On Apr 17, 2007, at 1:06 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: >> Much of the focus of the TMO over the years I was involved (and I > have >> no reason to think it's changed, in fact it might even be more so > now) >> seems to be to put as much in between people and their children as > they >> can, or even between married couples: accepting one person to a > course >> but not the other, insisting people come to the Domes during the > best >> part of the day for parents and kids to be together, and on and > on. >> Basically forcing them to choose. >> > > **snip to end** > > Sal, your last paragraph is an expression, I think, of the fact that > Maharishi never really understood or intrinsically valued the > householder life,
And I think that sums up really well why most of us are no longer involved any more. > despite the fact that his self-perceived mission > was to bring the practice of meditation to those of us "in the > world". And I also think he gets a lot of credit for realizing that Americans/Westerners lead lives that were way too fast and needed to slow down a bit. > Although the basic 2x/day meditation is valuable in the > context of everyday life, It's very valuable, and I'd say is the main thing many of us were attracted to. > most or all of his advanced programs > reflect a default position that places primary emphasis on the > individual's sadhana, distinct from, and in conflict with, the duties > and demands of family and the larger community. It really can make > it difficult. Very difficult. Plus I think a lot of people didn't notice the kids of benefits they thought would come from 2+ hours of meditation/day. I know I didn't, but I still practiced the Siddhis faithfully for over 10 years. > > A lot of us, in our late teens and early 20s, essentially followed > the traditional eastern pattern of living a monk's/nun's life for a > brief period (TTC, sidhi and other long rounding courses) before > entering the world as productive and (to one degree or another) > spiritually grounded adults. But many of us lingered, and obviously > some still do, on the margins of two lifestyles in which we > weren't/they aren't really living one or the other; and, > consequently, garnering little fruit from either. (Limbo lower now.) >
