The answer to your musings is: perform actions while established in the Self. This would include those actions that you think are right for the situation. This the fight that the Gita is addressing during the battle in Kurukshetra.
IMO, the goal of the Immortality Course is to learn how the self can identify with the Unified Field which is eternal. As such, at death the self becomes eternal. IOW, for those who believe in the transmigration of the soul, the body is similar to a cloth that the soul wears while existing in this world and discards at the moment of death. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > OK, there is some wisdom in this Maharishi-ism. If you can see potential > trouble brewing down the road and can do something about it before it > hits the fan, there is value in doing that. > > What I'm finding myself thinking about in this cafe today, however, are > the paucity of any teachings Maharishi might have given about what to do > once the problem *has* hit the fan, and is right in your face. I'm > sitting here searching my memory, and I can't really remember much of > any advice on the handling of problems other than, essentially, "Run > away and avoid the problem even now that it *has* come. Instead, dive > into meditation, and its powerful Woo Woo Rays will fix the problem > without you getting your hands all muddy." > > I remember in particular a period just before I left the TMO. I was > working at National, and Maharishi instituted a new policy in which > major (read "any") decisions had to be approved by a multi-country Board > Of Governors and, as I hear, unanimously. Jerry Jarvis was the > representative on this board from the US, and because we worked together > I occasionally got to hear his frustration with this concept. From his > point of view, due to the committee nature of it all, almost no problems > ever got solved by the committee. They'd just talk, talk, talk > endlessly, never coming to any conclusion or recommending any action, > and after weeks and occasionally months the problems would have been > resolved on their own, through total inaction. In his frustrated > moments, I remember Jerry opining that this may have the whole idea -- > give people the illusion that they have some say in deciding things, but > then set up a scenario in which they never really get to make any > decisions. > > Color me not convinced that this approach reflects the world of reality. > I'm SO not a God freak, or a believer in the notion that the world is > run by some omnipotent being or Laws Of Nature, and so well that it > really doesn't need our help in resolving problems, thank you. I think > that some problems are best met head-on, and "dealt with on the level of > the problem." > > Then again, I believe in free will, and the possibility that my actions > really *can* make a difference. I don't think Maharishi did, and that > belief colored his approach to dealing with -- or in reality *not* > dealing with -- problems. I think he believed that any "problem" was the > result of people not being able to tell that everything was already > perfect. Thus he clung to the perfection of his vision about the > perfection of things like Vedaland and the Immortality Course and people > levitating Any Minute Now, and ignored the things that others perceived > as problems. Like Vedaland being laughed out of existence, graduates of > the Immortality Course (including him) dying, and people still bouncing > around on their butts all these years later like frogs on crystal meth. > Like the world that he described as having entered an age of Sat Yuga > still allowing one person a minute to starve to death. > > Call me crazy, but my allegiance these days is going to have to be with > those deluded people "dealing with the problem on the level of the > problem" and feeding these people instead of trying to sell them > meditation. >
