--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], taskcentered <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], taskcentered <no_reply@> > wrote: > <snip>
Judy, You appear to be having an off night. Comments interspersed below. > > > > I have to say, though that it's hard to think of the > > > > Maharishi as egoless when he has named everything from > > > > food supplements to universities after himself. To me > > > > it seems every aspect of the TM Org is a testament to > > > > the man's world-class, narcissistic ego. > > > > > > A much more likely explanation is that using > > > his name and picture is a branding strategy. > > > But that wouldn't reflect quite as badly on > > > him, so of course you wouldn't mention it. > > > > As to branding, he could have followed the practice of other > > Indian teachers and named everything after his teacher, Guru > > Dev. > > And if he had, he'd have been even more violently > attacked for associating his teacher with a > commercial enterprise, when Guru Dev was known for > not even taking donations. Wow. What a strange argument. Maharishi was actually being selfless by not associating Guru Dev with the crass commercial enterprise that he launched in his name (in Beacon Light). > > Plus which--another obvious point that you have > carefully overlooked--if he puts his name on > things, he also has to take the responsibility > if they don't work out. Yet you think he should > have arranged it so Guru Dev got the blame. > > Get real. Again, he started using his own name largely AFTER the fad days of the TM Movement. He had experienced a very large success. Then he started plastering his name on everything. > > > Also, I could point out that he began his incessant > > naming of everything "Maharishi" after the TM fad of the > > 1970s had largely passed. With the exception of MIU, the > > brand name he promoted up until that point was Transcendental > > Meditation itself. If anything he diluted his branding when > > he switched to naming things after himself. > > You conveniently forget that this was also > around the time when disaffected TM teachers > were publicizing the mantra lists and telling > folks there was nothing unique about TM, and > the imitators really got going. Plus which, > Benson had come out with his Relaxation Response. > > Obviously, MMY didn't *need* branding until then. > Branding is what you do when you have competitors. That's simply not true. He trademarked TM, Transcendental Meditation, and the TM-Sidhis before the Relaxation Response. He obviously felt he needed branding then. > > > The guy's just not egoless. > > Did you imagine that I said he was egoless? Actually, I didn't say you did say this. Did you imagine that I did? Nabulous was making a case that the Maharishi was egoless before you wandered into the conversation. > > > It appears, rather, that you are making excuses for him. > > That's a crock, John. That's your threadbare > mantra when anybody points out that your > accusations are over the top. > Weird. I don't remember ever saying you or anybody else was making excuses for the Maharishi before. Can you provide an example? John M. Knapp, LMSW http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ http://trancenet.net/ [A] bad guru can be extremely good for a sincere devoteeĀ . It's the main reason so many bad gurus do good business. They are merely idols upon which sincere devotees project their own divinity, with sometimes seemingly miraculous results. --Jody R, Guruphiliac.blogspot.com
