--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > on 1/1/06 9:35 AM, mrsatva at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> Because it got too weird for people, or what ? > > > > Probebly all the reasons why people are leaving the TMO... > > > > I have been thinking about it for quit some time now and I thing > > the main reasons are to many scratches in the heart. > > One of the biggest TMO problems: the way people treat eatch > > other.
Yup. It's a movement full of people who care more about talking the talk than they do walking the walk. In fact, there is no perceived *value* in walking the walk, whereas there is for talking the talk. Good talkers get promoted into the movement hierarchy, whereas those who actually live quietly according to generally-accepted spiritual precepts get ignored or are cast off. > I wonder how the TMO compares with other spiritual movements > in terms of this problem. I can't speak for all other spiritual movements, but I'd say that it's in the same ballpark as other spiritual movements whose primary myth is centered around the importance of one's own personal enlightenment. (As opposed to movements in which the highest ideal is service to others or working for the enlightenment of all beings.) That's where the issue lies, in my opinion. When you create a group myth that says that one's personal enlightenment is the most important thing in life, then suddenly *many* other things become considered secondary, or not terribly important. Some of those "secondary" other things can include treating people with a basic sense of civility and respect, taking personal responsibility for one's actions, living up to responsibilities that have been assigned to you, etc. We've all been around the TM block a few times. How many times have you seen some TM teacher/ governor/purusha/MD/whatever completely crap out on their responsibilities (financial, personal, family or otherwise) and just blow town to go to the Next Next Big Thing Course, leaving others holding the bag? It's almost *accepted* behavior. And IMO the reason for this is that the predominant myth in the TMO is the importance of one's personal enlightenment. You would not see such behavior in, say, Buddhist groups, in which the primary myth is service to others. Add to this the tendency in the TMO to stigmatize anyone who deviates in any way from the established dogma, and you've got a real mess on your hands in terms of social interaction. > There are plenty of sweet people in the movement, and plenty > of jerks who hopefully are getting sweeter, but it's been a > long haul. If the TMO is worse than average, why is that? I don't think the TMO is worse than the average. It's about average, in almost every way imaginable. > Maharishi has given plenty of lip service to "speak > the sweet truth" and "the world is my family," but > does he treat the people around him that way No way. > ...and does he inspire his followers to do the same? No way. > If so, is his inspiration explicit or by example? "By example" is ALWAYS what wins. Maharishi could talk and talk and talk forever about how strongly he feels about humanity as a whole. But then he turns around and ACTS in a manner that indicates he couldn't care less about humanity as a whole, and in fact has almost no sense of loyalty to those who have served him for years as TM teachers. Given the dichotomy between what is said and what is done, the "lesson" being picked up by most students as "this is the way an enlightened being acts" is what is DONE, not what is said. > Or, on the other hand, are people treated like expendable > commodities, to be discarded if they become ill, run out > of money, become too independent in their thinking, get > eclipsed by someone with skills exceeding theirs, etc? Well, duh. That, in a nutshell, is the forty-year history of the TMO. > Is that any different than the way a corporation functions? No. > Should it be? In my opinion, yes. Unless you believe that organizations that profess to teach a pathway to enlightenment should be nothing more than big corporations, intent on making a profit. > For some reason, I felt like writing this as a series > of questions. I think each question could be answered with > examples both pro and con, so we would have to look at what > the predominant tendency has been. The question format seemed right to me. And you're right in that for every generalization one can find a rare exception (some rare TMer who actually acts in a humane manner). But it's the predominant tendency that defines the movement, and I think there is no question about what that tendency has been, and continues to be. The people who pay for the TM movement are considered to be, and have *always* been considered by Maharishi and the TMO administration to be as disposable as Kleenex, and with as much inherent worth as a used Kleenex. > I don't feel like spouting glib answers at the moment. > I guess everyone draws their own conclusions, based on > their experience, and acts accordingly. As you say, in > Germany, most have left. Unless you're really into S&M, being on the receiving end of the TM movement's horse copulation ceremony gets a little old after a while. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/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/