--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: <snip> > > The A of E and Chopra technique is a real departure > > from Maharishi's usual schtick. Can you imagine the > > initiator's answer to any question from another > > system that described this practice? It would get > > labeled superficial moodmaking before they were done > > describing it. > > Exactly. You nailed it again. As teachers, we were > taught *explicitly* how to demonize such "guided > meditation" techniques and present them as so, so, > SO much less than the TM technique. As I remember, > TM apologists on this forum (TM teachers or just > wannabees) have done so as well. But I'm betting > we'll hear hear nary a peep from any of them about > the efficacy of this official new TMO product. > > Which is curious in a way, because this technique > seems to me to be the very *antithesis* of the > "natural tendency of the mind" aspect of TM. The > whole point seems to be following what you are > told to think about and where to put your focus, > as opposed to TM's "take it easy, take it as it > comes" approach. By releasing such a guided medi- > tation, the TMO has effectively undercut its own > PR and sales spiels about its primary product, TM.
Uh, no. In the first place, as Curtis correctly notes (and Barry completely misses), it's hardly the first such technique taught in the TMO. Even the TM-Sidhis don't conform to the "natural tendency of the mind" approach. In the second place, it's an *ancillary* technique (as are the others) that would presumably be significantly less effective if one weren't also transcending regularly with TM. So it doesn't undercut a thing about TM per se. Barry and Curtis are grasping at straws. And they both know better. Caveat: I make no claims whatsoever for the Vedic Physiology course's effectiveness. I'm just calling attention to the fact that these guys are so painfully eager to diss it that they aren't thinking straight. > My bet is that if, at some future time, the TMO > powers-that-be introduce some technique that involves > actual focus or concentration (as did many of the > techniques that SBS actually taught), we'll hear a > similar resounding silence from those who have vehe- > mently decried such practices over the years. Notice how Barry courageously makes a bet about something he knows is vanishingly unlikely to happen. And if it *did* happen, it would blow away his repeated smug predictions that nothing new can ever come out of the TMO. But taking that bet on its own terms: If a concentration technique were introduced to *take the place* of plain-vanilla TM, you'd hear howls of outrage from here to Mars. If it were an *ancillary* technique, most likely not so much (assuming the explanation of how it was said to work were convincingly integrated with basic TM theory).
