--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "geezerfreak" <geezerfreak@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: <snip> > > > MMY gave a lecture many years ago, explaining why he allowed > > "Maharishi" to be used in > > > the name "Maharishi International University." The explanation still > > holds, IMHO, and holds > > > for all things branded Maharishi: > > > > > > He told the people forming the university to name it as universities > > are traditionally named > > > in the West, and so they wanted to name it after him. At first he > > was hesitant, but then > > > realized that "maharishi" meant someone who could teach others to > > become rishis, and > > > that the purpose of the school would be to create maharishis, so it > > made sense. > > > > > Ahhh, OK I get it. So it was the people AROUND Maharishi who wanted > > this, not him. And then he gave in. > > Why don't you ask Nat Goldhabber who came up with the name? > > Then these same people wanted to > > attach his photo to all these products and services > > as well, just in case there was any misunderstanding > > about "which Maharishi". > > Where is MMY's photo on any Maharishi Ayurveda product label? > > http://www.mapi.com/en/1-800-255-8332/index.html > > > I bet a lot of the things that are goofy with the > > movement are because of people AROUND MMY, huh. If > > only he had some good people around him things would > > be different. > > What does the naming convention have to do with any of that?
And what would be different? Would TM products then be marketed under Guru Dev's name instead?
