--- In [email protected], "dhamiltony2k5" <dhamiltony...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote:
> > Hey Doug, would you kindly explain in no uncertain terms 
> > what is motivating your ongoing meditator/non-meditator 
> > inquiry? 
> 
> Om, what the problem ewe people? U might can't believe 
> that I might write, straight ahead? As a meditator?
> 
> I said already what my interest was in whether people 
> are writing as meditator, non-meditator, fallen-away, 
> or quitters as our esteemed `yes=meditator' Nab would 
> call them. Look back in the messages real quick towards 
> May 9th .  And come forward.  Is rather clear.  
> 
> Is rather innocently stated really all along through 
> that thread as it went and then separated.  Does say a 
> lot that folks could not believe or respond straight 
> ahead in kind. Turq got it bingo some while ago.  

And, as I suggested then, the button-pushing 
may have gone on a bit long :-), but it might 
have served the purpose of clarifying the issue
of whether there *is* a difference between
"meditator" and "non-meditator." I found two 
types of responses to Doug's parody interesting.

The first was the number of people suspecting 
that the guy who compiles an Index of FFL posts 
critical of the TMO every month might be doing
this as a way to suggest that TM meditators were,
in fact, better than anyone else. But that's 
sorta the nature of good satire -- the better it
is, the more people take it seriously. I've had 
fun in the past riffing off some of Doug's posts
*as if they were serious*. To be honest, I didn't
always know for sure myself, but it seemed more
fun to pretend they were serious because...um...
there would be more to say about them if such 
posts *were* serious than there would if they
weren't. :-)

The second was what I perceived as a slight
reluctance on the part of -- interestingly 
enough -- those who *do* meditate regularly to
admit it by "stepping up to the place" as a
TM meditator. Well, given what they post, and
why, I don't actually find that all that sur-
prising. If they did so, there would be no
question in the mind of lurkers here that folks
can practice TM faithfully for decades and still
be petty, small-minded, prudish, hateful, and 
driven by no higher goal in life than needing to 
argue and play pseudo-intellectual "gotcha" games 
with another human being for no more noble 
purpose than the desire to "make them lose."

The reality of the "meditator vs. non-meditator"
difference is that there is no difference.

People are people are people are people.

The only thing one can probably say with some
validity about people who seem to believe that
"their kind of people" are actually better or
in some way superior to "those other kinds of
people" is that anyone who believes that clearly
isn't. By believing that they are superior in
some way to others they, have identified themselves
as belonging to that vast mainstream of people on
this planet who believe exactly that. Let's face 
it...the only people on this rock who "stand out" 
in a positive way are those few who *don't* believe 
themselves superior to others. They are as rare as
hen's teeth -- in spiritual circles or not. And 
Doug's satire nails that.



Reply via email to