--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> 
> 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.
> >
> I am not tap dancing-- only trying to identify and address any issue 
> of practical relevance here. The only issue that I can see remains 
> is that you have said that Maharishi did wrong, he is not evolved 
> enough to avoid doing this, and therefore this affects his 
> credibility as a spiritual icon and authority figure, for you and 
> others. So please let me know how to address this. Thank you.:-)


I'm not accustomed to a 'polite' bullshit artist. You're a first for
me.  I'm wasing my time with you, Jim. 



Reply via email to