--- In [email protected], Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > on 11/3/05 12:38 PM, authfriend at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "feste37" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> I wonder about this "meaningless sounds" business. At the > >> preparatory lecture, I always used to say the mantras were "sounds > >> the effects of which are known," or "words selected for their sound > >> quality," or something like that. I never said, "meaningless > >> sounds" and I wonder whether using that phrase was ever an official > >> instruction. It's a very unfortunate phrase, in my opinion. > > > > Whatever associations they may have in Hinduism, > > as they're used in TM they're semantically > > meaningless sounds. > > Meaningless, but the bija mantras are fundamentally connected with > Devatas,
They *are* devatas. and these Devatas are instrumental in producing the > effects that result from meditating with their mantras. > > > I know all the "names of gods" stuff from Trancenet, > > but that's just inaccurate. At most, they're sounds > > that are associated with gods in Hinduism. > > But if you regard Hinduism as anything more than a mythological > tradition, then you might acknowledge that it's colorful depictions > of gods and goddesses might represent actual celestial entities who > are powerful governors of nature's mechanics. Well, I have my own ideas of what they represent. > >But even > > Hindus who are taught TM are told to treat the mantra > > as pure sound during meditation (at least that's what > > I was told by a long-time TM teacher who did a lot of > > initiations in India way back when). > > Hindus who are taught TM in India are asked who their cherished > deity is, and on that basis their mantra is chosen. And that contradicts what I said how? > > If you want to get all esoteric about it, the mantras > > are in some sense devas, but then you have to get into > > the whole Nama-rupa thing and how Sanskrit syllables > > aren't symbolic, like regular language; they don't > > *stand for* things, they *are* things. And if you're > > going to say mantras are gods, well, you gotta first > > believe in gods. I'm a lot happier with "impulses of > > creative intelligence," myself. > > Just a Western phrase Maharishi chose to make a Hindu concept seem > more scientific. Or perhaps not. Perhaps "impulses of creative intelligence" is the more accurate description for the abstract celestial entities or forces which in Hinduism are metaphorically represented by colorful gods and goddesses, and which are actually aspects of our own consciousness. Remember that MMY also refers to "devata" as "process of knowing," that which connects Knower and known, or rather which *creates* what is known. The Knower "knows" the known into being, devata being the creative agency. I believe the mythological aspects of religions generally are metaphors for highly abstract components of reality--of the mechanics of consciousness--rather than personal beings. Not that they can't take the form of personal beings, of course. But their essence is vastly more abstract, I think. ------------------------ 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/
