three days of checking, you're not exactly
> any kind of expert here.  :-)
>
> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE get the point.
>
> I DON'T CARE about any of this. I was trying to
> make a point to you as if you were a rational
> human being, because you've been acting like one
> for several months now. Silly me. Push your
> "TM is not quite effortless" button and you're
> back being compulsive. I want NO PART OF IT.
>
> > > Now go argue about this with someone who gives
> > > a fuck.  :-)
> > >
> >
> > Obviously you give a fuck or you wouldn't be on this forum.
>
> I give a fuck only about the comparative discussion
> of various forms of meditation and self discovery,
> and about the weirdass things that people do while
> pursuing those forms of meditation and self discovery.
>
> I DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT TM.>>

I guess you don't give a shit about science either Turq. You want to
take the human race back to the Dark Ages, without science.

OffWorld

Reply via email to