--- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It's interesting. I have never viewed TM as "conditioning," but > > rather as counter-conditioning. > > Counter-conditioning is also conditioning
Only insomuch as any experience has an effect on the nervous system. If the effect on the nervous system is to create greater flexability atall possible levels as is alleged, then to call it "conditioning" in the most common use of the word is misleading. > > > In fact, and yes, this could be my > > own blindness to conditioning coming through, but my "experience" > > with TM is such that I can't even conceive (or even admit to save in > > words strung together in a script that I'm reading, rather than > > feeling/meaining) that there is an "easier" "technique" than TM. > > I think I can really relate to what you are saying Lawson. My point is > not so much the 'experience' you have, which I know very much. Its > everything else, which the mind spins around it. The experience, in > all its purity, is embedded in some theory, which is justified by the > 'experience'. In your mind, the theory you have about meditation is so > inevitably connected with the experience, that you can't see how it > could be wrong, or how there could be other alternatives. That part is > the conditioning. It is the judgements and conclusions of the mind. > Everything you write here. No argument about the 'experience' itself. > > > My own limitation? > > Yes of course, but you are not alone.. > > > Or perhaps the limitation of everyone else who > > never "got" TM the way I have? > > But some have got it the way, having 'got' is is just having the > experience. It's the conclusions you draw, the expectations you have > about the whole process etc. etc. In your mind it is so much linked, > that you can't conceive of it as something separate > My interpretation of what goes on, etc., is my own attachment. What is actually going on, at least seems to be non-attachment. If that is an appropriate phrasing to use, of course. > > It's a hard thing to discuss, either > > way, because, there's so little (if any) there to discuss in the > > first place. > > But you are discussing all the time. If you are not discussing, there > is no conditioning. But when you discuss its full of it. Period Well, like duh. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
