This is now the second instance where the facts provided by this non-Member are questioned.
Rick, wouldn't it just make more sense to provide attribution? Do your Sources need to be protected? More transparency, please. --- In [email protected], nablusoss1008 <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > From a friend (with apologies to Dan Friendman): > > > > > > > > Dear Rick > > > > > > > > MMY had several sets of sandals made for him over the years. Mark's were > > not the original set. Helen Lutes had a set of sandals that M left behind > > when new ones came as did a few others. > > > > Mark had the sandals M used during that time period. But they were not the > > first set. > > So what ? > > > > > > > > > Five million? > > > > Should be careful making personal gain from a holy man's belongings. > > > That's complete nonsense. Who told you this, and why do you believe in this ? > Don't you have an opinion of your own ? > > > > Bevan has some rules about that and if Mark connects to Rajas he may come > > across those rules. We had some items and ran into the rules. Nothing > > happened as a result. > > > Never heard of these rules, what I know is that the TMO wants to be in > control of the Knowledge. Including knowledge of potential relics. If not > anyone could start selling, say deeskins which could turn out to be shot last > year. > > I'm pretty sure Maharishi would be very happy to hear that one of his boys > made a fortune. > > > > > > I think the rules come from MMY. > > > That's what you t h i n k ! > Perhaps you should trandscend more and think less. >
