--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > My criticism of selling yagyas comes from its theory as well as > > > its practice. I don't know of any plausible theory of how > > > offering, smoke and food to statues of Indians mythological > > > characters can have an effect on the world without proposing a > > > magical connection. > > > > Actually, there are quite a few theories floating > > around these days from highly credentialed, non-TM > > physicists that would allow for yagyas to have an > > effect on the world, along with a lot of other > > phenomena that you would call "magic." > > I don't discount this Judy. The world is a plenty magical place and > there is so much to discover. I think MMY has too many a priori > assumptions for me to believe that he is sincerely trying to find > out what works and what doesn't.
That doesn't make sense, Curtis. Why on earth would having a priori assumptions indicate a lack of sincerity? He believes he knows how it all works behind the scenes. What he's experimenting with is the implementation. How could it be otherwise? Nobody's ever tried to accomplish what he wants to accomplish systematically on such a large scale, even those who share his a priori assumptions. So he has to make it up as he goes along. Whether he's making smart choices about what to try and how is another question. > But if others are putting in the time > and effort, more power to them. > > > They all have to do with the nature and mechanics of > > consciousness, and while they approach the problem > > from different angles, they all appear to gravitate > > toward a view of reality that is remarkably similar > > to that of MMY and a whole bunch of ancient cultures. > > > > These theories aren't yet mainstream, but they're > > moving in that direction. Oh, and they all involve > > quantum mechanics in one way or another. > > I think it will be left to people far more brilliant than me to sort > these relationships out. When most people discuss quantum mechanics > from outside physics I think they are using physics terms in a sort of > poetry. I don't have the math tools necessary to really understand > what high level physics is saying about reality. But your optimism > that it will serve as a great insight about reality is warranted. But > as Clint Eastwood said in Dirty Harry " A man's got to know his > limitations." I know mine. That goes for both of us. But my point is that just because you don't know about these kinds of theories doesn't mean they don't exist. So leave that door open a crack.
