>"In comparison, TM is very much proprietary source software. It >cannot >really ever be completely divorced from its origins in Hindu (or, if >you >prefer, Vedic) trappings."
Would seem that TM is between a rock and a hard place trying to get in to public institutions generally. Could the TM-Rajas alter their source code, just to get in? Or be satisfied to just stay outside with private and church institutions otherwise? Maharishi singing the TM- Puja: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxrCqMuVods&feature=related --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > "What would a completely secularized set of meditation and > > > > self-development techniques LOOK LIKE?" > > > > > > > > -The Holy Grail > > > > > > > * * Over the years I have really enjoyed the Holy Grail corpus and loved > > > its Unitive emphasis on alchemy, feminism, and ecology, particularly when > > > I was unable to completely embrace the church, but is it really > > > completely secularized? Or could it be? > > > > > > Well, finding the meditation grail as in, = teaching meditation in schools > > or other public institutions. > > > * Aha! I see, Buck, you were describing it as IT IS, not as it "would look > like" -- thanks! :-) >
