Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Was John Lennon Right About Maharishi?'

Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:35:19 -0700


On Jul 21, 2006, at 8:40 PM, Vaj wrote:


On Jul 21, 2006, at 7:29 PM, authfriend wrote:

--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On Jul 21, 2006, at 3:30 PM, Paul Mason wrote:

--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
wrote:
I've never heard anything other than that.  I never
heard that Guru Dev himself gave MMY the technique.

 On 8th July 1971 in Amherst, U.S.A., Maharishi Mahesh Yogi made 
the
following statement which contradicts the assumption that he never
claimed the TM technique came from Guru Dev Shankaracharya Swami
Brahmanand Saraswati.

'But the great impact of Guru Dev, in his lifetime, in bringing 
out so
clearly and in such simple words, this technique of TM. And his, 
his
blessing for, for this movement which came out much after he left 
his
body. Because there was no, no occasion during his lifetime for, 
for
any of his intimate blessed disciples to go out of his presence 
and
that's why this any such movement to bless the world couldn't have
started during his time'.

As has been repeated here before many times

(Which must make it true...)

, and also verified by  
Dana Sawyer in his research with SBS's sect the Dandis

Documentation, please.  On what basis was it "verified"?


You'd have to ask Dana. He's talked to many of these guys. I have his article on the Dandis and it may mention it simply in passing, as what they do with householders.

Keep in mind there are teachers in the Shank. tradition who will realize a certain student is ripe for non-dual meditation and teach them a method that isn't as dualistic as meditation with an object.



And yet another comment from Dana:

> I also find the great strengths that exist in other organizations. But
>this thing, of our experiencing "live mantrah", something that exists on
>its own, deep within self, that something which moves self into Self, is
>that thing which makes TM so very precious.

This is not a unique quality of TM. It exists in all formal, Tantric
Hindu and Buddhist traditions. There is no aspect of TM practice that is
not common in these traditions (as I mentioned before, the only change
I've seen is in how drifting from the mantra is interpreted. In TM, it's
attributed to unstressing; in the mainline traditions it's attributed to
lack of success. In both cases the instruction is the same - "return to
the mantra once you realize you're off of it."

The sooner that TMers face the fact that there is nothing amazing or
unusual about their practice (and time spent exploring the mainline Hindu
traditions points this up) the sooner they'll understand why even after 35
years of regular meditation they still aren't enlightened. There is no
magic technique. Maharishi was able to convince Westerners that there was
simply because young Westerners didn't know better. TM is relaxing and
relaxing is nice. All these years of practice by Westerners proves that
TM isn't the magic pill we once thought it was. And if it was, then
Asians already practicing it would have been enlightened long ago.

__._,_.___

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



__,_._,___

Reply via email to