Isn't that something? Yes, I've said the same thing. I wonder if he remembers it. I stumbled on it some time ago when I was looking for something else on alt.m.t, saved it, then forgot I had it until I stumbled over it in my own files a couple days ago. I suspect it was intended as a putdown of Maharishi with his claims for enlightened behavior.
In any case, I hardly think he'd want us to hold him to it now; so many of his insults to TMers are based on the notion that TM is responsible for what he considers their unenlightened behavior. Whatever would he do if he had to stop using that line of attack? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fleetwood_macncheese@...> wrote : That's funny as shit! As I said... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote : Comments below... Especially coming from one of the "Maharishi enlightened." "What if what has been described as enlightenment in the past has *absolutely nothing* to do with personality or behavior? What if, just as those who described it in the past have said, it is purely about consciousness, having the ability to directly perceive eternality 24/7, and that ability has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on simultaneously in terms of personality and behavior?" --Barry Wright, awhile back on alt.m.t This exchange illustrates my basic thesis on this forum. It REALLY DOESN'T MATTER what one *says* about people one doesn't like on FFL. All that matters is what the persons saying it do in their posts, as often-unintended "accessories" to what they say. Very curious to know what Barry believes people"do" in their posts other than say things (maybe attach an image or link to an article or YouTube video, but other than that?).
