LG, I was planning to make my own response to this post of Michael's, but I find you've made all the points I was going to make. Well done, thank you.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Michael, if you're going to bring this up again, and before reading responses > from anyone willing to take the time, relax and open your mind to what you > are about to read. No one here is trying to convince you of the efficacy of > TM or convert you back to its practice. They're trying to help you move past > this and find some peace in your life. More interpersed below. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > Some time ago I posed the question that if, as Marshy always claimed, TM is > > better, superior to all other meditations, how can that be so, what makes > > TM special? > > > > In addition to being reviled for supposedly setting up a condition which > > would allow me to take shots at the TMO, I was told that it was not the > > mantras that are successful, but rather the fantastic instruction on how to > > use said mantras. > > > > Complete horseshit. If that were the case, then you really could use any > > word as long as you used it the way Marshy told everyone to use his > > mantras. And we know that ain't right. > > > > Sorry Michael, but your reasoning above doesn't make sense. The mantras used > *aren't* special in that they're just meaningless sounds whose effects are > known. They've been around and used for a long, long time. How do you get > from that understanding that *any* word can be used? The effortless use of > the mantra *is* what made TM different in the worldwide marketplace in the > very beginning. There may have been other techniques just as effortless but > this was the way that Maharishi chose to *market* his technique and he wasn't > lying - it *is* effortless. Now there may be many techniques that advertise > their effortlessness either from copying TM or the realization that it is a > great marketing ploy. > > > The mantras are as good as any others but even you true believers have said > > the mantras are not superior to others, its the WAY they are used. But if > > its the instruction, then any word should do, so why have the mantras at > > all? > > > > Again Michael, your reasoning doesn't make sense. Where is your bridge from > "mantras not superior to others" (as in mantras I assume) to "any word should > do"? > > > So with TM being special, it has to either be the mantras or the way you > > use them or a combination - I don't see the instruction as being all that > > special - its not much different than other meditations including Deepak > > Chopra's Primordial Sound meditation and others where you are told to just > > not pay attention to thoughts and bring the awareness back to whatever when > > you notice you are on a thought. > > > > In the beginning, TM *was* different, and what made it different, its > effortlessness, was copied by others. After all, Chopra was part of the TMO > before he branched out on his own so doesn't it make sense that he would have > incorporated what was best about TM into his own money-making endeavors? > Other techniques may have been effortless also but they don't promote > themselves as such. > > > Thus we can see quite clearly that the idea that TM is a superior > > meditation, or as Marshy put it, the "jet plane" to enlightenment is > > complete nonsense, or to be more precise, a lie. > > > > I'm sure marketing to the general western masses has a lot of do with these > claims. However "different strokes for different folks" as the saying goes. > > > Now of course if one believes Mark Landau, then one knows that mantras are > > repeated to actually receive the blessings of whatever > > goddess the sound is associated with - in other words its about doing a > > practice to git something, its about accrual of power, not transcending to > > gain enlightenment. > > > > And why can't it be both? What's wrong with "gitting" something? > > > Oh and Richard W, we all know the blabbity blab blab about all things TM > > coming from some Buddhist temple or other so no need to repeat it. > > > > Michael, the same could be said about your writing. > > > And I was not setting up a situation to enable me to revile the Movement - > > I can do that all on my own. As I have said before, I am willing to believe > > anything, but not without evidence. > > > > No you're not, Michael. People have tried and what they've presented has > fallen on "deaf" eyes. Of at least, a mind that wasn't open to other ways of > thinking. > > I'm sorry to say this, but Michael, I'm beginning to sense that you're only > interested in the "dirt" about anything that Maharishi and his movement has > *ever* done (your recent request for "stories" about the Vedic Atoms was > interpreted by me in this vein). And your thinking and/or belief that > Maharishi and his movement did nothing whatsoever of benefit to thousands of > people would be the greatest lie of all. Have you ever heard the expression > "throwing out the baby with the bathwater"? > > > Thus far, the evidence I have collected has shown me that Marshy was a > > liar, perhaps well intentioned in the beginning but soon after he left > > India he allowed himself to be seduced by the blandishments of the ego. > > > > The evidence I have also shows me that TM is a decent meditation, but no > > more special than anything else available and yet most of the claims made > > for it are false, such as enlightenment accruing from said practice and > > ability to fly etc, also all claims made of TM Sidhis are false (like world > > peace). > > > > The evidence is that TM has caused many problems on multiple levels for > > thousands of people, and that thousands of others have ceased the practice > > due to many reasons. > > > > The unmonitored and excessive rounding on early courses, I daresay, is what > caused the most significant problems for most. But, "thousands of people"? > Come on, Michael, where's the "I am willing to believe anything, but not > without evidence"? (BTW, I'm quoting you from above.) > > > Other evidence is that long term practice doesn't lead to any kind of > > superlative behavior as demonstrated by the TMO leaders and managers. Given > > the downside of TM, the evidence is that other meditations are far superior > > to TM since few of them have the kind of baggage that TM has. > > > > Again, different strokes for different folks. However, TM for getting the > masses to even think about meditation or to get them started on their journey > cannot be surpassed...IMO, of course. >
