Guest guest Posted July 29, 2002 Report Share Posted July 29, 2002 I just went to one of the sites mentioned in a previous post, and I found a very sexist statement. I was wondering if sexism is a written or unspoken policy in the TM organization. It was on the "Permanent World Peace" website. <A HREF="http://maharishi.invincibledefence.org/ad_proposal_world_peace/Proposal_ad\ ..gif"> http://maharishi.invincibledefence.org/ad_proposal_world_peace/Proposal_ad.gif </A> It had a link to an article that the TM organization had published in newspapers after the 9-11 terrorist attacks. It said, "What is immedately needed is an endowment fund of $1 Billion in order to permanently engage 40,000 young men from the traditional Vedic families in India...." in regard to establishing an army of meditators to establish world peace. Why in God's name would it say "men"? For that matter, why "young men"? For that matter, why "traditional Vedic families from India"? Are women, older men, and people from outside India unworthy of being employed as meditators for peace? I remember reading (on pages 78-79 to be exact) of Paul Mason's 1994 biography "The Maharishi" that he is one of the few gurus who came to the West that supported India's caste system (social status and job determined by birth). Paul Mason writes, "Was he not aware that the people of America and Europe were generally opposed to elitist values and replacing them with althogether more liberal attitudes?" Recently when I saw the Maharishi on TV (Larry King Live) he said, "Damn the democracy, it's the worst thing for any country" in stating his opposition to citizens having a say on how they are governed. I'm also aware of people in Fairfield who live in fear that people in the TM heirarchy will find out they have "other" (read "heterodox") views that will lead them to be excommunicated from TM-related programs in the community on the justification that they are not "pure", or rather, that their views are not pure. I also know gay and lesbian TM followers who live in fear of being "outed," literally, and removed from jobs in the TM movement. I'm putting all this stuff together for an obvious reason. After studying a bit about the movement and visiting Fairfield a few times, I'm wondering if there are others who believe that though meditation and holistic health are good things, the basic social philosophy of the TM movement is completely elitist along the lines of what they call "Natural Law," which is far as I can tell simply means "whatever Maharishi says". I'm wondering if people feel that the Maharishi is essentially a rigid theocratic who advocates excommunicating anyone who crosses caste or orthodox belief boundaries. Lastly, does anyone in the TM movement take seriously the ad's claim that equates George Bush with Hitler? I mean, I've never voted Republican in my life, but the logic in the TM advert seems completely bizarre. Hiter WAS a totalitarian fascist, and the U.S. put an end to his fascism (and they entered the war too late to save millions of Jews). Now the U.S. is deliberatly attacked by religious fascists and the Maharishi states that responding militarily to such fascism makes one a Hitler? I just can't believe anyone takes this seriously. Nearly any historian would laugh at that comparison. Although the U.S. could easily have annihilated entire countries if they had wished, they specifically target the Taliban and Al-quaeda. This is hardly the Hitlerian model of exterminating every living Jew in Europe! I feel that the Maharishi, while having a lot to offer the discussion of complimentary medicine, loses credibility when he ventures into foreign policy. It's funny, because a long time ago when Allen Ginsberg warned people that the Maharishi had extreme right wing views, I thought he was being alarmist. Now I'm staring to wonder if he hadn't nailed it right on the head. -=-- Ascend and Create-=== hari om-=-=-- Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2002 Report Share Posted July 29, 2002 In a message dated 7/29/2002 3:08:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, aikya writes: > <<Most Americans think democracy and capitalism are > the same. The U.S. government treats them as if they are the same. >> > No, democracy (or rather, representational democracy) is a system of electing government that sets policies. Capitalism is an economic theory. But the primary competeing economic theory, socialism, has collapsed so there hasn't been much of discussion about it these days. I agree with you that democracy can be a ruse for capitalist's goals. However, even worse can be said about communism-- that genocide was rationalized for economic expansion as well. A really good academic book about this is "The Black Book of Communism" which covers 100 years of terrorism in Marxist "experiments" around the globe. Politics just isn't nearly as much fun as mysticism. --= Jai Ma=== Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2002 Report Share Posted July 29, 2002 As far as I have been able to tell in my contacts with TM people and TM related programs, IMHO their main effort is to financially and organizatinaly support the TM organization. The naivete of people in the U.S. and their love for the quick fix sets them up to be misled by such organizations. What TM has done in the name of ayurveda raises my pitta too high for my health. Ayurveda is an ancient and complete system of medicine that deserves the same amount of education (oh, and respect) as allopathic medicine. Giving allopathically trained doctors and nurses a diploma after a brief course in ayurveda is spreading disinformation among US health care providers and not serving the needs of people seeking care. But then, as far as I can tell, the main purpose is to sell the organization's "ayurvedic" medicines. Amma has a big organization too. Pretty soon Amma's big orgnization will have an international center for complementary medicine if people are interested in health care outside the allopathic model. As for traditional Vedic families, they are probably very poor families. Many of the sons may want to study computers instead of continuing the tradition. There's more money in programming and website design. And, by the way, not all Americans and Europeans are opposed to elitist ways of doing things. Some of those people think elitism and all the other nasty -isms are a great idea. As for democracy, if it is different from capitalism, where have you seen it lately? Most Americans think democracy and capitalism are the same. The U.S. government treats them as if they are the same. When we go overseas to "promote democracy," usually the government is making sure that US corporations can build a pipeline or sell cigarettes or baby formula or something else better left undone. Democracy is messy. The wrong people get elected and so on. Acting with impeccable integrity and a view to the benefit of all creatures ought to be the basis for all activity. Stick with Amma. Aikya Ammachi, SoulQuest7@a... wrote: > I just went to one of the sites mentioned in a previous post, and I found a > very sexist statement. I was wondering if sexism is a written or unspoken > policy in the TM organization. It was on the "Permanent World Peace" > website. <A HREF="http://maharishi.invincibledefence.org/ad_proposal_world_peace/P roposal_ad.gif"> > http://maharishi.invincibledefence.org/ad_proposal_world_peace/Proposa l_ad.gif > </A> > It had a link to an article that the TM organization had published in > newspapers after the 9-11 terrorist attacks. It said, "What is immedately > needed is an endowment fund of $1 Billion in order to permanently engage > 40,000 young men from the traditional Vedic families in India...." in regard > to establishing an army of meditators to establish world peace. > Why in God's name would it say "men"? For that matter, why "young men"? > For that matter, why "traditional Vedic families from India"? Are women, > older men, and people from outside India unworthy of being employed as > meditators for peace? I remember reading (on pages 78-79 to be exact) of > Paul Mason's 1994 biography "The Maharishi" that he is one of the few gurus > who came to the West that supported India's caste system (social status and > job determined by birth). Paul Mason writes, "Was he not aware that the > people of America and Europe were generally opposed to elitist values and > replacing them with althogether more liberal attitudes?" > Recently when I saw the Maharishi on TV (Larry King Live) he said, "Damn > the democracy, it's the worst thing for any country" in stating his > opposition to citizens having a say on how they are governed. I'm also aware > of people in Fairfield who live in fear that people in the TM heirarchy will > find out they have "other" (read "heterodox") views that will lead them to be > excommunicated from TM-related programs in the community on the justification > that they are not "pure", or rather, that their views are not pure. I also > know gay and lesbian TM followers who live in fear of being "outed," > literally, and removed from jobs in the TM movement. > I'm putting all this stuff together for an obvious reason. After > studying a bit about the movement and visiting Fairfield a few times, I'm > wondering if there are others who believe that though meditation and holistic > health are good things, the basic social philosophy of the TM movement is > completely elitist along the lines of what they call "Natural Law," which is > far as I can tell simply means "whatever Maharishi says". I'm wondering if > people feel that the Maharishi is essentially a rigid theocratic who > advocates excommunicating anyone who crosses caste or orthodox belief > boundaries. > Lastly, does anyone in the TM movement take seriously the ad's claim that > equates George Bush with Hitler? I mean, I've never voted Republican in my > life, but the logic in the TM advert seems completely bizarre. Hiter WAS a > totalitarian fascist, and the U.S. put an end to his fascism (and they > entered the war too late to save millions of Jews). Now the U.S. is > deliberatly attacked by religious fascists and the Maharishi states that > responding militarily to such fascism makes one a Hitler? I just can't > believe anyone takes this seriously. Nearly any historian would laugh at > that comparison. Although the U.S. could easily have annihilated entire > countries if they had wished, they specifically target the Taliban and > Al-quaeda. This is hardly the Hitlerian model of exterminating every living > Jew in Europe! > I feel that the Maharishi, while having a lot to offer the discussion of > complimentary medicine, loses credibility when he ventures into foreign > policy. > It's funny, because a long time ago when Allen Ginsberg warned people > that the Maharishi had extreme right wing views, I thought he was being > alarmist. Now I'm staring to wonder if he hadn't nailed it right on the > head. > -=-- Ascend and Create-=== hari om-=-=-- Nick > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.