--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > on 12/3/05 11:42 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > >> on 12/3/05 3:25 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Actually, they're quite private, even secretive. Maharishi > > >>> isn't "people." > > >>> > > >>> But WHY do they talk about it with YOU? > > >> > > >> They've talked about it with other people. They're just not > > >> running to the > > >> newspapers or setting up a web site. > > > > > > Patiently: but why are they talking about it at all? > > > > Put yourself in their shoes and ask yourself that question. > > Don't the have a right to? Are they under some moral > > obligation to remain silent all their lives? > > That question, "Why are they talking about it at all?" > says a lot about a very prevalent trend/teaching in the > TM movement that I don't think is positive. > > "Don't focus on the negative." "Don't talk about those > unpleasant things." Ever hear those phrases? > > And don't forget the canned response if, God help you, > you *do* talk about something less than pleasant that > occurred to you along the Way: "You're just unstressing." > > In the TMO one is supposed to pretend all the time that > things are just hunky-dory. It was like that in TM centers > throughout America; I can only assume that this pressure > to "always be positive" and to cover up anything that is > less than positive is even more intense in Fairfield. > > And God help you if you violate this unspoken taboo. > You are first told that you're unstressing, then you're > shunned, and if you persist in speaking the unspeakable, > you're stigmatized. Your credibility is questioned. > And if this doesn't shut you up, there is always being > declared apostate -- thrown out of the TM movement. > > I don't think this is a good thing. While one can make > a case for focusing on the positive and not dwelling > overlong on the past, I don't think one can make a case > for stigmatizing those who feel the need to talk about > what's happened to them. I fell that to do so (to stig- > matize or attempt to impune the reputation or the > credibility of the person speaking out) reveals the > spiritual poverty of those who practice it. > > Unc >
"Why are they talking about it at all?" is a question that gets asked by everyone whenever a man or woman starts telling tales about past sexual relationships. There are no doubt many legitimate reasons to talk about such relationships. I'm just wondering what the reasons are in THESE cases. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
