carde, I'd say that that's one way to frame it. Maharishi talks about heart and mind being fully developed but not connected to each other. I think he also talks about dharma on different levels. What also comes to mind are the research findings about TMers and Kohlberg's Moral Reasoning scale.
________________________________ From: card <cardemais...@yahoo.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 4:49 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: BatGap Panel Discussion – John Hagelin, Ph.D., Igor Kufayev, and Mark McCooey. Moderated by Rick Archer FWIW, wasn't it mainly morality that almost prevented Krishna from fulfilling his duty as a kshatriya? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <no_reply@> wrote: > (snip) > > Do you have any problem with folks getting the badges taken > > away if they attend other spiritual lectures? > > Let me put it this way: I don't have a problem with the TMO > establishing whatever rules it thinks are necessary to ensure > maximum effectiveness of the dome program and implementing > those rules with good judgment and fairness. > > But that's in principle. I don't know whether its rules *do* > ensure maximum effectiveness; nor is it clear to me, from > what I've heard here (although I have no way of verifying it), > that the rules are implemented wisely and fairly. > > However, it's been my impression that badges aren't taken > away simply for attending a spiritual lecture; I had thought > one had to be actively helping the teacher (e.g., making > arrangements for the lecture). And I had also thought this > applied only to governors, not the rank and file. Just > attending a lecture seems like overkill, as well as being > impossible to enforce consistently. > > But I don't live in Fairfield, so I have no firsthand > knowledge of any of this. > > (snip) > > Do you think Hagelin's morality is a bad reflection on the > > efficacy of the TM technique to evolve a personality into a > > more moral being ? I think you'd have an "apology" to explain > > that, but I don't know, so I ask if you've put it into text > > yet. > > > > For discussion purposes, let's just talk about anyone who is > > a "serial marriage rapist" instead of Hagelin, cuz I only know > > gossip about him, so just answer if you think TM affects > > morality such that a person of that ilk would be improved in, > > say, less than ten years of such therapy. > > I'm afraid I'm gonna have to give you another equivocal > response here. > > I haven't seen much evidence that practice of TM affects > morality positively (at least morality per my standards). > > On the other hand, I've become increasingly uncertain about > the nature of the relationship between expansion of > consciousness in the direction of enlightenment (via any > technique) and morality. I'm not sure these days whether > there's *any* relationship at all; and if there is, I sure > wouldn't want to have to define it so as to make it possible > reliably to discern someone's development of consciousness > (or the effectiveness of their practice) based on the > morality (whose?) of their behavior. > > One thing I *am* sure of: It's completely unacceptable to > excuse or try to justify bad behavior on the basis of one's > estimation of a person's development of consciousness. The > enlightened guy doesn't get a pass on making a pass. > > Best I can do, Edg. I guess that's postmodern spirituality > for you. ;-) You're welcome to probe further if you'd like > me to elaborate on my ambivalence. >
