--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > That is, the fallout of Maharishi's famous "Every ques- > tion is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have > already prepared." THAT was -- and still is -- the TM > mindset. You ask questions, we give you the "pat answer" > we have already prepared, and you STFU (Shut The Fuck Up).
I find this kind of funny, and I think I have mentioned it before, (but I am rushing this morning), but it seems to me that a student, any student approaches a teacher with a somewhat open mind. He may engage the teacher with questions, and sometimes may disagree with the teacher, or not get the answer he wants. So, are you suggesting that he, (or she) endlessly question the teacher in an effort to nail down some point? I have been in situations, in person, where people have questioned Maharishi, and he spent time attempting to answer the question, and the follow up question, and then the follow up question. And it is all interesting until everyone else in the room wishes the person would just STFU. I think in the the spiritual game when looking for a teacher you question the teacher, but there comes a time when you either decide to get on board or move on. It doens't mean, at least for me, that you surrender your intellect, or give a whole hearted buy in. Yes, I think you find some that adhere dogmatically to the TMO mindset, but overall I think you are misrepresenting the situation as it is and was. piritual traditions I've been exposed to > there is generally no tolerance in the TMO for a seeker > *challenging* the pat answer. To do so, in fact, risks > ridicule or, if you *keep* challenging it after having > been told to STFU a couple of times, excommunication. > The pat answer is Truth. You are expected to *accept* > the Truth. > > The problem with this, as I see it, is that NO pat > answer in the history of answers has ever been Truth. > At best, it's a partial, relative truth, "true" only > from one point of view and one state of consciousness. > Shift points of view, shift states of consciousness, > and even the pat answers become untrue, or at best > only partially true. > > My experience on the spiritual path has left me feel- > ing that this "pat answer" approach is a Really > Dumb Idea. It not only creates in those who accept > the pat answers as Truth a false belief that they > "know the Truth," it also creates in them (IMO) a > reluctance to question further, and often an angry, > attached overreaction to those who suggest that in > their own interest they may want to examine these > pat answers in more detail to see how "true" they > really were, or are. > > Pat Answer Syndrome explains a LOT of the behavior > we see on FFL, and in the TMO at large. People who > heard the pat answers just parrot them out every > time a "perfect opportunity" arises to do so, with- > out ever questioning whether the pat answers were > ever true. Push the issue -- point out that the > pat answers were possibly not true, and even present > quotes from Maharishi indicating this -- and they > plant their feet in the dirt like a dog pulling on > a leash and get first defensive, and then angry. > > In other words, IMO, Pat Answer Syndrome -- present- > ing theories or partial truths as Truth -- has in > the long run a deleterious effect. It breeds stasis > in those who accept the pat answers as Truth, breeds > a lack of curiosity as to finding out more about the > subjects dismissed by the pat answers, and eventually > (after years or decades) breeds heavy-duty attachment > to "knowing" the Truth, just because they learned to > re-parrot the pat answers used to dismiss their > questions. > > That's my theory, anyway. Others may have other > theories, and are welcome to present them. I might > suggest, however, that those who become angry at > my suggestion in this post and resort to namecalling > and insults in reply to it are proving my thesis, > not disproving it. >
