My sentiments as well, and yes, I'm sure it is/was tactical, though I think it will continue to dog them until they come clean and state emphatically that "TM is not being taught as a Religion" but has its foundation in Religion and that if you want the benefits of Religion you must practice Religion.
They can't have their cake and eat it too, they want TM to be thought of as non-Religious yet providing all of the benefits of Religion. Unfortunately, such a course doesn't do justice to TM nor Religion. I would like it to be called a *Religious Science* which is more accurate....IMO. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "metoostill" <metoost...@...> wrote: > Einstein's composing the theory of relativity does not make it Jewish, but it's parallel is not TM, a simple relaxation > technique, but His Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi composing a commentary on the Hindu scripture The Bhagavad > Gita, which is more difficult (I would think impossible) to distance from religion. As is a reverence for pundits > performing Hindu yagyas. Neither of those are narrowly "the TM technique", but like that, bible study is not the act > of taking communion at Mass. It is difficult nonetheless to separate the two as if they each exist in a vacuum. Not > that there is anything wrong with any of the individual acts or events, only that understanding the way in which they > relate to each other is either muddled or clear. The strained attempt to portray involvement with TM as not having > relation to the area of religion may or may not have strategic benefit, but it is a hard row to hoe. Best of luck to > those who assign themselves the task. I am sure they mean good.
