--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, taskcentered <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > I don't mean to be facetious. How to judge the "success" of a > > > > spiritual master -- at least a mass-market one, such as the > > > > Maharishi and L. Ron -- is a thorny issue worthy of > > > > discussion. > > > > > > > > > Well yeah, but it was never really adiscussion on either side. > > > > I was merely reacting to Paul's quoting Gurudev about sidhis. > > > > > > > > That's what a discussion is, Lawson. One party reacting to what > > > > another has said or written. > > > > > > Except that the reactions in question weren't about > > > the "success" of a "mass-market" spiritual master, > > > which was what you stipulated above. > > > > John wants to make it one, using Scientology as the > > counter example. > > Of course, and he's entirely welcome to start that > discussion. But he was trying, disingenuously and > patronizingly, to make it appear that his question > was just a continuation of the earlier exchange, > which was in fact on a different topic. >
I had no intention of being either disingenuous or patronizing. If I appeared so, I apologize. If you believe I should start another topic to discuss this, I'm happy to. To my way of thinking, my question evolved naturally out of the discussion at hand. J. --- John M. Knapp, LMSW TM-Free Blog: 99 & 44/100% TM Free! Google-bomb the TM Org! Make us #1 on Google when you link to http://tmfree.blogspot.com!
