From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of TurquoiseB Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 9:24 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] The Revocation Of Dogma (was: Re: New Message from "Raja Raam") --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , "wayback71" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > > > The following statement is not really accurate since > > > Maharishi-ji never said to me the following in those terms: > > > "Maharishi had told him that, in the tradition of rulership, > > > having the support of a Royal Family brought stability and > > > strength to the Kingdom". > > > > How did Girish know that MMY had not said the above words? > > Did he ask Raja Raam exactly what MMY said? > > This is what I was getting at in my previous post. > Girish didn't have to *ask* anything; he can claim > to KNOW. > > If you have built an entire fortune and empire of > little brown Mini-Me boys based on nothing more > than saying "Maharishisez," I guess you have the > right to say "MaharisiUNsez." > > This is the first invocation of the right to "UNsay" > a previous "Maharishisez" statement. :-)
I'm going to repost this under a different title and without the smiley face, just to see whether anyone else sees it as having the import I see. I do. This one struck me as revealing some very interesting behind-the-scenes dynamics, which may portend abundant entertainment for us all as events unfold. I checked it with someone in the movement who's in a position to know whether or not it's a legitimate message, and he honestly didn't know.
