All valid points. The boyfriend was actually a follower of Yogananda, so the girlfriend might have been playing a oneupmanship game with him.
Of course, as you say, maybe she just wanted to see something happen. My own belief is that if she saw anything at all, it was MMY hopping around. SOme of the more spectacular hops you can find on youtube (filmed apparently by the local TV stations) are pretty impressive, and I can see how someone primed to want to believe in levitation would claim that they had seen someone float. I had a similar thing happen the first time I went to the Domes to do Yogic FLying. Someone in the very front of the room appeared to be saying up in the air for many minutes. All of us newly made sidhas didn't get up and leave when we were supposed to but instead sat quietly watching this amazing guy at the front of the room float around for 20 minutes. I expressed mild skepticism but couldn't come up with an alternate explanation. Years later, I went back to Fairfield and wandered by the front of the room. The raised area where the speakers sit during meetings was also covered with mattresses, so anyone who had bothered to climb up their to have some extra room to hop around and hop would have appeared to be staying about 18 inches off the ground for their entire yogic flying period. Oops. Had any of us bothered to stand up and leave when we were supposed to, we probably would have noticed this factoid, but none of us did. In fact, for my first 2 year of Yogic Flying, I was absolutely convinced that I had seen someone float for about 20 minutes non-stop. No-one is immune to "confirmation bias," which is the whole point behind much of scientific methodology: to try to make sure that the researcher's own expectations don't influence the evaluation of the data. L --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > ...in 1975, I ran into a kid whose girlfriend was on a TTC > > and was summoned to MMY's room and arrived a few minutes > > early to find MMY "floating in the air." > > > > I was extremely skeptical of this story because I assumed > > that if MMY were so enlightened that he could float, he > > would be able to tell that she was about to enter the room > > and therefore wouldn't have accidentally allowed her to see > > something she wasn't supposed to. > > > > In retrospect, after practicing Yogic Flying for 29 years, > > I see more than just a single interpretation of the story: > > > > 1) he really WAS floating and wanted her to see him float; > > 2) he really WAS floating, but the fact that he could float > > didn't guarantee that he would be able to predict that she > > would arrive early; > > 3) he wasn't really floating but merely hopping around like > > all the TM Sidhas do and she saw what she wanted to see; > > 4) it was just a story. > > I'm going to have to go with Door Number Four. > > With variations. For example, the way you told the story > above, you didn't even hear it directly from the ostensible > source, but from someone claiming to have heard it from her. > The boyfriend could have made it up, to make himself seem > more self-important. > > Or the girl could have made it up, to make *herself* seem > more self-important, or to add to Maharishi's myth to make > *him* seem more important. > > Or she could have really believed that she saw him floating, > whether she actually did or not. People see things that > aren't really there all the time. > > But I'm more interested in the storytelling process. Segue > to Paul Ryan's story, told in front of millions of people > at the Republican National Convention, that he had run a > marathon in "two hours fifty something." It later came out, > of course, that in an earlier interview with Runner's World, > he had said that his "personal best" was 4:01. > > So WHY would he tell such a story? I'm thinking that the > real reason is that he'd told the 2:50-something story a > few times before, to "easy audiences" who never challenged > it, and had *gotten away with it*. After a few times getting > away with it, part of him actually came to believe that it > was true. So he told it again, unthinkingly. > > Take another story, told on TM-related forums about why > Deepak Chopra deleted information about his association > with Maharishi from subsequent printings of his book. > A story was told that the TMO had *asked* him to delete > the information. The first time this story was told, it > was presented as what it was -- pure speculation. And no > one could really comment on its truth or untruth, because > of course no one in the forum audience was ever in a > position high enough with the TMO to either confirm or > deny it. But then an interesting thing happened. In later, > subsequent retellings of this story, it stopped being > presented as speculation, and began to be presented as > if it were fact. I would suggest that the same dynamic > that afflicted Paul Ryan afflicted this storyteller; > they began to *believe* the truth of stories that they > had made up, and thus felt no reservations about repeat- > ing them as if they were truth. > > In my opinion, when dealing with outlandish stories such > as Maharishi actually levitating, a number of factors > need to be weighed. First, who is the storyteller? Does > he or she have a reputation for credibility? Does he or > she have a reputation for needing to make himself or > herself seem more important? > > Next, who was this person telling the story *to*? Was > it an "easy audience" of True Believers who would believe > a story about Maharishi not only levitating, but turning > into an enormous Cheshire Cat and singing Tom Petty's > "Learning To Fly" while doing it? Or was it an audience > that was more...uh...more balanced? > > Third, I think one needs to ask "Why is this story being > told?" With regard to Maharishi actually being able to > levitate, I think we don't have to delve too deeply into > that one. Someone felt the need to come up with a story > that would convince others that Maharishi was as "special" > as the storyteller thought he was, or that the TM-Sidhi > program wasn't just a made-up bunch of hokum. > > Fourth, does the story make any sense? On my early Sidhis > course, Bevan was sent around weekly to all of the course > locations *specifically* to try to find someone -- anyone -- > who was having demonstrable experiences of flying or any > of the objectively-verifiable siddhis. WHY would there > be a need for this if Maharishi could easily verify them? > > I was around Maharishi for a number of years, and heard > a number of stories told about him. In some cases, the > stories told were of events at which I was present. The > stories often had *no relationship whatsoever* to what > I saw go down at those events. In many cases, Maharishi > was "quoted" in the stories as saying something completely > opposite than what he said, a fact that was verifiable > on audio or videotape. But that didn't seem to faze the > storytellers in the least -- they heard what they heard, > and that was that. Besides, they'd gotten away with > telling this story dozens of times before, so someone > (moi) pulling out the tape in question and pointing out > that it wasn't true wasn't about to stop them from > telling it again. > > A fifth thing to bear in mind when dealing with "Maharishi > stories" IMO is, "How desperately does the person being > told the story want it to be true?" Are they anxious for > something -- anything -- to justify all the time and money > they've spent on TM-related activities? Are they more or > less professional proselytutes, and anxious to add another > story to *their* arsenal of them? > > Remember the story told here recently about Guru Dev's > atman leaving his body just before his death and entering > Maharishi's? Someone made that up, and at least one person > on this forum wanted to believe it so desperately that he > repeated it here. The fact that if it were true Maharishi's > first act after being taken over by Guru Dev's soul was to > dive into the Ganges and attempt to follow his old body > to a watery grave had obviously never occurred to the > person who made up the story. > > Stories are weird, as are the people who tell them and > the people who believe them. >
