--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > My point is simply: you have no idea why people didn't get to > > enlightenment in 5-7 years. > > Absolutely true. But neither does Maharishi. But I'd > be willing to say, based on my experience and that of > hundreds of other seekers I've met and interacted with > over the years, that "stress" has nothing to do with it. > Conditioning, yes. Stress, no.
Now I'm wondering if you haven't completely misunderstood what MMY means by "stress." In my understanding, "stress" is the term MMY uses to refer to what are called *samskaras* in the Hindu/yogic tradition: "The imprints left on the subconscious mind by experience (from this or previous lives), which then color all of life, one's nature, responses, states of mind, etc." (from "The Hindu Dictionary"). This would obviously *include* "conditioning," and it's entirely consistent with how MMY uses the English term "stress" in the context of TM. If you acknowledge that releasing conditioning is a factor in achieving realization, then your longstanding objections to "stress" as something that inhibits realization go right down the toilet. > > For some reason. MMY probably DID expect people to get > > enlightened faster than they did. > > I agree. > > > This makes his time-line mistaken... > > Either that or it makes him guilty of expressing his > hopes -- founded on nothing -- not only as fact, but > as ad copy. That's what MMY *does*, has always done. Big whoop.
