--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, scienceofabundance <no_re...@...> wrote: > > Sparaig: I am quoting him...I cannot read his mind. > > Science > >
Well, in the context of everything else, where he emphasized the importance of an organization to "preserve the purity of the teaching," it seems obvious to me that he wasn't ranking independent TM teachers and those sponsored by the TMO as being the same. He was satisified if someone going to an independent teacher was getting the TM program, even if it wasn't called that, but it seems obvious he wasn't saying "who needs the TMO these days?" It seems a bit disingenuous to assume that the weight of most of his previous comments on "purity of the teaching" should be ignored simply because he said he was satisfied if someone had gotten some benefit from TM outside the TM organization. Likewise, his caveat is that "they're [the student\ getting the same thing" which can only be guaranteed via a central licensing organization so to imply he was suggesting the TMO was redundant or superfluous is also disingenuous, IMHO. L.
