--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
wrote:
> >
> > Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of
> > the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should
> > be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks
> > pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up
> > his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of
> > Maharishi and what that represents to him.
>
> Jim, this is an *assumption* on your part, and, as
> it turns out, an *erroneous* assumption. I have NO
> OPINION on the questions Paul asked, because I don't
> know the answers. It really doesn't MATTER to me
> whether Maharishi is a well-meaning but flawed monk
> or a con man. I don't have any opinion on the subject
> at all. He's not my teacher; I have nothing invested
> in him one way or another. But you obviously do.
>
> I think that what you're upset about is that Paul is
> asking the questions that YOU should have asked 'way
> back when, and never did.
>
> These questions should have been asked back in 1959,
> and by every person who learned TM along the way. But
> they weren't. Most people just treated everything that
> Maharishi said as if it were automatically some cosmic
> truth, and accepted it as Truth. And now, when someone
> asks the simple questions that they should have asked,
> and would have asked of anyone who was trying to sell
> them something other than meditation, they get all
> upset and try to trash the person who is asking these
> questions now as if he's some kind of heretic.
>
> I think you're angry at YOURSELF for never questioning
> the stories you bought about Maharishi's background,
> and the nature of his relationship with Guru Dev, and
> whether Guru Dev would ever have approved of what
> Maharishi has done in his name.
>
> I don't know the truth of the situation. Neither, as
> far as I can tell, does Paul. But at least he had the
> balls to ASK THE QUESTIONS, and you didn't. He had the
> initiative to TRY TO FIND OUT, and you didn't. You
> just believed what you were told to believe.
>
> I do NOT necessarily agree with the commentary Paul
> included in his last "question." But it doesn't bother
> me in the least that he included it. That is his right.
> What he expressed was his *opinion*, formed after years
> of doing the legwork that no one else was ever willing
> to do. It really doesn't matter AT ALL to me what Paul
> or anyone else says about Maharishi. WHY does it bother
> you? Do you somehow believe that it is impolite or
> insulting to ask questions of Maharishi that you'd
> probably ask of any other salesman trying to sell you
> something?
>
> Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.'
> suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his
> promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that
> the "degree" came from the University of P.O. Box 2000,
> and that the "course of study" involved in earning that
> degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would
> asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why
> would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems
> unable to document be impolite or insulting? Why would
> asking him whether Guru Dev *really* taught him TM be
> inappropriate, or asking him ANY other question?
>
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
