--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" wrote: > > > > > Michael Jackson: > > > I am wondering what the deal is on puja anyway. > > > > Puja is all about placement and positioning. > > IMHO, puja is all about moodmaking and the > placebo effect, both for the people performing > them, and for the people watching them and being > instructed in some puja-accompanied technique.
Said like the true cynic that you are. I am not saying you are wrong, it is just that this is exactly what I would expect you to say. Whether you truly believe it or not I don't know. But it certainly is a sweeping dismissal of the power or effect of the puja on its participants. > > TM teachers are actually instructed *to* moodmake > while performing the puja, and to "dwell on the > meaning of the words" while performing one. I wouldn't know about that but other teachers here would. Can anyone who are TM teachers here confirm that? > > Although there are undoubtedly people here who > would disagree with me, I never felt much of any- > thing while performing a puja. I don't believe > that the puja has *anything whatsoever* to do with > the effective "transmission of a mantra" or whether > the student derives any benefit from the meditation > being taught. Too bad. Sounds like you missed out a bit there. I'm not even a teacher and I am far, far from a moodmaker but boy, did those pujas feel GREAT - not based on my ideas of what they were supposed to do either. > > I have been instructed in mantra-based techniques > that involved the chanting of a puja, and in tech- > niques that were taught in a group, with no "bells > and whistles" at all, just "Here's the mantra." I > found no difference the students' experiences -- > mine or other people's. I couldn't compare since the only technique I was ever officially taught was TM. > > I think it's ALL bells and whistles. For the teachers, > to lead them to believe that they are part of a long > "tradition" that, in the case of TM at least, does > not even exist -- Maharishi invented the TM technique, > and there is no record of it being taught similarly > that anyone can produce. In the case of the people > being taught, witnessing a ceremony they don't under- > stand, or even understand the language of, invokes > their inherent sense of Woo Woo, and leads them to > believe that there is something mystical going on. Not for me. It was just a ceremony, an experience, and a very nice one at that. I would love to have a puja performed in my presence every day. It's as pleasant as eating a great meal, having a massage or watching a great movie in some ways. A pleasurable, pleasant, satisfying activity in and of itself - no ideas, no trappings of great philosophy just simply enjoying and receiving an experience. Of course, it could be more than that too if you wanted to focus on it but for me it was a stand alone deal. > > I don't think there is. I think it's all moodmaking. Placebo, moodmaking, what does it matter? If you feel something, you feel something and if you don't, you don't. One or the other is neither wrong or right, better or worse. Let the masses swoon in delight if they want and you can sit back and smirk from the sidelines as you switch channels to another cop show. Each to his own. > The TM puja does nothing more than chanting a Catholic > mass in Latin would do I always loved that too. Having been raised Catholic and being old enough (born in 1956) meant I was able to experience Latin masses as a young child. I loved the incense, the chanting, the Latin. I guess I like ritual and ceremony to a certain extent anyway, no matter what tradition it comes from. So maybe I'm a sucker. >, or chanting nonsense words in > a made-up language. It's just bells and whistles used > to market a technique and make it seem more than it is. > YMMV. >
