2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguis
being done
here by a lot of good people who are with it in the community. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists
ne
here by a lot of good people who are with it in the community. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious
faith-and-belief-in-Maharishi conservative TM ideologic
ily that lives here now and we are all affected by how
they behave up there. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitione
ous work that is being done
here by a lot of good people who are with it in the community. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists
ng done
here by a lot of good people who are with it in the community. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practiti
es here now and we are all affected by how
they behave up there. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM M
rom: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critiqu
re by a lot of good people who are with it in the community. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony2k5@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
Well, you are laying out the "vision of possibilities" that drew so many in.
I'm not sure it's worked out that way for everyone, but I will concur that
stepping upon the spiritual path is indeed fortunate, but not for the faint of
heart.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
I'd s
I'd say there's been a "black night of the soul" for many of us regarding M's
teaching.
Indeed...and yet how much more marvellous are the first rays of early morning
set against the darkest of nights, with the full brightness of day yet to come!
Through the line behind the pioneering attitude
Truth and Consequences, The Sin of the Spin,
Nice post, Upfronter. This is really well written critique as it speaks to the
dangers we have in our collective story of our communal TM standard of ethics
as a corporate spiritual group.
It comes at a good time for what are processes of
I'd say there's been a "black night of the soul" for many of us regarding M's
teaching.
In the best case, you reconcile it in some manner, and emerge on the other
side keeping intact some parts, and letting some parts go by the wayside.
Or, in some cases, people become embittered, and set
“I don't recall that on my TTC ('72) that we were trained to be as deceptive
as upfronter is suggesting.”
I’m sorry if you thought I was suggesting that TM teachers were “trained to be
as deceptive”. My point, in a nutshell, is that before this practice was ironed
out (thank you authfr
ut the one you buy is yours and
yours alone. We never discussed criteria for selection.
From: "authfri...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2016 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Pr
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
“Teacher briefly glances at initiation form to check the criteria for mantra
selection (age and/or sex) and to preserve the illusion of personal mantra
selection.”
In other words, alter the truth that mantra selection is based solely o
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
(snip)
Also, looking at the early supposed TTC training script (unless it has been
doctored to provide a falsehood), I notice that the giving of the mantra should
be done in such a way as to make the initiate feel that they are getting a
un
I remember when I learned TM so many years ago that the mantra, in terms of
meaning and origin, was not discussed at all, nor was I particularly interested
in the details, as long as it worked. It was *the correct use* of the mantra,
the delicacy of its implementation, that was emphasized.
I
“Teacher briefly glances at initiation form to check the criteria for mantra
selection (age and/or sex) and to preserve the illusion of personal mantra
selection.”
In other words, alter the truth that mantra selection is based solely on age
and sex and create an illusion that it is som
yep, TM wasn't designed for a required support structure, beyond those first
days of checking. A very wise move by Maharishi, and unique so far as I can
tell among the many offerings out there. It is truly a "householder's"
technique, and far more helpful than a bunch of crutches.:-)
---In Fai
Good narrative, Upfront. By definition it sounds like you are a practitioner
who simply has come to have faith in the practice based on experience with it,
spiritually. That is different than the tru-believers who seem to make
something cultural out of their time with it, like a religion. Thi
I sincerely thank the disciplic line responsible for the meditation that has
brought me to a world in this world that I could not even have dreamt of. How
grateful am I!
However, I do not agree with much of the certain knowledge spoken by the
masters that comes from the East except in parall
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious
faith-and-belief-in-Maharishi conservative TM ideologic
AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious
faith-and-belief-in-Maharishi conservative TM ideologic zealotry of strict
preservation on the
uary 16, 2016 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious
faith-and-belief-in-Maharishi conservative TM ideologic zealotry of strict
:36 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious
faith-and-belief-in-Maharishi conservative TM ideologic zealotry of strict
preserva
well, good luck.
From: "dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
Om no, no. The
ve up there. -JaiGuruYou
From: "dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
I am on my way to a work
m: "dhamiltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
I am on my way to a working meeting on campus right now a
ltony...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
I am on my way to a working meeting on campus right now about the moveme
ay, February 16, 2016 6:18 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners,
The TM Movement Community
Why? Well, on a purely practical level I live here and a lot of my friends
live here. I have family that lives here now and we are all affected by how
16 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
I am on my way to a working meeting on campus right now about the movement but
this division over ‘originalism’ is a communal rub and scrap in harnessing
actionable change i
airfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:50 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
I am on my way to a working meeting on campus right now about the movement
but this division over ‘originalism’ is a c
I am on my way to a working meeting on campus right now about the movement but
this division over ‘originalism’ is a communal rub and scrap in harnessing
actionable change in cultural things that have evolved within the TM movement
community. It is extremely trying inside the movement right now
in
each state.
From: "s3raphita@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:16 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Re "Leave it to the individual states to decide" :
M
On considering uncompromising and Strict Originalism, like with some strict TM
preservationists:
“..a static interpretation of the law that doesn't move with the times,
doesn't move with the society.”
“He (Scalia) was its most fierce proponent I guess I would say, but that
didn't mean that
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:16 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Re "Leave it to the individual states to decide" :
My view also. And one of the most attractive featu
e was conflict between states.
From: "steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 9:26 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Okay, take one example. Gay marr
om
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 10:16 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Re "Leave it to the individual states to decide" :
My view also. And one of the most attractive features of the US federal
st
No, it was Supreme Court justices who ruled on Roe v. Wade, not "shyster
lawyers." Lawyers, shyster or otherwise, don't get to rule on anything. Only
judges or justices can do that.
And please don't tell me what I can and can't see. You don't have a clue.
---In FairfieldLife
Re "Since when do "shyster lawyers" get to rule":
Roe v. Wade?
"The Court recognized the right to an abortion as a fundamental right included
within the guarantee of personal privacy."
Let me spell it out. Here in Europe abortion rights are not a live issue. The
right of a woman to ha
"Shyster lawyers"?? We're talking about the Supreme Court here. Since when do
"shyster lawyers" get to rule on interpretation of the Constitution?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :
Re "Allowing for changing attitudes" :
You're making my case for me!
If people's at
2016 9:26 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Okay, take one example. Gay marriage. Strictly interpreted
constitution-wise, ala Originalism, the verdict would be "no".
But allowing for changing attitudes, w
From: "steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife]"
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 9:26 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Okay, take one example. Gay marriage. Strictly interpreted
y 14, 2016 9:26 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM Originalists v Progressive Practitioners, The
TM Movement Community
Okay, take one example. Gay marriage. Strictly interpreted
constitution-wise, ala Originalism, the verdict would be "no".
But allowing for changing attitudes,
I am not a student of the Constitution, but passage of a constitutional
amendment is a rather arduous process, and questions about the meaning of the
constitution with regard to certain issues, is something that comes up all the
time, and is, in most cases, the purview of the Supreme Court. I a
It's almost prohibitively difficult, actually; it was designed to be. And it
can take years.
Those who are not originalists (don't know the term for them) don't
necessarily interpret the original wording in a way that is "clearly at odds
with the obvious reading." It's much more complicated t
Re "Allowing for changing attitudes" :
You're making my case for me!
If people's attitudes have changed they will vote for representatives who
share their views and who will amend the constitution accordingly.
See how it works? The people decide; and not shyster lawyers.
---In Fai
Okay, take one example. Gay marriage. Strictly interpreted constitution-wise,
ala Originalism, the verdict would be "no".
But allowing for changing attitudes, with a slightly more liberal
interpretation, the answer would be "yes"
Issues seem easier to resolve in theory than in practice.
"Originalism" sounds like what I would call common sense.
If you don't approve of what the original constitution lays down then get your
elected representatives to amend the constitution by due process. How hard can
it be?
The idea that a bunch of lawyers - who I've never voted for - can
“Originalism, as defined by Justice Scalia and others, is that what is in the
Constitution literally is what the founding fathers meant.”
Conservative TM Maharishi Originalism: That Maharishi set it up the way he did
as an enlightened soul and teacher, that he knew what he was doing, and it
'Originalism', this becomes a useful critique for distinguishing the religious
faith-and-belief-in- Maharishi conservative TM ideologic zealotry on the one
hand from progressive practitioner elements who in experience would like to see
things evolve and work out well for the TM movement.
“And
Standing like Constitutional Original-ists, the faith-in-Maharishi religionist
TM'ers inside TM at the top for decades have contended and winnowed things down
fundamentally in their own minds that, “Fairfield is for those who have 'faith
and belief' in Maharishi and everyone else should leave us
54 matches
Mail list logo
