--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" jyouells@ > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > <snip> > > > > There is so much hidden in the TMO, that unless we know > > > > from our own experience, we're just guessing... > > > > > > Or unless of course you knew and talked with one of M's closest > > > confidants who helped set up SCI and the birth of the sidhi > > > program... :-) > > > > > > Having done that you'd know that he knew none of this stuff, but > > > had to seek it out with couriers dispatched to various locales. > > > You'd also know that much lecture material was also not his own. > > > And I believe we have one a brother student of SBS who said flat > > > out, M knew nothing about yoga: he was not a yogi! > > > > > > I know this is hard for some people, but it is the plain > > > truth of the matter. > > > > Nothing would surprise me anymore.... > > I don't understand why you would *ever* have been > (presumably unpleasantly) surprised to learn that MMY > sought out input from others. If you were creating a > curriculum to teach something you thought was of great > importance, wouldn't *you* want to explore every > possible angle with others who might have something to > contribute, and incorporate into your curriculum > whatever of their thinking you found valuable? > > Seems to me assuming you have nothing to learn from > anybody would, at the very least, not be good > pedagogy.
It would be difficult to be surprised about Maharishi seeking out input from others, because he never mentioned it. Honest disclosure, now THAT would be a surprise.... I always figured that MMY borrowed stuff from other teachers, that doesn't bother me, but if he 'borrowed' it ALL, I'd like to know. JohnY
