--- In [email protected], "Paul Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Peter, > > you are asking why I continue speak out about MMY and his teachings. > > The answer is remarkably simple. > > Having learned TM I decided to practice it come-what-may, for at > least ten years, to see how it measured up to its claims. I decided > to let the time run longer, and longer, and longer. (In fact I even > vowed to continue its practise even if MMY disavowed the teaching.) > > I put the together 'The Maharishi: The Man Who Gave Transcendental > Meditation to the World', and as Vaj rightly says, it is the only > objective biography of the man and his teaching extant. But I didn't > stop researching the Maharishi, TM and his master, I kept up the > project for much longer, and I have shared much of the Guru Dev > translation work free-of-charge on my website > http://www.paulmason.info/ . > > I kept practising the TM technique more many more years after the > publication. > But after more than three and a half decades it struck me it was > about time I actually decided it was time to come to some sort of > verdict, about TM and about MMY. > > Since I am recognised as an authority on the subject (at least by > those honest enough to admit it) I thought I'd share my verdict. I > posted this on TM-Free Blog a few days ago. But afterwards I > realised that there must still be great many people who still don't > even have the basic points. > > I notice you don't attempt to correct me on any point raised in the > blog. That is interesting, very interesting > > Finally, the suggestion that I get on and attend to my own life. > Well, as it happens, I most certainly do (which is the main reason I > seldom log on to the TM forums. But, as it happens I consider that > sharing the enormous amount of research on the MMY is a part of > attending to my life. > > It would be all too convenient for those who just want to hear sweet > truths if I were to be quiet. > > You have your views on MMY, I have never once tried to silence you > or anyone else on the subject. I have never suggested that you go > and attend to your life. > > It seems the truth has got you just a tad mad at me, just a tad. But > as another responent pointed out to someone else, don't shoot the > messenger or in your case encourage the messenger to turn his > attention to something else. It sounds just a bit like that bit in > the Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy and Toto were told to ignore 'the Man > Behind The Curtain'. > > Paul > > PS To the so-called supports of the Maharishi and of TM, on FFL, > don't convince me much, you seem to spend an inordinate amount of > time and energy sparring and being unpleasant to one another, and to > those you perceive as threats. Is that what practising TM impels you > to do? It never did that to me, that's for sure.
Nice statement, Paul. What we saw in the last couple of days, in reaction to the things you've posted, is a far greater condemnation of Maharishi than anything you could have written about him. Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to "shoot the messenger" and to demonize you. In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. In my opinion this response is cult behavior, and the fact that Maharishi allowed and even cultivated it in his students says more about him and his teachings than anything you could possibly have written. The people who went on and on "defending" him and his teachings, and doing so by trying to trash you, made far more of a statement against Maharishi and his teachings than you did.
