On May 29, 2009, at 2:49 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: > So what is the TM movement counterpart of "Thou > shalt not suffer a witch to live?" > > I propose, given the evidence of the TMO's long > history and this discussion group, that Maharishi > Mahesh Yogi's and the TM movement's variant of this > tried and still untrue piece of shit...uh, sorry... > dogma is "Thou shalt not suffer a TM critic to be > thought well of." > > Is this not the recurring theme we see over and > over in the TMO? Is it not the recurring theme we > see on this group?
Oh definitely. But character assassination, well poisoning, hasty generalizations, straw men, ad hominems--are also used by people who don't have anything intelligent or worthwhile to add to what is being said. Being filled with fear, they lash out and show us their insides. > > Those who have taken the mantle of Defending That > Which Only An Idiot Would Try To Defend onto their > own shoulders run this number day in and day out > here, and the TMO lawyers run it on a larger scale > in public. Whenever someone criticizes them or > their belief system or their organization or above > all their access to money, their *first impulse* is > to try to destroy the credibility of the person who > is doing the criticisizing. Their second impulse, > when that doesn't work, is to become insanely > jealous and out of control every time the critic > is treated as if he or she were a thinking human > being, or worse, a cool human being. Nothing pushes > the TM TB's buttons more than to see one of their > enemies being liked. Yes, I've noticed that. > > It's as if the mere *possibility* that someone > accepts or -- <crossing myself to ward off evil> > -- actually *likes* a TM critic sends the compul- > sive TM Defender into paroxisyms of jealousy and > spite. THEY GO CRAZY. > > And their next impulse is to lash out, to do some- > thing -- anything -- that will restore the social > order, "bring things back into accord with the Laws > Of Nature," reveal this evildoer (who *must* be > one because he believes something different than > the TM TBs believe) to "justice." He or she *must* > be discredited, or if the TM Defenders cannot do > that, they must *claim* that the critic has been > discredited. > > And who are these claims *made* to? > > Not the objective and fairly dispassionate lurkers. > They are capable of -- and have always been capable > of -- coming to their own conclusions about posters > on this forum, be they TM supporters or TM critics. > What the compulsive TM Defenders have to say in > their attempts to demonize the critics probably > isn't going to affect them much one way or another. > > No, the appeal of the TM Defender is to *Other TM > Defenders*, or to those they want to recruit to > that cause. And if you watch the traffic here on FFL, > those are the *only* people who play "pile on" and > "reward" the demonizers for their efforts. I've always got a chuckle at this pile-on phenom here. I guess they just can't, for some reason, see how childish they appear doing that. No mindfulness. :-) It's not, in the end, surprising at all to me that a sentimental puritan Vaishnavite group like the Shankaracharya line, would produce a sentimental, puritan Vaishnavite TM movement. That actually makes sense. Really, particularly since the British Raj we see an even more Puritanical trend inspired largely by British Protestantism in most of the major McMeditation groups since that time. Gone is the erotic, orgiastic "ecological Dionysianism", caring for animals and love of nature but instead exploitative puritanical moralisms. Tear down cities to enslave people into a caste system that makes the American slave trade look like a blip in time. Ambedkar was right "The Hindu Civilisation.... is a diabolical contrivance to suppress and enslave humanity. Its proper name would be infamy. What else can be said of a civilisation which has produced a mass of people... who are treated as an entity beyond human intercourse and whose mere touch is enough to cause pollution?"
