--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Rather interesting, since one of the welcome side-benefits of
> effective meditation *should* be decrease in negative emotions, their
> intensity and their duration.
>
Where is it said that this is the case?
My understanding of meditation is that it is for the development of
consciousness which is an entity unto itself. And in the long run,
because of it's activation/enlivenment (whatever you call it), the
person still has their personality, with the difference that though
they may have their personality and the way they are in life, the
good-the bad-the ugly, their consciousness is increasingly fully
developed so they are no longer attached to their actions and I don't
mean that in a moodmaking sort of way.
It may be for most if not at least the many, that over the years of
meditation the tendency to get angry diminishes but is it a rule?
Does that mean that meditation is not effective for that person if 30
years later they still get angry? Would it say anything about their
consciousness, per se, if they still got angry?
After all these years I have come to doubt that is the case. I think
people are who they are, and if they are making it a point not to
strain to behave in ways that are not suitable for them ("I'm a
meditator, therefore I don't get angry") maybe they still will get
angry. And we cannot know if their meditation is effective or not,
just because they still get angry.
Ken
> On Apr 12, 2007, at 9:52 PM, taskcentered wrote:
>
> > Readers here may be helpful in answering questions a woman raises
> > about her ex's anger,
> > who was a long-term TM insider. She also reflects on the
> > Maharishi's anger and abusive
> > nature.
>
