--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote: > > Yep, you got it. These clause about using non-TM movement religious services > exclusively evidently were put in the guidelines as part of a business plan. > It appeared in the Dome admission guidelines as part of a pitch to support > the movement pundits exclusively. It got toned down a little towards saying > it is okay to go to other services but not host or organize them now. >
But how did they catch you? > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > When it comes to pundits, it's the same thing. Deal > > > > with the wrong kind, and it might look as if you were > > > > hiring people to chant and make offerings to Hindu > > > > gods and goddesses to achieve the things you want in > > > > life. Can't have that. Gotta hire only Maharishi- > > > > approved pundits, so that it's all "scientific," > > > > and you can't be accused of doing something religious. > > > > > > I wonder what he problem is really, they might even be > > > scared of Buck bringing negative vibes into the dome, > > > little realising they are doing plenty of that. But it > > > might be just a financial thing - the TMO is in deep > > > financial shit. Or it might be they sincerely believe > > > their stuff is better! > > > > I was obviously being facetious above, but I suspect > > this is the real reason. And it's not that they actually > > believe that their stuff is better; it's that they don't > > want the example of someone benefiting from something > > that "wasn't manufactured here" available to other TMers. > > > > It seems to me merely an extension of the same demon- > > ization of techniques of meditation and self discovery > > that they see as "competitors" that has been going on > > with the TMO since Day One. You don't want anyone to > > even *consider* a "competing" technique or service, > > much less benefit from one and tell other meditators > > about it. > > > > The myth has always been "If Maharishi didn't teach it, > > it can't possibly be of any use, and it might be BAD." > > > > > Whatevr the reason this inquisition > > > is outrageous. I would have been over the horizon in > > > seconds. But then I was the one telling them jyotish was > > > a bunch of superstitious crap when they suggested I stay > > > inside and don't watch a solar eclipse. I Told them I'm not > > > scared of shadows and that was the end of it (bar a lecture > > > on supreme knowledge as revealed by Marshy.) I watched the > > > eclipse, they cowered in their offices. But there was no > > > banning me from the flying room, they must have stepped > > > up the paranoia since those days. > > > > To me it's just another hallmark of a spiritual movement > > in decline. They have realized that they cannot effec- > > tively expand their numbers by appealing to the public; > > they have both priced themselves out of that market and > > "PR'd" themselves out of it with their shenanigans. So > > the only way to bring in "new meditators" is by getting > > someone else to pay for large-scale programs, such as for > > schools or the military or the "underprivileged." > > > > That said, the flip side of that coin is to keep the > > existing meditators from leaving. This policy seems to > > be an implementation of that, by trying to prevent them > > from learning that there are other options -- cheaper > > and possibly more effective options -- than the TMO > > offers. Ignorance is not only bliss, it's stasis. How > > ya gonna keep 'em down on the farm after they've seen > > Par-eee? Simple. Never let them see (or even hear about) > > Par-eee. > > > > > > > > As for Jyotish: > > > > > > > > ['I sense that someone is about to swindle you.' 'Wow, > > > > thanks for the warning! How much do I owe you?' by White, Andy] > > > > > > Quite. > > > > Indeed. Love this cartoon. It really captures the > > essence of it, both from the seller's side, and the > > buyer's side. > > >
