--- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> 
wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" 
<jflanegi@> 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [big snip]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > > but my involvement in such things is limited to just this 
> > > > > > board, one other, and my daily practice of TM. I have no 
> > > > involvement 
> > > > > > nor do I discuss my spiritual life with anyone or any 
group 
> > > > outside 
> > > > > > this and one other forum.:-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > That's irrelevant to this discussion.
> > > > >
> > > > OK- Thanks for your comments. In such an online discussion it 
is 
> > > > difficult for me to see what the real issues are sometimes. 
So, 
> > you 
> > > > want me to say that I understand that Maharishi has done some 
> > things 
> > > > or caused those in his organization to do some things which 
> > others 
> > > > see as wrong. Yes, I see that. 
> > > > 
> > > > Second issue seems to be: Do I admit that Maharishi has done 
> > some 
> > > > things that are wrong, and therefore these things impact my 
> > judgment 
> > > > of his credibility? And my answer is that whatever he may 
have 
> > done 
> > > > that is wrong doesn't impact my view of him. Which speaks 
> > directly 
> > > > to the critical issue here of what I am attempting to get 
from 
> > him 
> > > > that requires that his credibility remain absolutely intact. 
> > Because 
> > > > the two are intimately linked; need and credibility.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This isn't about 'you' Jim OR what 'you' need or believe. It's 
> > about
> > > Maharishi's legitimacy as a teacher and spiritual icon in terms 
of
> > > right and wrong and the implications that flow from that for the
> > > movement, all TMers and the public.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > There is nothing I need from Maharishi. Absolutely nothing at 
> > all. 
> > > > Zip. Not enlightenment, or CC or GC or UC or Brahman, or any 
> > > > explanations, elucidations, clarifications, techniques, or 
> > anything 
> > > > else. That being said, there is nothing he can do to affect 
his 
> > > > credibility with me. I want nothing from Maharishi, past, 
> > present or 
> > > > future.
> > > > 
> > > > I hope this settles the question with you John. We appear to 
> > have 
> > > > very different needs with regard to our relationship with  
> > > > Maharishi.:-)
> > > 
> > > The discussion has *nothing* to do at all with what you or I 
might
> > > "need" from Maharishi. It appears that you're tap dancing and 
that
> > > it's a waste of time to discuss this any further with you. 
That's
> > > unfortunate... for me, as I was beginning to feel that someone 
like
> > > you would openly address this issue.
> > >
> > Not tap dancing at all. What is there to do? Post stuff on that 
TM 
> > Free website? What do you want to do? Again, it comes down to 
your 
> > objectives. What are your objectives here? 
> > 
> > If Maharishi's reputation is sullied and it affects his 
credibility 
> > in the eyes of the public, and therefore fewer people will see 
the 
> > legitimacy of TM, what is there to do? Must something be done, or 
> > can we trust that as Maharishi once said, "all is well and wisely 
> > set"? What kind of result are you looking for? :-)
> 
> 
> Again, you're tap dancing. It isn't a matter of "what to do". That's
> just another dodge. [Seems the dodges are endless with you.] It's a
> matter of acknowledgement and discussion. You appear unwilling to
> directly acknowledge or to directly discuss the objective facts that
> I've brought up. You treat all of this as if it has no significance.
> But it does and you won't even admit that.

Great facts I must say... not


Reply via email to