Thank you Judy and Curtis and Xeno and Ann - interesting conversation. It seems like the individual experiences with TM over periods of time could, potentially, differ between individuals based, in part, on differing physiologies, among many other things.
Can I always tell the difference between fact and POV when it comes to TM discussions? No, but because I have no experience with it, I just ingest it (when I read it) and let it be. Do I take Curtis's posts as his point of view? Of course I do! Smile. >________________________________ > From: authfriend <authfri...@yahoo.com> >To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Saturday, March 9, 2013 1:05 PM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: MUM kid expelled for pot but the foreign kids get >no punishment. > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" ><curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: >> >> - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: >> > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" >> > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: >> > > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn" <emilymae.reyn@> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Does meditation work to balance out the chemical makeup of >> > > > one's physiology? Does it release our natural feel good >> > > > chemicals within the body? Or, maintain balanced levels >> > > > of serotonin, dopamine, etc. >> > > >> > > My experience with TM meditation and its associated practices >> > > is that it is a way to hijack our usual brain reward system >> > > for achievement in our lives. >> > >> > Maybe this should say, "...it is a way to hijack my usual >> > brain reward system for achievement in my life," since this >> > is your personal experience. >> >> I believe your brain and mine are similar in this regard. >> If you transcend into what Maharishi called bliss >> consciousness you are giving your brain such a high >> reward it forgets everything else. > >During meditation, yes. > >> This is just Maharishi's teaching. But you raise an >> interesting point that perhaps there is a difference >> between the kind of brain that would go into a sidhaland >> or Purusha and someone who has integrated TM into their >> life the way you have. > >Yes, "perhaps" there is, TM being for householders and >all. > >> > > And this was Maharishi's stated goal, fulfillment divorced >> > > from achievement. >> > >> > When did he say this? Do you have a quote? Was this one >> > of the "secret teachings" just for teachers? Because I >> > sure don't remember having heard him say it. >> >> It is a core part of his message I don't know how you >> missed it. > >Yeah, I don't think so, Curtis. Certainly I didn't hear >it during *my* three days' checking, and I never heard it >subsequently, either. I think you must be misinterpreting >something, or expressing it badly. > >> We go to bliss consciousness and establish ourselves in >> that to give us complete fulfillment which bypasses the >> whole action for achievement for fulfillment cycle. It is >> actually taught in 3 days checking. > >You didn't include "action" in what you said above. With >"action," you might invoke "Do less and accomplish more/ >Do nothing and accomplish everything" to make your point. >But what you said to start with sounds as if you meant >there was no *accomplishment* involved. > >And then there's the old "200 percent of life," and the >idea that you don't meditate for the sake of meditation >but for fulfillment *in activity*. > >The impression you've been conveying is that you just >sit around in bliss rather than accomplishing anything. >But that would not be an accurate picture of Maharishi's >teaching (at least not his teaching to the Great TM >Unwashed). > >> Where I differ with his teaching is that he thinks this >> automatically makes people better at and more dynamic >> in activity and I don't. > >Well, reasonable people could disagree on this point. > >> > Anybody else remember Maharishi saying this was his goal? >> > >> > > If you keep mediating you cultivate the mind to trigger >> > > highly pleasurable states. It becomes very addictive. >> > > Many meditators show signs of extreme irritation if they >> > > miss a mediation once they get hooked on it just like >> > > any other addict. >> > >> > How many meditators show this? What percentage would you >> > say? And how have you determined this? >> >> I lived with thousands of meditators while in the movement. >> I have seen many meditators reactions to missing meditation. >> Discussed many with my own TM students. I have discussed the >> experiences of dozens of people who quit TM as I did. As >> well as some who have gone back and forth as I have. But >> your question is valid. And I don't have an answer for you, >> I am just presenting my view and believe it does not only >> apply to me. > >OK. When you're addressing someone who has no experience >of living or working with TMers (Emily in this case), it's >really important for you to be clear that your assertions >reflect your own views and beliefs, and not necessarily >established fact. > >> Skip afternoon meditation for a week and see how tired you >> get around meditation time. When you are conditioned to >> get this state your brains begins to need it. After a week >> or so off TM you mind recovers and you no longer feel tired >> in the afternoon. >> >> When I get addicted to TM I crave the state. YMMV. > >MMDV. Or rather, I've never gotten "addicted" to TM. > >> > In what follows, you shift back and forth from statements >> > about your personal experience to general statements as to >> > how TM affects people in general. With regard to the latter, >> > could you explain how you've determined that these are >> > effects common to everyone who practices TM? (Or meditation >> > in general, depending on which you mean, which you don't >> > always specify.) >> >> This is my current working model of understanding. I don't >> doubt that others will see it differently. I believe that >> we all share a similar physiology. Your criticism could >> equally apply to anyone making any claim about what >> meditation does for people. I am trying to explain what I >> believe is the underlying mechanism in the brain functioning. >> It is my alternative model to Maharishi's. > >Yes, I understand this. Emily might not unless you're >explicit that it's your own opinion. I'm suggesting you >haven't been explicit enough about that. > >> > I ask because none of what you describe resembles my >> > own experience. >> >> I don't know how many times you have gone off and on TM. >> This insight came to me after I had done that a few times. > >I've also been "off and on" several times. > >> But your general question of what part of this is just >> personal seems valid. That is true of most inductive >> reasoning. How man examples are enough? > >Right, and if you can't quantify, it's especially important >to note that it's *in your observation*. > >> But people may have completely different experiences with >> TM just as all brains don't react to cocaine the same. >> Some people dive in and become addicts and some say "that >> was annoying". > >And everything in between. > >I think "addiction" is a tricky term to use. It's handy when >you want to discourage people from trying TM or suggest >there's something dangerous about it, because the term is >usually pejorative; but then there's the whole "positive >addiction" theory to be considered. > >Of course, when you cite cocaine addiction as if it were >similar to "addiction" to TM, your intention to load >your argument becomes obvious. > >> I appreciate your points though and will give them more thought. I am just >> trying to figure this out and this is what I have so far. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > So IMO mediation can become a problem like any other form of hijacking >> > > the pleasure states, meant to reward our species for doing things that >> > > promote our survival or express our creativity. I believe there is no >> > > neuronal free lunch, every pleasure state has a cost. >> > > >> > > Of course this is a highly heretical view in circles where regular >> > > meditation and more meditation are both seen as only positives. But for >> > > me the balance is trickier. I use meditation when I need some of what >> > > it does for my brain, but regular meditation just leads to me getting >> > > hooked on the mental states it produces. And for me these states do not >> > > produce my optimum functioning. >> > > >> > > They are as advertized, very charming to our minds. But they can easily >> > > lead to an end in themselves since our brains are inherently lazy and >> > > getting the quick reward is neurologically preferred. Unfortunately that >> > > does not lead to my fullest creative potential any more than hitting the >> > > slot lever again and again. Although they say that meditation is a >> > > preparation for activity, and I don't doubt that for really impulsive >> > > people it is a real benefit, for people like me who have perhaps >> > > cultivated this functioning a bit too much, it can become a real >> > > distraction. I get a lot more done with my eyes opened! >> > > >> > > This understanding is still just a work in progress. I am fascinated >> > > that some like Barry maintain that other forms of meditation do no >> > > exhibit some of what I see as downsides of TM's passive bliss states >> > > style. >> > >> > > > > >
