I don't have anything to add to what you posted, Michael, just a suggestion. Whatever editor/email program/whatever you are using to write your posts seems to have "smart" (curly) quotes and semi-quotes turned on. The Yahoo system is obvously unable to process these, and turns them into the â and â characters you see below. Most such editors or programs have an option to turn off "smart quotes," even Microstuft Word, if you are using that. You might consider using such an option, because your current setup makes your posts difficult to read. The  characters that show up from place to place are non-breaking spaces, and I don't know why they appear, unless either you or the editor in question is adding them manually; almost no one *tries* to create them.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > My thanks to > everyone who offered their answers. Since Mike D was the first to respond I > will start there, but really I am using all the answers as a springboard to > think and write about this: >  > So > from what most of you seem to be saying, you feel he was enlightened in some > way, but because his consciousness was housed in a human body, he was subject > to flawed human behavior and yet he was still a holy man, or enlightened. >  > Or > you may feel that he was holy and engaged in Divine activity by teaching > meditation, yet not enlightened and therefore his human lies and deception were > just part of his human life, sort of like the various Popes who have guided the > Catholic church while doing things they officially denounced. >  > I began my question with the idea of Mâs sexual activity > because it seems that those who have talked about it (the women and the skin > boys) have come forth with some amount of detail, as opposed to some of the > financial allegations which are a little lacking in detail (here I speak of things > like suitcases across the border rather than the obvious soliciting funds for > projects that never materialized that everyone could see) > > I agree with Navashok that it does make a difference that Maharishi > preached celibacy to others and as head of a movement claimed to be so himself. > > > Had he only practiced deception about his sexual activities, I could have > turned a blind eye myself, but in addition to the sexual considerations, he did > two things â" one being that he seemed to take money under false pretenses, > asking for funds for many, many projects that never or rarely ever materialized. > >  > Second, he always claimed that everything he ever offered was far superior to > anything everyone else offered. His meditation was superior, his advanced > techniques were superior, he alone was able to revitalize ancient vedic > knowledge - ayurveda, jyotish, yagas, vastu veda and all the adjunct programs > and offerings that went with the main things he sold. He seemed to do this to > keep his customers loyal to him, to keep the cash flowing and to feed his ego, > that he alone could provide the best of the best. > > So with the sexual activity, Maharishi practiced deception > on a grand scale (meaning that he lied for the better part of his adult life to > nearly everyone he came into contact, as opposed to just a few times with a few > people), he took money under false pretenses therefore committing fraud and > seemed to have a large ego. > > Committing these sexual and financial acts he > manipulated people also on a grand scale meaning he manipulated many people for > many years, seemingly to feed his ego and achieve sexual and financial gains. > > This is behavior that most people would not tolerate in their > friends, family, co-workers or strangers. As a society we certainly revile our > politicians for doing the exact same things. I find it interesting in a > cat-with-a-hairball kind of way that some of you can so easily give him a free > pass for doing things you would never allow anyone else in your life to get > away with. > > One more thing I want to mention, Mike said this: âThe Bible > tells us that all men fall short of the Glory of God. That means > that all men have and will sin.â > > This must mean that he was not enlightened. Maharishiâs own > definition of enlightenment was: > >  â...in > this state (of enlightenment) the mind has become transformed into > bliss-consciousness, Being is permanently lived as separate from > activity. >  > Then a man > realizes that his Self is different from the mind which is engaged with > thoughts and desires.  >  > It is now his > experience that the mind, which had been identified with desires, is mainly > identified with the Self. >  > He experiences > the desires of the mind as lying outside of himself, whereas he used to > experience himself as completely involved with desires. >  > On the surface > of the mind desires certainly continue, but deep within the mind they no longer > exist, for the depths of the mind are transformed into the nature of the > Self. >  > All the desires > which were present in the mind have been thrown upward, as it were - they have > gone to the surface, and within the mind the finest intellect gains an > unshakable, immovable status." > >  > âFortunate is > man that he can rise to the Life of Godâ. (4:35 p.308) >  > âIn such a > state a manâs every thought, word and action produce a life-supporting > influence for himself and for the whole universe. This is a state of > life where no wrong action is possible. In this state one has crossed > over all evil by the raft of knowledge.â (4:36, p.309) >  > It is this passage that speaks to me regarding Maha and his > and the TMO leadersâ behavior: âIn > such a state a manâs every thought, word and action produce a life-supporting > influence for himself and for the whole universe.â > > It > must be obvious that Maharishiâs actions and words did in fact not produce life > supporting influence for others around him â" one need only look at the number > of tried and true TM believers who committed suicide, those who spent years > trying to recover emotionally and mentally from TM and direct involvement with > Maharishi, some even having been institutionalized, the number of people who > had their lives financially disrupted from giving most of their income to the > TMO and in general just the effect that lying, manipulating and committing > fraud has on the world. > > It > beats me how you feel that someone could even pretend to create world peace > when they were themselves perpetrating the very behavior that leads to world > destruction. Behavior comes from thought, thought is based on feeling. You canât > tell me that he was even close to enlightened even by his own definition considering > the things he said and did. I cannot imagine a scenario where lies, > deception and manipulation are the actions of an enlightened person. > > The > idea that we canât âjudgeâ the actions of an enlightened man is a free and easy > get out of jail card for him that in fact doesnât apply since he was not > enlightened. > And lastly here is this quote from Mike D: > > âOne last comment on this. M told us the story of how he > left seclusion. He had been in Uttar Kashi and was sitting with a saint. He > told the saint he had the thought to go to the south of India and the saint > told him "across the river is nothing but mud". In other words, if he goes out into the world , > he should expect to get muddy.â >  > I always took this to mean and in fact Maharishi actually > said so once or twice on old tapes, that the guy he was talking to meant donât > waste your time, across the river is nothing good. > > You are interpreting it as an excuse for his unethical > behavior. This is just an excuse and not a very good one either. The mark or > sign of a man or woman is how we behave when the going gets rough, or how we > behave when we are in an energy field where bad behavior is pervasive. > > > My > problem with M is that he pretended to be different than the rest of us and > created a façade that made him appear to be above such worldly considerations, > but he was actually behaving as some of the worst elements of our society > behave now. > > You vilify politicians and people in high finance who do the > exact same things that Maha did and give him a free pass for doing what you don't tolerate in others. I understand it, but I shore donât agree with > it. >  > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Mike Dixon > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 4:56 PM > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Serious Question > > >  > Yeah, he's still a holy man, just not as holy as most of us thought. The Bible tells us that all men fall short of the Glory of God. That means that all men have and will sin. Maharishi was a man, not God. The Bible also speaks of angels coming to earth and having sex with women. Veda Vyasa had sex with an unmarried woman in a boat while crossing a river, thus we have Shukadeva. Maharishi belongs on a pedestal, just not as high as we might have thought. My thoughts are that M was a very high soul on a mission and upon taking birth as a man, he did things men do. > > From: Michael Jackson > To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" > Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2013 12:58 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Serious Question > >  > OK, serious question here to all those who have defended Maharishi as a saint and true holy man. > > > How do you account for the stories that several of his former skin boys have told about his sexual escapades? Mark Landau, Billy Clayton, Nedd Wynn and others have told stories that are very similar as to what who and when. > > Do you think they are all lying and if so why? Or do you honestly think it is alright for a true holy man who always said he was a lifelong celibate to have sex repeatedly and lie about having done so? >
