Comment below: **
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 3, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: > > > Comment below: > > > > ** > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > >> > > **snip** > >> > >> Certainly not on the commercial side of things, but on the spiritual > >> side of this, he constantly defers to GD. I always thought a comment > >> I heard years ago, when they had just unveiled the lineage painting > >> portrayed the truth of the matter. Someone on Purusha asked 'why are > >> you not in the picture' and M. responded 'oh I could never be part of > >> the lineage picture, the most I could be would be a doorkeeper'. In > >> other words he could never be more than just an emissary for the > >> tradition, leading people towards its. I found those remarks very > >> honest. In fact often on listening to M. I got the impression I was > >> listening to SBS, not M. A friend and I used to call it "channeling > >> Guru Dev" because that's exactly what it sounded like. He would even > >> look like SBS. > >> > > **end** > > > > This is my take on Maharishi, also, and why, regardless of any > > failings he may have, I retain such reverence and gratitude to him. > > He really did, I feel, reflect Guru Dev's glory in his own person. > > That transmission of Guru Dev and the fundamental teachings he > > conveyed impelled most, if not all of us on the path we still walk > > today, whether or not we still follow or revere Maharishi. > > > That's where we vary--having known of the damage done to at least > thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands) of beings, it would be > impossible for me to see that than for anything other than what it > is. I feel it's important to understand that a lot of this, from a > yogic perspective, is only more recently being observed as genuine > yogic masters from the Saraswati (and other) traditions see what has > happened to these people (at a yogic level). I therefore cannot help > but see the TMSP for what it is: the most intense form of suffering > available for human evolution on this planet (that I am aware of). > It's no surprise nature does not support it. > > And believe me, I wish I didn't have to say that, because it's not a > popular thing to say. > **end** Vaj, we do vary but perhaps it is because I'm not aware of the damage you speak of. For clarification, the 'fundamental teachings' I referred to above did not include (in my mind) the TMSP. Although I do appreciate the teaching on sanyama itself, I never really connected with that program beyond the first 3 sutras and haven't practised it for a very long time. For what it's worth, I'm reminded by your post immediately above, that even though Buddha is venerated in the Hindu traditions as an incarnation, his role as understood from the Shankaracharya tradition is that of an avatar who spread an erroneous teaching to delude and bewilder the population. I've never been comfortable with that view and I don't quite understand it, either. My daily program is wildly off-program, I'm sure, but at its heart is the meditation I learned from Maharishi. And that is so very sweet and profound that I have difficulty understanding how it could be wrong or damaging. I would appreciate anything you can tell me about what you have learned; I've learned to accomdate just about everything and I don't feel that I would freak out over anything you might tell me. Thanks. Marek
