--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > On Mar 24, 2009, at 9:10 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: > > > I disagree with your assessment of the religious > > nature of TM, but am not inclined to sum up your > > POV as the result of some negitive emotional state. > > We just disagree on the religious nature of TM > > instruction. This doesn't surprise me because you > > didn't spend many weeks bowing down to the floor to > > a picture of Maharishi's dead guru after invoking > > divine and semi divine Gods in the Hindu religion. > > (Vyasa is 3/4 Vishnu don't ya know.) It is easier > > for you to ignore its religious roots. > > This selective memory and selective seeing interests me.
This is total crap. There's no "selective memory" or "selective seeing" involved. What there is, of course, is a disagreement about what constitutes a religious teaching. I see the same things Curtis sees (except for things only TM teachers do). I just don't think the only way to understand them is in religious terms, nor do I understand them that way. They certainly weren't taught to me that way when I learned TM. >From my perspective, forcing plain-vanilla TM into a religious box is a function of cognitive limitation, an inability to deal with abstraction. And your "interest" is only in finding something to slam TMers with.
