Rick, I'm the author of the anon post below. I agree with you entirely. I hope that it didn't appear that I thought M's Brit pronouncement would make any difference. My goal was to show the originator of the British karma idea that it didn't hold much water.
On the other hand, could make some difference to those in the UK who feel obliged now to move elsewhere. Also, to the children who were attending school in Skelmersdale. For these people, it could be quite a disruptive change. So Maharishi's pronouncements can have a significant human cost - to members of his own movement. Incidentally, I now recall a time when M did something similar. So I have to recant on my statement that this is an entirely new aberration. Some time ago (in the 90's, I believe), M proclaimed that the TMO had tried all that it could to uplift the consciousness of Wash DC and lower crime etc., but since the collective cness just wouldn't listen, then the TMO was going to respond by pulling out. He wanted all governors and sidhas to move elsewhere. Of course, only some did so. In the end, the tactic seemed to have no impact on Wash DC at all, though it did affect the morale of the DC meditator community. a --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The assumption implicit in the thinking of some of the participants in this > thread seems to be that allowing or disallowing TM to be taught in a country > would make a whit of difference in that country's destiny. How many people > are being taught in the UK now? What difference could it possibly make if > that trickle were staunched? > > > on 5/9/05 4:13 PM, anonymousff at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > It seems to me that the karma line of reasoning isn't very > > worthwhile. The Hindu tradition tells us that the course of karma is > > unfathomable. That implies to me that nothing definitive can ever be > > said about it, even amongst those who subscribe to the theory. To do > > moreso is to claim more knowledge than Krishna indicated was > > possible for a human. > > > > On the other hand, suppose that we could find an unmistakable > > connection between a country's wrongdoings in the past and > > Maharishi's cutting them out of Heaven on Earth and Sat Yuga. Why > > then would it make sense for Maharishi to include just about any > > country in the world? Think of the recent threads on FFL re the mass > > murders that have taken place by the Germans (during WWII), by > > Stalinist Russia, in the former Yugoslavia, in parts of Africa, etc. > > Why don't these countries get cut out of Heaven as well? > > > > Maharishi's platform has always been about amending the errors of > > the past, not about punishing the errors of the past. This Brit > > thing is entirely out of character with his lifetime platform, if > > not out of character with his private railings against the CIA etc. > > > > Maharishi's platform has always been about global enlightenment - we > > all rise together faster when we all participate. Cutting a whole > > country out of the good news isn't what he taught us. This is an > > entirely new aberration. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
