That is interesting - I don't understand why you deplore the act because of who he did it with? You know the women and don't like them or what?
________________________________ From: authfriend <authfri...@yahoo.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2013 10:37 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Real Fairfield Life Post --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@...> wrote: > > OK, in keeping with Buck's theory of FFL posts being in some way > about FFL I've given my answer to your question about Maharishi below, but for the record, Buck's "theory" on this point is belied by what Rick has up on FFL's home page about what the group is for. Take a look: "Pretty much any topic is fair game. Currently, there's a lot of discussion about American politics. We have discussed spirituality, politics, economics, morality and higher states of consciousness, drug laws, evolution vs. creationism, enlightenment, advaita, reincarnation, karma, Jyotish (Vedic astrology), yagya, Ayurveda, dzogchen, tantra, channeling, vegetarianism, kundalini, celibacy, sexuality, homosexuality, abortion, racism, UFOs, Buddhism, Hinduism, Veda, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Scientology, etc." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <snip> > My question to everyone who cares to answer is how do you or > did you deal with the idea of Maharishi having sex and lying > about it? Do you think he did, and it doesn't matter or what? I have no doubt that he did. I don't presume to know what it means in the cosmic scheme of things. Seems to me entirely possible that it was "in accord with the laws of Nature," as Rory proposes. After all, Krishna tells Arjuna that not even the enlightened can know what Nature's purposes are ("Unfathomable is the course of action"). Personally, I deplore his philandering because of who he philandered *with*, but it doesn't affect what I think of his teaching.