--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > Here is a little gem from Maharishi on caste from his Meditations of > > Maharishi Mahesh Yogi compilation of his SRM pamphlets. It was the > > first book I read of his and I am taking this from its first printing > > in 1968, years before I actually started TM. > > > > P 46 > > > > The very physical structure of the child is cultured like that in > > order to pronounce those hymns with perfect rhythm to produce that > > particular effect. That is why they have the caste system in > > India:this caste will do this work an that caste will do that work. > > Someone does this work and in this way he is brought up and then this > > is the yagya for him. This is like the different types of radios to > > tune to different wave lengths. It has a very great significance. > > People forget about the greatness and fineness of this division of > > labor in society and begin to mingle.(MMY's caps here) THAT IS JUST > > NOT KNOWING THE DEEP SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF > > EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE. Not having that knowledge and thinking that all > > should get a chance for everything, what a terrible mess it is. > > > > Me: > > > > He then goes on to explain that society wont have the right number of > > people to do the right jobs if everyone chooses their own > > occupation. > > > > He was the one who put caps on the claim that societies jobs are > > based on a person's state of evolution. I find this statement to be > > highly repugnant. So who wants to claim that Maharishi made all this > > up and this was not a part of Guru Dev's perspective? > > And furthermore, who wants to claim that *either* > of them had a handle on "the different specific > states of evolution of people." I suspect that > both were as clueless as everyone else. They just > repeated the same bullshit that had been told to > them and hoped others would buy it as completely > as they had. > > > He uses the phrase "thinking that all should get a chance for > > everything" as causing the mess society is in. I'd like to hear > > someone tell that to the science wiz son of a Hispanic field hand > > immigrant whose family risked death to put him in a situation where > > his full potential could blossom through education. Please note that > > nowhere is it mentioned that today's version of the system is either > > an import, a corruption of the British, or not as the old Vedic > > version. Know your place you lower caste laborers, God wants you > > picking cotton and your kids picking cotton, and their kids picking > > cotton. Know your place and know your "DIFFERENT SPECIFIC STATES OF > > EVOLUTION." > > "The way that WE do. Of course, our place is at > the top of the power pyramid and yours is on one > of the much, much, much lower levels, but think > of all the people YOU are higher than." > > > If you get uppity you'll just mess up the society. > > > > Excuse me while I throw up in my mouth from all this enlightened > > spiritual perspective. > > Excuse me while I join you. I find it particularly > fascinating that Westerners who would be casteless > and thus lower than untouchables would find a way > to support the caste system. > > Maharishi was trolling for elitists in this early > book, and obviously found them. > > I wonder how they would have reacted if Maharishi > had been honest with them about how he regarded > *them*. That is, as disposable cash cows. Instead, > he convinced them what *important* cash cows they > were. They can't think clearly about the caste > system or anything that they were told was "Vedic" > and thus "good" because if they doubted any of that, > they would have to doubt their unshakable belief > that they as "important" and "highly evolved" as > he told them they were, and as they wanted to be. > > In my book, "knowing your place" actually DOES > have a value. "Our place" is at EXACTLY the same > level as every other human being on the planet.
To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen during his debate with Dan Quayle: "You're no Guru Dev, Senator". It all comes down to the motives you discern for MMY and SBS. If you see them as elitist power trippers, intent on scamming as many fools as they could, and living off the resulting bounty for personal wealth and self aggrandizement, then that is your interpretation of what they wrote, and why they wrote it. >From that perspective, both MMY and SBS sound like borderline sociopaths and I am surprised anyone with half a brain had anything to do with them. No better than any other garden variety cult leaders. Who can argue with that? I'll leave your interpretation to you, and let you own it. I have my own, with no intent to change anyone's mind.
