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.


 

Reply via email to