--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@...> wrote: <snip> > Robin4 tells us that the whole TM trip as a deception, and > illusion, and side by side in the same post Robin1 tells > that the initiation into TM is the most marvelous experience, > to which we should always be committed and faithful.
Just curious if anyone else understood Robin to be saying "we should always be committed and faithful" to the initiation into TM. > Robin4 tells Emily it is better to never start TM, and Robin1 > tells Vaj, that he doesn't know anything because he never > transcended and urges him to start learning TM. It is as if > all these personas, are overlay-ed upon each other, but there > is no final resolution. It's hard to know whether the above represents a genuine misunderstanding on iranitea's part, or if he's doing his best to mislead readers to think Robin is being inconsistent. <snip> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@> wrote: > > > > Dear Share, > > > > My take on all this policing of persons who go outside of the spiritual > > resources sanctioned by the TM Movement is pretty simple. Those who devise > > and enforce these rules (which originated in Maharishi himself) are going > > by their first experience of what TM and Maharishi represented: This is The > > Way; there is no other way that compares to the TM-Maharishi way. > > > > TM is defined as the simplest and most natural technique to take one to the > > deepest level of one's very beingthere is no other practice which is > > defined mechanically and objectively such as to afford the most efficient > > way of transcendingthere are no competitors here. > > > > The most profound realization one has when one is made a teacher of TM by > > Maharishi, is: this is It. There isn't anything else. And if TM cannot do > > what it says it doestake one to the level of pure consciousnessthen we > > are selling a product which does not do what we say it does. > > > > Any compromise on this policy of guarding "the purity of the teaching" will > > mean the gradual corruption of TM and the dilution of Maharishi's Teaching, > > That is one thing that Maharishi was able to do that no other teacher in > > our lifetime has been able to do: Make us experience that he was the very > > best, the only one, and that what he was giving to us was coming directly > > from reality or God or the source of creative intelligence. > > > > Any flexibility, reasonableness, tolerance here just makes no sense at > > allunless the people at the top are giving up their claim to the > > exclusiveness of TM as being the most beautiful way to transcend that is > > available anywhere. I refer readers (who have done TM) to their first TM > > experience. How it happened; what the process was like; how they > > experienced the mantra working inside of them. The very miraculous > > innocenceand profundityof this experience signifies: No competition will > > be allowedbecause what could produce an experience equal to the one you > > first had when you started TM? > > > > I don't say the policy is justified on the basis of TM being what Maharishi > > made us believe it was, and what our experiencesat least for > > awhileconfirmed, because of course I don't think that TM and Maharishi > > have continued to get the grace and support which would indicate that > > reality and God still think they are It. But in terms of the truth of one's > > devotion to one's Master, and Maharishi brilliant and unchallengeable > > authority to persuade us of his preeminent position and status in > > Creationand his gift to us in the form of his spiritual technologywhat > > the TMO is doing in being careful about vetting persons who meditate in the > > Dome is not only reasonable, it is entirely truthful to their conscience, > > their understanding of the will of Maharishi, and their own sense of what > > is the right thing to do. > > > > This behaviour on the part of those who wield this authority over > > meditators is irreproachable in my estimation. Of course if these persons > > believed that there was another path to God, to the Self, to enlightenment, > > then the enforcement of these policies would be subject to moral scrutiny. > > Inside the context of what they deem as truth and the means of not > > betraying the wishes of their Master, they are behaving entirely > > appropriatelyThere simply is no argument to be made against them > > whatsoever.
