--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > According to a very experienced TM teacher who > > taught TM in India, Hindus who attached meaning > > to the mantras were told to completely ignore > > that meaning when they were meditating. It was > > an obstacle, not an advantage. > > And that matches my own experience. When I learned some of the words > in my advanced technique at TTC it didn't make any difference to my > practice since I was only using the sound quality. > > I don't believe anyone can maintain a level of meaning after repeating > something a bunch of times. The practice of japa itself puts you in a > state where meaning gets minimized even if you were trying to imagine > a devotion to the God of your mantra. I talked with the monks about > their use of the Jesus prayer where they used the word "Jesus" as a > mantra. They pretty much said the same thing. At first they were > conflicted about it becoming a mechanical process, but then they felt > they were experiencing a mystical connection with Jesus beyond the > name, and that solved the problem. In any case staying on the surface > of the meaning was not an option. > > The explanation you are giving is more respectful of people's common > sense than Jerry Jarvis duplicitous "they could be the names of > Chinese spices for all we know." I guess it was the fear of Christian > backlash if they knew the meanings. At this stage of the Hinduization > of the TM movement I think they should go with the Indian explanation > rather than the "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain version." > >
Vaj has made reference to keeping the meaning of the mantra in mind while meditation or something along those lines. I think THAT is the interpretation of meditation that MMY was speaking against. Lawson
