--- In [email protected], "Jason" <jedi_spock@...> wrote: > > > > Granted that humility was never exactly one of TM-org's > strong points nor was MMY's. > > The main complaint by people like Vaj and few others is that > these kind of cults create a huge ego in the sadhaka by > telling them that this is the "best path" and they have the > "highest" and "most noble" goals. > > They also create a prejudice in the minds of Sadhakas who > fail to appreciate other valid alternate paths and ways of > life. Their mind becomes rigid and dogmatic. >
You guys just don't know, really it's about alpha. TM'ers have the most alpha and alpha coherence between everywhere brain, and therefore are the best-est. The others don't even come close. This is clear in the alpha science. By the science of alpha TM is world class meditation and TM'ers are world-class spiritual human-being people. By definition TM'ers are doing less and also accomplishing more in life spiritually. Everyone else evidently are spiritual losers. You need to go back to school. -Buck in the Dome > However, please note that all organised religions on this > planet are also guilty of this. > > If Maharishi had taught a number of different meditations > techniques, Judy would be on the forum "defending" all them > as the "best" and "highest" and the "truest" path. > > --- turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Having rapped once this morning about the concept so often pushed out by > > TM and TMers of it/them being "The Best," I thought I'd balance things > > somewhat and rap about another concept. As much as I may appreciate > > people whose aspiration -- like Olympic athletes -- is to become The > > Best at something, I'm personally just not drawn that way. > > > > In both spiritual pursuits and more mundane ones, I'm more attracted to > > folks who have learned the quiet joys of being ordinary. > > > > I just did an Amazon "Look inside this book" search of Maharishi's "The > > Science of Being and Art of Living," looking for instances of a word. I > > got zero results. None. Nada. Bupkus. This doesn't surprise me, because > > in the many years I studied with him, I can't recall him having ever > > used the word in any talk or lecture. > > > > But if you think about it, that *should* be a bit surprising, because > > this word is the *basis* of many other spiritual teachings and > > traditions. They give whole talks devoted to this word and concept. They > > write whole books about it. Much of their daily practice is devoted to > > achieving it. > > > > The word is "humility." > > > > The dictionary defines humility as "The quality or state of being > > humble." Looking up humble, it is defined as "Not proud or haughty; > > reflecting or expressing a spirit of deference." The Dalai Lama, in one > > of his talks on this subject, has said, "Any sense of conceit or > > self-importance gets in the way of cultivating the genuine altruistic > > intention, and the most effective remedy against this is the cultivation > > of humility." > > > > Isn't it interesting that the quality that Buddhism considers one of the > > noblest and most altruistic intents one could have, so much so that it's > > considered a "remedy" for its opposite, self importance, is something > > that Maharishi Mahesh Yogi didn't even feel was worth mentioning? > > > > Different strokes for different folks, eh? > > > > Anyway, I'm a big fan of humility, in the sense of realizing one's > > ordinariness and *lack* of self importance. This, to me, is a portal > > that leads to the ability to better empathize with one's fellow human > > beings. And that, of course, leads to the ability to be more of service > > to them. > > > > There are a few folks here on Fairfield Life who I think -- based on the > > things they write -- "get" humility. You see it in the way they describe > > the "people on the street" they interact with (think Curtis and Marek) > > and you see it in the things they aspire to or fail to aspire to (think > > Xeno and some others, who have given up the one-pointed pursuit of > > enlightenment in favor of the pursuit of just living a fun or meaningful > > life). > > > > Then there are others, who *don't* seem content with being ordinary. > > We've been told here that the "highest goal in life" is to aspire to > > becoming enlightened. Or to create world peace by being so important > > that the very thud of your buttocks on slabs of foam creates world > > peace. Call me crazy, but I don't see a lot of humility in these > > aspirations. > > > > I also don't see a lot of happiness and fulfillment in the people who > > pursue them. > > > > It's as if they're never satisfied. There's this carrot dangling > > somewhere on the end of a stick in front of them, and they won't allow > > themselves to be truly happy until they've grabbed it. Sounds like a > > dumb way to live one's life to me. > > > > Some people need big, enormous, ostentatious and above all IMPORTANT > > goals in life. Enlightenment. World peace. I like people who have more > > humble goals, like just trying to be as happy as they can in their daily > > lives, and trying to do as much as they can to help the people they > > personally interact with every day to be a little happier themselves. > > Those goals sound just fine to me; I don't see why anyone would need > > loftier ones. > > > > But then I have listened to a lot of songs by Bruce Cockburn, a guy who > > "gets" humility, too. His lyrics and his way of looking at things may > > have warped me. When he sings verses like the following, I get the > > feeling he's actually onto something: > > > > To be one more voice in the human choir > > Rising like smoke from the mystical fire > > Of the heart > > > > Not "the" voice. Not even the lead singer. Just one more voice. Now > > that's humble. > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVfssmB4ok0 > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVfssmB4ok0> > > >
