---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote :
You make the point well, Ann. I don't know many who took these claims at face value, and thereby set themselves up for disillusionment. Most put them in the context of a vision of possibilities and discounted accordingly. And it seems strange to make the case that since, "we didn't eliminate the ago old problems of mankind in this generation" the whole program was a fraud. I poured my heart and soul into achieving those goals. And at some point I too became a little disillusioned, but I never felt anyone owed me anything in this spiritual game. "Let a man raise himself, by himself. Let him not destroy himself. He alone is his own friend. He alone, his own destroyer" From the Bhagavad Gita. Maybe that is what helped me. Well then good for you. Buyer beware and all those cliches seem to suddenly become relevant. Now YOU make many good points in this post and I agree with all of them. If everyone took responsibility for a reasonable amount of what they end up going through in their lives there would be very little anger and resentment. Face it: shit and life happen all intertwined. It is the hazards of possessing a beating heart. That heart can either expand or it can wither and become like a blackened, scorched thing. We all have really hard times but what we do with them makes all the difference - in the end and even as we proceed until that time. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : BTW, for Steve: From: "steve.sundur@..." <steve.sundur@...> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 2:22 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unstressing or Demons? I think Ann made a good point, that there seems to be a misconception of the part of Michael, at least, that the ME is capable of having such a transforming effect on the environment that conflicts will become non existent. It is in areas like this where I think he sometimes has a problem separating fantasy from reality, hence my comment along those lines. What I was actually saying was that anyone with a bit of balance and sense would realize that what MMY claimed would happen based on the existence of this supposed ME is not likely to be possible. It is the old adage: If it sounds too good to be true... . So untwist your knickers and fingers (Bawwy). My point was simply don't believe everything you hear and if you did believe it all lock, stock and barrel, then you only have your own gullibility to blame and the common aftermath of bitterness and blame toward those who "misled" you. Steve, you are not bitter and angry about your time in the Movement so this indicates to me that perhaps you either didn't believe it all at face value or you simply can let go easier than others. I find myself wondering whether you (and Ann, since this dumb idea seems to have come from her) missed all those Maharishi lectures in which he said *very explicitly* that TM and ME would have such an effect on the environment that if enough people did them conflicts would become impossible. That was the whole *basis* of his "Age Of Enlightement" and "Dawning of Sat Yuga" talks. Duh. Maharishi and the TMO *did* claim -- in many, many talks and press releases and sales spiels pitching "Invincibility" -- that sufficient numbers of TM/ME practitioners would generate such a field of positivity and invincibility around them that no crime would be *possible* within it. So what happened *on the campus of MUM* -- well within the boundaries of this of this all-powerful field of Woo, and with surely "sufficient numbers" given the percentage of students, teachers, people on courses, and others on campus practicing both TM and the ME -- that made Maharishi's predictions and proclamations go blooey, and ended in a murder? Seems to me you can't have it both ways. To claim publicly that the ME *will* solve all problems by creating a field of Woo...uh...I mean coherence...so powerful that crime cannot exist, and then to say, "Oooopsie...we didn't really mean *all* crime when we said 'all crime'" Sounds to me as if someone was practicing the "fingers crossed" mudra. :-)
