It is not just a given that the University in Fairfield will just continue.  
Its existence has to be worked at all the time both financially and for its 

---In, <> wrote :

 The University and the larger TM movement?  Why care?  Because a lot of people 
live there or are dependent on it all in different ways.  People we know who 
are people we are in community with.  In many different ways even in its 
diminished form of late the University itself is a fulcrum in both the local 
community and the larger TM movement that is here. This is real stuff to people 
here who live here in Fairfield and the larger meditating community.  A lot of 
people who live here are affected by the way people behave up in the movement 
there.  Everyone living here should be interested in how it is going up there.  

---In, <> wrote :

 The meditating University and the meditating Movement community are 
significant fly-wheels in the local economy here. The University is a 
substantial employer and provider for people in the community. As is, the 
meditating community that has settled and embedded in the local economy here 
along with the University.  

 All the economic development agencies should be sitting up (the Chamber of 
Commerce and local, regional, and State economic development types).and be 
proactively asking how it is going up there and if there is anything they can 
do to help mitigate how it is going for the University here.   

 It should be a major local economic disturbance where it goes bankrupt, or 
closes for lack of accreditation. 

---In, <> wrote :

 Thanks for your responses Doug. What a hell of a problem. I can certainly see 
the POV of the obstructionists, the ones who want to keep doing what they are 
doing, "because that's the way granny sliced the ham...".  

 If I had once been anointed as some sort of gate-keeper by "His Holiness" 
Maharishi, and had not yet awakened to my infinite nature, that would be 
something almost impossible to let go of. With such a  consciousness, it is 
enormously scary to relinquish such power, something that according to the 
psyche of the controlling person, *practically came from God, Himself*, and 
must be kept in place for the person's ongoing salvation. Such an illusion is 
very tough to see, much less confront and see through.

 The issue with a spiritual community modeled around the personality of a 
single teacher, is when that teacher is no longer there, the model crumbles. 
There is no precedent to follow wrt integrating such knowledge into the real 
world, unless it comes from the teacher. In any other venue, politics, 
business, military, religion, there are track records based on measurable 
objectives, to guide the organization after the leader is gone. But in a  
spiritual community the only thing that continues is the relative power of the 
individuals, at the time of the leader's passing. Unless they are able to work 
cooperatively, or a single person rises to take the founder's place, the 
organization will wither.

 ---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : 

 Why concern ourselves?  Because,it is a fully functioning university and 
facility right now and it would be a horrible terrible local disruption for a 
lot of good people who live here if it lost its accreditation, went bankrupt 
and closed. 

 Everyone who lives here should be very interested in how it is going for the 
movement and MUM up there.  There should be a lot more proactive mediating of 
what is going on there for its welfare for the whole community for a lot of 
good reasons here locally.  

---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 “.. What is the downside to it all going away, except the process to continue 
the marketing and teaching of TM and the TM Siddhis programs? 

 Why bother with the University or the community Dome meditation up there? Why?

 People should be very interested in how they are behaving up there on campus 
and how it is going for them.    

---In, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 It's called *trying to solve the problem on the level of the problem*.

---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 Om no, no.  The process is bringing light to what evidently has been a dark 
elusive area. The light will enlighten things around all of this.  For some who 
do not like change this may feel like it is schismatic but change could be very 
expansive as meditators will come to this school, graduate and leave having had 
very positive experiences with it all in total while they were here.    

 The changes in the works are very exciting.  It is time, this is timely.  This 
has to be about more than survival and endurance but expansion.  There is 
general agreement in consensus on that and only a few rigid holdouts against 
progressing.  The next four or five months will be arduous getting there and 
may not be for the faint of heart.  This is glorious work that is being done 
here by a lot of good people who are with it in the community.     -JaiGuruYou 

 From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]" <>
 Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, 
The TM Movement Community
 'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious 
faith-and-belief-in-Maharishi conservative TM ideologic zealotry of strict 
preservation on the one hand from progressive practitioner elements on the 
other hand who in experience would like to see things evolve and work out well 
for the TM movement.



---In, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 If it's *extremely trying inside the movement" why be bothered? That's why i 
keep my distance from the TMO. That way,I don't stress them out and they don't 
stress me out. Why swim in their mess?

---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 Why?  Well, on a purely practical level I live here and a lot of my friends 
live here.  I have family that lives here now and we are all affected by how 
they behave up there.  -JaiGuruYou 


 From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]" <>
 Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The 
TM Movement Community

 I am on my way to a working meeting on campus right now about the movement but 
this division over ‘originalism’ is a communal rub and scrap in harnessing 
actionable change in cultural things that have evolved within the TM movement 
community.  It is extremely trying inside the movement right now.   


---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 On considering uncompromising and Strict Originalism, like with some strict TM 
 “..a static interpretation of the law that doesn't move with the times, 
doesn't move with the society.” 
 “He (Scalia) was its most fierce proponent I guess I would say, but that 
didn't mean that he prevailed. Not everybody on the court agreed with him, 
including many of the conservatives on some issues. And so while he was its 
principal proponent and theoretician, he didn't win a great deal of the time 
because he was not a consensus-builder. Other people were more willing to 
compromise than he was. He would have called that "faux-conservatism."”


 "The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living but dead, or as I 
prefer to call it, enduring. It means today not what current society, much less 
the court, thinks it ought to mean, but what it meant when it was adopted."  
-Antonin Scalia


 Originalism: A Primer On Scalia's Constitutional Philosophy
 Originalism: A Primer On Scalia's Constitutional Phi...
 NPR's Nina Totenberg explains how the idea that the Constitution is "not 
living but dead" transformed the Supreme Court during Antonin Scalia's te...

 View on
 Preview by Yahoo 


---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 “Originalism, as defined by Justice Scalia and others, is that what is in the 
Constitution literally is what the founding fathers meant.”

 Conservative TM Maharishi Originalism: That Maharishi set it up the way he did 
as an enlightened soul and teacher, that he knew what he was doing, and it 
needs to stay that way.

---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious 
faith-and-belief-in- Maharishi conservative TM ideologic zealotry on the one 
hand from progressive practitioner elements on the other hand who in experience 
would like to see things evolve and work out well for the TM movement.

 “And there's no such thing as an evolution of ideas and an evolution of 
society. ..He (Scalia) wouldn't buy that, ..He believed the same thing in 
interpretation of statutes (TM Movement admin policy, guidelines, and 
instruction), that the words (originalist) on the page are all that counts. 
That legislative history, that constitutional history, they don't count much if 
at all. What matters is the intent at the time. To put it most bluntly, "I mean 
what I say and not any more or any less." 

---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 Standing like Constitutional Original-ists, the faith-in-Maharishi religionist 
TM'ers inside TM at the top for decades have contended and winnowed things down 
fundamentally in their own minds that, “Fairfield is for those who have 'faith 
and belief' in Maharishi and everyone else should leave us alone”.

 That wish, that people without 'faith-and-belief' should leave, would have to 
be taken apart and looked at to see how it has actually gone down. A lot of 
meditators have come and left and some lot of meditators have stayed on for 
their own good reasons. Clearly the Dome group meditation numbers are really 
tiny.  Donations to the University and undergraduate enrollment tight.  Has 
Bevan gotten his wish? That those who do not have 'faith-and-belief in 
Maharishi', “..should leave and leave us alone”?


 “Be careful what you wish for in this world, for if you wish hard enough you 
are sure to get it. I once heard a very wise many say this, and the longer I 
live the more firmly I believe it to be true.” The Atlantic monthly, Volume 67. 



---In, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 In zeal as 'Original-ists' having stood in way of progressive elements also in 
the TM movement community this is a lot like Scalia's camp has been on the 
Supreme Court in restraining and obstructing societal evolution.
 The difference evidently is that though there are a lot of opinions and 
feelings about how it should go for TM and many have their many firm 
'Maharishi-saids', there evidently is not 'written' preamble, constitution 
guiding or bylaws governing TM that people easily share.

 Everyone seems to have their own lists of 'Maharishi-Saids' to stand on 

 “..And he continued to be its (Originalism's) foremost exponent. From being a 
sort of a fringe movement 30 or 40 years ago, it is now major league, perhaps 
the dominant philosophy — or was a dominant philosophy with his vote — on the 
Supreme court.” 

  -This would be Bevan in the TM community? With Neil.

 What is Originalism?
 4 Questions With NPR's Nina Totenberg About Justice Antonin Scalia
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)

Reply via email to