--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" wrote: > > My opinion is that they developed the buddy system and > all the other "precautions" because there had been a > few really sad and serious situations where people did > become unstable or have breakdowns while on various > course, or even died.
That is correct. Even though there were freakouts back on the India courses (one guy lost it and ran through the jungles screaming for several hours before they could catch him), the concern on the part of the TMO started, as I understand it, back in Estes Park, where people were having all sorts of mental and physical issues related to the long meds (no asanas then), so Maharishi tried "rounding." When that didn't stop the negative effects of the longer periods of meditation, he started to talk about "unstress- ing" as related to this phenomenon, and claim that it was because Westerners carried more "stress" in their systems than people in India he had been more used to, and that it was a Good Thing, because, after all, "stress" was being released. And everybody just bought this, just as they had everything else he had said. The addition of asanas to "program" on courses didn't do anything to stop these negative side effects, however, as anyone who was on the Fiuggi course should remember. The first 2-3 rows at that course were reserved for "heavy unstressers," and it was a real zoo. It looked like a convention of people suffering from epilepsy, Tourettes Syndrome, or both. Arms jerking and flying around, people grunting and yelling and moaning -- and all of this *in activity*, sitting in a lecture hall, not during "program." In fact, most of these people were told to *stop* rounding and meditate normally, and *the symptoms did not go away*. For some of them these tics and jerks and uncontrollable spasms lasted for months. (Please note that all of this was the result of plain, vanilla TM, *long* before the Sidhis and *their* brand of grunting and twitching appeared upon the scene.) > My guess is that most of these people were unstable before > coming to the course. I suspect this happens in all > spiritual groups and churches, too. What I'm trying to tell you is that -- based on my exper- ience and that of thousands of others who have attended in-residence long meditation courses in other techniques, NO SUCH PHENOMENA ARE PRESENT. No one ever had to make up "rules" or "guidelines" to deal with such extreme side effects, because they NEVER APPEARED. Personally, I believe that the basic laziness of the basic TM technique is at fault. The techniques of meditation at these other courses involved more focus. *Not*, as TMers were often told, "concentrating" on the mantra or other point of meditational focus, just being aware enough not to sit there for long periods time -- or for the whole meditation session -- lost in thoughts and daydreams. MMY thought this was OK, but most other traditions -- those based on *real* traditions as opposed to having been made up, like TM -- say that the lazy, effortless approach characterized by TM is debilitating, because long-term, this practice causes people to get "stuck in the astral" and become spaced out and reclusive and incapable of being grounded in activity. That's certainly what I saw on TM courses, but *never* on courses from these other traditions whose courses I attended. > People who need a place to belong or to rest their weary > and confused bones land in churches and Buddhist groups, > etc. Not to argue, but I think such people would be more drawn to churches than most Buddhist groups I'm aware of, because in the latter one is expected to WORK, on a daily basis, at resolving one's own problems. There is never that sense that someone or something is going to "do it for you" that we see in churches and in New Age groups. > For the TMO, to try and keep an eye on people somehow, > people were paired into buddies so that a report would > come if someone seemed odd. At which point, as I suggested earlier, NO ONE IN CHARGE OF THE COURSE WOULD KNOW WHAT TO DO. They had never been *trained* in what to do. In my considered opinion, the main reason for the "Don't leave the course" and the "buddy" rules was to keep spaced- out people from wandering around in the towns the courses were held in and thus giving TM and the TMO a bad name. That happened enough times in the early days that they were wary of it. But in retrospect I really believe that all of these side effects of longer periods of meditation were the result of the TM technique. I say this based on my *own exper- ience*, both with TM and with a number of other techniques, and both on TM residence courses and those given by the teachers of these other techniques of meditation. And, of course, on similar experiences reported by thousands of people who had studied the latter techniques, vs. thousands of people who studied TM. You don't have "rules and regs" to deal with "heavy unstressing" on these other courses BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT NEEDED. No such experiences ever arise for the course participants. Why do they with TM? > > Seems to me that the fault is in the technique itself. > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: turquoiseb > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:05 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Challenge: Talk about the issue, not the > > > people who brought it up > > > > > > > > > Â > > > I'm just going to riff off of one small aspect of your post, > > > because it triggered a train of thought that I found inter- > > > esting and wanted to rap about. No disrespect to the rest > > > of your excellent post, really. :-) > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson wrote: > > > > > > > > Quite by accident or perhaps by Cosmic Design, I became > > > > aware of some things that disturbed me a fair amount > > > > with the behavior of Bevan and other members of the TMO > > > > who were creating some shenanigans in Heavenly Mountain > > > > - it was really the Boone, NC stuff that made me decide > > > > not to have anything to do with the TMO except maybe > > > > round sometime... > > > > > > Have you ever noticed that one of the never-noticed > > > and never-spoken-of assumptions that many people make, > > > *including* those who have stepped back from involve- > > > ment in the TMO, is that being able to "round" is > > > somehow inevitably linked to being in good enough > > > standing with the TMO that you will still be allowed > > > to go on one of their courses? > > > > > > The assumption is that "on a course" officially offered > > > by the TMO is the only place they *could* round, or at > > > least "safely" round. > > > > > > Did it never occur to them to just go to a nice place, > > > rent a room with a great view, and just do some "extra > > > rounds" on their own? Did it never occur to them to go > > > on some other organization's retreat and just do their > > > TM and/or TMSP program there? > > > > > > I suspect, now that this has been brought to my attention, > > > that a LOT of people picked up this subliminal idea that > > > one cannot or should not "round" except on a TM course. > > > > > > And why? Is it somehow "safer" to "round" as we were > > > instructed on an "official" course? Do you believe that > > > the people who led them had any ability to keep you > > > safe, that they were taught things specific to rounding > > > to watch for in course participants and how to help > > > them out of the difficulties if they found themselves > > > in one? > > > > > > I ran all of the TM residence courses offered in the > > > Western US States for several years. In that capacity > > > I was pretty much in charge of "residence course teacher > > > training," in that I made sure that everyone who taught > > > these weekend or week-long course followed certain > > > guidelines sent down to us from "International." In > > > the Regional Offices we tried our best to select good > > > teachers, people with a good rep as teachers, but also > > > as having a good head on their shoulders and being > > > pretty real-world grounded. But I can assure you that > > > none of them ever received any training on how to > > > take care of anything woeful that might happen to > > > a course participant during "rounding." It was as if > > > the whole residence course idea was based on the > > > assumption that this could never *happen*. What could > > > possibly go wrong, after all, on a TM residence course > > > that is by definition "100% life supporting?" > > > > > > This may have changed after I left the TM movement, > > > and as more people freaked out on courses. I can only > > > speak for the period up to 1972, and based on my own > > > limited experience within the TMO. If anyone who ever > > > taught residence courses has different memories, please > > > speak up. > > > > > > Anyway, these were just thoughts triggered by something > > > Michael said, thrown out to see if anyone identifies > > > with them, or has anything to say about them. > > > > > >
