--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > I thought your confidence in TM was in the practical results you have > received not devotion. You have been the poster child here for not just > believing in TM but for people to practice it long enough that they get the > results you have, right?
**I think it can be a useful technique. That's as far as I am going. > > So it is not hoisting the movement on its own petard of scientific marketing > hype to want them to demonstrate yagyas to whatever practical level is the > correlate of personal benefits of TM is it? **Absolutely a valid exercise! I hope you aren't assuming I am sticking up for the TMO right now... > > But if you are saying that people who already believe in TM results will just > take this at face value as fact and never need more than John Hegelin waving > a paper around saying it has been proven or that the Vedic tradition claims > it is true, and they are the most likely donors... > > then we agree. > > The rest of the world is really not invited to this party. But it could be > and why it isn't should be a concern for anyone who deeply believes that this > knowledge needs to spread beyond a few thousand people who still have earth > shoes somewhere in the back of their closets. **I'm not willing to take out a "should" on this one. The TMO never has been a marketing powerhouse. What publicity they get seems mostly due to celebrities. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "futur.musik" <futur.musik@> wrote: > > > > Yeah, I can see the marketing problem it presents for the TMO if they > > discount scientific or demonstrable results. Since the TMO has always set > > scientific validity as a key objective, wrt marketing and fundraising, it > > remains an ongoing tussle for the TMO between putting enough scientific > > evidence out there to bolster the claims it makes and getting pinned down > > with those attempts, especially wrt things like sidhis and yagyas. > > > > Maybe one day the TMO will schism into two sects, the rationalists and the > > bhaktis, each will seize a Dome, and its on! > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > Although I did use some scientific terms because I believe that this kind > > > of claim could meet such a threshold in principle, it makes just as much > > > sense through the perspective in this sentence: > > > > > > "practical and solitary nature of the TM practice eventually won out." > > > > > > You felt results so you continued, right? Not scientific but practical. > > > > > > If we lower the bar below a scientific threshold and say > > > "this claim could be practically demonstrated so that people of good > > > faith could appreciate that it was true" wouldn't we be back to the need > > > for demonstration? This is not a claim that you will feel better, it is > > > about the world so we can share in its evidence together, in a strictly > > > "aw shucks ain't that a sight Ma" kind of way. > > > > > > You are making a case for apriori faith in the system which is fine for > > > believers. But since this is in principle testable, even if we accept > > > that for people who already believe it is not necessary,wouldn't the > > > message go out to more people just as it did for TM? Even though it > > > wasn't the science rap that drew you in, it was the thing that made it > > > rise above other spiritual practices in popularity. > > > > > > So I get that you don't find this necessary, what I am challenging is why > > > isn't this a priority in an organization whose purpose is to spread this > > > knowledge and preserve Maharishi's teaching. > > > > > > So on an individual level, sure I agree. But this is a claim about the > > > world and it will involve cash from donors right? > > > > > > There are plenty of ways that we use to distinguish fact from fantasy in > > > life. None of them that I know of are against such a demonstration even > > > if it doesn't meet true scientific standards. > > > > > > They say they can do this wonderful thing, show us as artists who want to > > > appreciate its glory. > > > > > > Is that a better fit? > > > > > Couldn't hurt. The TMO has always tried to have this rigidly scientific > > demeanor to justify its programs > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "futur.musik" <futur.musik@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Although your arguments for scientific validation are valid, I am not > > > > sure it makes a lot of difference whether the sutras and yagyas are > > > > provable scientifically. While I can see Maharishi's attempts to bridge > > > > science and yoga as necessary to bring his message to the West > > > > initially, now that so many teachers and methods are here, it has > > > > become more of a spiritual cafeteria in terms of what each of us > > > > decides benefits us as a practice, vs. which technique can be proved > > > > rigorously by science. > > > > > > > > I remember my starting TM had nothing to do with science. I had already > > > > been exposed to Hindu, Buddhist and Christian religions and although I > > > > got a lot out of each one, the practical and solitary nature of the TM > > > > practice eventually won out. I am not arguing for TM, but rather to > > > > show that the science is nice to have but not a must have when deciding > > > > which technique to adopt as a regular practice. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > And with this announcement we enter the realm of the testable. Let's > > > > > break it down: > > > > > > > > > > > While Yogic Flying produces a powerful, generalized, non-directed > > > > > > surge> of positivity for the general well-being of society, > > > > > > > > > > Actually sidhis themselves included many testable behaviors. But that > > > > > didn't really pan out too well did it? No one was able to produce > > > > > something specific that would prove the theory. It could have > > > > > happened, Maharishi predicted it would happen, but it did not happen. > > > > > > > > > > So they changed the claim to something they could paint a circle > > > > > around and claim victory, the panacea snake oil of "generalized > > > > > non-directed surge" (I think I saw that flick when it came out on > > > > > VHS, It stars Ginger Lynn who claimed to have a detachable jaw and in > > > > > the third scene with the pizza delivery guy made me a believer. Now > > > > > that's what you call a convincing demo of a claim!) > > > > > > > > > > So they could have given a demo that would have changed the world > > > > > forever with the sidhis. The finding lost objects one that Larry > > > > > Domash bragged about doing would have been enough, and we would have > > > > > given Jonathan Shear's claim of understanding a squirrel a polite > > > > > pass. But they didn't, which in the rest of the world is known as, > > > > > they couldn't. They got off the hook by changing the claim to be so > > > > > broad that, "hey look a squirrel" worked for movement believers. It > > > > > did not impress the world at large who pretty much unanimously > > > > > responded to all these claims with "Yeah right, hey do you want to go > > > > > grab a coffee?" > > > > > > > > > > But happy days are here again folks, if the movement will step up > > > > > they have a chance once again to redeem themselves and convert the > > > > > world. All that is needed is for them to produce exactly what they > > > > > are claiming to. And before you are too quick to say "oh that Curtis > > > > > is being a butthole again" think about this for a minute. This is a > > > > > chance for them to prove to the world that their claims are true, so > > > > > why are they not doing it in a form that the rest of us could > > > > > appreciate? The fulfillment of the world plan is right there in > > > > > front of them, isn't it? Am I being unreasonable for asking them for > > > > > a convincing demo? When did TM become the a branch of the > > > > > Evangelical Church of Jesus the Redeemer? Why is faith necessary > > > > > when a demo is possible? > > > > > > > > > > <Yagyas create a > > > > > > very focused, concentrated influence of positivity designed to > > > > > > neutralize specific threats. Like the threats that are looming > > > > > > today.> > > > > > > > > > > All they have to do is pick 3 things. 3 things that need yagya-ing. > > > > > 3 things that are broken or not enough of something or too much of > > > > > something we don't want. Why is it improper in principle to insist > > > > > that they first put their money where their mouth is with a decent > > > > > demo of this effect that we can all see if in fact it is specific? > > > > > Why aren't they the ones insisting on one if they are so sure of this > > > > > that they will accept people's money for them? Hell, they deserve to > > > > > put down a wager with all of us skeptics. If they could do X then it > > > > > is reasonable for them to ask us to pony up and pay for the next > > > > > round, right? > > > > > > > > > > So I challenge any believers in yagyas here to come up with 3 things > > > > > that we could verify that Yagyas could fix. I believe it deals with > > > > > the issue of the simultaneity not equaling causation problem by > > > > > asking for 3. Wouldn't that do it? And if it isn't scientifically > > > > > airtight (also an anatomically enlightening scene in the above > > > > > mentioned movie) wouldn't it be a good faith demo worthy of more > > > > > research? Since the whole TM thing is not supposed to be faith based > > > > > why is it out of line to expect that they do what they claim first? > > > > > > > > > > But they wont, and I have a pretty good idea of why. I saw this > > > > > routine before with the sidhis. Nobody ever guesses which shell the > > > > > pea is under in this game. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > All area Satsangs: > > > > > > While Yogic Flying produces a powerful, generalized, non-directed > > > > > > surge > > > > > > of positivity for the general well-being of society, Yagyas create a > > > > > > very focused, concentrated influence of positivity designed to > > > > > > neutralize specific threats. Like the threats that are looming > > > > > > today. > > > > > > > > > > > > [LAUNCHING: THE NEW NATIONAL YAGYA PROGRAM] > > > > > > > > > > > > Maharishi has designed the most powerful system of Yagya the world > > > > > > has > > > > > > ever seen. The Maharishi National YagyaSM program is a massive > > > > > > application of Yagya on a national scale, specifically engineered to > > > > > > produce the largest possible impact on an entire nation. > > > > > > Focus for 2012: Maharishi Yagyas® for the Nation > > > > > > Join us in this great endeavor, please.Let us launch this powerful > > > > > > new > > > > > > program, > > > > > > may abundant good fortune smile on America, and may Maharishi's > > > > > > great legacy of peace and enlightenment permanently bless the human > > > > > > race. > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Guru Dev > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
