--- In [email protected], "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "tertonzeno" <tertonzeno@> > wrote: > > > > > > -- > > > I agree with Lawson on the basis of direct experience: my TM > mantra > > > has tangible Shakti in it whereas I couldn't detect any > significant > > > Shakti in 2. The Ramakrishna mantra I received from the > resident > > > teacher at the Vedanta Temple in Hollywood, 3. Sant Mat Mantras, > or > > > 4. attempted use of "Om Nama Shivaya" or "Om Shivaya Namah" > silently, > > > after getting involved with Muktananda. These Shiva mantras are > > > quite powerful if chanted by a group; but didn't measure up to > my TM > > > mantra when used silently. > > > 5. and of course, just picking a mantra out of a book; as > suggested > > > by that idiot MD from Harvard. (Benson). > > > Nope, after a direct experience "taste test", TM turned out to > be > > > superior to others, in regard to the criterion of Shakti. > > > > > > > > Even many TM teachers badly underestimate the direct connection > Guru > > Dev has with the TM initiation and the TM itself - AND - Guru Dev's > > easy accessibility and ongoing influence in TM meditaters' lives if > > they are sincere and so choose. He didn't teach and represent the > > Whole Thing, the Real Thing, for nothing. > >
> I've often thought that his real work here began after he left. How is that ?
