--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 13, 2011, at 2:03 PM, feste37 wrote: > > > > > > Of course, having said that, Mahesh did admire some of the most evil > > > people. > > > > That's a classical and easy mistake to make. > > Maharishi did not admire these dictators, he lifted them up > > so they could leave office without any loss of lives. The > > "Shah", Marcos, Haile Selassie, Peron - the list is long. > > Nabs, you know, if we assume MMY was fully > enlightened, we don't have to deny that he admired > those dictators. It's fully consistent with his > teaching to assume that Nature caused him to admire > them, that Nature "knew" his lifting them up would > result in their leaving office with little or no > violence. > > IOW, MMY didn't have to know what he was doing; he > didn't have to foresee the effects of his actions. > Nature "knew," and he was just following Nature's > dictates. > > Or to put it another way, the gunas don't just > control action in the world; they also control > action inside our heads, what our brain's synapses > do.
Actually, I agree with you, Judy. Well put. It also means I don't need to agree with or follow the actions and ideas of someone else who is enlightened. The gunas may be acting on the brain of the enlightened person and on my brain, too, and we would come to different conclusions. I might think their support of someone like Mugabe is ridiculous, and that is just perfect for me to feel that way. It is the only way someone not enlightened can act and be honest with themselves. Just do what you think is right. Not follow the ideas of any person with whom you don't honestly agree. And not bend into all sorts of contortions trying to find a way to make it all make sense. So if MMY adored Mugabe, well, that feeling is right for him. The gunas in the wisdom of the cosmos made MMY adore him for some ultimate reason that I have no clue about. But my dislike is equally valid. So, just because MMY liked or disliked someone means........not much at all, really, I guess. His work was in the meditation and the darshan. > > That's one way of looking at it, anyway. I think it > makes more sense than to argue that he had ulterior > motives and was engaging in complicated plotting to > bring about unexpectedly desirable results. He would > have been just as surprised as anybody else at what > Nature had wrought through him. >
