Judy for the record, your objections to my other post were either based on your lack of familiarity with Maharishi's experiential goals for his programs beyond the beginner level of instruction, (never attended an experience grading group), your confusions concerning different aspects of the teaching,(confusing the programs inner goals with the outer goals), or a deliberate malicious filter that twisted what I meant into something you could complain about propelled by a premise that I have an agenda to mislead people who might want to start TM for some devious, although inexplicable, reason.
But in the end we both got what we want. I got to clarify what I meant, and you got to make your eternal case that a stranger on the Internet was a bad, bad person. Now you can go back to your fulltime job of informing the world what a bad person Barry is, and will hopefully leave me alone to discuss my topic with people with an genuine interest in what I am saying. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > Curtis, for the record, while there's a lot in this post > I *disagree* with rather strongly, there isn't a thing > in it that I object to the way I did with your other post. > As far as I'm concerned, no one has any need to cover > their ears. > > You will no doubt continue to insist that I criticized > your first post because I disagreed with it rather than > because it was misleading, but if so that's your problem, > not mine. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > So after the wave of drama I am back contemplating what the value is of the > > different states of mind produced and cultivated by meditation. (Emily > > please cover your ears.) > (snip) >
