Randy,
You are showing a bit of naiveté about Vaj. Now that you are feeling nice and relieved about NagaVaj's expansive views please remember his method of turning around your post to imply you had a poisoned intent. He demonstrated it just a few posts ago. Post 220779 @ 01:12 p.m. Vaj: Randy, this is not a Maharishi list, it's for all sorts of different people, but what most seem to share in common is that at one time they had some connection to TM, Mahesh, FF, etc. I think it's pretty rude of YOU to assume that all TMers are ignorant. His reply was a typical Vaj snarl. It means you were pressing uncomfortably close by your query into his real purpose for being here. His suddenly gracious view misdirected you pretty well to another topic. He is quite experienced at doing this here on the forum. Randy said - Hey vaj, Why do you insist on calling Maharishi, Mahesh? For whatever reason he went by that name (and I have read all the various stories of whether the name was conferred officially or people just started calling him that, or whatever the reason,) it was his name. Its just disrespectful. No matter what what you think of him, it was his name. By you (and others here) calling him Mahesh, it implies a variety of things, such as "he wasn't really a maharishi". or "he wasn't really a saint" or even "I know better who really was" etc. Give it up. Do you really think he did not help many, many people in the world and therefore calling him a saint (which is the common expression for any of these types of people in India) is not justified? I think many of us here have some issues with some of the things he has done, or the way he ran his organization etc., but still there is nothing wrong with showing some respect. Frankly, it makes you seem arrogant. No matter what you think of him, show some respect --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Meltzer" <rm...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 4, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Randy Meltzer wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On Jun 4, 2009, at 1:59 PM, Randy Meltzer wrote: > > >> > > >>> So Vaj, if you don't consider him a maharishi or a yogi, what are > > >>> you doing on this forum? Do you feel its your job to somehow > > >>> bring the light of knowledge to all us ignorant Tmers? > > >> > > >> Randy, this is not a Maharishi list, it's for all sorts of different > > >> people, but what most seem to share in common is that at one time > > >> they had some connection to TM, Mahesh, FF, etc. > > >> > > >> I think it's pretty rude of YOU to assume that all TMers are > > >> ignorant. > > >> > > > What I meant by "us ignorant TMers" is the fact that your posts > > > mostly seem to be saying that you have more knowledge and experience > > > that most TMers, or at least the ones here. And to say this list is > > > not a Maharishi list is ridiculous. Sure its not an oficial TMo > > > list, but the reason pretty much everyone is on here is because they > > > have had, or do have a connection to TM > > > > I've found the type of people who learned TM in the past (and I'm sure > > the same now) to be very learned in many different fields, and many > > went on to profoundly represent any number of paths and realizations. > > I think this is true of many spiritual trips, they tend to draw a very > > high caliber person IMO. > > > > You should not get so up tight when we ruthlessly look into why > > someone has a name they have or whatever it is. We owe it to history > > to try to arrive at definite, honest answers for these questions. > > There's a reason these answers have been hidden. Being happy with just > > an advertising buy-line veneer is insane. The truth is often stranger, > > but definitely better than fiction. We should not settle for less, > > whether it's the Maharishi or Swami Rama boning their students or > > Swami Muktananda experimenting on 16 year olds or some Buddhist > > nutcase pumping Sarin gas into the Tokyo subways or some priest anally > > raping young boys or Chogyam Trungpa drunk out of mind extolling > > dharma. Veritas liberat. > > > > At the same time, it's also worth contemplating the bizarre paradox > > these things represent and the good some of these folks were to able > > catalyze. What's up with THAT? Who are the divine madmen and who are > > the merely mad and avaricious? These are all great questions. > > > I agree, great questions? >
