I would have to say that you began your reading of my points with your own bias, which was to invalidate everything I said.
TM doesn't quiet the mind - we do that as we release the normal link we have to constantly thinking thoughts - the mantra is a convenience. What we experience is not exactly mood making, but some of it is. Bottom line, the negative effects associated with TM are not seen in other meditations. Why some are affected and others not, I don't know. But the unstressing deal which is NOT good is very real and the basket cases and suicides and attempted suicides are a testament to that. If someone were to ask me about meditation I would direct them just about anywhere other than TM. As far as you asking me about this, I would have to say if you reaaaaaaalllllyyyy think TM is so groovy, you would be teaching it because it is so valuable to others and you would be doing TMSP. So how about coming clean and telling us why you don't do TMSP and why you don't teach? It has to be more than just you need a job that pays. I have known TM teachers who work full time and teach on the side because they believe in TM so much. Do you contribute to the yagya programs and any of the other "causes" the Movement asks for money for all the time? Just how committed to TM are you? ________________________________ From: "steve.sun...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2014 12:30 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 8/12&13/14-Maharishi: As we take care of ourself, the world will take of itself for us on that level ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : This does bring up a lot of things. In all honesty I agreed with and bought into all of Marshy's blabber. But I don't any longer. One of the things I disagree with is the idea that the mind's natural tendency is to go to greater fields of charm. Life experience shows that in fact the human mind does just the opposite. The TM belief is that the human tendency to go toward greater fields of stress, pain, agony, suffering and so forth is an aberration. Prove it. Human experience suggests otherwise. Take a bunch of people, put them in a nice place like Yosemite, or the Snake River in Wyoming. Then let loose a bear on one side of the group. Or let three guys start to argue and fight. What will the entire group focus on. The beauty all around them? Or the stress? Michael, there is one precondition we have to agree on, and I don't think it is major. That is, that in the earthly experience, there is both good and bad. Forget about karma, just that people will sometimes act in way that is generally considered bad. But inspite of this people will still act always act in a way that they feel will bring them greater happiness, greater knowledge, greater power. The results will not always be positive, but that is how people will act. If someone likes hamburgers and not pizza, then they are not going to go to restaurant that serves pizza. People will select a movie based on what they think will bring them greater enjoyment. It is very basic, but maybe you disagree with it. There are a million examples one can think of. I realize it is not a popular notion. People would rather believe that humans are really very noble creatures who have just temporarily lost their way. Human history suggests otherwise. That being said, I doubt that the so-called transcendent contains the ultimate "field" of charm for the human mind. As so many spiritual aspirants can attest, one can have these charming experiences sometimes for years and the good old human mind drifts away again in favor of something a bit less picturesque. Now of course we have stories about people (generally men) who got in that exalted state and remained there for the rest of their lives on earth. But that doesn't mean we have a field of ultimate charm the mind is aching to always go towards. If that were the case once we reach that field one should naturally stay there forever. The experiences of meditators show that obviously is not true. We go to what intrigues us most even if it is morbid or macabre, not some imaginary field of charm. And so what? It again proves the point, that people will go to what they find most interesting. You may make a value judgement, that what they find most interesting is not a good thing, but that is only your bias. As to the TM technique and your statements about it, there are those here on FFL who believe TM is the best meditation. Marshy always said it was in both overt and subtle ways. Interesting that you would ask me about the culture around it. The Movement likes to pretend the TM technique stands head and shoulders above all other techniques and that it is almost like a mechanical act with no spiritual or religious aspects to it at all. And so what if anyone says it is the "best" technique. It is a technique for quieting the mind, not unlike other techniques which produce the same result. Are you faulting the technique simply because, in someone's opinion, it is to be the "best"? That is what they say publicly but we all know it is a different story in private. There we have the pictures of saints (so-called), the robes and the crowns, the beads and the amulets (yeah the Movement does suggest the use of kavach or shield amulets for various arcane purposes) and all the celebration of Hindu holidays, avoidance of south facing entrances and eclipses and a many fold foray into pure superstition all of which is predicated by the TM technique itself. The dishonesty of the TMO begins when it claims the technique is secular and mechanical. The very underpinnings of the "success" of the TM technique is itself predicated on the use of the TM puja. Given the fact that Marshy created the puja himself, it has no ancient provenance, it was not given him by Guru Dev or anyone else it seems curious that the mantra is useless without it, yet that is what the TMO privately claims. The puja must be done to "potentize" the mantra ostensibly by calling in the various "masters" of the non-existent holy tradition that Marshy also created in his own mind to give legitimacy and a history to his made up movement. Okay fine, you object to all the hoopla surrounding the technique. But the technique itself is rather simple, and leads to a quieting of the mind. So, again, are objecting to the technique, which is pretty mechanical, or the manner in which the technique is taught? Because, again, the technique is just a means to quiet the mind, and resembles many other techniques, which presumably you do not object to. Or maybe you are against any form of meditation. So without the puja, supposedly the mantras will be useless. The Movement has said privately (specifically in the person of Raja Badgett Rogers) that the mantra doesn't work unless proper gifts have been given (fruit, flowers and money). Interesting for a mechanical, secular technique. The next point I will make will not be accepted by many, including maybe those who also find fault with the Movement and with TM itself. I believe that a lot of one's experiences are self created. The TM way of thinking is that this superlative technique gives with practice all these fantastic experiences that lead to enlightenment. But there is subtle manipulation from the beginning in TM. No matter what you experience it is said to be good, not because it is, but to find something unpleasant or unwanted in the practice of TM was a fearsome thing to Marshy who felt he could not afford to have ANY negative connotations associated with TM. So you are sitting in meditation and no matter what you feel in the way of energy and so forth you subtly associate it with TM. Okay, so you dismiss any positive experiences that arise from the practice as the mere power of suggestion. And I guess you would have to make the same assumption of benefits that arise from any other form of mediation. Why would they be different? So, basically there is no value in mediation of any kind. It all boils down to power of suggestion. The people who practice meditation, TM or otherwise, are just mood making. That seems to be the premise you hold. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Which is a mistake. All these experiences are there waiting to be had, they are there and you can experience them whether you do TM or not. This means that TM is as run of the mill as it gets. So the difference? I dunno. I have done TM and TMSP. I have done Chopra's Primordial Sound meditation which is essentially TM with a different set of mantras. I have done some mindfulness meditation. Okay, again, so the whole practice of meditation, or any kind is just a waste of time. All the benefits which people attribute to mediation can be held elsewhere, by other means. You just have to think about them and they will materialize. Is that what you are saying? Michael, I don't think you are making a particularly strong case, for whatever point you are trying to make. I have friends and acquaintances who have done all those plus kriya yoga and all kinds of other meditations. Like Barry I have yet to meet anyone who will tell stories of the kinds of unstressing that is experienced with TM. And that is the difference. Maybe the people from other meditation traditions aren't willing to tell about their kinds of unstressing but you would think if the it was there someone would have talked about it some time. The fact that long term TM will often result in mental/emotional problems particularly on rounding courses or just in TM facilities is a major reason to find fault with it. Also the fact that the long term TM'ers like Bevan and Hagelin behave the way they do is just something I think no intelligent and decent person should ignore. How can a meditation that is supposed to AT LEAST do no harm wind up producing the kinds of so often seen behavior that we see among top, middle and minor leaders and managers in the TMO? Tell me again, because I seem to have missed the point, what it is about TM that can cause it to be inherently bad, when it appears to be a technique for quieting the mind remarkably similar to other techniques, including those championed by Herbert Benson, which is exactly TM only with a different mantra. Is it the rounding that is bad? What I am getting is that you don't like the culture surrounding the technique, but you have failed to make the case that the actual technique is any worse, that any other form of meditation. It is dishonest to believe there is no correlation between the practice and one's behavior. This is particularly so when the hype around TM is that it is supposed to be so superlative and produce such phenomenal results INCLUDING on the level of making behavior better – you know, increased harmony among coworkers, better relationships and so on. You just don't see it in TM facilities. Plus the fact that TM is supposed to produce greater efficiency on the job when in fact everyone who ever worked in a TM facility knows they were dealing with some of the most inefficient, scatterbrained lazy individuals they would ever see in life. AND such laziness and inefficiency is institutionalized in the Movement. There seems to be in fact an inverse relationship to length of time doing TM and TMSP, time spent with Marshy and decent behavior. When you strip away the hype, the PR bullshit, TM has a pretty grimy sleazy record that becomes really serious when you add in the number of people whose lives have been adversely affected by the practice and being part of the Movement and the suicides that so many here on FFL love to ignore, deny and minimize. I admit on the suicide front I have been collecting info for about a year and the things I see are concerning. I also admit that I have spoken at some length with someone who grew up in the Movement, whose parents are still in it, and who married a siddha who attempted suicide twice. This was someone whose family was at the top of the US TMO and when the second attempt occurred the TMO leadership treated the family like garbage and did absolutely nothing to help or support in anyway, blaming the woman for "not being stable and not doing program properly." I do understand the stance some take, that TM did them no harm and they feel its been good for them and they still do it and just ignore anything that might make them question or stop their practice. I used to take the same stance. I ceased in part because I refuse to support in any way an organization that gives off the vibes the TMO does. But I just can't ignore the downside to TM practice - the fact that it obviously does not correct the kinds of behaviors that are in fact common amongst the Movement people, esp. the leadership. The mental problems that I do not believe can be attributed to some pre-existing imbalance. Hell, the whole PURPOSE of TM is supposed to be to correct imbalance through transcendence. So that's the difference to me. If other kinds of meditation have the same kinds of side effects I would like to know about it. There is one other thing, and that is that a lot of this consciousness stuff is just bs. It is people making shit up, they may believe it, but they make shit up. And its not must TM'ers – a lot of the people in the now popular "awakened" movement are doing it right and left and that includes the big shots that blabber about awakening. I mentioned not long ago that my friend Bill had a long lunch with Frances Bennet one of Rick's BATGAP interviewees and he addressed the same thing – saying that most of the people who are teaching all this awakening stuff like Adyashanti are full of hot air and much of what they do is for the money. So that's my take on things. I see. You don't the TMO or the culture surrounding the technique, but I'd say you failed to make much of dent in why the basic practice is any worse than any other form of meditation available. You missed the mark in that regard. At least in my opinion. ________________________________ From: "steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 8/12&13/14-Maharishi: As we take care of ourself, the world will take of itself for us on that level Okay, no biggie, but what about the technique? Okay, you've got Edg, who you respect, and so do I, saying, if I understand him correctly, that there are different means to transcend. You can observe thoughts till you find a break in the action and then settle to a quieter place. You've got Barry who, again, if I understand it correctly, practices some form of meditation on a daily basis. Same with Salyavin, who has indicated that he does TM, at least some of the time. It seems to me that basically, they all work the same way. So, why would one technique, be singled out as being harmful. Or maybe you give the technique a pass, but find fault with the culture around it, especially the upsell. But take that away, and I can't see where the basic technique differs much from any other forms of meditation. Yes, if I found myself giving an introductory lecture, I would say,with confidence, that the technique is natural and effortless, and that it follows the natural tendency of the mind to go to a field of great charm. In my mind that field is sat chit ananda. But I wouldn't use that term. And no, I would not say that is the "best" form of meditation available. Anyway, I'd welcome your opinion, if you'd care to share it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : I disagree - I felt the same way. Through a series of circumstances I believed that Marshy was enlightened too. And over time I came to see that was not the case. It is a part of growing up in many ways to see through the smoke a mirrors a powerful personality or a charismatic personality creates, especially when lots of people will agree with and reinforce the illusion. As Rick as said on here, the truth is not harmful to anyone. Tough to swallow, but it doesn't hurt to know the truth. ________________________________ From: "steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 7:49 PMSubject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 8/12&13/14-Maharishi: As we take care of ourself, the world will take of itself for us on that level What I find kind of interesting is to see people here, over time, keep discounting anything to do with MMY. I don't mean to single out Barry, but I've seen, (particularly with that quote Judy found), that MMY's stature has gone from someone enlightened, in Barry's eyes, to someone with no awakening, but rather a personality that people just latched onto because they had a cult mindset. It really doesn't make a lot of sense, and as Jim likes to point out, says a lot more about the person finding fault, that the object of that person's criticism. I guess this is a just sayin' observation. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote : While reading this I see that this was a golden time for MMY and for the Movement. There is so much power behind what he says here and seemingly so much truth. This was a pleasure to read. It reminds me why I started to meditate back in 1970 and why I attended MIU. What a pleasure to read! Jai Guru DevTo subscribe, send a reply with "subscribe" entered as the subject or message; to unsubscribe, send a reply with "unsubscribe" entered as the subject or message.-- David Hooper1000 Purusha Place, Suite 219Romney, WV 26757
