--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote: > > Determining whether or not the mantra is "subtle" isn't part of TM practice.
Lawson, you were making the point, that just thinking OF the mantra, would be a subtle form of the mantra. And, since it is your main point here, to immediately return to the mantra, if you notice it isn't there, as you make this point again below, that it is imperial to follow the TM instruction, you constantly contradict yourself. If the mantra can be so vague, that you don't know anymore if you are thinking it or not, how could you then follow the instruction? You should at least know if you are thinking the mantra, in order to be able to determine if you should go back to it, when you are not. Now you say it doesn't matter if it is subtle or not, then you claim, thinking about the mantra is a subtle form thereof. It is all self contradictory. You and Judy have been making this point for ages, that the mantra could be so subtle, that you don't know if it's there. That's all BS, if you don't know if it's there, you can't go back to it. So much for your 'I just follow instructions' > Nor does it matter that it doesn't matter. If you're "doing" TM, then you > follow the instructions, if you don't follow the instructions, such as they > are, then you're not "doing" TM. > > Of course, "follow the instructions" can be kind of vauge sometimes, but > that's as OK as any other part of the process. > > > As long as you can think a thought, you can meditate. > > > L. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > Oh dear, for the last 39 years I've been doing TM improperly. The > > > > horror. > > > > > Lawson, that's the dawn of knowledge, when you know that you don't know > > > anymore, all your previous knowledge has been evaporated. There is a very > > > good practice in Zen to cultivate the 'don't know' mind. If you like, > > > read this http://www.kwanumzen.org/about-zen/three-letters-to-a-beginner/ > > > > I have been practicing TM for a long time, and I do think this 'don't know' > > mind has come about. A long long time ago I learned mindfulness, and found > > at that time it was rather difficult, or perhaps because my mind would not > > settle down then, annoying. Lately though the character of TM and > > mindfulness just seem to have merged; it does not matter anymore. It does > > not matter whether the mantra is there or not, or if I notice that the > > mantra is not there, it does not matter if I start it again or not. It > > actually seems as if there are no subtle levels of the mantra at all. > > > > I think it helps to find alternative explanations, to try to find different > > ways to explain the same thing. This is easy to do with metaphysics because > > there are no facts. The scientist Richard Feynman would attack physics > > problems this way, he would try to find alternative ways to explain various > > phenomena, and of course he was ultimately constrained by facts, what the > > experiments showed. This keeps thinking more flexible, and when you do > > this, you are breaking the potential for doctrinaire ossification of belief. > > > > You step outside on a fine sunny day and there is all this stuff and > > instead of saying, 'Well, there is a pond, and trees, and clouds'; you just > > feel 'Wow!', And then if that could be expressed in more concrete > > conceptual terms it might be something like 'What is all this?'. A certain > > freshness imbues experience because you do not know what is going to happen > > and you are not thinking about what things are and what they might become. > > >
