--- In [email protected], "wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Rick Archer <groups@> wrote: > > > > > Hi Rick, > > > > > > I am not familiar with Fairfield life, but wouldn't you rather be with > > > Maharishi than some Indian lady, even if she is doing some good? How can > > > the little good she is doing compare with total reconstruction of life on > > > earth--and Maharishi's letting us be part of it with him. > > > > Apparently you're not in the habit of examining your underlying assumptions > > and judgments. I've been consciously trying to culture that habit for > > several years. Almost everyone has layer upon layer of them, and their > > worldview is deeply conditioned by them. In your case, it appears that you > > harbor the "what I'm doing is the best, and therefore everyone else's path > > and teacher are inferior by comparison" attitude. This is common in > > religious and spiritual groups, and is really nothing more than a tactic the > > ego uses to preserve and inflate itself, thus postponing it's annihilation > > (enlightenment). You might try Byron Katie: http://www.thework.com. She > > presents a simple system of discriminative analysis that's very effective in > > cutting through the inner bullshit. > > > > > It's amazing. > > > She's not another system, is she? Isn't she just someone who goes around > > > and tries to inspire people to be happier? > > > > Like describing Maharishi as a cute little guy who giggles and holds > > flowers. > > > > > Is Irene really into it? > > > > Very much so. > > > > > > John Hagelin said for everyone to apply and if their application wasn't > > > coming through in a timely manner to send an email directly to him and > > > he'd take care of it. It's worth a try. And especially since you are > > > his teacher!! He told the story of how you came into his hospital room > > > and told him about TM at Maharishi School at graduation or something. He > > > admires you. > > > > And I admire him. I don't admire his callous womanizing, his drunk driving > > conviction, etc., but he has a great intellect, and basically a very good > > heart. He's a sincere seeker, but he seems to have his work cut out for him, > > dealing with his shadow. > > > > > > You have such a fine intellect and you are such an important part of this > > > community. I think it would be a wonderful opportunity. It's pretty > > > amazing to be lying in the dome after second round and have Maharishi > > > call and ask for experiences and go deeply into them--sometimes in terms > > > of Vedic Science, other times in just a simple but profound way. > > > > Even if I wanted to go, which I don't, they wouldn't let me in without a > > major inquisition, which I wouldn't submit to for one second, unless they > > wanted to be subjected to one as well. And I wouldn't want to do that to > > them. I know things about Maharishi and the movement that I don't foist upon > > people still dedicated to them. I think it's wrong to disillusion people > > unless they want to be disillusioned. When you think about it, the word has > > a positive connotation. To be enlightened is to be dis-illusioned. > > > > Part of my "examining underlying assumptions" attitude is the simple desire > > to know the truth about things. This hasn't led to a negative attitude, as > > my tone above might imply, but rather, to what I consider a balanced one. We > > don't live in a black and white universe. TM-Ex people (if such still exist) > > have traded one fanaticism for another. They've swung to the other end of > > the spectrum. The truth of the matter is represented by the entire spectrum, > > and believe me, it is stranger than you might imagine. Really a stretch > > coming to terms with it, but then, that's good too, because Brahman > > incorporates all paradoxes. That's why the Puranas are full of them. > > > > Rick > > > Really nice, thoughtful reply, Rick. Re the part about not wanting to > disillusion people > unless they want to be disillusioned - I agree with you, bit I do wonder how > people will > feel when the books about inappropriate sexual conduct come out? There will > be lots of > denial, but I also wonder if eventually people will be angry that secrets > were kept for so > many years. Some people have NO idea about this stuff and it will be > difficult to reconcile > with a lifetime of devotion. Devotion is black and white, rarely gray. >
So, sex is OK for everyone else, but not MMY? Assuming that the books actually get published, of course. 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/
