--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Lynch reportedly told MMy that he wasn't getting many donors > > > > for his foundation because the price was too high, so MMY told > > > > him to talk to Hagelin about setting a lower price. > > > > > > > > The upshot is that schools, or large segments thereof, can > > > > learn TM for $600 a head. > > > > > > While I still believe that this price is 10X too > > > high, given the current "market price" for meditation > > > instruction in America, I praise David Lynch both for > > > his dedication and for his efforts to make TM more > > > affordable. My conversations a few years ago with > > > the woman who was his long-time personal secretary > > > convinced me that he is a good-hearted person, and > > > I have no doubts that he is trying everything he can > > > to help make something he feels is valuable more > > > available to young people. It's just a shame that he > > > has to fight the organization that provides that > > > "something valuable" to achieve his laudable good > > > intentions. > > > > Keep in mind that Lynch is a TBer like myself who believes that > > TM is unique or durned close to it. While I wouldn't be surprised > > if various non-TM teachers offer TM-like techniques to their > > students. the quality control just isn't there. Radically > > different techniques go by the same name. > > > > What is bothersome, even telling, is that many of you former TBers > > are confident that its all the same, despite the obvious physiological > > evidence to the contrary (not to mention common sense understanding > > of how TM differs from most run-of-the-mill mantra meditation that > > *I* have heard of). > > > > This criticism is directed at many former TM teachers on this group, > > who appear to have missed things the entire time they were > > parroting MMY's words. Which suggests that MMY's words aren't > > as good as they could be, I guess. > > Or that they were lies. Or, more kind, hopeful > fantasies on his part. I can agree with the > kinder interpretation for some of his claims, > but not all. Some were knowing lies. The person > who sat there on the stage looking out at the > rows of twitching, spasming, out-of-control > meditators in Fiuggi and still claimed that TM > could not possibly have any negative effects > was definitely lying.
Assuming those were temporary side-effects of "unstressing" or "normalization" as he claimed, he was definitely NOT lying... > > But the bottom line is that my experience learn- > ing, practicing, and teaching both TM and other > techniques of meditation is that Maharishi's > claims to: 1) the uniqueness of TM, 2) the effect- > iveness of its "followup," 3) the "differences" > between the supposed positive effects of TM and > the positive effects of other techniques, and > most importantly 4) what it is *worth* in the > marketplace are at best mistaken and are at > worst knowing lies. > > When you have had the same experience learning, > practicing, and teaching both TM and some other > technique of meditation, then you are qualified > to criticize me. Until then, you are still in > the position of being a person who has tried > only one technique of meditation in his life, > has practiced *it* sporadically, has never taught > it or been trained to teach it, and has never > learned, practiced or taught any of the other > techniques you still believe TM is "superior" to. > > In other words, Get real. > Well, based on your avoidance of my points, specifically that there's a huge range of techniques that go by the same name, I can only assume that you're blind. L
