I'm not sure what to say about your plagiarism charge, since your link doesn't illustrate how I was plagiarizing, and you don't explain it here.

I never claimed that what I was explaining was TM. I am not trained in TM, but have read Bob Roth's book and listened to several interviews with him--as well as seen Seinfeld, Hanks, Brand, and others speak about it.

The fact is, Vedic-style meditation predates TM by (as you rightly point out) millennia. There are other meditation styles of this non-directive type that have established proprietary variations. TM is one, Vedic Meditation (as a brand) is another. But I never claimed to be explaining either of those--by design. I KNOW I didn't learn either of those methods--but as you say, I learned a stripped-down version. But you know what? That stripped-down version is still helpful. And I chose to share that with the people here.

Your dialogue about the possession of world and words is fun, but if you want to use that kind of interpretation, then plagiarism loses its meaning entirely. After all, no words are my words, or yours, or Einstein's or the authors of the Vedas, and so on. No ideas are theirs either, since there's as much proof of ownership of ideas as of words.