--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 10/5/05 8:57 AM, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Both were current when I started TM in 1975, so I
> > > > couldn't say. But I've heard TM teachers say that
> > > > at first it was just "Do less and accomplish more."
> > > >
> > > > Back in 1967, did you understand "Do nothing and
> > > > accomplish everything" to be a prescription to
> > > > refrain from acting?
> > > >
> > > > That would have been when you were a TM teacher, no?
> > >
> > > "Do less and accomplish more" would seem to be the standard
> > > injunction for people in the householder ashrama who receive a
> > > householder ishta-devata mantra. I mean, that's the idea of
> > > giving householders such mantras, they get worldly boons from
> > > invoking their ishta. Thus it supports their role and stage in
> > > life. That's all this is about, no? I think people read way too
> > > much into these things.
>
> I always remember the two terms being used together -- back to 1967,
> like Unc. I remember the latter phrase being a sort of punch line to
> the former. M. would say "Do less accomplish more." then pause, and
> then say, drawing it out a bit "Do (oooo) nothing ... and accomplish
> ... Every ..... Thing!" It always got a big laugh.
>
> Many catch phrases that M. used had 2-3 levels of meaning. For
> example, "Knowledge is Structured in Consciousness".
Or "Reincarnation is for the ignorant."
> The liviness of
> meaning on multiple levels is what made these phrases good one
> liners, funny, insightful. But not all levels of meaning were
> literal.
>
> > I'd say you're correct about "Do less and accomplish
> > more." On its own terms, it has a clear, uncomplicated
> > relative meaning.
>
> The primary meaning of "Do less and accomplish more" per my take,
> historically in hearing it live many times, was in relationship to
> the bow and arrow analogy. A la .. 'We do a bit less, we take 20
> min 2x, to refresh the mind, etc. Though counter-intuitive, and
> sounding paradoxical to stop action in order to achieve more, in
> practice it actually works, we draw the arrow back, in the opposite
> direction of achievement, and then let it go. We actually acheive
> more. Thus, we "do less (take a break from activity and yet
> accomplish more (due to the deep rest, clarity or mind, etc.)'
Sure. I don't think that's incompatible with Vaj's take,
though, just more subtle, more abstractly expressed.
> Subtler, seconday meanings, relate to the mind settling down ('doing
> less', not in the sense that TM is "doing", but in the sense of the
> mind's activity becoming less. In that more subtle state of mind
> funcioning, we gain more -- more happiness, clarity, etc.
>
> > But "Do nothing and accomplish everything" is obviously
> > *not* meant in a relative sense, so when MMY offers it
> > as a corollary to "Do less and accomplish more," the
> > latter acquires a new, non-relative spin. > Now it refers
> > to the experience of increasing identification with the
> > Self: the greater the identification with the Self, the
> > Non-Doer, the greater the sense that "I [the Self] do
> > not act at all."
>
> To you I am sure that's the case. That does not necessarily make
> that a universal connotation, or even M's intended meaning.
>
> My take on the phrase was always, as I said, a punchline, a laugh
> getter, for "Do less and accomplish more."
Yup. But I'd say it was so funny because it instantly
changed the meaning of "Do less and accomplish more,"
or instantly added a whole new level of meaning to it.
> In that vein, it was not
> meant to be a practical guidance, but a sort of funny word play. It
> was funny because one knew M was NOT advocating "meditate and then
> do nothing". Its power was tied to the scondary meaning below.
Right.
> Secondary meanings, which make it a "rich" and witty phrase, include
> the capture the fort idea: do nothing, that is "transcend the field
> of activity" and accomplish everything by "capturing the fort", or
> "highest first".
Yup.
> A third level of meaning is what Judy suggests, and adds to the
> multi-dimensional sparkle of the phrase. But to be honest, in
> hearing M say it live many times, I did not, and most others it
> appeared to me -- from the group vibe and laugh -- seem much
> focussed on this third level of meaning.
Well, it's been the understanding of most TMers
in *my* experience, although they also appreciated
the other levels. Maybe it depends on the degree of
one's familiarity with "I do not act at all" from the
Gita and MMY's analysis thereof.
In any case, you confirm my main point, which is
that neither phrase means "Do not engage in action,"
on *any* level (including "Do not engage in A, B,
and C"). That would be an absurd misinterpretation,
given the number of genuine injunctions, PREscriptions
for action, such as "Meditate and act," and the
unequivocal assertion by Krishna in the Gita that it's
literally impossible to refrain from acting.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
