--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > I don't think Barry, myself, and most others feel hate or > > are trying to pull meditators off their chosen path. I still > > meditate regularly. Our attitude, at least mine, is that people > > will be stronger in their spiritual path if they can learn to > > look at things honestly without hiding behind unexamined > > concepts and beliefs. If people don't want to do that, they > > shouldn't hang out on FFL. > > Bingo. > > Rick COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN CLEARER > about the focus and credo of this discussion group > than he was on its Home page. > > There is a concerted effort by a few (and *very* > few) individuals here to portray those who think > critically about TM, Maharishi, the TMO and its > dogma, and other related subjects as being somehow > "interlopers" here, intruding into their world > and subjecting them to ideas they don't want to > hear.
That would be pretty silly, given that the majority of posters here are critical of TM, MMY, and the TMO. More often than not, it appears that TM supporters are the ones treated as interlopers intruding into the world of the TM critics and subjecting *them* to ideas they don't want to hear. <snip> > So WHO are the "interlopers?" > > Are they the people who come to this forum attracted > by its free-thinking guidelines, so clearly stated > on its Home page, or could it possibly be the people > who actively try to SUPPRESS the free discussion of > information, the "wish to find out," and who devote > a great deal of time and energy to demonizing and > practicing character assassination on those FFL > members WHO ARE FOLLOWING ITS CHARTER, while > they are NOT? You, Barry, are absolutely the *last* person who should be complaining about demonization and character assassination. That is your *stock in trade*, and it's the substance of far more of your postings than considered, thoughtful criticism of the TMO and MMY. Indeed, that's exactly what you're doing in the paragraph quoted immediately above. <snip> > > I believe chicks should peck their way out of their shells, > > not have them opened from the outside. The TMO is an > > incubator. When you're ready to hatch, you'll know what to do. > > And in the meantime, if you don't like others pecking > at the shell you've erected around yourself to protect > that self from challenging thought, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. No, see, Barry, Jim is saying that it isn't up to you to peck anybody else's shell. If they're going to break out, they'll do it on their own, from the inside. Voicing your own criticisms of MMY and the TMO is fine. But you appear to believe that the "free discussion" charter means not only freedom for you to criticize but also freedom from any challenge to that criticism. That ain't the way it works. If you don't like it, YOU go somewhere else.
