--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@...> wrote: <snip> > What hardcore TMers would prefer is that I still maintain the > boilerplate spiels I learned to spew on TM, rather than be > true to my own POV. They desperately want me to not speak from > that new perspective, but continue to regurgitate the schtick > they continue to roll over in their minds, as a source of > comfortable illusion.
Wrongaroonie. This is what Vaj wants folks to believe TMers would prefer, but he isn't telling the truth. In fact, what we've been saying all along is that we'd like Vaj to relate his "new perspective" to MMY's teaching so we can understand what his "new perspective" *is*. There should be no reason why he can't do that *and* remain true to his own POV--if he in fact were as familiar with what MMY taught as he claims. That he refuses to do it raises the suspicion that he doesn't know the TM lingo well enough to attempt straightforward comparisons between MMY's teaching and his "new perspective." Indeed, the few times he's tried, he's gotten the TM part badly wrong. It's hard to avoid the conclusion that this is why he doesn't want to do it; his difficulty with the lingo and the teaching is too revealing of what appears to be his ignorance of TM. New perspectives are fine; we get plenty of 'em here. But if one is going to compare the old perspectives with them unfavorably, one needs to be able to articulate the old perspectives coherently--especially if one knows one's audience isn't familiar with the lingo of the new perspectives.
