--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ShempMcGurk" <shempmcgurk@> wrote: > > > > > > You used the word "ideally" below several times in answering > > > questions. > > > > > > I'm wondering whether "ideally" reflects your own feeling on > > > what is ideal (perhaps with a touch of the western idea of > > > meritocracy thrown in that is influencing the use of that > > > word) or whether that is, in fact, what the vedas say. > > > > I used the word "ideal" to differentiate the varna system > > in actual practice in India. As practiced today, the varna > > system is a devolution of the intent of the vedas. > > > > You are right that I am inserting my own interpretation of > > meritocracy as thought of in the western culture. I believe > > that the vedas had the same intent. > > I reply to this not to comment on John (jr_esq) > per se but on a larger phenomenon, "the inability > to see the forest for the trees." > > One of the failings that is *rampant* in the TMO, > and which I believe based on my experience in the > TMO came directly from Maharishi, is the tendency > to focus on the "ideal" (or even the idea) of some- > thing to the point where one is incapable of seeing > what the reality of that thing is. > > John's idea of "meritocracy" isn't true *even in > the TMO*. If it were, poor people could become > "Rajas," and even more telling, a few women might > be present running the TM movement as well.
That would certainly be true if the Rajah -- who inevitably is rich -- got his money via inherited wealth. But if the Rajah has "bought" his position vis his own work and creativity in business then that itself is a form of meritocracy. And with inherited wealth the argument could be made that the inheritor/rajah has good "genes" from stock that made the money (e.g. Rockefellers). > > For other examples of clinging desperately to the > idea or "ideal" of something rather than looking at > reality, we need look no further than "Global Good > News," which persists in reading the evening news > and claiming that we're knee-deep in Sat Yuga instead > of knee-deep in shit. Maharishi proposed the *idea*, > and if he threw it out, it "must" be true, right? > > Wrong. Every religion or spiritual tradition in his- > tory has had some good ideas. But actual history does > not judge them by their ideas but by *what they > actually accomplished*. By that standard, the legacy > of the Vedas is modern-day India. By the same standard, > the legacy of the TM movement may just be Vedaland. > > It's *pleasant* to focus on the "ideal" and ignore > the reality. It can allow a True Believer to keep > believing, and think that he hasn't wasted his life. > But if the TB is honest, at some point in his life > he's really got to step back and assess whether the > path he dedicated his life to ever *lived up to* its > ideals. For many, that moment is likely to be on > their deathbed. Some of us chose to make that > assessment earlier. >
