Sort of neat to see you pulling this discussion to a sensible middle, nooz.
It is not what some want to hear. They are satisfied with only the most scornful of interpretations. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote : There are a lot of "Bucks" in India. And real yogis tend to disregard them as fanatics. My trip to India, studying with Indian teachers for ayurveda, jyotish and tantra gave me a good perspective on Maharishi. He didn't stray too much from traditional thought. If he would have he would have been chastised by the yogi community. Many of them praise him for popularizing meditation in the west but wouldn't have anything to do with the movement when invited to do so. One needs to remember in Indian tradition there is a right hand path for renunciates and the left hand path for householders. Problem is a lot westerners aspire to the right hand path because they want to be "holy men". But that is ridiculous because you have to almost be born into it. The left hand path is more practical in the west because you can go about earning income to raise a family. I think in India the only advantage to the right hand path is you get taken care of by the monasteries or if on the street people will give feed you out of tradition. My tantra guru taught that samskaras don't entirely go away in enlightenment. Maharishi actually taught this too as "the remains of ignorance." But it determines your personality and probably keeps us away from being totally intolerable bliss ninnies. On 11/14/2014 11:13 AM, curtisdeltablues@... mailto:curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: C: Since Buck decided to take a swipe at me well I have been off the board, I will take a moment to make my own case: that Buck comically misunderstands the meaning of Maharishi's message as usual and idiotically thinks it might serve as a weapon against people who think differently than he does. The hysterical perversion of the intention of Maharishi's words being used as a justification of his doing EXACTLY what Maharishi is warning against is too good to miss. Plus it gives me a chance to comment on Maharishi's style of self promotions as a special guy that seems to have worked so well on Buck. My comments will be interspersed with Maharishi's below Don't Speak Ill, Remain Pure, 1964 Everyone has to discharge one's duty towards himself and towards spreading of this meditation in whatever capacity one can. And never undermine any other's attempt or desires in whatever humble way it may be. C: The context is his teachers who were bitching about each other. Maharishi wants them to get back to work pitching his product and STFU about their personality problems with each other. One thing of very great importance: that now when you have been meditating for some time, purity has grown in life quite a lot. As the mind gains more and more of the Being, mind becomes more and more pure. C: Again setting the context, this applies to those who are of a level of purity where this kind of magical effect takes place. He is not making a broad statement about all people and is not addressing this to non meditators. By applying it to Barry and Michael and me, Buck is saying that our consciousness is as pure as his so this should be a problem for us too. In Maharish's system, like that of the Laws of Manu, there are different instructions for behavior for each level of consciousness. He is not instructing Buck to run around like a clucking hen berating people like me who are acting according to my own level of consciousness according to his system. He is directing this to insiders who want or care about his opinions. It is not a scold to be used to beat others over the head, it is an insiders tip for insiders. But one thing which you have to be very cautious about is that you don't think evil of anyone, don't speak ill of anyone. Otherwise speaking ill and thinking ill of someone, dwelling on the weaknesses of someone, all their bad qualities come to your heart; [this way] you get your heart and mind spoiled. C: Here is where it gets even funnier. For Buck worry to be valid, the things we are saying about Maharishi must be true. He is not denying that people have real "weaknesses", he is saying that those real weakness come into your heart for paying attention to them. So only in the case where Maharishi is an actual con man shyster, or whatever other criticism had been leveled does this influence come into play. And none of it has anything to do with my own critiques of Maharishi's belief system. He is not condemning all philosophical disagreement or he would be condemning Shankara's main activity traveling around India and debating with and arguing his points with opposing view points. Buck is misusing the intention of this instruction because he has intellectual boundary problems with people who don't share his provincial view of the world. So when through meditation, purity is growing in life, we don't invite this mud from outside to make us impure anymore. We have to be cautious against our thoughts that we don't think ill of anyone, and we don't do ill to anyone naturally. C: Again, the point is for people who in the system have gained this imaginary purity, it is not a universal instruction for outsiders. Speaking ill of others is a very bad.... We say it makes the cloth dirty, makes the whole personality very dirty and impure. That we have to guard against in our dealings and feelings with people. Very important; very, very important. It is as important as daily practice of meditation. C: So WTF is Buck doing chasing us around, drawing our "mud" to himself? If what we are doing it is impure, then by dwelling on and attacking us Buck is violating the very purpose of the instruction, while at the same time thinking it is a way to put us down? Now THAT's funny. In the olden days in India, there was a practice that if some man did some great sin, then the way to repent it was that he would cover his body with a cloth like that and will go to any village. Standing out of the village, he would shout out: my name is such and such, and I come from that village, and I happened to be doing like that and like that and like that. He would just announce it and go ahead, and keep on announcing from village to village. And the effect was: all the people who heard him, if in their evening meetings with their fellow men, they talk about that, then the contention is that they partake of his sin and after some time he becomes pure. Just by talking about the sinner, the people who talk about him share his sin. This is very dangerous. Someone has done something wrong and if we dwell on that and talk it over with someone, we have been affected by that sin and we spread that sin; we partake of his sin and take it upon us. C: I agree with Maharishi that olden day India was full of idiotic practices. Anyone who has done any mistake there or there or there, we just don't speak of it. Otherwise we will only be shrouding ourselves with the sins of others. Very important, especially now when through this Transcendental Meditation we are making ourselves more and more full with Being, means more and more full with purity, then we have to guard against this thing which is very dangerous. No one thinks that if I am talking ill of someone, then no one thinks that I am taking over his sin. It is a common practice in the world to simply talk something wrong done by others. It is just very harmful for us. C: So Mr. Pure guy. Heed your master and STFU about people who you believe are sinners. It is very dangerous for you to focus your purity and wa wa woo woo power on people who don't share our views. It isn't even his intended point. Take a moment to actually read what your teacher said, apply it to yourself after you understand what the F was actually talking about. More below;: Question (inaudible, about newspaper writers?) They do a great service as far as amending of the wrong is concerned, but as far as partaking of his sin is concerned, they do partake. They help the sinner by spreading the news about him and everybody talks about him, and then all of them partake of the sins. As far as partaking of the sin is concerned, that is helpful for the sinner. C: What a complete indictment of how you behave here Buck. In Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna said to Arjuna at one point [Gita 9:1, see below] that I am giving you this most secret wisdom because, one condition out of many that He said was, that you never speak ill of others (anasuya). That is you don't speak ill of others, for this quality in you I think you deserve this wisdom, so I give this wisdom to you. Just this quality of not speaking ill of others. Out of my own experience, I tell you, in the ashram of my Guru Dev, there were 100s of people, all good disciples. And everyone after all is a human being. No aspirant is ever perfect. They come to the feet of the master for that perfection. So everyone has his own failing there and there and there. I had my own failings, I never knew what were they, but must be because no human is ever perfect. C: With the myopic self knowledge of George Bush who as asked the question about his failings, Maharishi doesn't know himself well enough to know what they were. That explains a lot. One thing I was famous about is that I will not speak ill of anyone. I would always cherish a hope of his becoming better sooner or later. I would always cherish a hope. C: Mr Self Promotion to the end. He was "famous" for being so wonderful while at the same time oblivious to his own faults. I would love to hear the discussion over chapattis about the clueless Mahesh by the other disciples! If someone says: that man has done like that and such a bad man. [I would say:] “Now that he is in the ashram he will improve.” Always I cherish a hope against all the wrongs done by all the people. C: Get it Buck? Stop being such a negative d-bag around here. And the effect that you find today is all this world Movement to bring peace to every man all around the world; it is a very great thing in the long history of the world. This great force of purity and strength for spiritual regeneration of entire mankind, no surprise [that it] is based on the faculty of mind that will not cherish into the wrongs of others. C: And he sticks the landing! I am going to predict that Buck will share Maharishi's lack of ability for self reflection and will continue to trot this out as if it means that critics of Maharishi and his belief system should stop expressing their POV here. And when he does, I will laugh my ass off at his utter lack of understanding of the system he claims to be such a champion for. What you are doing is hijacking Maharishi's belief system into your own personal agenda for promoting your image as a super special spiritual person, while demonstrating your lack of reading comprehension. Why did it take a critic of the system to point out its intended meaning to you? Now you have three choices. Show me where my understanding is specifically wrong and why his words should apply to me, go ad hominem as if that solves the problem, or cut and run and apply yourself to writing some new preachy bullshit that attempts to sell us on how special you are for the intellectually mangled beliefs you hold. Bhagavad Gita 9:1 The Blessed Lord said: Now I shall fully declare to you, who do not cavil, this the greatest secret, the knowledge combined with the experience, having known which you will be freed from evil. Quote from Upanishads, which was used in Vedic Atom Pledge (1980) Let us be together, Let us eat together, Let us be vital together, Let us be radiating truth, radiating the light of life, Never shall we denounce anyone, never entertain negativity. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> mailto:dhamiltony2k5@... wrote : Well, really there is a much larger communal discussion going on here about dealing with negativity. As such I am not going to entertain your particular negativity around this any further. For to go any further might well necessitate having to denounce you in addition to dredging your negativity further and I feel that should not be spiritually useful for either of us right now, according to the teaching. Instead I shall sit in yoga with your energetic resolution of your anger issues. I wish you well, -Buck turquoiseb wrote Son,... How old are you, "Buck?" I'll bet I'm older than you are. ...as a transcendentalist I well know the reality of my inner experience with this and for that I am quite a satisfied customer of the transcending meditation experience. I have no problem with this, and am in fact happy for you that your "inner experience" has been good for you. What I object to is your assumption that YOUR "inner experience" means diddleysquat to anyone else or is good for them. Or even that it should. I know and can certainly trust in the clarity of that reality by the science of my experience, thank you for asking. "That reality" isn't one. It's only your "inner experience." YOUR INNER EXPERIENCE IS NOT REALITY. IT'S ONLY YOUR INNER EXPERIENCE. Get it? I am not going to get down in to your mud to wrestle with you point by point about George Bush, life is too short for that. However there is in deed a discerning and practical spiritual aspect of caution to what Maharishi is getting at with his negativity talk around spiritual practice. I find it wise to take that to heart. Jai Guru Dev, -Buck Sorry, but I can't "take to heart" the possibility that anyone who still tries to end rants by invoking the thoughtstopper "Jai Guru Dev" could possibly be "wise." turquoiseb wrote :
