Just as a followup, it is worth pointing out to those who have never thought about how they treated Maharishi and how they believe TMers *should* treat Maharishi that this is behavior that was *taught* to them.
There is no inherent tradition with regard to other teachers in America or the West that we have to treat them as if they were somehow "special," and "revere" them as if they were near-gods or "better" than you are. There are no traditions saying that when you greet them you stand silently in polite lines and then hand them flowers. There are no traditions that tell you how to react to them when they say something in a talk or lecture; for most teachers, if you disagree with what they say, you would naturally ask for clarification, or actually disagree. But the way many Westerners treat Eastern spiritual teachers is the way that they are treated in the East. This is *learned behavior*. As TMers, the first time you met Maharishi (for those here who actually did), you were *taught* how to interact with him. Not in words per se, but *by example*, watching how everyone around you who had been around for a while was treating him and interacting with him. You almost never saw anyone express any doubts about anything he said, because it "just wasn't done." In the rare cases you *did* see anyone disagree with him, those people were likely excommunicated shortly thereafter, and you never saw them again -- this is a pretty strong "lesson" in how one "should" interact with Maharishi and treat him. And, because all of these "As newbies you should/must treat him and what he says the way we older students do" lessons were spread out over years, you never realized that they were, in fact, lessons -- a form of indoctrination. You learned very quickly the "right" way to treat Maharishi and think of him, and that it always had to be with respect and deference, because he was, after all, enlightened and you weren't. These quiet, subtle forms of indoctrination were so powerful and so effective that even now -- decades later and even years after his death -- many people are afraid to *not* follow the guidelines they were taught about how one should/must interact with or talk about Maharishi. And when people who still think this way see someone treat him like what he really was -- just another human being, not inherently "higher" or "better" than anyone who has ever lived -- it makes them uncomfortable and uptight. I think this is what Steve and others on this forum are expressing. It makes them *uncomfortable* to see Michael or myself or others treat Maharishi as if he was "just another guy." Because they were subtly taught that to treat him that way was "wrong" and a sign of disrespect -- and, during his lifetime, a "sin" worthy of excommunication -- they feel that anyone who treats him as if he were just another guy is doing something "wrong," and they lash out at these heretics. Free clue -- it's not US who are being weird when we treat Maharishi no differently than we'd treat anyone else we've ever met or interacted with. It's YOU, if you still are so indoctrinated that you feel you have to. ________________________________ From: "TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:53 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 8/12&13/14-Maharishi: As we take care of ourself, the world will take of itself for us on that level From: "steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> What I find kind of interesting is to see people here, over time, keep discounting anything to do with MMY. I don't mean to single out Barry, but I've seen, (particularly with that quote Judy found), that MMY's stature has gone from someone enlightened, in Barry's eyes, to someone with no awakening, but rather a personality that people just latched onto because they had a cult mindset. It's a natural process you might not be familiar with, Steve, because it's called "growing up." There has NEVER been a time on either a.m.t. or on FFL in which I said that I believed that Maharishi was enlightened, because it would not have been true. The only time I thought that was during the early years when I was as bamboozled by his act as anyone else. But during my TTC and afterwards, as I got to work more closely with Maharishi, I realized that I had never once seen or experienced anything I would categorize as "darshan" or "shakti" or even "charisma." As far as those qualities go, he had the charisma of a wet burrito, compared to many teachers I have worked with since. When I left the TMO and began to interface with other teachers from real traditions, I found out what real charisma and personal power were like, and thus realized how little of them Maharishi had had. I also got to learn from real spiritual traditions, as opposed to the ones he had made up and ripped off from Hinduism, just dressed in Western clothing. In terms of intellect and being able to give truly "advanced lectures," Maharishi was a spiritual kindergarten-level teacher at best. So there is simply no possibility of me considering him "enlightened." OR of considering him a good teacher. I *did* learn some useful things from him, and I thank him for those, but not to the point of feeling the need to put him up on some unrealistic pedestal for having qualities he never had. Do you still revere your kindergarten teacher, and place him or her up on some kind of pedestal of supposed wisdom, the way you might have "at the time?" Of course you don't. Similarly, I don't consider Maharishi anything more than one of the first teachers I ever worked with, back when I was young and naive and easily impressed. I have grown since then, and can "call a con man a con man" when it is appropriate. People -- including yourself, Steve -- DID latch on to Maharishi because he cultivated in them a cult mindset. Some of us grew up and got over it, and can in retrospect see him a little more clearly. If you can't, and get uptight when you hear other people doing so, you'll have to forgive me if I don't consider that my problem. It really doesn't make a lot of sense, and as Jim likes to point out, says a lot more about the person finding fault, that the object of that person's criticism. I guess this is a just sayin' observation. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote : While reading this I see that this was a golden time for MMY and for the Movement. There is so much power behind what he says here and seemingly so much truth. This was a pleasure to read. It reminds me why I started to meditate back in 1970 and why I attended MIU. What a pleasure to read! Jai Guru DevTo subscribe, send a reply with "subscribe" entered as the subject or message; to unsubscribe, send a reply with "unsubscribe" entered as the subject or message.-- David Hooper1000 Purusha Place, Suite 219Romney, WV 26757
