--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, zarzari_786 <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Judy, this is an example of Buck piling onto his own comments > in a progression as his thoughts develop over a course of > several days. I just want to point this out as another example > of self-commenting, where I don't really see any attempt at > manipulation.
I don't see any attempt at manipulation in this sequence either. It's the one- or two-sentence-per-post deals one right after another, in which each post is just a continuation of a single train of thought rather than an expansion/elaboration of a previous one, that bug me. Many of us from time to time will have second thoughts and comment on one of our previous posts. Also, in this case, something happened between his second and third posts in the series: he went through a badge-application interview and was reporting back to you on that, so that accounts for one instance of the piggybacking. > I do think that Buck is giving us some valuable information > about the internal workings of the movement at present. Most assuredly. Your insights are valuable as well. May I ask about your TM background? How did you get here? Just curious; no need to respond if you're not so inclined. > As I also have, occasionally, other sources of information, > my feeling is that his assessments are quite correct. I don't have any other sources, but I have no reason to think that we're being misled. I do wonder a bit, BTW, about his assertion that the TMO insiders all read and ponder FFL. So much of what goes on here isn't even remotely relevant to their concerns. One of them would have to go through and pick out only the posts of TMO interest and then circulate them to the others. Possible, I suppose, but I'm not sure it's all that likely. When has the conservative element, in particular, in the TMO ever cared about what a bunch of renegades think? What's your assessment on that score? > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > The TM-conservative element inside evidently has the stronger hand over the > > progressive TM'ers. The progressives get tolerated as much as they are in > > that they are productive at teaching TM through Hagelin's work over with > > David Lynch Foundation. Lynch is interesting in this because his works are > > extra-territorial in his foundation. Lynch does not have to go through > > Bevan so much; yet, Hagelin can't just do things by himself without > > bringing the TM0 conservatives along. So as you say, mode is in a range > > between membership that is practitioner-client based on the one hand and > > discipleship-cult on the other. It's a good analysis. > > -Buck in FF > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > Zarzari786, I have just come through a long and arduous interview > > > > probing process in re-applying for a dome badge. Much of the > > > > consideration was around this client-centered vs. membership-cult as > > > > you frame it. It was very much around the difference between client > > > > practitioners and membership devotee types. > > > > > > > > That is a fair distinction within TM. On the one hand we got some more > > > > progressive people who tend to be more over in the Hagelin camp who > > > > would like to see it work out for practitioners, while on the other > > > > hand are the more strict preservationists around Bevan. Some of these > > > > later conservatives are like the Taliban in that they are ruthless in > > > > their position. The progressives are more sympathetic towards working > > > > it out for practitioner-clients. Right now the Bevan-ista doctrinaire > > > > disciples have more power than the Hagelin-ites. > > > > -Buck > > > > > > Zarzari, they do play hardball at this and there is lots of yelling going > > > on. A risk is that if anybody wanting/needing to be on the inside would > > > really persuasively argue for progressive change in the movement > > > guidelines along the lines of a client-centered hosting as you describe, > > > the Bevan-istas could just pack the bags of those people and 'out' them. > > > There is still a web of dependence this way that gets pulled. Within this > > > the "preservationists at all costs" is really where the cult is. > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Zarzari786 excellent critique here. And, welcome too to FFL. > > > > > Fairfieldlife is proly the best place to give input to the TMO from > > > > > the outside as it does get read and digested by everybody inside. > > > > > -Buck > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, zarzari_786 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I couldn't agree more with what you say here. If Adiraj, Maharaj, > > > > > > whatever is anything close to a Maharishi successor, he should go > > > > > > out and make a lecture tour about TM, or whatever they think they > > > > > > have to offer. > > > > > > > > > > > > He should be able to publicly stand for the program, embody it to > > > > > > everyone. This is what the Maharishi did. TM started out as a > > > > > > client cult, that is to say, it was not based on membership, > > > > > > discipleship, but rather directed to the general public, you simply > > > > > > could sign up for courses. The same was true for Ayurveda, which > > > > > > did not require TM membership, and many other programs that > > > > > > followed. > > > > > > Now TM is more and more like a membership club, more like a > > > > > > traditional religion. > > > > > > > > > > > > Compare that 'badge' approach to, lets say Ammachi, Karunamayi, > > > > > > Mother Meera and others, where anyone can come, anyone has access. > > > > > > Now that openess is the new style. > > > > > > > > > > > > TM at it's time was new style, client centered, but has sort of > > > > > > regressed into more of a membership cult. The new thing in this > > > > > > time is something completely open, there are too many things out > > > > > > there, too many meditations which you can pick. Any kind of elitism > > > > > > will not work. People select from different sources and pick what > > > > > > suits them best. And that is how it should be. And for me, > > > > > > openness, like open source is a precondition. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" > > > > > > > > <whynotnow7@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds really good - glad you were able to go. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, I have to thank Raja John Hagelin for > > > > > > > > granting me an exemption to attend the meeting. > > > > > > > > It was very nice .
