--- In [email protected], "Nelson" <nelsonriddle2...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > ...find and post a quote from someone > > who represents a legitimate spiritual tradition > > other than the TM movement who believes that what > > Maharishi sold as the "sidhis" have any relationship > > to actual siddhis, or what Patanjali was writing > > about. I'd be interested in seeing such a quote, and > > don't remember ever having seen one. I don't know that > > such quotes do not exist, but I suspect that they do > > not. And if they don't, then it seems to me that > > those who believe that TM sidhis are really siddhis > > are basing their entire view of the subject on one > > word -- "Maharishisez." > > > > Is that enough to constitute "truth" in your view? > > > > It's OK if it is, blind faith being unchallengable > > and all that, but wouldn't it be more honest to > > admit that faith in "Maharishisez" is one's only > > reason for believing that the TM sidhis are what > > they were sold as being? > > Don't care much for faith as I have "an ounce of > expierience is worth a ton of faith" viewpoint. > I see more of "one with the universe" type of things > than particular sidhis like whenI need to see someone, > they show up or the traffic lights will be green when > I get there etc.
For the record, I have *zero* problem with this. If your practice of TM and the TM sidhis agrees with you and gives you all you're looking for, bully for you. I just "springboarded" off of your original posts to the subject of "outside legitimization." That is, *IS* there anyone from *outside* the TMO (and that means having *no* link to Maharishi or the TMO in any way, and would exclude, say, a scholar or Ayurvedic physician who works or has worked at any time for the TM organization) who has ever thrown their academic or religious standing behind the idea that the "TM sidhis" are in fact related to what Patanjali wrote about? I honestly don't remember ever seeing such a thing. Such a quote or recommendation might have been posted here or on a.m.t. and I just missed it, but rack my brain as I might, I certainly can't remem- ber such a posting or reference or citation. So I'm curious as to whether anyone can produce one. If not, I'm curious as to whether the folks here who believe strongly *that* the TM sidhis are, in fact, the same as what Patanjali wrote about can admit that the only reason they believe this is because Maharishi said so. Again, I have *no problem* with anyone doing that -- taking the word of someone they consider an "authority" as all the evidence they need. What I think is a little odd is people doing that and being unwilling to admit that that's what they are doing.
