--- In [email protected], "Robert" <babajii...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Robert" <babajii_99@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It just occurred to me (tangentially) that part
> > > > > of the confusion between TM and other mantra
> > > > > meditation techniques has to do with the erroneous
> > > > > equation of these two principles:
> > > > > 
> > > > > --It's better to go back to the mantra if
> > > > >   you realize you're thinking something
> > > > >   other than the mantra.
> > > > > 
> > > > > --It's better to be thinking the mantra
> > > > >   than thinking something other than the
> > > > >   mantra.
> > > > > 
> > > > > These are seemingly almost identical statements,
> > > > > but the distinction is crucial. In the case of TM,
> > > > > the first applies, but not the second.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > But in both cases there is the quality
> > > > of "better."
> > > > 
> > > > Pursuing that "better" by coming back 
> > > > to the mantra involves intention.
> > > > 
> > > > And it involves it whether you believe
> > > > statement #1 or statement #2. If you 
> > > > did not believe in that "better," there
> > > > would be no reason to come back to the
> > > > mantra. But you DO believe it, so you
> > > > have the intention to come back to it.
> > > > 
> > > > Thank you, Judy, for having made the
> > > > case for TM being intentional.
> > > >
> > > The case for intentionality is well made...
> > > What is ever done which is not from intention?
> > > Intention is the seed of manifestation.
> > > So, yes, we intend to sit and meditate or how else could you sit and 
> > > meditate.
> > > You intend to get something to eat; how else would you get something to 
> > > eat.
> > > The whole nature of TM and the TM-Sidhis, is to refine intention.
> > > As intention is refined we begin to be aware of subltety...
> > > And the more subtle the observation, the more truth will be contained 
> > > there, because it is close to the source.
> > > We are all longing for and striving toward being connected to 'Source 
> > > Energy', our true nature...
> > > That's all it is, no matter how complicated you wish to make it, the 
> > > simpler the better.
> > > R.G.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > Its the pink elephant of hte mind. Don't ever think of it: make it the 
> > least desired 
> > element in your mind--the same as making it the most desired element, or
> > almost least desired or almost most desired.
> > 
> > 
> > It's a fine balance of intent and not-intent, of desire and not-desire, of
> > effort and not effort.
> > 
> > No effort, intent or desire is REQUIRED....
> > 
> > But to worry about having none at all is silly as well.
> > 
> > 
> > L.
> >
> I still say that there is an original intention in TM to:
> Begin to think the mantra, as effortlessly as we think any other thought...
> So, we begin by intending to think the mantra effortlessly...

But I don't always intend to start TM and yet I often do, in teh right 
circumstances.

Where's the intent in that?

> And we subtley have been taught to think the mantra in an effortless way, 
> after the initiation process, which sets the angle of effortlessness of 
> repition of the mantra...

Sure but true effortlessness isn't an angle. DOn't take the analogy too far.

> The mantra tends to slip away, and you experienced what is meant by 
> effortlessness.
> So, it is both: beginning the intention to meditate like instructed, and 
> letting the process go by itself, always coming back to the mantra with the 
> intention of effortlessness...

no need to intend to be effortless. That's as subtle a trap as any other.


> With practice the intention of effortlessness, becomes more refined...

COuld be... Or maybe not.

> We are always impressed by effortlessness, BTW...
> In athletics or politics or music or whatever, we admire the genius, when 
> what appears to be difficult or creative, seems to happen gracefully, 
> elegantly, without effort...
> So, effortlessness, would also be a quality of genius, or enlightenment.
> R.G.
>

Could be or maybe not. Worrying about how effortless TM is is
as futile as worrying about effortful it is. No effort required. 

Effortlessness not required either.

L.


Reply via email to