--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, eustace10679 <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > Looking at the big picture and leaving aside, for the moment, the details,
> > wouldn't you agree that even with this black spot on its history, the TMO
> > still remains the bright exception to the checkered histories of similar
> > large scale organizations?
>
> Absolutely not.
>
> In all honesty, absolutely not. And I consider
> myself a voyeur of spiritual organizations. I've
> carefully watched the histories of many of them.
> At this point I'm more of a "religious sociologist"
> than a pursuer of or believer in any religion.
I have to admit that I haven't been following the other spiritual organizations
closely as I did in the 70s. At that time practically all of them that had
reached some prominence and size were riddled with scandals.
>
> I would say that there is very little difference
> between the TMO and any other spiritual organ-
> ization, large or small, except the extreme
> silliness and self-absorption present in the TM
> organization. Have you forgotten robes and crowns?
> Have you forgotten "de-teachering" the vast maj-
> ority of all TM teachers ever created and declaring
> that they were no longer "certified" to teach TM
> because they wouldn't sign up full-time for just
> a *promise*, a promise that they knew would never
> be fulfilled?
The scandals that plagued the other organizations were different in kind and I
would say more serious then the ones you describe - embezzlement of large sums
of money, serious sexual transgressions. In my judgment, compared with those,
the ceremonial crowns are much sillier but also much less consequential. As for
the robes, personally I find them more to my taste than the strict dress code.
As for the decertification of teachers, I do not know the details but I would
lump them together with steep rise in the initiation fees and the crowns: All
these certainly did not help the movement, but, and this is the amazing fact,
they did not seem to have hurt it much either. Please observe that I am not
justifying these policies, I am rather basing my judgment on the overall effect
that they have had on TMO.
> I think the "real story" is the one above.
> You managed to "write off" a murder by relating
> it to your personal experience of a random moment
> in time,
I disagree with the randomness of the moment. But I understand that what is
clear to me is at the same time not obvious to others, so I would not insist on
this point.
> suggesting that the "real reason" for it
> was on some level "cosmic."
Hmmm... No, I wouldn't put it this way. The real reason was, of course, karmic
- I hope we do not disagree on this point. The "cosmic" (as you call them)
connections that I saw made the karmic situation more concrete in my mind. Or
something like that.
> ANYONE can find a
> way to "justify" the things that "their" organ-
> ization does and make them look less stupid or
> bad. That doesn't mean that they *are* less
> stupid or bad.
>
> The murder at MUM happened because one person, who
> had been taught for decades that practicing his
> meditation at a specific time every day was more
> important than anything else -- *anything* else --
> failed to guard a delusional student who had
> *already* attacked another student and went off
> to meditate.
That person had encountered an extreme situation he had not encountered before
in his life, and he failed to realize it. I am sure he learned his lesson.
> There is nothing "cosmic" in this.
I see much karmic, rather than random, in this. His experience did not help and
his intuition did not work. Mistakes happen, and people pay for them.
> There is only stupidity and non-acceptance of
> responsibility in this. There is only fanaticism
> in this.
"Fanaticism" may explain the failing of intuition.
> *You* can only feel comfortable with the history
> of the TM movement by "leaving aside the details."
> You will have to forgive me if I do not consider
> this a particularly reality-based position.
There are different perspectives to look at things, one way does not invalidate
the others. I wrote "Looking at the big picture and leaving aside, for the
moment, the details". I only asked you to look *for a moment* the whole
picture without focusing on the details. I find it very useful sometimes. From
a different perspective sometimes things look unexpectedly different. This in
no way invalidates the more detailed perspective and its reality - or vice
versa. Seeing things in different perspectives helps attain a more balanced
view.
>
> A "happening" spiritual organization IMO is one
> that "steps up to the plate" and *takes respon-
> sibility* for its fuckups and mistakes. Name me
> one time that the TMO has done that. Even one.
>
> I'll wait.
On the basis of my personal life experience I consider actions much more
important that words, and correcting one's mistakes more important than taking
(verbal) responsibility of them; maybe this attitude explains why some things
do not seem to bother me *as much as* they bother you.
>From the realm of the relative,
Eustace
--
The Meditation Meter Project
https://files.nyu.edu/emf202/public/tm/project.html
