--- In [email protected], "Ron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Or, to paraphrase Senator Lloyd Bentsen's reply to Dan Quayle
during
> > the 1988 Vice Presidential debate: "You're no Maharishi Mahesh
Yogi,
> > Swami G".:-)
> >
>
> Maharihsi is a world class business man among other things, that is
> not an insult regarding his business capabilities- it is
phenominal.
> There is a Shankaracharia in Yoganandas Autobigraphy that is a
better
> mathmatician than Maharishi and 10 enlightened beings all gathered
> together at the same time, these are transcient qualities- that one
> essence is all that is the same, all else is quite different.
>
> What are the transcient qualities that the enlightened must have in
> order to meet your definition for being enlightened?
<snip>
I haven't really given it any thought. I can say what my personal
criteria are for myself (eternal freedom), or I could say why I feel
Maharishi is enlightened, but what's the point? Its a very personal
consideration and whether you think differently about it makes no
difference to either of us. I generally avoid such a conversation
anyway. The only thing I meant when I said I didn't get any energy
from the pictures of Swami G was just that. I am glad you get a lot
out of your relationship with her.:-)
