> > Yes there is a lot of talking about Worl Peace and so on. But do > > people REALY talk to each other ? If not, why not ? > > About what? The TMO isn't a religion or philosophy per se. On this > newsgroup you have people like Shemp and Judy who are completely > opposed to each other on virtually every topic, who both meditate via > TM and both believe/hope that it may have some long-term effect for > the good of the world. What, other than TM, would Shemp and Judy have > to discuss in a non-confrontational way?
Thats fine for FFL. But what about daily TM-center life ? > > Does this meen, most tm peoples think that they can reach > > enlightenment without taking care about others and without taking > > responsiballity for theire aktion/nonaktion ? > Nevertheless, the TMO's *teaching* on the subject of charity and all > other relative behaviors is that you follow your own > religion/conscience on such things. That people may not be doing so > suggests that they are being *lazy* aoubt their own religious > traditions, not that the TMO is discouraging them from following them. Mayby that has been the teaching at the beginning of the moovment. Today there is meditation plus MMY-Ayurveda plus MMY-Yotisch plus MMY-Jagya plus MMY-Gandharva Ved plus a lott of other MMY-Veda-things. I dont want to take MMY responsibel for everry of his followers funny idear/interpretation. But he is aktualy pushing people into somthing called "Vedik culture". "Tear down your citty and rebuild it akording MMY-Stapatha Ved". Thats quite strong culturel enterference! > > I think it is the other way round. Only this to thinks can bring > > enlightenment. > > Define "taking responsibility for one's own actions" in a way that > fits all cultures. Just commen sence. > > > > 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. > > > > In my opinion, no. It should not function the way a corporation > intent > > on making a profit funktions but like a corporation intent on > selling > > social goods (social work...). > > > > A non-profit organization is every bit as dependent on customers > (donors) as a profit-making one. Charities have to advertise their > product (good works) in order to keep running. Agreed. Mr Satva ------------------------ 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/
