--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Mr. Magoo wrote: > > > > > > > If you really want to read the Bhagavad Gita with it's > > > > Religious/Spiritual context still in tact read Swami > Yogananda's two > > > > volumn set, an ambitious project but a remarkable translation! > > > > > > > > If you think you've read the Gita because you've read MMY's, > think > > > > again. MMY doesn't even begin to unfold the Holy allegory of > this > > > > great masterpiece of Vyasa's!! Seriously.... > > > > > > > > Don't mean to denegrate MMY's effort, only to put it in > context. MMY > > > > himself qualifies his translation, as, to fulfill an "urgent > need" and > > > > a "general basis" for further commentaries but deemed it > > > > "necessary...without further loss of time". > > > > > > > > > It's my understanding that all that was done for MMY's > commentary was > > > to read several extant versions and then he gave a synopsis and > > > synthesis--in other words, it's not his own innate knowledge or > > > comment, just a bunch of others put together in his own words. > Rather > > > disappointing once you know it's origin. > > > > > > > > > Not what Vernon Katz said, and he was there. > > > Hey, you aren't repeating Vaj's brainwashed mantra- > > "TM bad, Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, Buddhism good, TM bad, > Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, Buddhism good, TM bad, Buddhism good, > Maharishi bad, Buddhism good, TM bad, Buddhism good, Maharishi bad, > Buddhism good...". > > Simple, huh? If you repeat it mentally as many times as Vaj has, the > truth of it will finally sink in. So, what are you waiting for? >
So why is it that a Buddhist can't be a TMer?
