Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
Michael, I don't know if I was so much a true believer in that I surrendered all my analytical skills. Yes, I believed in the message, and spread it pretty effectively I think. That is to say the basic technique of TM. Perhaps, like many, I was searching for something "more" back in the day, and TM seemed to be the answer for that. And so, I became a teacher and graduated from MIU. Throughout that time, there were aspects of the organization that I found ridged and a bit misguided and so it lost some of its charm for me. But there was no single event that caused me to become disillusioned. In fact I've mentioned that after I graduated in 1981, I continued to do group program until the time I got married and had a child. And now, I feel as though that spiritual journey has entered a different phase. As far as my mediation, I still do that after work before I come home, or after dinner when I feel a need. I find it relaxing, although I don't do it in the context of a spiritual technique, if that makes any sense. And again, I feel the spiritual path is what makes life meaningful, but that path take on many forms. My wife is a pretty devout Catholic, and I think she has been served well by her adherence to that practice. Thanks for the inquiry. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Steve, I may be wrong but didn't you recently allude to you being a real true believer at one time who became disillusioned with certain things about TM or at least with the TMO? Would you mind telling what aspects you became disillusioned with and what aspects you are still alright with? On Sat, 4/19/14, steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@...> wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, April 19, 2014, 1:49 AM ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : And *this* gets me to thinking about whether Maharishi always pitched TM to losers and people with problems and low self esteem because they become the best disciples. And *disciples* is what he was looking for. Or is it possible that for whatever reason the generation that responded most strongly to Maharishi's message was a generation that was searching for something different. Is it possible that this may have been a reason, or do you prefer just to go with the low self esteem, loser scenario. And is it possible that somehow you have gotten more jaded in your outlook on life such that everything to do with TM, at least, gets reduced to the worst possible interpretation. This is after all an organization that you left more than 40 years ago, and yet you are one of the most active participants in a forum which has this organization as it's focus. I don't know if the TB experiment you allude to regularly really makes sense. You appear to have a pretty big investment in anything, and everything TM. Am I wrong about that? Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems. Kids doing badly in school. Criminals locked away in prisons. Veterans with PTSD. Can't this be seen as a continuation of a long-standing trend to look for prospective new students among populations who are more likely to be easy to convert into True Believers and thus become disciples? It's just an idea. YMMV.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
Steve, I may be wrong but didn't you recently allude to you being a real true believer at one time who became disillusioned with certain things about TM or at least with the TMO? Would you mind telling what aspects you became disillusioned with and what aspects you are still alright with? On Sat, 4/19/14, steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, April 19, 2014, 1:49 AM ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : And *this* gets me to thinking about whether Maharishi always pitched TM to losers and people with problems and low self esteem because they become the best disciples. And *disciples* is what he was looking for. Or is it possible that for whatever reason the generation that responded most strongly to Maharishi's message was a generation that was searching for something different. Is it possible that this may have been a reason, or do you prefer just to go with the low self esteem, loser scenario. And is it possible that somehow you have gotten more jaded in your outlook on life such that everything to do with TM, at least, gets reduced to the worst possible interpretation. This is after all an organization that you left more than 40 years ago, and yet you are one of the most active participants in a forum which has this organization as it's focus. I don't know if the TB experiment you allude to regularly really makes sense. You appear to have a pretty big investment in anything, and everything TM. Am I wrong about that? Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems. Kids doing badly in school. Criminals locked away in prisons. Veterans with PTSD. Can't this be seen as a continuation of a long-standing trend to look for prospective new students among populations who are more likely to be easy to convert into True Believers and thus become disciples? It's just an idea. YMMV.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : And *this* gets me to thinking about whether Maharishi always pitched TM to losers and people with problems and low self esteem because they become the best disciples. And *disciples* is what he was looking for. Or is it possible that for whatever reason the generation that responded most strongly to Maharishi's message was a generation that was searching for something different. Is it possible that this may have been a reason, or do you prefer just to go with the low self esteem, loser scenario. And is it possible that somehow you have gotten more jaded in your outlook on life such that everything to do with TM, at least, gets reduced to the worst possible interpretation. This is after all an organization that you left more than 40 years ago, and yet you are one of the most active participants in a forum which has this organization as it's focus. I don't know if the TB experiment you allude to regularly really makes sense. You appear to have a pretty big investment in anything, and everything TM. Am I wrong about that? Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems. Kids doing badly in school. Criminals locked away in prisons. Veterans with PTSD. Can't this be seen as a continuation of a long-standing trend to look for prospective new students among populations who are more likely to be easy to convert into True Believers and thus become disciples? It's just an idea. YMMV.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
Yes, the money people donate goes to: 1) the overhead for keeping the doors of the DLF open. 2) the TM teachers 3) the Maharishi Foundation according to the Maharishi Foundation 990 form from 2012, https://bulk.resource.org/irs.gov/eo/2014_01_EO/04-3196447_990_201212.pdf https://bulk.resource.org/irs.gov/eo/2014_01_EO/04-3196447_990_201212.pdf ,TM instruction of students of any description (10-18, full-time undergrad/grad) was at 1,473 with revenues of $685,000. Expenses were $436,023. That works out to 2/3 of the money going to the teachers at nearly $300/student taught,and the rest going to the TMO. The DLF got some money for overhead and the teachers got 2/3 of the official fee and the TMO got the rest. If your point really IS that somebody paid for it at some point, that's just plain silly. Even when you donate blood to the Red Cross, somebody pays for it. Leaving aside the food you consumed to produce the blood in the first place, the Red Cross has to pay someone to refrigerate teh blood, transport the blood, etc. They have full-time employees (not volunteers) that handle large portions of this process because it is delicate work, not left to amateurs. They pay their executives a pretty decent wage ($6 million+), though not-so-much considering that they accept $3 billion+ a year in donations and so on. http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m16540911_FY12_ARC_990_Filed_with_IRS.pdf http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m16540911_FY12_ARC_990_Filed_with_IRS.pdf Complaining that "the money goes somewhere" without being specific about it, is silly. Money ALWAYS goes somewhere. There's overhead in keeping the doors open for large 501(c)(3) organizations. John Hagelin gets paid $36,000 as head of the Maharishi Foundation and another $37,000 as head of the David Lynch Foundation. https://bulk.resource.org/irs.gov/eo/2014_02_PF/20-0458302_990PF_201309.pdf https://bulk.resource.org/irs.gov/eo/2014_02_PF/20-0458302_990PF_201309.pdf Gail McGovern gets paid $591,000+ as president and CEO of the American Red Cross plus another $37,000 in the misc category of compensation. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : I didn't say the people pay anything, I said the Lynch hucksters are always begging for donations - that money goes somewhere On Fri, 4/18/14, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@...> wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 18, 2014, 2:03 PM The people who learn TM via the David Lynch Foundation don't pay anything. People who receive food from the Red Cross don't pay for that food, but the people who donate money to the Red Cross did. You're picking a nit that only exists in your own mind. TM teachers get compensated for their time teaching TM, whether they teach through a TM center, or through the DLF. The national TM organization gets a cut of the money as well, though it isn't that much in the case of students. Currently, TM instruction costs $360 for school age kids, including full-time undergrad and grad students in college. A single TM teacher is responsible for teaching 300 students at a Quiet Time school, at least as far as compensation goes, though details of how local TM centers and/or local TM teachers are involved in the process are unclear to me (probably because they wing it depending on who is available when). If you look at the Maharishi Foundation, Inc Form 990 for 2012, when teaching students, TM teachers got 2/3 of the fee while the TM organization got 1/3. This works out to nearly $300/student. The 990 form for 2013 isn't available online yet, but they TMO is supposed to be so flush with cash this past year that they were able to drop the fees substantially and still pay all their bills. With the new fee schedule for 2014, I'm guessing that TM teachers will still get about $300/student while the TM organization will only get $60. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Incorrect Lawson - David Lynch doesn't offer shit for free. Why do you think he is ALWAYS begging for "donations" to FUND the programs? The TMO ALWAYS gets paid, no matter what. EVERYTHING they do is a scam to make money so they can live big. ---- On Fri, 4/18/14, LEnglish5@... wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 18, 2014, 11:10 AM The David Lynch Foundation offers TM instruction for free to people in "at risk" groups, but the $2500 pri
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
Lawson and Judy, good points. turq, to whom was Maharishi *marketing* TM when he went on the Merv Giffin Show? TV watchers?! And in your opinion would those folks be in an *at risk* group? Or a privileged, wealthy group? Or a mental problem group? All of the above?! I remember that a couple weeks before I started TM I "slipped into the zone." So much so that my Mom asked me what was making me so peaceful. A few days later I saw a poster of Maharishi announcing an intro lecture. I decided to go, but sort of casually. When I walked into the room, the guy was giving out pamphlets. I said I didn't need one because I knew I was gonna start. Which I did. A week before Maharishi's appearance on the Merv Griffin Show. Not being from California, I knew very little about meditation, etc. I had once taken a yoga class in which we did asanas and stared at a flame. I had read Autobiography of A Yogi which a gorgeous young man left on my table at Yes! Health Food Restaurant in Georgetown. Which is all to say that I was not a seeker. Nor was I having problems. Nor was I wealthy. All in all, I'd say I was simply very fortunate. Because I heard decades ago that when a person gets on a spiritual path, the teacher as if makes an agreement with the universe to get that person enlightened. I feel very fortunate that in my case, the teacher was Maharishi. On Friday, April 18, 2014 6:10 AM, "lengli...@cox.net" wrote: The David Lynch Foundation offers TM instruction for free to people in "at risk" groups, but the $2500 price tag was originally set by Maharishi to entice wealthy people and only wealthy people to learn TM. Weren't you complaining about how insanely high that price tag was? Seems to me that no matter how TM is marketed and for what price and for whichever group of people -the homeless, war refugees, students in El Barrio watching their cousins kill their cousins, or world famous actors and actresses, CEOs worth as much as small countries, etc.- you'll find a reason to kvetch. It's just an idea. YMMV. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : One of the things I've noticed over the years is how many long-term TMers say things like, "I'd be dead if it weren't for TM," or "TM saved my life," or "TM cured me of my depression/anxiety/suicidal thoughts/mental illness/whatever." I've always found these claims difficult to relate to, because I didn't have anything to "cure" or "get over" when I first started TM. I had already left drugs behind me, having discovered them back when LSD was still legal and came in a bottle with Sandoz on the label. I did my time with them, enjoyed them *not* because they were an "escape from my problems" but because they enhanced an already-enjoyable life. But then I got tired of them, and even more tired of the scene surrounding them, and left them behind. I'm probably one of the only people here who didn't have to wait 15 days before starting TM. :-) I was also neither depressed nor suicidal. In fact, I was a pretty happy frood, and merely one who was looking for ways to become even happier. And for a time, TM presented what I was looking for, something to enhance a good life and help me to appreciate it even more. But then it became as boring and as stagnant as drugs had been, and with an even more stifling social scene, so I moved on again to other forms of meditation that worked better. But there seem to be any number of long-term TMers who don't look back on their TM experience this way. They seem to focus on what it enabled them to "get over" or "cure" or "get beyond," almost as if (almost) before TM they had been "broken" and TM had "fixed" them. This gets me to thinking about tent revival meetings in the South (which, of course, you can't help but attend a few of if you grow up in the South), in which the most fervent "believers" and most fundamentalist Bible-thumpers were ALL those who formerly were drunks or whores or thieves or something BAD. It's as if they don't feel they can adequately shout "I've been SAVED!" unless they feel they had a lot to be saved FROM. And *this* gets me to thinking about whether Maharishi always pitched TM to losers and people with problems and low self esteem because they become the best disciples. And *disciples* is what he was looking for. Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems. Kids doing badly in school. Criminals locked away in prisons. Veterans with PTSD. Can't this be seen as a continuation of a long-standing trend to look for prospective new students among populations who are more likely to be easy to convert into True Believers and thus become disciples? It's just an idea. YMMV.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
I didn't say the people pay anything, I said the Lynch hucksters are always begging for donations - that money goes somewhere On Fri, 4/18/14, lengli...@cox.net wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 18, 2014, 2:03 PM The people who learn TM via the David Lynch Foundation don't pay anything. People who receive food from the Red Cross don't pay for that food, but the people who donate money to the Red Cross did. You're picking a nit that only exists in your own mind. TM teachers get compensated for their time teaching TM, whether they teach through a TM center, or through the DLF. The national TM organization gets a cut of the money as well, though it isn't that much in the case of students. Currently, TM instruction costs $360 for school age kids, including full-time undergrad and grad students in college. A single TM teacher is responsible for teaching 300 students at a Quiet Time school, at least as far as compensation goes, though details of how local TM centers and/or local TM teachers are involved in the process are unclear to me (probably because they wing it depending on who is available when). If you look at the Maharishi Foundation, Inc Form 990 for 2012, when teaching students, TM teachers got 2/3 of the fee while the TM organization got 1/3. This works out to nearly $300/student. The 990 form for 2013 isn't available online yet, but they TMO is supposed to be so flush with cash this past year that they were able to drop the fees substantially and still pay all their bills. With the new fee schedule for 2014, I'm guessing that TM teachers will still get about $300/student while the TM organization will only get $60. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Incorrect Lawson - David Lynch doesn't offer shit for free. Why do you think he is ALWAYS begging for "donations" to FUND the programs? The TMO ALWAYS gets paid, no matter what. EVERYTHING they do is a scam to make money so they can live big. On Fri, 4/18/14, LEnglish5@... wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 18, 2014, 11:10 AM The David Lynch Foundation offers TM instruction for free to people in "at risk" groups, but the $2500 price tag was originally set by Maharishi to entice wealthy people and only wealthy people to learn TM. Weren't you complaining about how insanely high that price tag was? Seems to me that no matter how TM is marketed and for what price and for whichever group of people -the homeless, war refugees, students in El Barrio watching their cousins kill their cousins, or world famous actors and actresses, CEOs worth as much as small countries, etc.- you'll find a reason to kvetch. It's just an idea. YMMV. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : One of the things I've noticed over the years is how many long-term TMers say things like, "I'd be dead if it weren't for TM," or "TM saved my life," or "TM cured me of my depression/anxiety/suicidal thoughts/mental illness/whatever." I've always found these claims difficult to relate to, because I didn't have anything to "cure" or "get over" when I first started TM. I had already left drugs behind me, having discovered them back when LSD was still legal and came in a bottle with Sandoz on the label. I did my time with them, enjoyed them *not* because they were an "escape from my problems" but because they enhanced an already-enjoyable life. But then I got tired of them, and even more tired of the scene surrounding them, and left them behind. I'm probably one of the only people here who didn't have to wait 15 days before starting TM. :-) I was also neither depressed nor suicidal. In fact, I was a pretty happy frood, and merely one who was looking for ways to become even happier. And for a time, TM presented what I was looking for, something to enhance a good life and help me to appreciate it even more. But then it became as boring and as stagnant as drugs had been, and with an even more stifling social scene, so I moved on again to other forms of meditation that worked better. But there seem to be any number of long-term TMers who don't look back on their TM experience this way. They seem to focus on what it enabled them to "get over" or "cure" or "get beyond," almost as if (a
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
The people who learn TM via the David Lynch Foundation don't pay anything. People who receive food from the Red Cross don't pay for that food, but the people who donate money to the Red Cross did. You're picking a nit that only exists in your own mind. TM teachers get compensated for their time teaching TM, whether they teach through a TM center, or through the DLF. The national TM organization gets a cut of the money as well, though it isn't that much in the case of students. Currently, TM instruction costs $360 for school age kids, including full-time undergrad and grad students in college. A single TM teacher is responsible for teaching 300 students at a Quiet Time school, at least as far as compensation goes, though details of how local TM centers and/or local TM teachers are involved in the process are unclear to me (probably because they wing it depending on who is available when). If you look at the Maharishi Foundation, Inc Form 990 for 2012, when teaching students, TM teachers got 2/3 of the fee while the TM organization got 1/3. This works out to nearly $300/student. The 990 form for 2013 isn't available online yet, but they TMO is supposed to be so flush with cash this past year that they were able to drop the fees substantially and still pay all their bills. With the new fee schedule for 2014, I'm guessing that TM teachers will still get about $300/student while the TM organization will only get $60. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : Incorrect Lawson - David Lynch doesn't offer shit for free. Why do you think he is ALWAYS begging for "donations" to FUND the programs? The TMO ALWAYS gets paid, no matter what. EVERYTHING they do is a scam to make money so they can live big. On Fri, 4/18/14, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@...> wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 18, 2014, 11:10 AM The David Lynch Foundation offers TM instruction for free to people in "at risk" groups, but the $2500 price tag was originally set by Maharishi to entice wealthy people and only wealthy people to learn TM. Weren't you complaining about how insanely high that price tag was? Seems to me that no matter how TM is marketed and for what price and for whichever group of people -the homeless, war refugees, students in El Barrio watching their cousins kill their cousins, or world famous actors and actresses, CEOs worth as much as small countries, etc.- you'll find a reason to kvetch. It's just an idea. YMMV. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : One of the things I've noticed over the years is how many long-term TMers say things like, "I'd be dead if it weren't for TM," or "TM saved my life," or "TM cured me of my depression/anxiety/suicidal thoughts/mental illness/whatever." I've always found these claims difficult to relate to, because I didn't have anything to "cure" or "get over" when I first started TM. I had already left drugs behind me, having discovered them back when LSD was still legal and came in a bottle with Sandoz on the label. I did my time with them, enjoyed them *not* because they were an "escape from my problems" but because they enhanced an already-enjoyable life. But then I got tired of them, and even more tired of the scene surrounding them, and left them behind. I'm probably one of the only people here who didn't have to wait 15 days before starting TM. :-) I was also neither depressed nor suicidal. In fact, I was a pretty happy frood, and merely one who was looking for ways to become even happier. And for a time, TM presented what I was looking for, something to enhance a good life and help me to appreciate it even more. But then it became as boring and as stagnant as drugs had been, and with an even more stifling social scene, so I moved on again to other forms of meditation that worked better. But there seem to be any number of long-term TMers who don't look back on their TM experience this way. They seem to focus on what it enabled them to "get over" or "cure" or "get beyond," almost as if (almost) before TM they had been "broken" and TM had "fixed" them. This gets me to thinking about tent revival meetings in the South (which, of course, you can't help but attend a few of if you grow up in the South), in which the most fervent "believers" and most fundamentalist Bible-thumpers were ALL those who formerly were drunks or whores or thieves or something BAD. It's as if they don't feel t
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
Of course, back in the day, the complaint was that the TMO overlooked People With Problems and focused on the secure and well-to-do. That fact appears to have been wiped from Barry's memory. Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
Incorrect Lawson - David Lynch doesn't offer shit for free. Why do you think he is ALWAYS begging for "donations" to FUND the programs? The TMO ALWAYS gets paid, no matter what. EVERYTHING they do is a scam to make money so they can live big. On Fri, 4/18/14, lengli...@cox.net wrote: Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers? To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, April 18, 2014, 11:10 AM The David Lynch Foundation offers TM instruction for free to people in "at risk" groups, but the $2500 price tag was originally set by Maharishi to entice wealthy people and only wealthy people to learn TM. Weren't you complaining about how insanely high that price tag was? Seems to me that no matter how TM is marketed and for what price and for whichever group of people -the homeless, war refugees, students in El Barrio watching their cousins kill their cousins, or world famous actors and actresses, CEOs worth as much as small countries, etc.- you'll find a reason to kvetch. It's just an idea. YMMV. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : One of the things I've noticed over the years is how many long-term TMers say things like, "I'd be dead if it weren't for TM," or "TM saved my life," or "TM cured me of my depression/anxiety/suicidal thoughts/mental illness/whatever." I've always found these claims difficult to relate to, because I didn't have anything to "cure" or "get over" when I first started TM. I had already left drugs behind me, having discovered them back when LSD was still legal and came in a bottle with Sandoz on the label. I did my time with them, enjoyed them *not* because they were an "escape from my problems" but because they enhanced an already-enjoyable life. But then I got tired of them, and even more tired of the scene surrounding them, and left them behind. I'm probably one of the only people here who didn't have to wait 15 days before starting TM. :-) I was also neither depressed nor suicidal. In fact, I was a pretty happy frood, and merely one who was looking for ways to become even happier. And for a time, TM presented what I was looking for, something to enhance a good life and help me to appreciate it even more. But then it became as boring and as stagnant as drugs had been, and with an even more stifling social scene, so I moved on again to other forms of meditation that worked better. But there seem to be any number of long-term TMers who don't look back on their TM experience this way. They seem to focus on what it enabled them to "get over" or "cure" or "get beyond," almost as if (almost) before TM they had been "broken" and TM had "fixed" them. This gets me to thinking about tent revival meetings in the South (which, of course, you can't help but attend a few of if you grow up in the South), in which the most fervent "believers" and most fundamentalist Bible-thumpers were ALL those who formerly were drunks or whores or thieves or something BAD. It's as if they don't feel they can adequately shout "I've been SAVED!" unless they feel they had a lot to be saved FROM. And *this* gets me to thinking about whether Maharishi always pitched TM to losers and people with problems and low self esteem because they become the best disciples. And *disciples* is what he was looking for. Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems. Kids doing badly in school. Criminals locked away in prisons. Veterans with PTSD. Can't this be seen as a continuation of a long-standing trend to look for prospective new students among populations who are more likely to be easy to convert into True Believers and thus become disciples? It's just an idea. YMMV.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Why does TM seem to focus on losers?
The David Lynch Foundation offers TM instruction for free to people in "at risk" groups, but the $2500 price tag was originally set by Maharishi to entice wealthy people and only wealthy people to learn TM. Weren't you complaining about how insanely high that price tag was? Seems to me that no matter how TM is marketed and for what price and for whichever group of people -the homeless, war refugees, students in El Barrio watching their cousins kill their cousins, or world famous actors and actresses, CEOs worth as much as small countries, etc.- you'll find a reason to kvetch. It's just an idea. YMMV. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote : One of the things I've noticed over the years is how many long-term TMers say things like, "I'd be dead if it weren't for TM," or "TM saved my life," or "TM cured me of my depression/anxiety/suicidal thoughts/mental illness/whatever." I've always found these claims difficult to relate to, because I didn't have anything to "cure" or "get over" when I first started TM. I had already left drugs behind me, having discovered them back when LSD was still legal and came in a bottle with Sandoz on the label. I did my time with them, enjoyed them *not* because they were an "escape from my problems" but because they enhanced an already-enjoyable life. But then I got tired of them, and even more tired of the scene surrounding them, and left them behind. I'm probably one of the only people here who didn't have to wait 15 days before starting TM. :-) I was also neither depressed nor suicidal. In fact, I was a pretty happy frood, and merely one who was looking for ways to become even happier. And for a time, TM presented what I was looking for, something to enhance a good life and help me to appreciate it even more. But then it became as boring and as stagnant as drugs had been, and with an even more stifling social scene, so I moved on again to other forms of meditation that worked better. But there seem to be any number of long-term TMers who don't look back on their TM experience this way. They seem to focus on what it enabled them to "get over" or "cure" or "get beyond," almost as if (almost) before TM they had been "broken" and TM had "fixed" them. This gets me to thinking about tent revival meetings in the South (which, of course, you can't help but attend a few of if you grow up in the South), in which the most fervent "believers" and most fundamentalist Bible-thumpers were ALL those who formerly were drunks or whores or thieves or something BAD. It's as if they don't feel they can adequately shout "I've been SAVED!" unless they feel they had a lot to be saved FROM. And *this* gets me to thinking about whether Maharishi always pitched TM to losers and people with problems and low self esteem because they become the best disciples. And *disciples* is what he was looking for. Think about it. Does the TMO really spend any energy trying to market TM to "regular people," who have few problems in life and are just looking to enjoy it more? They do not. They focus on People With Problems. Kids doing badly in school. Criminals locked away in prisons. Veterans with PTSD. Can't this be seen as a continuation of a long-standing trend to look for prospective new students among populations who are more likely to be easy to convert into True Believers and thus become disciples? It's just an idea. YMMV.
