--- In [email protected], "Ingegerd" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Ingegerd" 
> > <marwincornyarmand@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "Ingegerd" 
> > > > <marwincornyarmand@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "Paul Mason" 
> > > > > <premanandpaul@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oh dear, you are so very attached to your beliefs, and
> > > > > > nothing MMY actually said makes any difference huh? Okay, 
> I 
> > > > > > was just offering quote from the man himself, but what 
> would 
> > > > > > he know?
> > > > > 
> > > > > She is The Knower - we are only on the path of knowing.
> > > > 
> > > > You *do* realize that Paul's response was a complete
> > > > non sequitur to what I said, right, Ingegerd?
> > > 
> > > No, I do not realise that.
> > 
> > Well, perhaps you should read it again.
> > 
> >  You think you are right from your stand 
> > > of view - I think I am right from my experiences - Paul has 
come 
> up 
> > > some quotes of MMY to clarify. And here we are.
> > 
> > Right, with the issue still unclarified.
> > 
> > I've made a reasoned case for my interpretation.
> > You haven't addressed it at all, and all Paul has
> > produced is a bunch of fulminating non sequiturs.
> > 
> > *That's* where we are.  You believe what you want to
> > believe because you want to believe it, I believe what
> > I believe on the basis of reason and logic.
> 
> It is good to analyse and use reason and logic - and we can
> probably do that. But in the TM-world - it was not much analysing 
> and logic thinking when it came to TM og Deep meditation (which was 
> the first name MMY came up with).

Maybe not, but we can look back on it using reason
and logic, no?

> MMY was an excellent seller of TM - and one of his
> sales-techniques was maybe, that Deep Meditation came 
> directly from the Holy Tradition - and given to MMY from Guru Dev.

That may well have been your impression.  What I'm
suggesting is that he didn't say explicitly that the
technique itself, the one he was and is teaching as
TM (or "deep meditation" back then), was taught to
him by Guru Dev.  He left it vague, as in "the secret
of" or "from whom we have this knowledge."

The question is, *why* did he leave it vague?

Partly because the idea that it had come from Guru Dev
was a selling point, surely, but also, I suspect--and
perhaps even more importantly, to MMY--because for him
to make it explicit that *he* had reconstructed the
technique would suggest that Guru Dev hadn't known how
to do it, which would seem to set MMY above his master.

> The big interest in the early days was related to that - an old 
> meditation method - given out in the original way - and that is 
> what all TM-Teachers say when they teach.

Sure, but an old method that hadn't been available
for a long while--*including* from Guru Dev, which
is what MMY wanted to avoid saying, I suspect.

> I learned the technique from 
> MMY - he learned it from Guru Dev - which again learned it from his 
> Master and so on and so on. I am not sure that if MMY had come to 
> the West saying that - this is a meditation method that I have 
> developed - that he would have had the same success from the 
> beginning.

Quite possibly not.  But by the time I learned in 1976,
TM teachers were quite explicit that it was MMY who had
revived the method, *based on* what he had learned from
Guru Dev.  In the West, questions of lineage and loyalty
to the master are perhaps not so important, so it wasn't
such a big deal for MMY to acknowledge that he had been
the one who revived it rather than Guru Dev.  Maybe by
the time I learned TM, he realized it didn't make much
difference to Westerners.

> We were somehow brainwashed from the start - to think in 
> a certain direction. I feel I can say that - because I learned Deep 
> meditation in 1962 and has been deep in the TMO in almost all these 
> years.
> I still think he fooled us.

I think you *inferred* in a certain direction.  But I
really do think that in India, at least, MMY was between
a rock and a hard place.  He couldn't say Guru Dev had
taught him the TM technique, because that wouldn't have
been truthful; but if he'd said he, MMY, had figured out
all by himself how to teach it, it would have made Guru
Dev seem less important.  So he didn't have much choice
but to be vague about where the technique itself had
come from.

*And also* the idea that it came from Guru Dev was a
selling point, but I have a strong sense that the
first aspect was more important to MMY, based on his
insistence all along, and still today, that all the
credit for anything he, MMY, did belonged to Guru Dev.

We can surely understand that there would have been
no TM and no MMY without Guru Dev, so to say Guru 
Dev made it all possible is not an exaggeration.






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups.  See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/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/
 



Reply via email to