--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <lengli...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is WRONG with "subtle or minimal effort?" > > > > What is WRONG with TM being slightly intentional? > > > > Is it WRONG because it conflicts with the sales > > > > brochure? That's what it looks like to me. > > > > > > Actually, you've misread what I said as far as I can tell. > > > > > > And MMY's own words that I recall are "least effort in the > > > direction of less effort." > > > > For the record, sparaig, I don't give a flying > > fuck what "MMY's own words" were -- about this > > or about anything else. > > > > I don't consider him an expert or authority > > about much of ANYTHING, including TM. > > > > That's what you guys don't seem to understand > > in this discussion. WE DON'T CARE how Maharishi > > describes TM. We are providing our OWN descrip- > > tions of TM, based on our own experience of > > not only TM but a wide range of meditative > > techniques, and not only the experience of > > practicing them but of teaching them. > > > > I am quite comfortable with "least effort" > > or "minimal effort" or even "almost nearly > > effortless" to describe the process of coming > > back to the mantra in TM. What I am not > > comfortable with is "effortless." > > > > What Maharishi says based on HIS "analysis" > > doesn't mean shit to me. > > > > What I'm talking about is what I say, based > > upon MY analysis. > > > > You can use the word "effortless" if you want. > > I cannot. It is not true, based on either > > theory or my own experience. > > But it is true based on theory AND my own experience. > > That you don't see this as relevant in a discussion of whether or > not you actually practice TM as taught by MMY is quite telling > to say the least.
Jesus, man...go take a fuckin' pill. I *DON'T* practice TM. I did once, and unlike you I taught other people how to do it. Maharishi contradicted himself ALL THE TIME. He was also WRONG, quite often. He also LIED, not quite as often, but often enough that I and others here have seen him do so. So what do I CARE how *he* describes TM? What's that got to do with ANYTHING? Just because he said something, does that make it so? YOU are the one who is all hung up on there being one and only one "correct" way to describe TM. And frankly, because you will never find your OWN descriptions of how it works for you in the three days of checking, you're not exactly any kind of expert here. :-) PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE get the point. I DON'T CARE about any of this. I was trying to make a point to you as if you were a rational human being, because you've been acting like one for several months now. Silly me. Push your "TM is not quite effortless" button and you're back being compulsive. I want NO PART OF IT. > > Now go argue about this with someone who gives > > a fuck. :-) > > > > Obviously you give a fuck or you wouldn't be on this forum. I give a fuck only about the comparative discussion of various forms of meditation and self discovery, and about the weirdass things that people do while pursuing those forms of meditation and self discovery. I DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT TM. I DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT MAHARISHI. I give a shit only about the "people in the trenches," the folks who practice TM or other forms of meditation, and what they seem to have learned or not learned about life by doing so. That I find endlessly fascin- ating. The antics of a guy who ended his life acting out scenes from King Lear do not interest me in the slightest. Trying to preserve some fantasy of him as either enlightened or perfect do not interest me in the slightest. IF I considered Maharishi enlightened (and I do not), I would consider him no more an authority than you or me. About anything. Anything he said is JUST HIS OPINION, just as anything you or I say is JUST OUR OPINION. Get over it. YOU may still have fantasies that revolve around Maharishi or ANY "guru" or spiritual teacher being knowledgeable enough for you to consider them an "authority." I have no such fantasies. If Buddha himself walked up and proved to me that he was who he said he was, I'd invite him out for a beer and enjoy his company immensely. And I would value his OPINION while hopefully never mistaking it anything more than OPINION. And I *certainly* would not consider him an "authority." If he was as cool a dude as I suspect he was, he would never ask me to.
