Discussion:
A tale of two gurus (from the Fairfield Ledger)
(too old to reply)
t***@aol.com
2005-07-16 15:46:30 UTC
Permalink
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.

As a former TM teacher, and as a person who held
postions with the TM movement such as State Coor-
dinator and director of the Western Regional Office,
I have also taken the liberty of marking (with *****)
several outright lies in the article below, all told
by TM movement representatives.

Wallace's statement is patently untrue; no such
"agreement" was ever asked of me or anyone I know.
Common non-teacher meditators have indeed "gotten
into trouble" for going to see other teachers, such
trouble including being denied admittance to TM
courses, denial of applications to become teachers
themselves, and being banned from TM centers perm-
anently. There is NO "due process." When you're
banned, you're banned, and that's that.

This editorial raises some good questions, questions
that the TM organization should, but never will,
deal with honestly. - Barry Wright


July 14, 2005
The Fairfield Ledger
Opinion

A tale of two gurus

Could the Transcendental Meditation movement learn a thing
or two from 'the Hugging Saint'?

By Erik Gable

Rick Archer had been practicing and teaching Transcendental
Meditation for nearly three decades when he first met Mata
Amritanandamayi, the Indian holy woman known to her followers
as "Amma" or "the Hugging Saint."

He didn't see any conflict between going to visit Amma and
his regular practice of TM in the men's dome at Maharishi
University of Management. In fact, Archer recalled, his
experience during his daily meditations actually improved.

But a few years later, after a meeting in which two TM
movement officials questioned him about his involvement
with Amma's group, Archer's dome badge was revoked.

He had run afoul of a university policy discouraging TM
teachers from seeing gurus other than Maharishi Mahesh Yogi,
and he was no longer welcome during group meditation.

That policy has been a source of division and even fear
among members of Fairfield's meditating community. Although
Amma has visited Mount Pleasant every summer for the past
four years, Archer said "fear and paranoia" leads some
Fairfield residents to skip her local appearance and drive
to Chicago to see her -- because they're afraid they'll get
kicked out of the dome if the wrong person sees them in her
presence.

But TM movement leaders say the policy is necessary to
preserve the purity of Maharishi's teachings. They also
say the rules are nowhere near as draconian as many people
think.

This issue came up repeatedly during a community meeting
last summer hosted by TM movement leaders. Robert Keith
Wallace, an M.U.M. trustee and the university's first
president, fielded several questions about reports of people
being banned from the domes after visiting other spiritual
leaders.

***** Wallace said TM teachers all agreed when they became
teachers not to see other gurus. ***** In an interview last
year, he compared the situation to a Coca-Cola salesman
being seen drinking Pepsi.

But movement leaders say Amma is not their enemy.

"The university's policy on any other teacher of meditation
or self-development is neutral," said M.U.M. executive vice
president Craig Pearson, "meaning we don't endorse other
people, we don't criticize other people."

At the same time, Pearson said, the university doesn't want
people practicing meditation techniques other than TM in its
domes.

"The essential core thing that we have to protect is the
purity of that practice," he said. In addition to the cere-
monies that earned her the nickname "the Hugging Saint,"
Amma offers her own meditation technique.

The standards are stricter for teachers than for rank-and-
file meditators, Pearson added. ***** While teachers aren't
supposed to be seen going to other gurus, he said, non-
teachers aren't likely to get in trouble for being seen
in another guru's presence. *****

***** "Just going to see somebody else, there's no problem
with that," he said. *****

***** And in any case, Pearson said, "there's always due
process." *****

Archer -- who says he had good experiences with Maharishi
and doesn't wish the movement any ill -- doesn't question
M.U.M.'s right to decide who can and can't meditate in the
domes.

"They're entitled to set whatever standards they want," he
said.

But at the same time, some say the movement hurts itself
by discouraging involvement with other gurus.

"I feel they lose the respect of a lot of people," said
Archer, "and they also box themselves in and run the risk,
which I think has been to a great degree realized, of
becoming very cult-like."

"I think it tends to isolate the TM movement," said Mark
Petrick, one of the people who organized Amma's visit this
year. "I think the TM movement becomes less and less
relevant to the life of the community when it closes itself
off to experiences that many people have found valuable in
their lives."

Petrick, a former M.U.M. faculty member, said he left the
movement because he felt it was "a little too closed, a
little too cultish."

Pearson, however, rejects the C-word.

"I think a common definition of a cult is that people try
to control the behavior, and the comings and goings and
even the finances of the members of the cult," he said,
"and there's nothing of that associated with the univ-
ersity or the practice of meditation in the golden domes."

* * *

The larger question, though, is whether Amma's popularity
in the Fairfield meditating community is a symptom of
problems within the TM movement itself.

Take a look, for example, at how Amma's admirers describe
her. Without exception, they paint a picture of a humble,
down-to-earth woman whose charitable projects make an
immediate difference for people in need -- a far cry from
the TM movement with its trappings of monarchy and its
seemingly endless string of grandiose schemes.

"More than anybody I've ever seen, she really does what
she says she does," said Bob Hoerlein, a member of the
local Amma group.

"I guess the thing that people respect," said Petrick,
"is that the things she does are very concrete and they're
serving enormous numbers of people."

Petrick contrasts Amma's down-to-earth mission of helping
the poor with Maharishi's promises of world peace and
supernatural powers like levitation.

"There's no pie in the sky with her," he said.

The upper ranks of the TM movement are filled with "
excellencies" and "highnesses." For $1 million, you can
take a course that entitles you to become a "raja," or
king, in the Global Country of World Peace. And every so
often, you can see white stretch limousines driving
around Fairfield with the Global Country's golden flag
fluttering in the breeze.

It should surprise no one that such airs of royalty don't
go over well in America -- which, after all, fought a
revolution to get rid of its monarchy.

But they also contrast sharply with the tales of humility
told by Amma's admirers, who say she's been known to
carry bricks on her head and jump into sewers to work
alongside her followers.

"She teaches by example, I think, that we're all created
equal and that you don't have the big important people
and the little peons," said Archer.

Amma's humanitarian efforts -- building homes for the
poor, funding hospitals, coordinating tsunami relief --
contrast just as sharply with the TM movement's
fundraising campaigns, which promise world peace but
never seem to make a concrete impact. The latest TM
campaign is an effort to build 3,000 "peace palaces"
around the world, with a price tag of $3 million each.
The total is a staggering $9 billion -- which could
build a lot of hospitals.

Faced with a choice between an organization that builds
homes for the poor and one that builds palaces, it's no
wonder many people would rather give their money to the
former.

If Maharishi's organization dropped some of its airs,
it would be less likely to lose followers to Amma or
any other guru.

The TM movement can crown all the kings and build all
the palaces it wants, but it could still learn a thing
or two from a humble Indian woman who travels around
the world giving hugs.

(Erik Gable is assistant news editor of The Fairfield Ledger.)
Martin
2005-07-16 16:06:53 UTC
Permalink
No argument, of course. The TM organization is full of
misrepresentation and can always come up with a "you should have known"
long after the fact whenever it is convenient (i.e. necessary to
maintain the guise of the upper hand).

There are many good teachers out there. Getting to know one or more
does not put the TMO in a particularly good light. Just exactly what
light it puts Maharishi is depends upon what you have experienced with
him.

I recently got to see the BBC documentary on Sai Baba "Secret Swami".
It nicely illustrates the dichotomy that cult leaders depend upon: the
rich and influential buttered up and the followers taken advantage of.

I don't know that this division is so broad in the TMO, but the
illustration of true believers in high places defending the leader
against alligations from "nobodies" was chilling in the documentary.

M
Bhairitu
2005-07-16 16:45:01 UTC
Permalink
While my tantric guru is fond taking me to visit some other local guru
just to check them out. He even visited Ammachi during her visit last
winter to the area (I wasn't along, been there, done that).

- Bhairitu
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
As a former TM teacher, and as a person who held
postions with the TM movement such as State Coor-
dinator and director of the Western Regional Office,
I have also taken the liberty of marking (with *****)
several outright lies in the article below, all told
by TM movement representatives.
Wallace's statement is patently untrue; no such
"agreement" was ever asked of me or anyone I know.
Common non-teacher meditators have indeed "gotten
into trouble" for going to see other teachers, such
trouble including being denied admittance to TM
courses, denial of applications to become teachers
themselves, and being banned from TM centers perm-
anently. There is NO "due process." When you're
banned, you're banned, and that's that.
This editorial raises some good questions, questions
that the TM organization should, but never will,
deal with honestly. - Barry Wright
July 14, 2005
The Fairfield Ledger
Opinion
A tale of two gurus
Could the Transcendental Meditation movement learn a thing
or two from 'the Hugging Saint'?
By Erik Gable
Rick Archer had been practicing and teaching Transcendental
Meditation for nearly three decades when he first met Mata
Amritanandamayi, the Indian holy woman known to her followers
as "Amma" or "the Hugging Saint."
He didn't see any conflict between going to visit Amma and
his regular practice of TM in the men's dome at Maharishi
University of Management. In fact, Archer recalled, his
experience during his daily meditations actually improved.
But a few years later, after a meeting in which two TM
movement officials questioned him about his involvement
with Amma's group, Archer's dome badge was revoked.
He had run afoul of a university policy discouraging TM
teachers from seeing gurus other than Maharishi Mahesh Yogi,
and he was no longer welcome during group meditation.
That policy has been a source of division and even fear
among members of Fairfield's meditating community. Although
Amma has visited Mount Pleasant every summer for the past
four years, Archer said "fear and paranoia" leads some
Fairfield residents to skip her local appearance and drive
to Chicago to see her -- because they're afraid they'll get
kicked out of the dome if the wrong person sees them in her
presence.
But TM movement leaders say the policy is necessary to
preserve the purity of Maharishi's teachings. They also
say the rules are nowhere near as draconian as many people
think.
This issue came up repeatedly during a community meeting
last summer hosted by TM movement leaders. Robert Keith
Wallace, an M.U.M. trustee and the university's first
president, fielded several questions about reports of people
being banned from the domes after visiting other spiritual
leaders.
***** Wallace said TM teachers all agreed when they became
teachers not to see other gurus. ***** In an interview last
year, he compared the situation to a Coca-Cola salesman
being seen drinking Pepsi.
But movement leaders say Amma is not their enemy.
"The university's policy on any other teacher of meditation
or self-development is neutral," said M.U.M. executive vice
president Craig Pearson, "meaning we don't endorse other
people, we don't criticize other people."
At the same time, Pearson said, the university doesn't want
people practicing meditation techniques other than TM in its
domes.
"The essential core thing that we have to protect is the
purity of that practice," he said. In addition to the cere-
monies that earned her the nickname "the Hugging Saint,"
Amma offers her own meditation technique.
The standards are stricter for teachers than for rank-and-
file meditators, Pearson added. ***** While teachers aren't
supposed to be seen going to other gurus, he said, non-
teachers aren't likely to get in trouble for being seen
in another guru's presence. *****
***** "Just going to see somebody else, there's no problem
with that," he said. *****
***** And in any case, Pearson said, "there's always due
process." *****
Archer -- who says he had good experiences with Maharishi
and doesn't wish the movement any ill -- doesn't question
M.U.M.'s right to decide who can and can't meditate in the
domes.
"They're entitled to set whatever standards they want," he
said.
But at the same time, some say the movement hurts itself
by discouraging involvement with other gurus.
"I feel they lose the respect of a lot of people," said
Archer, "and they also box themselves in and run the risk,
which I think has been to a great degree realized, of
becoming very cult-like."
"I think it tends to isolate the TM movement," said Mark
Petrick, one of the people who organized Amma's visit this
year. "I think the TM movement becomes less and less
relevant to the life of the community when it closes itself
off to experiences that many people have found valuable in
their lives."
Petrick, a former M.U.M. faculty member, said he left the
movement because he felt it was "a little too closed, a
little too cultish."
Pearson, however, rejects the C-word.
"I think a common definition of a cult is that people try
to control the behavior, and the comings and goings and
even the finances of the members of the cult," he said,
"and there's nothing of that associated with the univ-
ersity or the practice of meditation in the golden domes."
* * *
The larger question, though, is whether Amma's popularity
in the Fairfield meditating community is a symptom of
problems within the TM movement itself.
Take a look, for example, at how Amma's admirers describe
her. Without exception, they paint a picture of a humble,
down-to-earth woman whose charitable projects make an
immediate difference for people in need -- a far cry from
the TM movement with its trappings of monarchy and its
seemingly endless string of grandiose schemes.
"More than anybody I've ever seen, she really does what
she says she does," said Bob Hoerlein, a member of the
local Amma group.
"I guess the thing that people respect," said Petrick,
"is that the things she does are very concrete and they're
serving enormous numbers of people."
Petrick contrasts Amma's down-to-earth mission of helping
the poor with Maharishi's promises of world peace and
supernatural powers like levitation.
"There's no pie in the sky with her," he said.
The upper ranks of the TM movement are filled with "
excellencies" and "highnesses." For $1 million, you can
take a course that entitles you to become a "raja," or
king, in the Global Country of World Peace. And every so
often, you can see white stretch limousines driving
around Fairfield with the Global Country's golden flag
fluttering in the breeze.
It should surprise no one that such airs of royalty don't
go over well in America -- which, after all, fought a
revolution to get rid of its monarchy.
But they also contrast sharply with the tales of humility
told by Amma's admirers, who say she's been known to
carry bricks on her head and jump into sewers to work
alongside her followers.
"She teaches by example, I think, that we're all created
equal and that you don't have the big important people
and the little peons," said Archer.
Amma's humanitarian efforts -- building homes for the
poor, funding hospitals, coordinating tsunami relief --
contrast just as sharply with the TM movement's
fundraising campaigns, which promise world peace but
never seem to make a concrete impact. The latest TM
campaign is an effort to build 3,000 "peace palaces"
around the world, with a price tag of $3 million each.
The total is a staggering $9 billion -- which could
build a lot of hospitals.
Faced with a choice between an organization that builds
homes for the poor and one that builds palaces, it's no
wonder many people would rather give their money to the
former.
If Maharishi's organization dropped some of its airs,
it would be less likely to lose followers to Amma or
any other guru.
The TM movement can crown all the kings and build all
the palaces it wants, but it could still learn a thing
or two from a humble Indian woman who travels around
the world giving hugs.
(Erik Gable is assistant news editor of The Fairfield Ledger.)
John Manning
2005-07-16 17:55:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
While my tantric guru is fond taking me to visit some other local guru
just to check them out. He even visited Ammachi during her visit last
winter to the area (I wasn't along, been there, done that).
If Maharishi's organization feels that
threatened by other gurus, it shows its own
insecurity within its leadership and lack of
awareness of what TM *really is*.

jrm
Post by Bhairitu
- Bhairitu
LawsonE
2005-07-16 18:53:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
While my tantric guru is fond taking me to visit some other local guru
just to check them out. He even visited Ammachi during her visit last
winter to the area (I wasn't along, been there, done that).
If Maharishi's organization feels that threatened by other gurus, it shows
its own insecurity within its leadership and lack of awareness of what TM
*really is*.
There are two issues: the marketing issue and the issue of practicing some
other meditation technique during group practice in the Domes.

Neither issue is worth getting upset over, IMHO. It's been known for years
at fairfield, regardless of what formal instructions were made, that if
you're seeing other gurus, you're "off the program" and are likely to be
banned from the Domes. Complaining about this as though its a new thing is
rather, well, silly.
t***@aol.com
2005-07-16 18:58:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
Neither issue is worth getting upset over, IMHO. It's been known for years
at fairfield, regardless of what formal instructions were made, that if
you're seeing other gurus, you're "off the program" and are likely to be
banned from the Domes. Complaining about this as though its a new thing is
rather, well, silly.
Accepting it is, well, cultlike.
LawsonE
2005-07-16 19:39:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
Neither issue is worth getting upset over, IMHO. It's been known for years
at fairfield, regardless of what formal instructions were made, that if
you're seeing other gurus, you're "off the program" and are likely to be
banned from the Domes. Complaining about this as though its a new thing is
rather, well, silly.
Accepting it is, well, cultlike.
Will complaining to the press change the rules, do you think?
Stephen K Anderson
2005-07-17 04:40:23 UTC
Permalink
Its worth a try.
Post by LawsonE
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
Neither issue is worth getting upset over, IMHO. It's been known for years
at fairfield, regardless of what formal instructions were made, that if
you're seeing other gurus, you're "off the program" and are likely to be
banned from the Domes. Complaining about this as though its a new thing is
rather, well, silly.
Accepting it is, well, cultlike.
Will complaining to the press change the rules, do you think?
John Manning
2005-07-16 19:11:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
Post by Bhairitu
While my tantric guru is fond taking me to visit some other local guru
just to check them out. He even visited Ammachi during her visit last
winter to the area (I wasn't along, been there, done that).
If Maharishi's organization feels that threatened by other gurus, it shows
its own insecurity within its leadership and lack of awareness of what TM
*really is*.
There are two issues: the marketing issue and the issue of practicing some
other meditation technique during group practice in the Domes.
Neither issue is worth getting upset over, IMHO. It's been known for years
at fairfield, regardless of what formal instructions were made, that if
you're seeing other gurus, you're "off the program" and are likely to be
banned from the Domes. Complaining about this as though its a new thing is
rather, well, silly.
I'd never accept it. Thankfully I dumped the
TMO two decades ago. It doesn't have the
integrity to be able to stand on its own
feet. The experience of Transcendental
Meditation itself, does however.
LawsonE
2005-07-16 18:13:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
While my tantric guru is fond taking me to visit some other local guru
just to check them out. He even visited Ammachi during her visit last
winter to the area (I wasn't along, been there, done that).
- Bhairitu
And MMY sent people on various courses to other spiritual teachers also.
That's not the point. If you were a representative of an organization, and
found attending meetings at another organization ON YOUR OWN, it would
weaken your own organization.

My son's mom rather dispises the TMO, and thinks all their rules are silly,
but even she pointed out that if you're going to be a member of an
organization, you gotta play by THEIR rules.
LawsonE
2005-07-16 18:10:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
As a former TM teacher, and as a person who held
postions with the TM movement such as State Coor-
dinator and director of the Western Regional Office,
I have also taken the liberty of marking (with *****)
several outright lies in the article below, all told
by TM movement representatives.
Wallace's statement is patently untrue; no such
"agreement" was ever asked of me or anyone I know.
However, Rick Archer, moderator of the FFL list said *on the list* that on
the TM teacher training course HE took, and on the one he conducted, it WAS
an informal point made to the students learning to become TM teachers that
TM teachers should not visit other gurus because it would make it seem that
the TM teacher was not content with TM.

You shouldn't be so in a hurry to blast the TMO and the TBs until things are
hashed out for a while, eh Barry?
Post by t***@aol.com
Common non-teacher meditators have indeed "gotten
into trouble" for going to see other teachers, such
trouble including being denied admittance to TM
courses, denial of applications to become teachers
themselves, and being banned from TM centers perm-
anently. There is NO "due process." When you're
banned, you're banned, and that's that.
True enough. As I already pointed out, the banning is arbitrary. I had some
Purusha member hating my guts because I refered to MMY as "the Maharishi."
Another, higher-ranking Purusha whom I've known sense gradeschool called me
up and explained my "error" and smoothed the waters on his end. The point
is, not only is there no "due process" to reverse the "banning," but there's
no due process to ban in the first place. It's not a formal policy, in other
words, but a judgement call.

Obviously, the folks in Fairfield judge very strictly...
...many would say TOO strictly.
Post by t***@aol.com
This editorial raises some good questions, questions
that the TM organization should, but never will,
deal with honestly. - Barry Wright
Probably not, but never say "never."


And what everyone appears to be missing (either deliberately or because
they're simply blind) is that the requirement to pay/raise $3 million in
order to become a Raja (basically a TM Center Chairman) and wear stupid
clothing and a silly crown is a *loyalty test*.

Deepak Chopra's departure tore the TMO in half. I can't imagine Chopra ever
wearing such a stupid getup. I also can't imagine him gaining sufficient
fame from public appearances on TV shows (arranged at TMO expense, BTW)
while wearing the stupid outfit that he would have been able to split and
found his own separate organization.

Once you realise that that is the (at least one of the) purpose behind the
Raja thing, its no more silly than any other organization's membership
requirements.
t***@aol.com
2005-07-16 18:42:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
And what everyone appears to be missing (either deliberately or because
they're simply blind) is that the requirement to pay/raise $3 million in
order to become a Raja (basically a TM Center Chairman) and wear stupid
clothing and a silly crown is a *loyalty test*.
Deepak Chopra's departure tore the TMO in half. I can't imagine Chopra ever
wearing such a stupid getup. I also can't imagine him gaining sufficient
fame from public appearances on TV shows (arranged at TMO expense, BTW)
while wearing the stupid outfit that he would have been able to split and
found his own separate organization.
Once you realise that that is the (at least one of the) purpose behind the
Raja thing, its no more silly than any other organization's membership
requirements.
Once you realize that you're grasping at straws to
preserve your illusions about Maharishi and the TMO,
I suspect you'll be a lot happier, and no longer
need Prozac. The only way to deal with cognitive
dissonance without it backing up on you is to dive
into it and come out the other side.
LawsonE
2005-07-16 18:54:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
And what everyone appears to be missing (either deliberately or because
they're simply blind) is that the requirement to pay/raise $3 million in
order to become a Raja (basically a TM Center Chairman) and wear stupid
clothing and a silly crown is a *loyalty test*.
Deepak Chopra's departure tore the TMO in half. I can't imagine Chopra ever
wearing such a stupid getup. I also can't imagine him gaining sufficient
fame from public appearances on TV shows (arranged at TMO expense, BTW)
while wearing the stupid outfit that he would have been able to split and
found his own separate organization.
Once you realise that that is the (at least one of the) purpose behind the
Raja thing, its no more silly than any other organization's membership
requirements.
Once you realize that you're grasping at straws to
preserve your illusions about Maharishi and the TMO,
I suspect you'll be a lot happier, and no longer
need Prozac. The only way to deal with cognitive
dissonance without it backing up on you is to dive
into it and come out the other side.
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
t***@aol.com
2005-07-16 19:00:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
I'm saying that the "loyalty test" is a fantasy that some
people made up to jutify the unjustifiable so that they
wouldn't have to deal with the unjustifiable.
j***@panix.com
2005-07-16 19:28:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
I'm saying that the "loyalty test" is a fantasy that some
people made up to jutify the unjustifiable so that they
wouldn't have to deal with the unjustifiable.
It would make sense to say loyalty test is
unjustifiable.

It makes no sense *whatsoever* to say the Raja
thing isn't a loyalty test.
Stu
2005-07-17 03:43:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
I'm saying that the "loyalty test" is a fantasy that some
people made up to jutify the unjustifiable so that they
wouldn't have to deal with the unjustifiable.
It would make sense to say loyalty test is
unjustifiable.
It makes no sense *whatsoever* to say the Raja
thing isn't a loyalty test.
I am not sure about loyalty test. It seems more like the method used
by the monarchy in ancient Rome. In order to become a magistrate or
senator you had to fulfill financial requirements. This was the most
stable system of the Roman Empire, lasting 200 years and resulting in
Rome's greatest achievements culturally and economically (Pax Augustus
or Romana). For the Romans it was a far better system than the messy
business of a democratic Republic.

I suspect that Marshy wants to fashion the TMO in the mold of the Roman
Empire, after all, it has worked so well for the Catholics.
--
~Stu
t***@aol.com
2005-07-17 12:20:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stu
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
I'm saying that the "loyalty test" is a fantasy that some
people made up to jutify the unjustifiable so that they
wouldn't have to deal with the unjustifiable.
It would make sense to say loyalty test is
unjustifiable.
It makes no sense *whatsoever* to say the Raja
thing isn't a loyalty test.
I am not sure about loyalty test. It seems more like the method used
by the monarchy in ancient Rome. In order to become a magistrate or
senator you had to fulfill financial requirements. This was the most
stable system of the Roman Empire, lasting 200 years and resulting in
Rome's greatest achievements culturally and economically (Pax Augustus
or Romana). For the Romans it was a far better system than the messy
business of a democratic Republic.
I suspect that Marshy wants to fashion the TMO in the mold of the Roman
Empire, after all, it has worked so well for the Catholics.
I really don't believe in the "loyalty test" idea because
nothing in my 14+ years of spending time around Maharishi
leads me to believe that he *thinks enough* of any of his
teachers to want their "loyalty." When you don't have any
respect for them in the first place, why do you need their
"loyalty?" They're only there to do what they're told
and raise money.

I think of the Raja thing as more of a "sucker test." Who,
after all these years, is still on the hook enough to be
persuaded to give me three million dollars?
j***@panix.com
2005-07-17 13:15:05 UTC
Permalink
***@aol.com wrote:
<snip>
Post by t***@aol.com
I really don't believe in the "loyalty test" idea because
nothing in my 14+ years of spending time around Maharishi
leads me to believe that he *thinks enough* of any of his
teachers to want their "loyalty." When you don't have any
respect for them in the first place, why do you need their
"loyalty?" They're only there to do what they're told
and raise money.
Even if it were true that MMY has no respect
for teachers, Barry has to subtly change the
meaning of "loyalty" to make his point.

In this context, obviously, "loyalty" means
"willing to do what you're told and raise money."
LawsonE
2005-07-17 21:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by Stu
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
I'm saying that the "loyalty test" is a fantasy that some
people made up to jutify the unjustifiable so that they
wouldn't have to deal with the unjustifiable.
It would make sense to say loyalty test is
unjustifiable.
It makes no sense *whatsoever* to say the Raja
thing isn't a loyalty test.
I am not sure about loyalty test. It seems more like the method used
by the monarchy in ancient Rome. In order to become a magistrate or
senator you had to fulfill financial requirements. This was the most
stable system of the Roman Empire, lasting 200 years and resulting in
Rome's greatest achievements culturally and economically (Pax Augustus
or Romana). For the Romans it was a far better system than the messy
business of a democratic Republic.
I suspect that Marshy wants to fashion the TMO in the mold of the Roman
Empire, after all, it has worked so well for the Catholics.
I really don't believe in the "loyalty test" idea because
nothing in my 14+ years of spending time around Maharishi
leads me to believe that he *thinks enough* of any of his
teachers to want their "loyalty." When you don't have any
respect for them in the first place, why do you need their
"loyalty?" They're only there to do what they're told
and raise money.
I think of the Raja thing as more of a "sucker test." Who,
after all these years, is still on the hook enough to be
persuaded to give me three million dollars?
One man's loyalty-test is another man's sucker-test. I take it you think
that MMY doesn't really believe in any of the stuff he spouts on and on
about?
t***@aol.com
2005-07-18 00:19:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
One man's loyalty-test is another man's sucker-test. I take it you
think that MMY doesn't really believe in any of the stuff he spouts
on and on about?
I really don't know. I will never know. Neither will you.

We just have to take our best shot at it. Mine is that as
much as I'd like to believe, for sentimental reasons, that
Maharishi really believes the things he says, I'm far from
convinced. I can easily see a scenario in which he allows
his conscious mind only to focus on the things he believes
to be true. I can also see the simultaneous possibility of
an equally strong subconscious mind that doesn't believe a
word of it.

I think that Maharishi's legacy on the planet will probably
depend on which of these two points of view becomes predominant
in the last months of his life. IMO, everything he has ever
done in his life has been "prep work." The bottom line of the
incarnation will be in the dance to death. How well he handles
that will, in my opinion, determine the way he is remembered on
this planet. I'm wishing him well, because I'd like to see
him remembered well.

Unc
j***@panix.com
2005-07-18 01:15:49 UTC
Permalink
***@aol.com wrote:
<snip>
Post by t***@aol.com
We just have to take our best shot at it. Mine is that as
much as I'd like to believe, for sentimental reasons, that
Maharishi really believes the things he says, I'm far from
convinced. I can easily see a scenario in which he allows
his conscious mind only to focus on the things he believes
to be true. I can also see the simultaneous possibility of
an equally strong subconscious mind that doesn't believe a
word of it.
Which he has somehow managed to completely
suppress for the past five decades lest it
sneak into his conscious awareness that he
has been working 16 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 50 weeks a year all that time for
things he doesn't believe in.

Sure, Bar. Makes a lot of sense. Real
clear thinking there.

I'll tell you what I don't believe: that you
would like to think he believes what he says.
I think you'd much prefer that he didn't,
because that makes him an easier target. But
it makes you look better if you can pretend
your constant attacks are more in sorrow than
in anger.
t***@aol.com
2005-07-18 07:01:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
<snip>
Post by t***@aol.com
We just have to take our best shot at it. Mine is that as
much as I'd like to believe, for sentimental reasons, that
Maharishi really believes the things he says, I'm far from
convinced. I can easily see a scenario in which he allows
his conscious mind only to focus on the things he believes
to be true. I can also see the simultaneous possibility of
an equally strong subconscious mind that doesn't believe a
word of it.
Which he has somehow managed to completely
suppress for the past five decades lest it
sneak into his conscious awareness that he
has been working 16 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 50 weeks a year all that time for
things he doesn't believe in.
Sure, Bar. Makes a lot of sense. Real
clear thinking there.
I'll tell you what I don't believe: that you
would like to think he believes what he says.
I think you'd much prefer that he didn't,
because that makes him an easier target. But
it makes you look better if you can pretend
your constant attacks are more in sorrow than
in anger.
Psst. Your cult paranoia is showing.
j***@panix.com
2005-07-18 12:53:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by Bhairitu
<snip>
Post by t***@aol.com
We just have to take our best shot at it. Mine is that as
much as I'd like to believe, for sentimental reasons, that
Maharishi really believes the things he says, I'm far from
convinced. I can easily see a scenario in which he allows
his conscious mind only to focus on the things he believes
to be true. I can also see the simultaneous possibility of
an equally strong subconscious mind that doesn't believe a
word of it.
Which he has somehow managed to completely
suppress for the past five decades lest it
sneak into his conscious awareness that he
has been working 16 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 50 weeks a year all that time for
things he doesn't believe in.
Sure, Bar. Makes a lot of sense. Real
clear thinking there.
I'll tell you what I don't believe: that you
would like to think he believes what he says.
I think you'd much prefer that he didn't,
because that makes him an easier target. But
it makes you look better if you can pretend
your constant attacks are more in sorrow than
in anger.
Psst. Your cult paranoia is showing.
Psst. No, it's psychological insight based
on long observation of your behavior (and
Maharishi's behavior).

As you know, I'm not a cultist in any sense
of the term.

And oh, by the way:

------------------
The word "cult," when used by *anyone*, is a thought-stopper. I'm
fairly sensitive to it because I've had to fight such epithets, and
more concrete issues such as blacklisting, on the front lines.

It's sorta like calling any American who was against the rush to war
after 9/11 a "traitor." The intent of hurling the epithet is to demean
the person being called the name, to encourage other people in the
audience to brand the person with that label, and thus to undercut
anything that the targeted victim says by calling his or her
credibility into question.

You wouldn't like it much if the epithet "cultist" was applied to you,
right? If that's so, you might think about not trying to brand others
with it. Just my opinion...

------------------

--Barry, on Fairfield Life
John Manning
2005-07-18 13:59:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by Bhairitu
<snip>
Post by t***@aol.com
We just have to take our best shot at it. Mine is that as
much as I'd like to believe, for sentimental reasons, that
Maharishi really believes the things he says, I'm far from
convinced. I can easily see a scenario in which he allows
his conscious mind only to focus on the things he believes
to be true. I can also see the simultaneous possibility of
an equally strong subconscious mind that doesn't believe a
word of it.
Which he has somehow managed to completely
suppress for the past five decades lest it
sneak into his conscious awareness that he
has been working 16 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 50 weeks a year all that time for
things he doesn't believe in.
Sure, Bar. Makes a lot of sense. Real
clear thinking there.
I'll tell you what I don't believe: that you
would like to think he believes what he says.
I think you'd much prefer that he didn't,
because that makes him an easier target. But
it makes you look better if you can pretend
your constant attacks are more in sorrow than
in anger.
Psst. Your cult paranoia is showing.
Psst. No, it's psychological insight based
on long observation of your behavior (and
Maharishi's behavior).
As you know, I'm not a cultist in any sense
of the term.
------------------
The word "cult," when used by *anyone*, is a thought-stopper. I'm
fairly sensitive to it because I've had to fight such epithets, and
more concrete issues such as blacklisting, on the front lines.
It's sorta like calling any American who was against the rush to war
after 9/11 a "traitor." The intent of hurling the epithet is to demean
the person being called the name, to encourage other people in the
audience to brand the person with that label, and thus to undercut
anything that the targeted victim says by calling his or her
credibility into question.
You wouldn't like it much if the epithet "cultist" was applied to you,
right? If that's so, you might think about not trying to brand others
with it. Just my opinion...
------------------
--Barry, on Fairfield Life
LOL!
j***@panix.com
2005-07-18 14:34:32 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
Psst. Your cult paranoia is showing.
<snip>
Post by j***@panix.com
------------------
You wouldn't like it much if the epithet "cultist" was applied to you,
right? If that's so, you might think about not trying to brand others
with it. Just my opinion...
------------------
--Barry, on Fairfield Life
LOL!
Even funnier, Barry just got done calling somebody on
FFL a cultist, so I reposted his smug little sermon
there too.

And then there's the old "Barry on Fairfield Life"
thread, for even more giggles:

http://tinyurl.com/7meqn
John Manning
2005-07-18 14:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
<snip>
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
Psst. Your cult paranoia is showing.
<snip>
Post by j***@panix.com
------------------
You wouldn't like it much if the epithet "cultist" was applied to you,
right? If that's so, you might think about not trying to brand others
with it. Just my opinion...
------------------
--Barry, on Fairfield Life
LOL!
Even funnier, Barry just got done calling somebody on
FFL a cultist, so I reposted his smug little sermon
there too.
And then there's the old "Barry on Fairfield Life"
http://tinyurl.com/7meqn
The guy is seemingly incorrigible. Makes me
wonder how his mind justifies what it does -
and how he lives with himself.
LawsonE
2005-07-16 19:40:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
So you're saying that the $3 million membership fee and silly robes and
crown is NOT a loyalty test (among other things, like raising $3 million)?
I'm saying that the "loyalty test" is a fantasy that some
people made up to jutify the unjustifiable so that they
wouldn't have to deal with the unjustifiable.
So you're saying that it is NOT a loyalty test...
j***@panix.com
2005-07-16 19:26:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by LawsonE
And what everyone appears to be missing (either deliberately or because
they're simply blind) is that the requirement to pay/raise $3 million in
order to become a Raja (basically a TM Center Chairman) and wear stupid
clothing and a silly crown is a *loyalty test*.
Deepak Chopra's departure tore the TMO in half. I can't imagine Chopra ever
wearing such a stupid getup. I also can't imagine him gaining sufficient
fame from public appearances on TV shows (arranged at TMO expense, BTW)
while wearing the stupid outfit that he would have been able to split and
found his own separate organization.
Once you realise that that is the (at least one of the) purpose behind the
Raja thing, its no more silly than any other organization's membership
requirements.
Once you realize that you're grasping at straws to
preserve your illusions about Maharishi and the TMO,
I suspect you'll be a lot happier, and no longer
need Prozac. The only way to deal with cognitive
dissonance without it backing up on you is to dive
into it and come out the other side.
And once Barry realizes his own fantasies aren't
reality, he may even be able to come back from
France.

Notice that he didn't bother to actually *read*
Lawson's posts in this thread. Notice also the
extraordinarily mean-spirited reference to Prozac.

You have to be pretty unhappy with who you are
to behave as Barry does.
Bhairitu
2005-07-16 19:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
As a former TM teacher, and as a person who held
postions with the TM movement such as State Coor-
dinator and director of the Western Regional Office,
I have also taken the liberty of marking (with *****)
several outright lies in the article below, all told
by TM movement representatives.
Wallace's statement is patently untrue; no such
"agreement" was ever asked of me or anyone I know.
However, Rick Archer, moderator of the FFL list said *on the list* that on
the TM teacher training course HE took, and on the one he conducted, it WAS
an informal point made to the students learning to become TM teachers that
TM teachers should not visit other gurus because it would make it seem that
the TM teacher was not content with TM.
You shouldn't be so in a hurry to blast the TMO and the TBs until things are
hashed out for a while, eh Barry?
Post by t***@aol.com
Common non-teacher meditators have indeed "gotten
into trouble" for going to see other teachers, such
trouble including being denied admittance to TM
courses, denial of applications to become teachers
themselves, and being banned from TM centers perm-
anently. There is NO "due process." When you're
banned, you're banned, and that's that.
True enough. As I already pointed out, the banning is arbitrary. I had some
Purusha member hating my guts because I refered to MMY as "the Maharishi."
Another, higher-ranking Purusha whom I've known sense gradeschool called me
up and explained my "error" and smoothed the waters on his end. The point
is, not only is there no "due process" to reverse the "banning," but there's
no due process to ban in the first place. It's not a formal policy, in other
words, but a judgement call.
Obviously, the folks in Fairfield judge very strictly...
...many would say TOO strictly.
Fairfield seems to have two groups... TM fundamentalists and
literalists, and those who continue to live in the community because it
is a cheap place to live and is a New Age community in the middle of the
cornfields.
Post by LawsonE
Post by t***@aol.com
This editorial raises some good questions, questions
that the TM organization should, but never will,
deal with honestly. - Barry Wright
<snip>
Bhairitu
2005-07-16 19:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Do you know of anyone who got a copy of what they signed? I didn't in
1976 and I also doubt if the document is binding in any way. And no
there was nothing in it about visiting other gurus.
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
As a former TM teacher, and as a person who held
postions with the TM movement such as State Coor-
dinator and director of the Western Regional Office,
I have also taken the liberty of marking (with *****)
several outright lies in the article below, all told
by TM movement representatives.
Wallace's statement is patently untrue; no such
"agreement" was ever asked of me or anyone I know.
Common non-teacher meditators have indeed "gotten
into trouble" for going to see other teachers, such
trouble including being denied admittance to TM
courses, denial of applications to become teachers
themselves, and being banned from TM centers perm-
anently. There is NO "due process." When you're
banned, you're banned, and that's that.
This editorial raises some good questions, questions
that the TM organization should, but never will,
deal with honestly. - Barry Wright
July 14, 2005
The Fairfield Ledger
Opinion
A tale of two gurus
Could the Transcendental Meditation movement learn a thing
or two from 'the Hugging Saint'?
By Erik Gable
Rick Archer had been practicing and teaching Transcendental
Meditation for nearly three decades when he first met Mata
Amritanandamayi, the Indian holy woman known to her followers
as "Amma" or "the Hugging Saint."
He didn't see any conflict between going to visit Amma and
his regular practice of TM in the men's dome at Maharishi
University of Management. In fact, Archer recalled, his
experience during his daily meditations actually improved.
But a few years later, after a meeting in which two TM
movement officials questioned him about his involvement
with Amma's group, Archer's dome badge was revoked.
He had run afoul of a university policy discouraging TM
teachers from seeing gurus other than Maharishi Mahesh Yogi,
and he was no longer welcome during group meditation.
That policy has been a source of division and even fear
among members of Fairfield's meditating community. Although
Amma has visited Mount Pleasant every summer for the past
four years, Archer said "fear and paranoia" leads some
Fairfield residents to skip her local appearance and drive
to Chicago to see her -- because they're afraid they'll get
kicked out of the dome if the wrong person sees them in her
presence.
But TM movement leaders say the policy is necessary to
preserve the purity of Maharishi's teachings. They also
say the rules are nowhere near as draconian as many people
think.
This issue came up repeatedly during a community meeting
last summer hosted by TM movement leaders. Robert Keith
Wallace, an M.U.M. trustee and the university's first
president, fielded several questions about reports of people
being banned from the domes after visiting other spiritual
leaders.
***** Wallace said TM teachers all agreed when they became
teachers not to see other gurus. ***** In an interview last
year, he compared the situation to a Coca-Cola salesman
being seen drinking Pepsi.
But movement leaders say Amma is not their enemy.
"The university's policy on any other teacher of meditation
or self-development is neutral," said M.U.M. executive vice
president Craig Pearson, "meaning we don't endorse other
people, we don't criticize other people."
At the same time, Pearson said, the university doesn't want
people practicing meditation techniques other than TM in its
domes.
"The essential core thing that we have to protect is the
purity of that practice," he said. In addition to the cere-
monies that earned her the nickname "the Hugging Saint,"
Amma offers her own meditation technique.
The standards are stricter for teachers than for rank-and-
file meditators, Pearson added. ***** While teachers aren't
supposed to be seen going to other gurus, he said, non-
teachers aren't likely to get in trouble for being seen
in another guru's presence. *****
***** "Just going to see somebody else, there's no problem
with that," he said. *****
***** And in any case, Pearson said, "there's always due
process." *****
Archer -- who says he had good experiences with Maharishi
and doesn't wish the movement any ill -- doesn't question
M.U.M.'s right to decide who can and can't meditate in the
domes.
"They're entitled to set whatever standards they want," he
said.
But at the same time, some say the movement hurts itself
by discouraging involvement with other gurus.
"I feel they lose the respect of a lot of people," said
Archer, "and they also box themselves in and run the risk,
which I think has been to a great degree realized, of
becoming very cult-like."
"I think it tends to isolate the TM movement," said Mark
Petrick, one of the people who organized Amma's visit this
year. "I think the TM movement becomes less and less
relevant to the life of the community when it closes itself
off to experiences that many people have found valuable in
their lives."
Petrick, a former M.U.M. faculty member, said he left the
movement because he felt it was "a little too closed, a
little too cultish."
Pearson, however, rejects the C-word.
"I think a common definition of a cult is that people try
to control the behavior, and the comings and goings and
even the finances of the members of the cult," he said,
"and there's nothing of that associated with the univ-
ersity or the practice of meditation in the golden domes."
* * *
The larger question, though, is whether Amma's popularity
in the Fairfield meditating community is a symptom of
problems within the TM movement itself.
Take a look, for example, at how Amma's admirers describe
her. Without exception, they paint a picture of a humble,
down-to-earth woman whose charitable projects make an
immediate difference for people in need -- a far cry from
the TM movement with its trappings of monarchy and its
seemingly endless string of grandiose schemes.
"More than anybody I've ever seen, she really does what
she says she does," said Bob Hoerlein, a member of the
local Amma group.
"I guess the thing that people respect," said Petrick,
"is that the things she does are very concrete and they're
serving enormous numbers of people."
Petrick contrasts Amma's down-to-earth mission of helping
the poor with Maharishi's promises of world peace and
supernatural powers like levitation.
"There's no pie in the sky with her," he said.
The upper ranks of the TM movement are filled with "
excellencies" and "highnesses." For $1 million, you can
take a course that entitles you to become a "raja," or
king, in the Global Country of World Peace. And every so
often, you can see white stretch limousines driving
around Fairfield with the Global Country's golden flag
fluttering in the breeze.
It should surprise no one that such airs of royalty don't
go over well in America -- which, after all, fought a
revolution to get rid of its monarchy.
But they also contrast sharply with the tales of humility
told by Amma's admirers, who say she's been known to
carry bricks on her head and jump into sewers to work
alongside her followers.
"She teaches by example, I think, that we're all created
equal and that you don't have the big important people
and the little peons," said Archer.
Amma's humanitarian efforts -- building homes for the
poor, funding hospitals, coordinating tsunami relief --
contrast just as sharply with the TM movement's
fundraising campaigns, which promise world peace but
never seem to make a concrete impact. The latest TM
campaign is an effort to build 3,000 "peace palaces"
around the world, with a price tag of $3 million each.
The total is a staggering $9 billion -- which could
build a lot of hospitals.
Faced with a choice between an organization that builds
homes for the poor and one that builds palaces, it's no
wonder many people would rather give their money to the
former.
If Maharishi's organization dropped some of its airs,
it would be less likely to lose followers to Amma or
any other guru.
The TM movement can crown all the kings and build all
the palaces it wants, but it could still learn a thing
or two from a humble Indian woman who travels around
the world giving hugs.
(Erik Gable is assistant news editor of The Fairfield Ledger.)
t***@aol.com
2005-07-16 19:09:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
Do you know of anyone who got a copy of what they signed? I didn't in
1976 and I also doubt if the document is binding in any way. And no
there was nothing in it about visiting other gurus.
No signed agreement is legally binding unless the
signee gets a copy.

Me, I never had to sign anything anyway, and there
was never any verbal agreement about not seeing
other teachers, either.

I just think it's sad that high-ranking members
of the TMO have to stoop to outright lies to deal
with legitimate questions from the press. It's an
indication of how little actual spirituality is
left in a supposedly spiritual organization.
John Manning
2005-07-16 19:40:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bhairitu
Do you know of anyone who got a copy of what they signed? I didn't in
1976 and I also doubt if the document is binding in any way. And no
there was nothing in it about visiting other gurus.
Correct.

Here is that 'agreement':

TO HIS HOLINESS MAHARISHI MAHESH YOGI

It is my privilege, Maharishi, to promise to
teach the Principles and Practice of
Transcendental Meditation only as a
teacher-employee of [IMS, SIMS, SRM, or
other TM movement front group]___________
which accepts me as such; that I will always
hold the teaching in trust for you, dear
Maharishi, and [IMS, SIMS, etc.]__________;
that I will never use the teaching except as
a teacher in [IMS, SIMS, etc.]___________ or
other organisations founded by you for the
purpose of carrying on your work of
spreading Transcendental Meditation for the
good of Mankind; that as a teacher in [IMS,
SIMS, etc.]_________ I shall receive such
compensation as shall be agreed between
myself and [IMS, SIMS, etc.]__________ in
writing and, except as agreed in writing I
expect to receive no monetary compensation
but am fully compensated by the love and joy
that I receive from the work, by the
alleviation of suffering that I may
accomplish, and by the Wisdom that I obtain,
expound, and cherish. In furtherance of the
pledge I acknowledge that prior to receiving
the training I had no prior knowledge of
such system of Teaching; that there is no
other available source where the knowledge
of such teaching may be obtained; that such
training is secret and unique. I am a link
in the chain of organisations that you have
founded; and that to retain the purity of
the teaching and movement, you have laid
down the wise rule that, should I ever cease
to teach in [IMS, SIMS, etc.]__________ or
other organisations founded by you for the
purpose of teaching Transcendental
Meditation, I may be restrained by
appropriate process from using this secret
Teaching of Transcendental Meditation
imparted to me.

It is my fortune, Guru Dev [the Maharishi's
dead master], that I have been accepted to
serve the Holy Tradition and spread the
Light of God to all those who need it. It is
my joy to undertake the responsibility of
representing the Holy Tradition in all its
purity as it has been given to me by
Maharishi and I promise on your altar, Guru
Dev, that with all my heart and mind I will
always work within the framework of the
Organisations founded by Maharishi. And to
you, Maharishi, I promise that as a
Meditation Guide I will be faithful in all
ways to the trust that you have placed in me.

Jai Guru Dev

DATED:_______________

_____________________
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi

_____________________

_____________________
INITIATOR
LawsonE
2005-07-16 20:16:56 UTC
Permalink
Such a document obviously can't be legally binding because it is too vague
and open-ended,at least IMHO, so even if there was a copy given to every
teacher when they signed, its legally worthless...
HOWEVER, as a statement of intent, it seems that it should be seen as
binding BY anyone who decides to continue to teach TM, or otherwise have
anything to do with the TMO.

If you don't want to play by their rules, go play some OTHER game but don't
pretend that you're playing their game anymore.
Post by John Manning
Post by Bhairitu
Do you know of anyone who got a copy of what they signed? I didn't in
1976 and I also doubt if the document is binding in any way. And no
there was nothing in it about visiting other gurus.
Correct.
TO HIS HOLINESS MAHARISHI MAHESH YOGI
It is my privilege, Maharishi, to promise to teach the Principles and
Practice of Transcendental Meditation only as a teacher-employee of [IMS,
SIMS, SRM, or other TM movement front group]___________ which accepts me
as such; that I will always hold the teaching in trust for you, dear
Maharishi, and [IMS, SIMS, etc.]__________; that I will never use the
teaching except as a teacher in [IMS, SIMS, etc.]___________ or other
organisations founded by you for the purpose of carrying on your work of
spreading Transcendental Meditation for the good of Mankind; that as a
teacher in [IMS, SIMS, etc.]_________ I shall receive such compensation as
shall be agreed between myself and [IMS, SIMS, etc.]__________ in writing
and, except as agreed in writing I expect to receive no monetary
compensation but am fully compensated by the love and joy that I receive
from the work, by the alleviation of suffering that I may accomplish, and
by the Wisdom that I obtain, expound, and cherish. In furtherance of the
pledge I acknowledge that prior to receiving the training I had no prior
knowledge of such system of Teaching; that there is no other available
source where the knowledge of such teaching may be obtained; that such
training is secret and unique. I am a link in the chain of organisations
that you have founded; and that to retain the purity of the teaching and
movement, you have laid down the wise rule that, should I ever cease to
teach in [IMS, SIMS, etc.]__________ or other organisations founded by you
for the purpose of teaching Transcendental Meditation, I may be restrained
by appropriate process from using this secret Teaching of Transcendental
Meditation imparted to me.
It is my fortune, Guru Dev [the Maharishi's dead master], that I have been
accepted to serve the Holy Tradition and spread the Light of God to all
those who need it. It is my joy to undertake the responsibility of
representing the Holy Tradition in all its purity as it has been given to
me by Maharishi and I promise on your altar, Guru Dev, that with all my
heart and mind I will always work within the framework of the
Organisations founded by Maharishi. And to you, Maharishi, I promise that
as a Meditation Guide I will be faithful in all ways to the trust that you
have placed in me.
Jai Guru Dev
DATED:_______________
_____________________
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
_____________________
_____________________
INITIATOR
j***@panix.com
2005-07-16 21:44:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
Such a document obviously can't be legally binding because it is too vague
and open-ended,at least IMHO, so even if there was a copy given to every
teacher when they signed, its legally worthless...
HOWEVER, as a statement of intent, it seems that it should be seen as
binding BY anyone who decides to continue to teach TM, or otherwise have
anything to do with the TMO.
If you don't want to play by their rules, go play some OTHER game but don't
pretend that you're playing their game anymore.
Exactly. People become TM teachers presumably
because they want to teach TM as taught by
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. And that's how he wants
it taught.

If you decide you don't want to adhere to his
standards, it means you no longer want to teach
TM as taught by MMY.

Which is fine, but at least understand what
you're doing and why; or respect yourself
enough to keep your own word as long as you
continue to teach under his aegis.
t***@aol.com
2005-07-17 12:15:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by LawsonE
If you don't want to play by their rules, go play some OTHER game but don't
pretend that you're playing their game anymore.
Exactly. People become TM teachers presumably
because they want to teach TM as taught by
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. And that's how he wants
it taught.
If you decide you don't want to adhere to his
standards, it means you no longer want to teach
TM as taught by MMY.
Which is fine, but at least understand what
you're doing and why; or respect yourself
enough to keep your own word as long as you
continue to teach under his aegis.
"Love it or leave it." Sound familiar? That's
what the people who don't want change say to
*everyone* who wants change. Those who are
comfortable living with elitism and hypocrisy and
doubletalk almost *always* tell those who want to
blow the whistle on the hypocrisy to "move on."
They don't want these troublemakers around, spoil-
ing the fun for the hypocrites by bringing up icky
things like the truth.

It's the standard way that cultists not only avoid
dealing with the fact that they're part of a cult,
but put down other cult members who are starting
to wake up. The clear and unmistakable message
is, "You're going down the wrong track there,
buddy. If you keep thinking this way (that is,
recognizing the reality of the situation -- that
you are being told who you can see and who you can't
and that you'll be punished if you disobey), you will
be asked to leave. Either stop thinking this way
or leave on your own. These are *standards*. You're
not going to change anything by bringing this stuff
up internally in the organization, and we REALLY
don't want you bringing it up outside the organi-
zation, so the only 'moral' thing for you to do is
either shut up and stay or shut up and go away.
But the bottom line is shut up."
j***@panix.com
2005-07-17 13:12:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by LawsonE
If you don't want to play by their rules, go play some OTHER game but don't
pretend that you're playing their game anymore.
Exactly. People become TM teachers presumably
because they want to teach TM as taught by
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. And that's how he wants
it taught.
If you decide you don't want to adhere to his
standards, it means you no longer want to teach
TM as taught by MMY.
Which is fine, but at least understand what
you're doing and why; or respect yourself
enough to keep your own word as long as you
continue to teach under his aegis.
"Love it or leave it." Sound familiar? That's
what the people who don't want change say to
*everyone* who wants change. Those who are
comfortable living with elitism and hypocrisy and
doubletalk almost *always* tell those who want to
blow the whistle on the hypocrisy to "move on."
More of Barry's rigid (and very un-Buddhist),
appallingly unrealistic and fundamentally
dishonest black-or-white thinking.

Not wanting change is one thing; recognizing when
it ain't gonna happen is another. Barry makes the
ridiculous assumption that the latter requires the
former. (And in other contexts, Barry would be the
one proclaiming that change ain't gonna happen in
TM, of course.)

But the unlikelihood of change is not what I was
talking about; that's a red herring.
Post by t***@aol.com
They don't want these troublemakers around, spoil-
ing the fun for the hypocrites by bringing up icky
things like the truth.
(And, of course, in any other context Barry would
be *mocking* anyone who declared they knew what the
truth was. He's hardly the one to be complaining
about hypocrisy here.)

Note how freely Barry puts words in my mouth. I
never said folks shouldn't stay in the movement
and complain; he made that up, because he can't
deal with the point I *did* make.

Complaining about MMY's standards is fine, stating
your perception of "the truth" is fine, in or out
of the TMO. But if you're going to continue to
teach TM under the auspices of the TMO, it's
hypocritical *in the extreme* to flout its standards,
and then complain when consequences are imposed for
doing so.

It's like with civil disobedience: if you break what
you think is an unjust law, it's hypocritical to be
unwilling to accept the consequences. That's the
whole point of civil disobedience, to *demonstrate*
the consequences of the unjust law.

As I noted, you took teacher training in the first
place to be able to teach TM as taught by Maharishi
Mahesh Yogi and gave your word to do so.

Even working for change--as unlikely as it is to
happen--within the TMO is fine as long as you
continue to observe its standards. What you're
working toward is a change in those standards.

If you no longer feel you can observe the TMO
standards, that's fine too--just don't pretend
that you're continuing to teach TM as taught
by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
Post by t***@aol.com
It's the standard way that cultists not only avoid
dealing with the fact that they're part of a cult,
but put down other cult members who are starting
to wake up. The clear and unmistakable message
is, "You're going down the wrong track there,
buddy. If you keep thinking this way (that is,
recognizing the reality of the situation -- that
you are being told who you can see and who you can't
and that you'll be punished if you disobey), you will
be asked to leave. Either stop thinking this way
or leave on your own.
Two points here. It's not a putdown to say that
people who no longer feel they can teach by TMO
standards should not pretend they are continuing
to do so. Barry wants you to *think* it's a put-
down, of course, so he makes that up.

And he also makes up and puts in my mouth the
injunction to "stop thinking this way." I did
not say, nor do I advocate, that if you want to
stay in the TMO and teach under its auspices, you
should change your thinking, or even what you
say.
Post by t***@aol.com
These are *standards*. You're
not going to change anything by bringing this stuff
up internally in the organization, and we REALLY
don't want you bringing it up outside the organi-
zation,
And he does it *again*. I don't think anything is
going to change, but there's nothing wrong either
with complaining or working for change anyway while
remaining in the organization.

He also made up the idea that I said people shouldn't
bring this stuff up *outside* the organization. I
never said that, nor do I advocate it. Bring it up
all you want.

so the only 'moral' thing for you to do is
Post by t***@aol.com
either shut up and stay or shut up and go away.
But the bottom line is shut up."
No, as I said to start with, the bottom line is
that as long as you're going to teach under the
auspices of the TMO, you should observe its
standards, or accept the consequences for not
doing so.

The same principle, of course, is applied in many
other institutions that nobody would characterize
as cults. This has been pointed out to Barry
many times before, but he seems to have enormous
difficulty bearing it in mind.

"Love it or leave it" is a dishonest phrase to use
in this context. Nobody said you had to love it;
that's something else Barry fabricated. *Observe
its standards*, whatever you think of them, or
accept the consequences, or leave it on your own.

The *real* bottom line is that Barry *cannot* deal
with the point I was making, so he fabricates a
bunch of things I never said and do not believe
and attacks those instead. Standard behavior from
a a thoroughly dishonest phony.
John Manning
2005-07-17 00:46:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
Such a document obviously can't be legally binding because it is too vague
and open-ended,at least IMHO, so even if there was a copy given to every
teacher when they signed, its legally worthless...
HOWEVER, as a statement of intent, it seems that it should be seen as
binding BY anyone who decides to continue to teach TM, or otherwise have
anything to do with the TMO.
If you don't want to play by their rules, go play some OTHER game but don't
pretend that you're playing their game anymore.
There aren't many I know who wish the
preservation of TM in its purity, more than me.

What you've just said however, confirms what
I said earlier:

"I'd never accept it. Thankfully I dumped
the TMO two decades ago. It doesn't have the
integrity to be able to stand on its own
feet. The experience of Transcendental
Meditation itself, does however."

The TMO is majorly fucked up in my view, and
has been for maybe 3 decades.

Freedom of choice is a primary and critical
spiritual principle. Demagoguery is its
fearful opposite.

My experience of TM confirmed the former. I
saw lots of different stuff [teachers,
methods, etc.], even as a TM teacher.
*Nothing* ever came close to TM. But who
could be so fucking stupid to buy into
special hats and titles - and dogmatic rules
about who you can talk to and can't?

The latter is the result of the fear of
losing control. It doesn't represent the
dignity of Guru Dev and/or the Holy
Tradition. It's just a bunch of clowns that
have done more harm to the *actual*
spiritual realization via TM than you are
willing to admit.
j***@panix.com
2005-07-16 19:21:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
And those would be...who, exactly?

Barry's fantasies appear to be running away
with him again (on both counts--he'd *like*
them to be true, so to him, they *are* true).
LawsonE
2005-07-16 19:55:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
And those would be...who, exactly?
Barry's fantasies appear to be running away
with him again (on both counts--he'd *like*
them to be true, so to him, they *are* true).
Since the article is available (or at least some of it is) online at the
Fairfield Ledger website, it would be kinda silly to try to prevent people
from reading it. Did anyone hear say "Oh, don't read Fairfield Review, it's
so, well, Off The Program?"

In fact, there's a link to Fairfield Ledger from the official MUM campus
newsletter webpage:

http://www.mum.edu > other important links > campus newspaper > Fairfield
news

http://www.mum.edu/TheReview/ > Fairfield news
j***@panix.com
2005-07-16 20:09:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by LawsonE
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by t***@aol.com
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
And those would be...who, exactly?
Barry's fantasies appear to be running away
with him again (on both counts--he'd *like*
them to be true, so to him, they *are* true).
Since the article is available (or at least some of it is) online at the
Fairfield Ledger website, it would be kinda silly to try to prevent people
from reading it. Did anyone hear say "Oh, don't read Fairfield Review, it's
so, well, Off The Program?"
In fact, there's a link to Fairfield Ledger from the official MUM campus
Not to mention the utter absurdity of claiming
that anyone who participates on this newsgroup
would have any qualms about the article being
posted, given the amount of rabid anti-TM stuff
that appears here on a regular basis (including
that posted by Barry).

His attacks on TM and TMers are so completely
devoid of *sense*. Barry's a one-man cult who
never subjects his own thinking to any kind of
critical evaluation.
Stephen K Anderson
2005-07-17 04:44:45 UTC
Permalink
I don't see the need for the either/or reasoning in the article about
Ammachi vs Maharishi. The world needs all kind of people, all kinds of
teachers. The world needs them both.
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
As a former TM teacher, and as a person who held
postions with the TM movement such as State Coor-
dinator and director of the Western Regional Office,
I have also taken the liberty of marking (with *****)
several outright lies in the article below, all told
by TM movement representatives.
Wallace's statement is patently untrue; no such
"agreement" was ever asked of me or anyone I know.
Common non-teacher meditators have indeed "gotten
into trouble" for going to see other teachers, such
trouble including being denied admittance to TM
courses, denial of applications to become teachers
themselves, and being banned from TM centers perm-
anently. There is NO "due process." When you're
banned, you're banned, and that's that.
This editorial raises some good questions, questions
that the TM organization should, but never will,
deal with honestly. - Barry Wright
July 14, 2005
The Fairfield Ledger
Opinion
A tale of two gurus
Could the Transcendental Meditation movement learn a thing
or two from 'the Hugging Saint'?
By Erik Gable
Rick Archer had been practicing and teaching Transcendental
Meditation for nearly three decades when he first met Mata
Amritanandamayi, the Indian holy woman known to her followers
as "Amma" or "the Hugging Saint."
He didn't see any conflict between going to visit Amma and
his regular practice of TM in the men's dome at Maharishi
University of Management. In fact, Archer recalled, his
experience during his daily meditations actually improved.
But a few years later, after a meeting in which two TM
movement officials questioned him about his involvement
with Amma's group, Archer's dome badge was revoked.
He had run afoul of a university policy discouraging TM
teachers from seeing gurus other than Maharishi Mahesh Yogi,
and he was no longer welcome during group meditation.
That policy has been a source of division and even fear
among members of Fairfield's meditating community. Although
Amma has visited Mount Pleasant every summer for the past
four years, Archer said "fear and paranoia" leads some
Fairfield residents to skip her local appearance and drive
to Chicago to see her -- because they're afraid they'll get
kicked out of the dome if the wrong person sees them in her
presence.
But TM movement leaders say the policy is necessary to
preserve the purity of Maharishi's teachings. They also
say the rules are nowhere near as draconian as many people
think.
This issue came up repeatedly during a community meeting
last summer hosted by TM movement leaders. Robert Keith
Wallace, an M.U.M. trustee and the university's first
president, fielded several questions about reports of people
being banned from the domes after visiting other spiritual
leaders.
***** Wallace said TM teachers all agreed when they became
teachers not to see other gurus. ***** In an interview last
year, he compared the situation to a Coca-Cola salesman
being seen drinking Pepsi.
But movement leaders say Amma is not their enemy.
"The university's policy on any other teacher of meditation
or self-development is neutral," said M.U.M. executive vice
president Craig Pearson, "meaning we don't endorse other
people, we don't criticize other people."
At the same time, Pearson said, the university doesn't want
people practicing meditation techniques other than TM in its
domes.
"The essential core thing that we have to protect is the
purity of that practice," he said. In addition to the cere-
monies that earned her the nickname "the Hugging Saint,"
Amma offers her own meditation technique.
The standards are stricter for teachers than for rank-and-
file meditators, Pearson added. ***** While teachers aren't
supposed to be seen going to other gurus, he said, non-
teachers aren't likely to get in trouble for being seen
in another guru's presence. *****
***** "Just going to see somebody else, there's no problem
with that," he said. *****
***** And in any case, Pearson said, "there's always due
process." *****
Archer -- who says he had good experiences with Maharishi
and doesn't wish the movement any ill -- doesn't question
M.U.M.'s right to decide who can and can't meditate in the
domes.
"They're entitled to set whatever standards they want," he
said.
But at the same time, some say the movement hurts itself
by discouraging involvement with other gurus.
"I feel they lose the respect of a lot of people," said
Archer, "and they also box themselves in and run the risk,
which I think has been to a great degree realized, of
becoming very cult-like."
"I think it tends to isolate the TM movement," said Mark
Petrick, one of the people who organized Amma's visit this
year. "I think the TM movement becomes less and less
relevant to the life of the community when it closes itself
off to experiences that many people have found valuable in
their lives."
Petrick, a former M.U.M. faculty member, said he left the
movement because he felt it was "a little too closed, a
little too cultish."
Pearson, however, rejects the C-word.
"I think a common definition of a cult is that people try
to control the behavior, and the comings and goings and
even the finances of the members of the cult," he said,
"and there's nothing of that associated with the univ-
ersity or the practice of meditation in the golden domes."
* * *
The larger question, though, is whether Amma's popularity
in the Fairfield meditating community is a symptom of
problems within the TM movement itself.
Take a look, for example, at how Amma's admirers describe
her. Without exception, they paint a picture of a humble,
down-to-earth woman whose charitable projects make an
immediate difference for people in need -- a far cry from
the TM movement with its trappings of monarchy and its
seemingly endless string of grandiose schemes.
"More than anybody I've ever seen, she really does what
she says she does," said Bob Hoerlein, a member of the
local Amma group.
"I guess the thing that people respect," said Petrick,
"is that the things she does are very concrete and they're
serving enormous numbers of people."
Petrick contrasts Amma's down-to-earth mission of helping
the poor with Maharishi's promises of world peace and
supernatural powers like levitation.
"There's no pie in the sky with her," he said.
The upper ranks of the TM movement are filled with "
excellencies" and "highnesses." For $1 million, you can
take a course that entitles you to become a "raja," or
king, in the Global Country of World Peace. And every so
often, you can see white stretch limousines driving
around Fairfield with the Global Country's golden flag
fluttering in the breeze.
It should surprise no one that such airs of royalty don't
go over well in America -- which, after all, fought a
revolution to get rid of its monarchy.
But they also contrast sharply with the tales of humility
told by Amma's admirers, who say she's been known to
carry bricks on her head and jump into sewers to work
alongside her followers.
"She teaches by example, I think, that we're all created
equal and that you don't have the big important people
and the little peons," said Archer.
Amma's humanitarian efforts -- building homes for the
poor, funding hospitals, coordinating tsunami relief --
contrast just as sharply with the TM movement's
fundraising campaigns, which promise world peace but
never seem to make a concrete impact. The latest TM
campaign is an effort to build 3,000 "peace palaces"
around the world, with a price tag of $3 million each.
The total is a staggering $9 billion -- which could
build a lot of hospitals.
Faced with a choice between an organization that builds
homes for the poor and one that builds palaces, it's no
wonder many people would rather give their money to the
former.
If Maharishi's organization dropped some of its airs,
it would be less likely to lose followers to Amma or
any other guru.
The TM movement can crown all the kings and build all
the palaces it wants, but it could still learn a thing
or two from a humble Indian woman who travels around
the world giving hugs.
(Erik Gable is assistant news editor of The Fairfield Ledger.)
j***@panix.com
2005-07-17 02:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen K Anderson
I don't see the need for the either/or reasoning in the article about
Ammachi vs Maharishi. The world needs all kind of people, all kinds of
teachers. The world needs them both.
Excellent point, Stephen.

You'd think a putative Buddhist would have
long since come to this conclusion.
Ashtakinch
2005-07-17 03:11:01 UTC
Permalink
By the way dont bother with ammachi . She was over here a couple of
years ago and about halfway through the service , she was about to
morph into Mother Divine when I realised I had left my lights on my car
so had to decide whether to get a hug or get home . It wasnt a hard
decision because I realy felt very little in the way of Spiritual
energy in the room so I left early. BTW since when is the outer
behaviour of a person indicative of their inner state anyway - I mean
plenty of people carry bricks and work in sewers. Imagine being Unc's
psychiatrist.
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by Stephen K Anderson
I don't see the need for the either/or reasoning in the article about
Ammachi vs Maharishi. The world needs all kind of people, all kinds of
teachers. The world needs them both.
Excellent point, Stephen.
You'd think a putative Buddhist would have
long since come to this conclusion.
j***@panix.com
2005-07-17 03:22:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ashtakinch
By the way dont bother with ammachi . She was over here a couple of
years ago and about halfway through the service , she was about to
morph into Mother Divine when I realised I had left my lights on my car
so had to decide whether to get a hug or get home . It wasnt a hard
decision because I realy felt very little in the way of Spiritual
energy in the room so I left early.
Someone on Fairfield Life posted this link:

http://guruphiliac.blogspot.com/

Be warned, the guy takes no prisoners.
Included is a multi-part account of his
(her?) attendance at one of Ammachi's
gatherings. Very funny. Dumps on MMY
too, of course, in other posts. Really
nicely done blog, I thought. Not all
that accurate where MMY is concerned, so
I assume it's the same with the accounts
of other gurus. But makes some good
points, and great fun to read.
Post by Ashtakinch
BTW since when is the outer
behaviour of a person indicative of their inner state anyway - I mean
plenty of people carry bricks and work in sewers. Imagine being Unc's
psychiatrist.
<cackle> No, thanks. Hazardous to the
health.
Ashtakinch
2005-07-17 04:00:18 UTC
Permalink
Scary doll isnt it .
http://guruphiliac.blogspot.com/2005/07/satsang-with-ammachipart-iv-mommy.html
Heres an even scarier doll :
http://store.chopra.com/Store_ViewProdDetail.asp?ProdID=603&Cat=124
Post by j***@panix.com
Post by Ashtakinch
By the way dont bother with ammachi . She was over here a couple of
years ago and about halfway through the service , she was about to
morph into Mother Divine when I realised I had left my lights on my car
so had to decide whether to get a hug or get home . It wasnt a hard
decision because I realy felt very little in the way of Spiritual
energy in the room so I left early.
http://guruphiliac.blogspot.com/
Be warned, the guy takes no prisoners.
Included is a multi-part account of his
(her?) attendance at one of Ammachi's
gatherings. Very funny. Dumps on MMY
too, of course, in other posts. Really
nicely done blog, I thought. Not all
that accurate where MMY is concerned, so
I assume it's the same with the accounts
of other gurus. But makes some good
points, and great fun to read.
Post by Ashtakinch
BTW since when is the outer
behaviour of a person indicative of their inner state anyway - I mean
plenty of people carry bricks and work in sewers. Imagine being Unc's
psychiatrist.
<cackle> No, thanks. Hazardous to the
health.
LawsonE
2005-07-17 05:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ashtakinch
Scary doll isnt it .
http://guruphiliac.blogspot.com/2005/07/satsang-with-ammachipart-iv-mommy.html
http://store.chopra.com/Store_ViewProdDetail.asp?ProdID=603&Cat=124
Interesting: Chopra is a fan of Osho...

http://store.chopra.com/Store_ViewProducts.asp?Cat=79
WillyTex
2019-11-04 23:22:08 UTC
Permalink
Amma's North America Tour 2019

https://amma.org/meeting-amma/ammas-north-america-tour
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
WillyTex
2019-11-04 23:25:27 UTC
Permalink
Ravi Yogi - Kali's Pimp
Post by WillyTex
Amma's North America Tour 2019
https://amma.org/meeting-amma/ammas-north-america-tour
Post by t***@aol.com
.
I am posting the following article here because
the staunch defenders of the TM movement and its
policies who hang out here would almost certainly
like that it never be seen by a Usenet audience.
Loading...