I really wish I had more time to devote to this post than I do...but I don't. The majority of your points are ridiculous.
The only thing that Earl says that I have no opinion or personal knowledge of is the bit about Guru Dev's supposed murder and the stolen yantra. The rest of your suppositions taken from Earl's letter are absurd. IMO n FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_re...@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 28, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Tom Pall wrote: > > > > > Mahesh, after traveling throughout India, found a man who could activate > > > the outer portions of the Shri Yantra. This gave Mahesh certain occult > > > powers and control over certain astral beings. Mahesh then created a > > > meditation technique and certain mantras that would help people blank > > > their minds. In this blank state (which has nothing to do with > > > transcendence that is talked about in the yoga sutras) these astral > > > beings would brainwash these meditators into certain beliefs and certain > > > actions. In addition, Mahesh would put blocks on people's nervous > > > systems to block their Kundalini from firing and to siphon off their > > > energy. > > > > > > Very good. This is the part of the draft I was referring to. It's very > > vague in the draft. Hopefully now you'll have a better understanding of > > what he's talking about and where he's coming from. > > > > Just thinkin', if the bulk of the material in EK's letter is true, then there > are a number of implications that one would have to accept. > > 1) SSRS would have to be a fake. He grew and was polished n his years around > MMY, validated MMY's teachings and was quite respectful of him. > > 2) Andandamayi Ma, Tat Walla Baba, Locksman Joo, Pundit Devarat (most > respected and learned Rig Veda pundit) would have to be fakes as they all had > significant relations with MMY. > > 3) A lot of the "awakenings" around FF must be fake / delusional in that the > majority primarily used TM as their sadhana. (maybe this one is not much of a > stretch for some to believe.) > > 4) The peer reviewed studies would be suspect -- how could they find good > benefit from TM otherwise? > > 5) Depak would have bailed far earlier. > > 6) Purusha would not be having any significant progress over 30 years. I > have only seen a few over the years -- and while not wildly dirpping with > yogic fruits, none the less liked the program and were continuing with it. > > 7) My own experiences in 15 months or so of long rounding, and some years of > practice (not exactly always on the program) would not be valid. While some > are undoubedly thinking "duh", I have not soley been sucked dry by my > practice. > > 8) At the many Kuma Mela's MMY was at, surely the vast hordes of vastly > realized ones would have come forward and busted him and the alleged scam. > > 9) Regardless of prohibitions, many initiators and meditators saw all sorts > of psychics, other teachers, etc. and rumors of stuff spread like wildfire. > That no one in 40 years prior to EK's visit to psychics hinted a the > mechanics EK lays out is baffling. > > 10) Amma, who likes FF, and whom I thought had good things to say about MMY, > would be deluded. > > 11) AS Clint Eastwood the icon of people who don't take shit said it, "Why > els would I have done it regularly for 40 years if it didn't work." > > 12) Among the very many pundits and all that MY brought around him over the > years wold have to have been dupped and/or silent - which is not my > experience with the ones I i interacted with and saw. > > 13) MMY would have REALLY REALY loved his family -- to work 16/7 or more for > 50 years on a scam. Who was his nephew on courses in early 70's, Pradeep? MMY > didn't seem particularly close to hime. > > > On the other hand, is it hard to imagine that MMY had some in India at odds > with him -- in terms of his teaching, organization, style etc. And I can > sympathize with Earl being quite PO'ed and wanting to lash out at the TMO - > and taking things said by those at odds with MMY verbatim. > > Lots more tings could be listed. But to me, for right now, EK's story seems > fishy. If others have pro or con arguments, I would be interested in hearing > them. >
