--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote: > > > > On 04/13/2012 06:36 AM, authfriend wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj<vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > On Apr 12, 2012, at 9:40 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > > > > > > > > Raunchy, I don't think Lawson was ever a teacher and maybe > > > > > never even a checker. ;-) > > > > > > > > As several initiators have explained to him before, he has > > > > some real OCD and errant ideas about what TM is. > > > > > > Which "several" initiators were those, Vaj? > > > > > > BTW, it was Lawson who explained to us that he has OCD. > > > > > > Lawson understands what TM is as well as, if not better > > > than, anyone on FFL--certainly better than Vaj and Bhairitu. > > > > What a ridiculous statement that is, Judy! I have taught > > TM and you haven't and neither has Lawson. You are both > > dilettantes! > > Meditation dilettantes sample techniques. Unlike Bhairitu, > Judy and Lawson just do TM so they have a much better present > day memory of the finer points of TM than he does.
"Wauw," said Turq in Dutch. The translation should be obvious. That said, I've been mentally tripping lately on the resemblance between spirituality's "Thou shalt have no teacher before me" and morality's "Thou shalt have one and only one mate, for life." Living as I do as a fly on the wall in a polyamorous household, I am often reminded of the narrow-mindedness of the human species and its attachment to monogamy as a de facto standard. Our next-door staunch Christian neighbors have no problems whatsoever with my three friends bringing up their daughter together. But you just can't *imagine* the shit I read on the Internet about how anyone who won't limit themselves to One And Only One Partner is evil, and a low-vibe slime. That is not my everyday experience, so I take notice. I've never had any problem loving more than one person at once. I kinda wonder about those who have. Which did they decide that it was proper *to* love, their mother or their father? When you cut to the chase, isn't the "Thou shalt not mix-and-match spiritual teachers/traditions" spiel just another form of monogamist thinking? It seems -- as does Raunchy's reply -- "fear-based" to me. "OMG. Bad Things will happen to me if I learn about other ways of viewing meditation. I must avoid them, and praise those who, like me, avoid them, too." Monogamy. The fear that something will dissipate or be compromised in some way because one opens one's horizons to learning or experiencing more of life. Spiritual monogamy. Ditto.
