--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Darling Obbajeeba, > > > > I can't get rid of the hate in my heart, so please bear with me while I > > attack you without cause. > > > > Did you watch Ellen Degeneres open that David Lynch Foundation event? And > > did you read Bob Price's wife's post attempting to persuade Emily to start > > Transcendental Meditation? And do you recall when TM for you was the best > > thing goingbefore the 1980's, that is? (By the way, I am going to assume > > you are an initiator; if you are not then some of my comments here are not, > > for you, completely on the mark.) > > > > No one could see anything about Ellen Degeneres (or for that matter in > > Martin Scorsese's comments) or in 'Mrs. Price's' commentary which would > > imply any kind of influence over their own individualism and originality. > > TM is the most subtle and efficacious technique there is to produce a > > blissful experience, and the most subtle kind of changesalmost > > immediatelyin one's personal life. If you listen to Ellen read what Mrs. > > Price says in her post, you realize that TM, mechanically and efficaciously > > considered, beats any other spiritual technique in existenceI would even > > say (from an Eastern point of view) ever. The fact that in doing TM one > > does not change anything about oneself in terms of one's own values, > > beliefs, or life styleand Ellen when she extolled the benefits of TM was > > as convincing and persuasive as anyone could belikewise when 'Mrs Price' > > wrote her letter to Emilyis something without precedent. There is no > > 'technique' that I know of which is not wedded to some belief system in the > > very practising of that technique. Not so TM. > > > > Transcendental Meditation, therefore, in my opinion, obbajeeba, is sui > > generis, intrinsically unique, like nothing else. Doing TM does not > > resemble doing anything else. There isthis is my argument based upon > > empirical evidenceabsolutely no cross-pollination with any other technique > > or forms of meditation. In fact, I contend that whatever alternative > > spiritual tradition a former TMer turns toespecially a former initiatorhe > > or she will approach, and even practiseand evaluatethat new technique > > *entirely in terms of their pervious experience of Transcendental > > Meditation*. TM is not just different, obbajeeba; it is distinct and > > separate from everything else spiritually in existence. > > > > This is why Rick Archer always comes offto me at leastas so much more > > conversant with the religious forms of experience, with spiritual reality, > > with how to understand states of consciousness than any of his guests > > (except for the TM ones: like Phil Goldberg and Dana Sawyer). Despite > > turning from TM and Maharishi, his nervous system has been schooled in the > > TM-Maharishi-Guru Dev universe, and this shows through at every level of > > himself. Even as he now professes to have a more authentic religious > > experience through his relationship with Mata Amritanandamayi (Amma: the > > Hugging Saint) than he did with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. > > > > Every one of us keen initiators, throughout the early and mid seventies, > > would have been nonplussed by any TM teacher trying to make the argument > > you make here. It wouldn't make sense to us. We did not just abide by what > > Maharishi had told us about guarding "the purity of The Teaching"; we felt > > it in our very soul. It was so manifestly clear to us that TM was something > > absolutely special, and could never be compared to anything that had been > > offered in our lifetime [our present one :-)] We acted on behalf of this > > notion of "No Saints" scrupulously, but not, as I say, out of deference to > > Maharishi; we could intuitively, deeply, feel the necessity of this. After > > all, what Master had produced the experience that "Mother is at Home"? What > > Master could allow us to confirm for ourselves that we were getting "The > > Support of Nature"? What other Master could deliver on his promise that > > once we became initiators, we could give to some other human being, a > > perfect stranger, this ultimate transcendent experience? The Checking Notes > > themselvesthe Checking Procedure as memorized and appliedare more > > dazzlingly and perfectly efficient than anything in existence. And there is > > no Master in our lifetime who systematically made teachers of this wisdom > > such that we could actually have the experience of tuning into the Holy > > Tradition, to having the experiences that previously were reserved for > > Hindus who sought silence in some Himalayan cave. > > > > Lookee here, obbajeeba: TM, Maharishi, becoming a TM Teacherall the > > advanced techniques that followed (including of course the Two Week > > Extension and the Sidhis)entailed participating in a certain metaphysical > > context within creation. And there is nothing nor ever will be anything > > just like TM and just like Maharishi (seen through our golden glasses as > > devout initiators). > > > > It is a very simple thing: the very moment Bevan relents on this policy, > > the floodgates will open and TM will dilute in its potency, and there will > > be a mystical mixture of substances which are not made to unite. If Bevan > > lifts the No Saints ruling, thus going directly against his Master's > > wishes, he will pollute everything, and TM will quite swiftly lose whatever > > status and efficacy it has presentlyand the whole project of Maharishi > > will not just flounder; it will alter its nature, and it will attenuate > > into something almost unrecognizable to what it has always been. No, Bevan > > is being true to Maharishi, to Guru Dev, and to the actual mechanical > > nature of TM to stick to his absolute fiat. > > > > Now I would never think about doing TM againand I have a pretty cynical > > view of who Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is seen sub specie aeternitatis. But were > > I still practicing and teaching TMand remained as Bevan is, devoted > > utterly to MaharishiI would offer to debate this issue with anyoneeven in > > a public forum. Because it happens to be, if you accept what TM actually is > > [and watch Ellen Degeneres and Martin Scorsese and read 'Mrs Price's' > > letter to Emily], like nothing else. And either is any other Saint or > > Master of our time like Maharishi. With all his faults and failings and > > worse, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, at his peak, was like no one who has ever > > been since Christ. No one on this forum who was at the zenith of their > > enthusiasm for TM and devotion to Maharishi would even be capable of > > questioning this judgment. > > > > The problem comes in when one looks at the long-term effects of TM, and the > > actions of Maharishi in private. Well, then, the argument could be made: > > why not subject TM to the eclecticism of the New Age smorgasbord and let > > it fend for itself? This would be fatal. Maybe it is coming, but the first > > person of final authority who bends this rule brings on the deluge. And the > > final ignominious fate of TM and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. > > > > No, obbejeeba; it's either TM or bust. Bevan is acting and Feste37 intuits > > thisin accordance with what he believes and knows to be the very desire of > > Guru Dev himself. > > > > There will be plenty of arguments flying back against what I have said > > here; but no one will seriously believe that he or she can change Bevan's > > mind about this. Because if they could, it would mean that even Bevan has > > abandoned his own beloved Masterand this would throw the whole Movement, > > Purusha, Mother Divine, into permanent confusion. > > > > I reject TM and Maharishi absolutely. But at the same time, if I am to > > believe in my experiences under TM and Maharishiincluding my > > enlightenmentthen I must firmly come out totally on the side of Bevan. All > > objections to this No Saint policy are destined to be futile. Maharishi, in > > his own way, created something miraculousat the level of *experience* > > anyway. And his possession of integrityin some basic sense: even Judith > > Bourque gave him absolute credit herewas undeniable. As I knew only too > > well by being in his physical presence. > > > > The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream. The emperor was Maharishi; > > the ice-cream was, and is, TM. > > > > Robin > > > > Beautiful and very well put Robin; thank you ! > My wish is these to be the last words in this evergoing "saint" issue and > that Buck et al take what you have written to heart. >
Beautiful yes, thank you, Nabby. This will be ever going as there are no last words for such word as, "evergoing." No Christmas presents for you! St. Nick is Jolly. Dear Robin, Thank you for your insight and sharing with us what your perception and experiences have been the the TMO. Without cause, is correct. I am not an initiator. Also, I was not part of the mass droves of music fans that flocked to the time to find a new religion, meaning when I learned TM, it was not because a famous person learned it and excited me to take notice. Nor was there drugs or alcohol involved as a problem or any recreational usage before learning TM. (One of the few who filled out applications without having to lie on it.) *We= you (not me) I am so sorry you had gone through those experiences. St. Nicholas hit the nail on the head with you. As children, we were anxious to see what Santa would bring us. We knew we had to be good. We also were aware of our Nativity and Jesus being the Savior. There seeemed to be something not right in the 1960's and the kids knew something was up, but couldn't place a finger on it. So they protested and gave free love and escaped to the free mind, and music was the aphrodisiac and we wanted Jesus to keep us safe, because Jesus and Santa were always told to be there for us. We wanted Jesus to walk off that cross he was nailed to, and into our hearts, but he stayed there, on a wall, on a coffin, above the alter, so any real meanings of truth, when they presented themselves, we scurried to that, truth. The great part of that, many have good experiences and peace. The bad part is the legend climbed along with it. The Maharishi, whether intentional or not, lead knowledge to people who already had been hidden in Pied Pipers's land and that is a big rock to remove out of the brains of the children who were brainwashed. Not to blame the TMO or the Maharishi or Guru Dev. These families were already like this. If one goes to India with Indians, where do you see a congregation of regulars every Sunday, and also voting for the separation of church and state representatives? Do you see Mommy pushing the Diebold electronic voting machine at the Hanuman Temple? At the Shri Maha Shiva Temple? Where do the Brahmans who could easily gain title as a Guru belong in the TMO? Are they considered Saints? What the heck is a Saint?, my dear Robin. I only know of Saint Luke, Saint Nicholas. The point I was making below your admission to being really fucked up in your belief system from following gods or God or maybe the drugs that were presented in the make love not war generation as the wars continue non stop with the maturing generation of hippies as if the thoughts of stopping the wars was or is enough by noticing them, the point I was making is when we initiate children to a stress reducing technique, what is not going to fly, and it will show up when the hippies are in their 80's, the children will be hurling those wheelchairs with hippies over the cliffs, if some perception like what Buck has presented is not thought about carefully. (Letting Sidhas back into the domes, who wish to practice their TM-Sidhis there.) I plan on having the youngsters care give my old bones with live flesh and mind still attached to a heart of gold. So far, I have their respect by treating them like human beings and not filling their heads full of shit without giving the children the option to rebuttal. This works for me. Back to the point, the TMO or the David Lynch Foundation could think about being careful with these strict requirements that are hidden upon at the beginning of learning the program, then slowly, fear is added as what not to do, as their consciousness grows (or opinion of who is growing by an initiator) or have meditated for a while, the rules list grows. A good meditation needs no other instruction than the good meditation's working results in spontaneous right action. Show me a Brahman that would not agree with me, I will show you a whiskey drinker.
