--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> > wrote: > <snip> > Your words, Jim, in response to almost everything on the abbreviated > > list I provided: > > > > "No problem with this. He began the Movement, and as its "CEO" he > can > > do what he likes." > > > > You've set Maharishi at a level of a corporate CEO instead of a > > spiritual icon. I would tend to agree with that assessment of him > > however, and further suggest that that indicates that he isn't much > > beyond your average CEO in standards or ethics. > > > > I find it interesting that the only thing that seemed to get your > > attention in the short list I provided was the disposition of the > > missing million$ - even though in the thread I extensively > elaborated > > on the other items on that list. > > > > That certainly reveals your position on Maharishi as a teacher and > as > > a spiritual icon. It reveals that you are indifferent to whether he > > has any particular standards or not. > > > > Guru Dev himself, as a young boy, had very rigid standards for > > whomever was to become his teacher. And Guru Dev himself > exemplified > > the highest standards of spiritual ethics. > > > > What's a bummer to me is that TMers like you seem to think > that 'all > > is well' WITHOUT any of those standards. And people like Jerry ask > > questions like, "Do you know any billionaires?" as if cash is the > > 'great answer' in lieu of Paramatman. > > > > Something's rotten in Denmark in my view and the population > refuses to > > notice it, even when it's clearly pointed out. I've experienced > that > > many of those people like it that way however, and will and have > > overtly, even viciously, attempted to eliminate any effort to make > it > > any different. > > > You are pretty accurate in reflecting my assessment of Maharishi-- > that he can pretty much do as he has done. I did provide a reasoning > for why I thought this was so; dogma vs attainment of Brahman.
Dogma isn't the same thing as genuine spiritual integrity. I'm talking about Maharishi's behavior, not about any rules to set up; not about teaching any dogma. It appears that you're suggesting that it doesn't matter what Maharishi does at all, as long as one gets his 'happy Brahman pie'. I'm saying that it certainly DOES matter what Maharishi does as a representative example. One could easily say that "if that's how the top guy in TM behaves, I want nothing to do with it," and neither you or I could legitimately disagree with that person. The only reason my wife learned TM is because she read Guru Dev's biographies and I explained to her that Maharishi has nothing to do with her initiation and that Guru Dev, not Maharishi becomes her 'spiritual teacher' via the Puja. My wife considers Maharishi a money-grubbing con man from whom she'd never take any spiritual advice - and she didn't get that from anything 'I' said. She came to that conclusion way before she even met me. > So I'll take it a step further and say that ordinarily I'd be on > your side 100%; that here is a spiritual icon, Maharishi, who is not > behaving as I would expect a spiritual icon to behave, and something > should be done about it. > > Except for one thing: > > I have met too many others who are experiencing the goal of this > particular teacher's teaching, too many others who are living > Brahman as their daily experience, too many others bathing every day > and every night in the full sunshine and moonlight of the age of > enlightenment. That is, as they say, the proof in the pudding. > > I agree that on the face of it, Maharishi appears to act in > confounding, confusing, even counter-productive ways. And yet, > whatever he is doing works. And that is the key. Whatever it is, it > works. Kind of like the whole paradigm of enlightenment; I don't > know how it works, but it just does.:-) I believe you're dead wrong on this, Jim. The people you mention who may be living Brahman etc. are doing it based on the TM techniques, NOT on "whatever he [Maharishi] is doing". You're conflating Maharishi's behavior with the techniques, and in the process you're complicit in accepting "whatever he is doing". It's very disturbing to me to see so many TMers not only make excuses for Maharishi's behavior and not notice or care about it, but worse, implicitly promote the idea that spiritual integrity doesn't matter and isn't a part of the outcome of TM.
