--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <groups@> wrote: > > > > on 8/4/06 11:28 AM, authfriend at jstein@ wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife% > 40yahoogroups.com> > > > , "nablus108" <nablus108@> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > > >>> > > KING: You're a bachelor. > > >>> > > MAHARISHI: ...monks. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > CNN - LARRY KING WEEKEND > > >>> > > Interview With Maharishi Mahesh Yogi > > >>> > > Aired 12 May 2002 - 9-10 p.m. ET > > >> > > > >> > Fine, he says he is a monk. Does not mean he has been that for > > >> > ever in the past. I could say the say thing actually - for the > > >> > last year or so...:-) > > > > > > Plus which, the question he was responding to was > > > whether he had a family and kids, not whether he > > > ever had sex. > > > > > Larry asked whether he had kids. His answer was, ³no, I¹m a monk.² > > That implies that he doesn¹t have kids because monks don¹t have sex > > and therefore don¹t have kids. > > That's what you *inferred*. > > Obviously King wanted to know whether MMY was celibate, > and equally obviously, MMY didn't want to say. He > knows the term "celibate." If he hadn't wanted his > response to be noncommittal, he would have used it.
<warm smile> well, to say "I am a monk, a sanynassi -- if you know what that means " is pretty explicit. And if you know MMY, its quite explicit for him. Its just an observation, not some prissy dismissiveness, but your comments reflect someone who has not been physically around MMY much. Thats not to say that you don't have a fine understanding of many TM points. However, in person, particularly in smaller groups, his style, often, was to be quite subtle. Its perhaps as if subtle thoughts and conveyances are more powerful. He made points, but in metaphoric, poetic, round about ways, humorous, multi-layered ways. And people who got the point(s), and got his style, were recognized by him, as they followed up on his points with questions or actions. It seemed as sort of a way of his to allow you to attune your mind to his. To get the drift of his thinking with less and less words. Sometimes, just a glance would tell a lot. Communications becomes less wordy. And it went both ways. With only a few words into a question, he would say something like "I understand your question, your point" and begin to answer it. And back to us, his answers could be less of words, and more of timing, inflection, gesture, the way he tapped his flower(s), his glances. It was a gestalt of things, drifting through the air, profound, but subtle -- like fine incense. You just "got" certain things he was conveying -- though he may have used only a few, subtle, oblique words. And it was verified by him, that you got it, with various follow ups, etc. There was at times a magic ebb and flow, back and forth, in just a few words, glances, "mmmmmm..s". Again, I think this style was about refining the CP's minds by appreciating finer thoughts/expressions, and as away of cultivating the CP's minds to be in tune with his. 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/
