--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_re...@...> wrote: > > Looking at the superficial aspects of a yogi, saint, sadhu, mukti,
So how do you know if a person is this special type? In particular what made you conclude that Maharishi was? < is like looking at a smudge on a glass and thinking "Its all smudge". The same for looking at anyone actually.> You seem kind of caught up in the smudges of the posts. Can you express what you see as the totality of Maharishi in your view? How do YOU see him. > > (Something that is eye-opening, is to watch some who focus on the totality of > the person, not the smudge.) > > Its not MMY who changed, IMO, its we who changed, our views changed. The > change occurred for many reasons, growing up, more knowledge, clearer or less > clear mind, and quite importantly, our karma. > > Various people had vastly different interactions with MMY -- IMO that was > simple the unwinding of varius individual karma. Someone whose karma was to > get treated like shit by their teacher got that. Someone whose karma was to > be on great terms always (vernon perhaps) got that. The karma we got relative > to MMY helped shape our view. Crappy karma made some see all smudge. Those > with karma of great interactions tenededm differently. Or some, regardless of > treatment, saw more than smudges -- and they tend to see more than smudges in > all people. How did you come to believe in this "karma" concept? On a scale how certain are you about this belief? I think this belief could be used to rationalize bad behavior like what happened to Judith. The old "I'm just the innocent mail man delivering your karma so bend over" line. > > Who cares who or what MMY was? I do for one. He was an interesting guy. <The sole question of import was, IMO, did you get something of value in your life, or did you not. If not, why did you stick around.> That seems like a pretty low bar. I get something out of every experience I have. < (I tend to think many stayed around for ego-driven reasons -- wanting to be a part of something fantastic, earth shaking, transformational (as in "I was there" as opposed to selflessly lending a helping hand).> I think you are being kind of hard on movement people and seeing all smudge. We all had mixed motivations but certainly we were chasing our own personal enlightenment. I never met anyone who could meet the standard of "selflessly lending a helping hand." > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <reavismarek@> wrote: > > > > Joe, I've enjoyed reading many of your posts and agree with you that > > Maharishi's basic nature likely hadn't changed over time. It appears > > evident that it was exactly his nature to "promote" Guru Dev and the > > Shankaracharya-ship that got him where it got him -- favor with his guru > > and influence within the Jyotir Math organization. > > > > Coming from an educated, business family and caste with a mercantile > > mindset it doesn't seem surprising that he organized the way he did with > > the TMO. As a young man, once he was close to Guru Dev he got to meet > > influential and wealthy individuals as the personal representative of a > > powerful man and his organization. Pretty heady stuff. The whole TM thing, > > in one sense, was just a way of him continuing to do what he'd done before > > for Guru Dev -- to keep on promoting and organizing. Guru Dev apparently > > gave people seeking initiation instruction to do japa twice a day and it's > > easy to see how Maharishi might have modified that basic instruction, > > realizing that it was something anyone could do, and interpreted or > > understood his "intuition" to be a sort of divine revelation and mission > > given to him by his guru. > > > > Dynamism and energy were both defining characteristics of Maharishi; at > > least that got a lot of press, to whatever degree it was true. And > > Maharishi wasn't much of a meditator, at least not in practice. It seems > > clear that meditating all day in a small basement and sitting by Ganges as > > the sun went down, didn't much suit Maharishi's nature and, for whateve > > reason, it wasn't long before he went south and got the inspiration to go > > about doing what he always did best -- promoting and organizing under the > > rubric of the Shankaracharya. > > > > Maharishi's great fortune was to hit the scene with a product and a message > > that caught the wave of culture change in the West at exactly the right > > moment in time and in exactly the right way. There were other spiritual > > teachers that hit the ground around the same time but none with the same > > numbers as he did. His message totally resonated with the zeitgeist and > > had a really long ride through the culture. > > > > The basic message stills resonates today, even though it's no longer taught > > or been emphasized by the TMO for decades. Maharishi was a powerful > > presence, a charismatic personality, and for a while, a very insightful > > promoter. But his marketing strategies failed with the introduction of the > > TM-siddhis. He was lucky in the beginning, and he was a true believer in > > himself; he trusted his intuitive schemes to work miracles. When they > > didn't, he marketed the next ideas to the smaller and smaller groups of > > people who still believed in idea of miracles. > > > > I think he was acting out his promoter, managerial nature within the > > spiritual teacher context. I enjoyed all my time I had with him and doing > > all the stuff I got to do within the TMO. And I still meditate, wave the > > light and all that, and I couldn't tell you exactly why I do, but I just > > dig it. > > > > Finally (I'm doing a little catch-up here, not having posted for a while), > > I loved reading Judith Borque's book and passed it on right away to my > > former spouse. We both agreed that it brought back all those feelings we > > had on those long courses, all the expectancy and social jockeying, how > > wonderfully spaced out and magical it felt to round all day . . . ; reading > > the book got a whole array of synapses firing that hadn't done that > > together for a long, long time. I totally enjoyed it, and there's certainly > > nothing in the story that makes me doubt her. > > > > Marek > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <geezerfreak@> wrote: > > > > > > Fascinating discussion topic! > > > > > > I used to take the "MMY fundamentally changed" view, but increasingly, > > > I'm coming to believe that, other than his last 15 years or so, when it > > > appeared he really had become more paranoid and "off" in a Howard Hughes > > > manner, MMY was basically the same. What changed was my own perception of > > > him. > > > > > > The seeds of all of the behaviors of him that we have been discussing, > > > can be found in the early 60s. Re-read Joyce-Collin Smith's book "Call No > > > Man Master'. It's all there, including the sexual dalliances. > > > > > > As I noted the other day, the gravitating to, and using of wealthy people > > > of influence was in place right from the Beacon Light days of 1955. > > > > > > - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <reavismarek@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Curtis, as always I credit you with being perhaps the most articulate > > > > and balanced of folks who post at FFL. Your input here, along with > > > > several others, certainly, has really been formative in my own > > > > reflections on Maharishi and evaluation of his role in my life. > > > > > > > > In your spectrum (below) I probably fall somewhere between the "not > > > > authorized within his tradition" and your own identified bus stop; > > > > although I totally recognize my own long term stops at the intial > > > > stages outlined in your model. > > > > > > > > I believe (don't know, but believe) that he was sincere in his initial > > > > offerings and I also believe that he remained a true believer > > > > throughout his life regarding the fundamental Hindu philosophies that > > > > underlay his meditation techniques. > > > > > > > > Within the Indian, Hindu culture he grew up in, it's easier to see how > > > > he saw his own unique task to spiritually regenerate the world as being > > > > an extension of the guru-god-man role that he saw in Guru Dev and took > > > > on as a "mission received" from Guru Dev after his death. It hardly > > > > needs to be stated that Guru Dev was by all accounts a true believer as > > > > well, but was a person who apparently walked the walk of piety and > > > > rectitude and spirituality his entire life, and did not contradict that > > > > lifestyle by any unseemly deviation. It doesn't make him god or > > > > anything, but it does attest to his sincere commitment to the > > > > principles he espoused. > > > > > > > > I believe at some point, likely in the mid to late 70s, when the TM > > > > siddhis were introduced, that the initial phase of Maharishi's mission > > > > had begun to dissipate and he reverted to a much more obviously > > > > commercial approach to the organization, now no longer a movement. > > > > > > > > I believe that the Maharishi I first met was much more the faithful and > > > > sincere mimic of his own guru and he exhibited the charm and charisma > > > > that I imagine was evident in Guru Dev. Unlike Guru Dev, however, he > > > > did not have the same long term immersion in meditation and spiritual > > > > lifestyle that Guru Dev had, and even more so, was exposed to peoples > > > > and influences that Guru Dev's cultural isolation kept him insulated > > > > from. > > > > > > > > I believe that both Maharishi and Guru Dev were guys, just guys. > > > > Maharishi was my first link, however, to a human cultural tradition > > > > that I admire and respect, if not wholeheartedly believe in anymore. > > > > For me they were, as you pointed out in an earlier post, symbols for my > > > > own sense of what an ideal person would be like, and if either of them > > > > fell short of that ideal (and how couldn't they?), nonetheless, they > > > > were the catalyst to recognize that ideal within myself. As many of > > > > those who post here continue to do to this day, I also continue to seek > > > > that out within myself and express it to whatever degree I can in my > > > > interactions in this life and thank my good fortune for that > > > > opportunity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > One of the the best gems from my last Judy marathon was the topic of > > > > > how we view Maharishi. I got to thinking about the continuum of > > > > > views of the guy and how many of them I have held at one time or > > > > > another. I'll set out a map so everyone can find themselves but > > > > > please feel free to add the views I am missing. Of course everything > > > > > will be tinged with my own feelings repressed or otherwise so some of > > > > > you may need to re-phrase the options for your own comfort. > > > > > > > > > > Let's start with the teenage pure love that many of us started out > > > > > with and which is becoming increasingly rare I suspect, the perfect > > > > > Maharishi-daddy. > > > > > > > > > > He is hard working and often absent (very 1950's) doing world shaping > > > > > important work. He has no physical needs as a monk, and is as pure > > > > > as the driven snow in the boner department (always flaccid) His role > > > > > as the "tool of nature" does sound a bit phallic. He is selflessly > > > > > working for the good of the world. His moods are always happy unless > > > > > he needs to act as if he is mad for the good of the person he is > > > > > appearing mad at. (People around him used to report feeling blissful > > > > > when he chewed them out.) This is the mythic Maharishi image that is > > > > > easiest to maintain if you don't get too close. > > > > > > > > > > Then there is the "but he is also a man" stage. Here we leave his > > > > > comic role unsullied, it is still pure and cosmic but he emerges as > > > > > an actual human with likes and dislikes.(He puts sugar in his ginger > > > > > ale reports Charlie Lutes to our delight.) Only the cute things > > > > > about him personally are emphasized and only a tinge of his cranky > > > > > side is allowed to enter our pretty little heads. Here he might get > > > > > mad for real real but it is still nature working through him when he > > > > > is acting like a baby in need of a diaper change. It made us feel > > > > > closer to him to see some of his human side. I hung out here when I > > > > > was in the movement. > > > > > > > > > > For some it progressed to "no he really IS a MAN" stage which Judith > > > > > covered in her book too well for me to add anything. You can still > > > > > view him as having a cosmic mission but you just have to accommodate > > > > > the missionary position into your view of him. > > > > > > > > > > Then some go to "he was a dude like Bill Clinton" where you have to > > > > > accommodate the image of him coming on to young women with the > > > > > finesse of an elevator masher. This is a bit of a tipping point in > > > > > how easy it is to still see him in his cosmic role but acting like a > > > > > frat boy. I doubt this level is inhabited by too many people because > > > > > it really shoves a conundrum in your face. (he, he, he says Bevis and > > > > > Butthead) > > > > > > > > > > Now we have to strip Maharishi of some of his cosmic stripes to get > > > > > to the next level. I think the first level would be to say that he > > > > > was not an authorized teacher in his tradition and was (sincere or > > > > > not) NOT doing God's work here on earth. This is where some of the > > > > > more spiritually minded people here hang out I believe when they > > > > > reject Maharishi's authority. > > > > > > > > > > Next we might conclude that he was sincere but totally misguided in > > > > > his beliefs. He really really wanted to spiritually regenerate the > > > > > world but his human failings got in the way and he went all Liberace > > > > > meets Hugh Heffner on us. He got distracted from his holy mission, > > > > > but there still was a holy mission. He really was a scientist of > > > > > consciousness using us as lab rats to try to discover how to "save > > > > > the world" in a Hindu sense. But he didn't really know what he was > > > > > doing and was winging it all with sincere intentions. > > > > > > > > > > Then we might see him as a super religious guy who had a personality > > > > > disorder. (I get off the bus here.) He did believe all the religious > > > > > stuff and believed he was doing good for the world but it was > > > > > filtered through the twisted lens of grandiosity and narcissism. It > > > > > wasn't that he wanted to be a user but he couldn't help himself. He > > > > > had a contempt for his fawning followers and felt isolated from them. > > > > > Only the human warmth of a parade of nubile hot tail could warm the > > > > > cockles (Bevis again with the he, he, he) of his heart and especially > > > > > that tender sub-cockle area that can only be reached with a the > > > > > handle of a French riding whip. (Hey if you got this far don't > > > > > complain if I serve up some unfiltered Curtis.) He thought TM was > > > > > doing good and even believed the fawning scientists falling all over > > > > > each other to give him good news so they could be close. (they were > > > > > all in the Happy Days stage of their love for him) The sidhis didn't > > > > > work out as planned but people seemed to like them and he may or may > > > > > have not have actually believed that a bunch of people smelling each > > > > > others farts in the same room brought world peace. > > > > > > > > > > End of the line. Here we have the straight up charlatan. All guru-y > > > > > in front of the cameras but once the lights went out it was cigars > > > > > and scotch with a blond bouncing on his knee. He was running a scam > > > > > on the stupid Westerners and fleecing them out of the money they > > > > > didn't even deserve to begin with. Trust fund babies milked out of > > > > > their inheritances and so forth. Tell a big lie and people will > > > > > believe that some of it MUST be true, promise them the moon and they > > > > > will believe that are as important as the mission he made up for > > > > > them. Yeah all you outcastes are gunna reach enlightenment in this > > > > > lifetime, sure that's the ticket. Line up with your international > > > > > money orders and step right up to Maharishi's magic circus where you > > > > > will physically fly in the air some day, oh yeah even you fatties, > > > > > cuz it's magic and in magic land even Dumbo soared above the earth > > > > > like Tinker Bell. > > > > > > > > > > There is one more level I can think of where a super spiritual person > > > > > could see him as a devil leading people AWAY from "true > > > > > spirituality." That level creeps me out too much to elaborate. > > > > > > > > > > So there you have it. A continuum with lots of gaps, I hope some > > > > > others add their own, I don't pretend this is complete. But it was an > > > > > interesting exercise for me to consider where I fall on the scale of > > > > > Maharishi views from God to demon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
