--- In [email protected], "Marek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Comment below: > *** > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Marek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > **SNIP** > > > > I've heard (or read, actually) of other saints who would get > > > immersed in the trivial with as much focus, energy, and > enthusiasm > > > as the (apparently) more important issues of life. > > > > > > If, from the standpoint of Brahman, everything is as important > as > > > everything else (because all appearances only have value > relative > > to > > > other appearances and there is no independent substance or > reality > > > to any of them) and, if Maharishi is established in Brahman > (which > > > despite the many allegations of behavior that strikes me as > > puzzling > > > or dissappointing on the level of the relative, is not in any > way > > > dispositive that he is not [established in Brahman]), then this > > type > > > of focussed awareness on whatever is the subject at hand would > > seem > > > to be a perfectly natural phenomenon. > > > > > > Awareness may stand alone but brought into contact with the > > relative > > > it becomes attention. If one is living Brahman as one's > Awareness > > > then That is what is brought as Attention to the matter at hand, > > > whatever that may be. > > > > > > For many of us who are very engaged in the world it seems that > in > > > Maharishi's "management" style there was never any real priority > > > setting. Almost any project became "the" priority project for a > > > time -- generally the time that Maharishi's attention was on it. > > As > > > soon as he turned his attention elsewhere the former priority > > faded > > > entirely. > > > > > > Most of us in the West seem very (or relatively) competent at > > > juggling multiple tasks and assigning constantly shifting > > priorities > > > with appropriate time allocations. Maharishi doesn't. But > > perhaps > > > it's likely that he was able to accomplish what he has because > > when > > > he did put his attention on the task at hand he brought Brahman > to > > > bear on it. > > > > > > Marek > > > > > > Marek, > > > > That's all very nice as both an esoteric explanation and > > justification as to why MMY has done things. > > > > Regardless, I must observe and assess those things from my own, > > admittedly, limited western-based consciousness of values. And > > those values include science, rationality, and common sense. > > > > But guess what? I started TM -- and got involved in the TMO -- > > under the auspices of science, rationality, and common sense. > There > > was NO PLACE for gurus, blind devotion, and cults in either TM or > > the TMO when I joined up. > > > > So I very well may be thinking and operating from an inferior and > > limited state of consciousness and values but that is the level at > > which TM was supposed to work...so that is the level at which I > will > > assess MMY and his activities. > > **SNIP TO END** > > I can't (and don't) disagree with you, but if we refuse to evaluate > the merits of meditation on any other metric than the "western- based > consciousness of values" it's obvious that we're going to be > disappointed with the "ultimate" results. > > We're all very much aware by this point that Maharishi was "selling" > TM to the West based on the "benefits" of meditation he perceived > westerners would value and were more or less likely to be enjoyed by > most people who meditated correctly. But, in my experience at > least, it didn't take much more than an advanced lecture or two to > realize that TM, in spite of the initial sales pitch, was part of an > esoteric Indian tradition and it was that underlying philosophical > structure that provided the real framework in which the significant > growth or progress of the meditator could be evaluated. > > Also, once you saw Maharishi and spent any time with him (or spoke > with anyone who had spent time with him) it was clear that what > Maharishi was actually promising was a level of happiness and life > satisfaction that was far beyond getting better grades, or a more > restful night's sleep, or less stress, etc. It was Bliss that he > was promising and furthermore, his person radiated that message with > tremendous wattage. > > That fundamental message or offer is the same that all the saints > have always proclaimed. For some reason, though, Maharishi just > always emphasized the relative values over the absolute even though > he always talked about the absolute. It's like he never trusted > that people would be drawn to the deeper spiritual values over the > relative ones. 200% of life, All Glories Worldly and Divine -- it > sounds fine and all -- it sounds great when all you want is more > money, more power, more sex, etc., but if you get 100% of the Divine > Glory (or even some real taste of it ) then the other 100% just > doesn't even exist, much less matter. > > At some point, based on your own experience, you've got to come to > the realization that there's nothing -- no thing -- that's ever > going to satisfy. Ever. And yet acquiring and amassing things is > core to the current cultural paradigm, maybe has always been core > and probably is just the nature of the mind itself. So, as far as I > can figure out, you've got to start re-evaluating what it is you > really want and what is the scale on which you measure its > achievement. Real and permanent achievement (fulfillment) can't be > on the level of the body or the mind or anything else in the world. > If you limit yourself to what you can get or are in the world as the > measure of how good or useful something is to you, then TM is going > to come up short regardless but its real value is in transcending. > > I think we've got to expand our models of evaluation. > > Marek
I think I'll stick with my western based models -- common sense, rationality, and science - and reject ones I never wanted anything to do with: cults, obeisance to gurus, and blind belief. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
