Interesting advanced technique story: a TM teacher I know had gotten his 2nd or 3rd technique directly from MMY. When he went to get his next advanced tech from Lillian (remember her?) and they had just finished the puja, she asked him his current technique in preparation for giving him the next. When he told her his current technique, she blew up, into a huge rage you could hear throughout the center. She screamed that he could not possibly have that technique since it was a more advanced one than she was about to give! He tried to explain that this was what MMY had given to him. She continued to scream and shriek and the teacher ran out of the room, down the stairs and out the center door, totally freaked out and angry. I believe the coordinators (who were pretty upset themselves at her behavior but did not have the courage to confront her), after he called and requested it, agreed to tear up his payment check.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, m2smart4u2000 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Amazing to me that people blame someone else when they lack moral > > character. "It must be the "movement's" fault that I didn't keep my > > promise. Somehow this justifies my lack of ethics." It's a broad > > excuse to justify anything and everything. Just look at what you > > wrote, "I don't believe that the TMO should get away scot-free", so > > therefore YOU are going to be the one chosen to deliver whatever you > > deem fair recompense for (again broad undescribable term)the TMO. > > Anything goes right? Maybe there could be some level of honor and > > still maintain a discussion without lowering yourself to breaking of > > legal contracts that you signed. > > Ok, time to call bullshit. > > There is one and *only* one reason for the > "secrecy agreements" that you and anyone else > here had to sign -- protection of corporate > secrets and profit. > > "Protecting the purity of the teaching" has > nothing to do with it. Some of my advanced > techniques were taught to me directly by > Maharishi in a grand total of 30 seconds -- > no puja, no nothing...just pay your money > (the important part, from his POV), stand > in line, and have him whisper a word that > *he* stole from "open source" religion into > your ear. > > Maharishi neither invented any of this nor > deserves sole credit or sole profits from it. > He took "open source" spiritual software and > threw a trademark on it for Westerners who > were too clueless to realize that it was open > source software. And then he tried to bully > those who had paid for the stuff he got for > free and resold for a profit into keeping > quiet about the nature of what they'd paid > for. > > And bullying it was, and is. "Legal contract" > my ass. Whatever the contract, it's not legal > unless you get a copy of it. Do you have your > copy? Right. Neither do I. Neither does anyone > else. The "contract" was and still is a quasi- > legal bluff. Towards the end of my time in the > TMO, no one could even *find* the worthless > pieces of paper signed by millions of TMers; > they had been placed in boxes in some storage > facility somewhere, and literally *no one* in > the U.S. National movement at that time could > remember or figure out where they were. They > dropped several potential trademark infringe- > ment lawsuits for exactly this reason. > > So don't pull this attempted guilt trip on US, > asshole. We had enough of it from Maharishi > himself, for far too many years, and we're not > about to stand for it from some putz who still > wants to play "I'm more moral than you" games. > > Some of us *like* being whistleblowers. We are > *proud* to stand up and tell it like it really > was, so that it isn't able to *continue* being > what it was. If you want to hold on to your > cherished illusions of what it was, so be it. > But don't you *dare* come roaring in here trying > to make people who now value truth over falsity > feel bad about doing so. >
