--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "llundrub" <llundrub@> wrote: > > > > > > Jim, I think what comes across in Vaj's post are superior > > > knowledge ? and that's one thing that will irk everybody > > > again and again. > > <snip> > > > > That someone may know more than I do doesn't bother me in the > > least. Often it is a great shrtcut to learning. > > > > It is as I said his distortions and condescending attitude > > regarding TM and Maharishi that bothers me. > > One might ask, WHY? > > I mean, that sounds a lot like attachment to me. WHY > should anyone care that someone else doesn't feel the > same way about their spiritual teacher and his teachings > that he does?
What's bothersome is how those different feelings are expressed, i.e., as Jim noted, condescendingly. > > Much of what he says in that regard > > is incorrect. > > Like what? Vaj often expresses his *theories* of why > Maharishi acts as he does, Here, I suspect Jim was referring to distortions of what MMY teaches and of what TM is and does, not theories of why MMY acts as he does. <snip> > > And who he has met or spoken to in his life means a lot > > to him, and nothing personal, it means nothing to me, > > regarding him or anyone else. > > Great. Some of us, with the benefit of water under the > bridge and numerous experiences with numerous other > teachers, pay very little attention to what *Maharishi* > says about spiritual development. Don't think this is what Jim is referring to here either. I suspect he's saying that he doesn't base his opinion of Vaj's expertise simply on who he has met or spoken to in his life, i.e., Vaj's spiritual CV. I would add that, given Vaj's numerous misunderstandings and distortions of what MMY teaches (MMY being one of the teachers on Vaj's spiritual CV), there are excellent grounds for not assuming that what Vaj reports of what his *other* teachers have said is all that authoritative. I would say that I > consider about 10-15% of what he taught me valid, and > useful. The rest I class as as meaningless to me as > you seem to class the things Vaj reports on from other > teachers. As noted, I seriously doubt this is what Jim was saying. Again, everything is as it should be, until > someone gets uptight about the fact that others don't > believe the same things he/she does. >
