--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice how MMY used to say that TM was all you needed to improve > > > > > > your life and reach enlightenment? CC,GC and UC. So in his lectures > > > > > > he suggested that all eight limbs of Patanjali weren't actually > > > > > > necessary, right? They (Yama and NIyama) were, as the tmorg still > > > > > > says, the 'ends' and not the 'means', right? > > > > > > > > > > > > But when you read MMY's Bhagavad Gita he says (in the appendix > > > > > > under Yoga) that Patanjali meant for ALL eight limbs to be > > > > > > practiced *simultaneously* (quote, MMY). Go figure? was MMY > > > > > > confused or just being clever? (I think the later). > > > > > > > > > > BillyG has repeatedly posed this same question and has been > > > > > repeatedly reminded of the answer: that MMY believed that to > > > > > practice TM *was* to practice all eight limbs simultaneously. > > > > > > > > That's what I said Clouseau! ;-) > > > > > > > > > Fine to disagree with him about this; not so fine to pretend > > > > > to be confused by it. > > > > > > > > MMY created the confusion, didn't you read my post! It's > > > > all black and white in the Gita and in his lectures. You > > > > believe what he said, I believe what he wrote!! > > > > > > I didn't say I believed any of it. My point was that what > > > he said was consistent with what he wrote and should not > > > be a source of confusion for anybody who has been paying > > > attention. > > > > You need to read your Gita appendix, what I stated was the > > truth and you can prove it to yourself by simply reading > > what I posted! If you don't have a copy then you don't know > > what you're talking about! > > I have a copy, and I've read it many times, sorry. > > > PS I didn't SAY you SAID you believed it, I said it's what > > YOU DO BELIEVE. (I think I'm correct). > > You aren't.
You're just being a silly girl Judy.
