--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mar 5, 2007, at 12:33 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hermandan0 <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The whole question is elementary and not really worth
> > >> arguing about.
> > >
> > > I think the whole point is that some TMers have turned
> > > it *into* an argument, and do so again every time this
> > > subject comes up here. As some have suggested, it kinda
> > > looks as if they have done so because they are more
> > > attached to the dogma they were taught being "right"
> > > than they are to common sense.
> >
> > It does take courage to deviate from the memorized scripts we
all
> > tend to keep and re-run like little tape loops.
>
> So do you and Barry have the guts to deviate from
> your "TMers are just mindlessly repeating the dogma
> they've been taught" tape loop and incorporate the
> possibility that they're telling you what their
> personal experience is?
>
> One of Barry's maxims is "Trust your own experience."
> But somehow that's never extended to "Trust someone
> else when they tell you what their experience is"
> if that someone else happens to be a TMer.
>
> In fact, I think
> > commercial forms of meditation with their repeated maxims tend
to
> > reinforce this type of conditioned "in the box" thinking. It
seems
> > important for progress to accept that our evolution might not
run
> > as it was scripted.
>
> It's probably also important for progress to accept
> that in some cases the "scripts" may be accurate. In
> other words, one shouldn't make a script of the notion
> that just because one can construct a box around a script,
> that guarantees what's inside the box is invalid. Such a
> notion may itself be conditioned "in the box" thinking.
>
> > In fact it might not be anything like what we "image-ined". In
> > that case it's best to just run over our own dogma, and then
> > back up over it just to be sure.
>
> But be open to the possibility that the run-over dogma
> may not end up crushed and bleeding like you "image-ined"
> it would.
>
Yeah, these guys run just as many stories as anyone else. Possibly
more when it comes to a technique neither of them practice.
