On Feb 25, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Tom Pall wrote:
It's up to each of us to decide if Maharishi had special knowledge of creation from his alleged omniscience which allowed him to go through this process "restoring the purity of the tradition". Maharishi was acting on whims, as he always did. Whether or not what he taught was perfect, entirely guided by the three goons, is at question here, IMO. What Maharishi did distorted the teachings if the interpretation of the teachings had gotten off the path. So now we're back to one of the seminal arguments on FFL: was Maharishi acting in an undistorted way from the home of all the laws of Nature or wasn't he.
Based on my direct experience with other teachers, I'd have to agree with his old secretaries and other insiders and have to give that one a big "no".
Each person would have to discover on their own why this is the case. Some people seem to have the knack (or karma) for never ever getting a good teacher. IME teachers who restore knowledge, without ever trying to do so, do so in the language of nonduality and revelation, not with the sound of square pegs squeaking into round holes. And that Wisdom flows over into the students, often without a lot of intervening talk and fuss. Fresh mind revelations are like pancakes straight off the griddle of sizzling gnosis. I've been on courses where I and others would awake from sleep, and the entire corpus of teaching was alive in consciousness, all questions were resolved and in many cases we'd have memory of individualized sadhanas. Having observed, witnessed and experienced a number of yogis as tertons (text revealers), I just don't feel or sense the same thing going with Ole Mahesh, despite having had numerous visionary experiences regarding him personally.
