> > I also believe that a first cause CREATOR, or, a first cause BIG > > BANG, are both primitive and quaint mythological ideas...not > > science. They are based on a complete misunderstanding of time. > > Agree about the creator, don't agree about the > Big Bang. There's some very good scientific > evidence for the Big Bang; *and* it seems to me > to map pretty well onto MMY's explication of > how the Absolute manifested as the relative.
And that's the point? To find "scientific" "evidence" to "prove" Maharishi right? Thanks for clarifying. :-) ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
