--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thing is, Chopra decided that he had better judgement than > MMY and could do more. Which is certainly his choice, but > raises an interesting question: if he really thought that > MMY was enlightened, as he now claims, why would he assume > his judgemnt was better than MMY's? At the least, it would > have made more sense for him to stick around, and work > *within*the enlightened man's organization then to leave > the only person on Earth he was certain was enlightened > (to quote one of his articles about MMY).
Lawson, with all due respect (belief is belief and thus there is not much we can say about some- one else's belief except that it exists), what you are saying here is based on YOUR beliefs about enlightenment, beliefs that were carefully cultivated by Maharishi and by the TM movement. YOU believe that because a person is enlightened they have better judgement than the non-enlightened. I don't. I believe that the Sixth Dalai Lama was enlightened, but his judgement got him murdered by his own monks, in collusion with the Chinese. YOU seem to believe that the only thing a person CAN rationally do if he believes that a person is enlightened is "stick by him," work "within his organization forever. THAT is what you are angry about, but Chopra *obviously* didn't believe that. What's WRONG with him not believing that? YOU seem to feel that Maharishi is enlightened and YOU don't act like you're claiming Chopra "should" have acted. Don't you detect a little cognitive dissonance here?
