--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@...> wrote: > > As someone who attended some of my checking sessions provided by TM teachers, > I was never asked to verify my mantra or how it was used. The intent during > checking was more to point out the innocent nature of thought through > experience, and use that as a model for appreciating the mantra during > meditation. > > As for the mantra's confidentiality, its kind of like my middle name, > something I would rarely think to bring up in conversation. It just is. Also, > I don't think of my mantra as mine. It was lent to me 36 years ago, for use > as instructed. > > Although money ($65) was exchanged prior to my initiation, I didn't buy my > mantra. If I had, I'd be able to sell it to someone else so that they could > use it as effectively as I have. The price paid was instead a very effective > rent of the mantra, with instructions, costing me about 3.5 cents per week at > this point. > > One of those instructions is to not share the mantra or speak it out loud. I > figure since it is a rental, why jeopardize my investment by using it in a > way it isn't intended? So I respect the rental agreement as stated, and don't > mess with it. >
Excellent point, Jim. Honoring your agreement to keep your mantra private is a matter of integrity. Your respect for "mantra on loan" is laudable. IMO appreciation for the delicacy of the mantra safeguards its subtle energy. I've used the planted seed analogy many times and it's apropos for this post: "Once we plant a seed we leave it alone so that it grows stronger and more powerful. We don't weaken its growth by digging it up. In that same way, we don't speak out the mantra, we keep it to ourselves." > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > As a (mere) checker I certainly had no access to anyone's mantras, let > > alone their correct pronunciation, at any rate! :-) > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <emptybill@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > That what it says in the checking notes of D.J. Wahl Ghoul. > > > > > Apparently he can't keep his sources separate. > > > > > > > > > > Still got a doubt that he never learned any of it? > > > > > > > > Not moi. That's been clear for some time. > > > > > > All his various smoking-gun missteps along these lines > > > are just the kinds of things someone on the outside > > > looking in would be likely to assume about how the > > > technique is taught and practiced. It makes perfect > > > sense for such a person to figure that something called > > > "checking" in the TM context would of course involve > > > having one's mantra checked, either as part of the > > > routine or upon request. He may even be remembering > > > point 23E from having read the checking notes and > > > erroneously thinking that's what it refers to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No wonder he won't give out the basic names of > > > > > his initiator and his course(s). > > > > > > > > > > But I am impressed. > > > > > Apparently Namkhai Norbu's webinars now give > > > > > modified instructions in TM. It's just no longer the > > > > > same old vajra-japa you seen in the Buddhist Tantras. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" LEnglish5@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > One POV worth considering is that since TM does not > > > > > > > > generally oppose the mantra changing in sound or quality > > > > > > > > or speed, etc., ones mantra could change and they would > > > > > > > > not remember the "original" sound they were given, but > > > > > > > > the morphed version. I know mine morphed so that I had > > > > > > > > to be re-told it on checking several times... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As much as anythign else I suspect that that was a nod to > > > > > > > your anxiety, rather than an essential part of checking... > > > > > > > > > > > > He seems to think that it's a routine part of checking > > > > > > for the meditator to tell the checker his/her mantra, > > > > > > whereupon the checker corrects it if necessary. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not the case. Any TMer who's ever been checked would > > > > > > know this; any TM teacher (or anyone who has taken > > > > > > checker training) would know this. > > > > > > > > > > > > Even if the meditator *asks* to have the mantra checked, > > > > > > it's extremely unlikely the checker would "nod to his > > > > > > anxiety." The checking procedure is formulated so as to > > > > > > *disallow* checking of the mantra (see point 23E of the > > > > > > checking notes). The checking procedure is designed to > > > > > > make the meditator comfortable with using whatever s/he > > > > > > remembers, "morphed" or otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not impossible that if the meditator made a huge > > > > > > fuss, his/her initiator might be brought in to check > > > > > > his/her mantra, but the checker would stand on his/her > > > > > > head to avoid it by simply going through the regular > > > > > > checking procedure loops as many times as necessary in > > > > > > the hope that the meditator says the hell with it. The > > > > > > whole idea is to discourage any anxiety the meditator > > > > > > may have about correct pronunciation. > > > > > >
