--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], kaladevi93 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > There are many TM TBers here. If you think otherwise, you're > > either blind, stupid or insane. > > Or, you are so much one yourself that you cannot > see the phenomenon you are an integral part of. > > If you honestly, truly believe that TM is the > "best" or the "most effective" technique of > meditation on the planet, and you have never > practiced another one except out of a book, you > are a TB. If you honestly, truly believe that > TM is "unique," and you have never practiced > another technique except out of a book, you > are a TB. > > The amazing thing is to see the TBs *deny* that > they *are* True Believers, while holding to > positions like, "TM is better and more effective > than any other technique of meditation on the > planet," when they have *never really studied > any others*. *Anyone* except a TB can see that > and identify it as True Believerism. *Only* a TB > could say such a thing and deny that they are one. > > I mean, it's equivalent to saying, "I don't *need* > to practice any other technique to know the "facts" > about it, and that TM is superior. *What I have been > told* about it by Maharishi is all that I need to > know to make that assessment. > > Yeah, right. >
Nicely said. With the definition of a TB, what've seen is a group of people who deperately want to move away from that label and have done so by changing the definition. It's no longer merely a TB in TM or the TMSP. If they profess skepticism about the TMO, they think this makes them immune from the label. Not so: if you believe TM is the best (or some similar variation on that), you're a TB. In other words, you can still be a TB and find the TMO offensive. A good example would be Bob Brigante: hates TMO (or appears to) but is a diehard TM believer. In some people this includes an almost carte blanche acceptance of anything that issues from the mouth or pen of Maharishi.
