> But Jim was addressing the issue of whether MMY had > empathy. Do you deny that the intention to eliminate > suffering (whether it's accomplished or not) indicates > empathy?
"O ye of the peaceless and suffering humanity..." This view of people other than himself is part of his condescension similar to his assertion that other people are living a life in ignorance. Hitler also had a very powerfully positive message for his society, but he lacked a bit of empathy too. Claiming to eliminate suffering in all mankind is part of a grandiose fantasy of his importance in the world. But when you see him interact with people, his lack of ability to understand their POV was striking. He would just sort of assert his own POV, sometimes using rhymes of words the other person had used to make it superior position clear. I can't think of any case where I saw him demonstrate empathy in the way you or I would. > > Because saying "This is very conceptual" and that MMY > didn't eliminate *your* suffering isn't a rebuttal of > the assertion that MMY's intention to eliminate > suffering shows that he had empathy. Seeing all people as "suffering" is really a shallow understanding on the human condition IMO. My life is not characterized by suffering but I have benefited from it, as I have all my human experiences. In fact suffering as an experience can deepen a capacity for empathy. When I was a kid and my parents took care of my needs I didn't understand their sacrifices. After a few year of being on my own I really "got" the value of money and what it takes to spend it on a loved one. The goal of eliminating all suffering in mankind is a childish dream IMO. Especially suspect because he sold his solution and made millions from it. I guess these days I am more impressed with a guy like Bill and Melinda Gates for examples of real world wide empathy rather then people like Maharishi who used his saving mankind as part of the sales pitch for his product. > > <snip> > > Did TM eliminate your suffering Judy? > > Certainly has reduced it, more and more over time. > Again, though, that's irrelevant to the issue of > whether it's what MMY intended. I just can't see you as being summed up as "suffering" Judy. We both won the genetic lottery of life by the circumstances of our birth. Neither of us should have a right to claim "suffering" as our condition. We may have experienced hard times and sorrows in life. But there are literally millions and millions of people ahead of us who could call their total life "suffering." One of Maharishi's slippery tricks was to convince a bunch of Westerners with every advantage in the world that they were suffering and that he could sell us the cure. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" > <sandiego108@> > > > > wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > As to his empathy or not, I'd say its a pretty > > > > > overwhelming show of empathy to begin a world > > > > > wide movement to spread a technique that eliminates > > > > > suffering in its practitioners. > > > > > > > > This is very conceptual. Maharishi never eliminated > > > > any of my "suffering." Wasn't suffering when I met > > > > him. and I am not suffering now. > > > > > > "Very conceptual"? Is that another way of saying > > > "I have no rebuttal to this"? > > > > No, it referred to the fact that a statement like "eliminating > > suffering in its practitioners" is divorced from anyone's > > possible experience. > > But Jim was addressing the issue of whether MMY had > empathy. Do you deny that the intention to eliminate > suffering (whether it's accomplished or not) indicates > empathy? > > Because saying "This is very conceptual" and that MMY > didn't eliminate *your* suffering isn't a rebuttal of > the assertion that MMY's intention to eliminate > suffering shows that he had empathy. > > <snip> > > Did TM eliminate your suffering Judy? > > Certainly has reduced it, more and more over time. > Again, though, that's irrelevant to the issue of > whether it's what MMY intended. >
