--- 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.
Actually your point has merit; MMY never could recommend dealing with the problem per se because he neglected teaching the first two limbs of Patanjali's Yoga, Yama & NiYama, the prescriptions and the proscriptions. Patanjali had envisioned (IMO) dealing with problems on multiple levels, hence you have the answer to your query/question. Their is Nothing wrong with using Astrology to "avoid the problem BEFORE is arises".
