--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "dhamiltony2k5" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, staging emotional 'trigger points', great synthesis Turq. > > You probably could have labeled this thread, The TM New Age Reich > > -Doug in FF > > any of us could probably remember trigger points along the way, > like being given a copy of the Holy Tradition upon finishing > Teacher Training. Being in meetings with Maharishi. Singing puja > together in highly produced meetings. Story of Trotaka. Guru Dev > finding his master. World Plans. Much and on-going glossy multi- > media production for the group and to the group which constantly > portrays that we are important and influential. Iterations mostly > for internal group consumption. Maharishi has been a master at it. > -D
While I agree with what you're saying, my point in saying it was not that it's a TM-only phen- omenon. It pervades pretty much the entire realm of spirituality and religion. As such, I think it deserves some pondering and possibly discussion. Some are probably going to say that the emotional rushes they experience as a result of some spiritually-oriented trigger *are* spiritual experience, and of course that's true if you define spiritual experience that way. If, however, you define it as the direct experience of the transcendent, then an emotional experi- ence, no matter how profound it may seem, just doesn't cut the mustard. I find it fascinating to look at different relig- ious or spiritual traditions and try to pinpoint which of their practices seem to be designed as emotional triggers. And, for that matter, to try to pinpoint how important emotion itself has been in religious history. Most of the wars started by religions were about emotion, most of the perse- cutions were about emotion, etc. In some of the repostings of currently-popular atheists on this forum, I seem to remember that a few of them characterized religion AS emotion. And, given the importance that emotion and the creation of emotional triggers seems to play in religions, that is not an unreasonable statement. It's just another way of looking at things, but I find it a fascinating one. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > Soon afterward, Dr.Stein and Hitler saw the Reich's lance > > > together in the Imperial Museum at the Hofburg. Dr. Stein > > > had been there before and had never failed to be moved by > > > the sight of the old relic, supposed to have been moved > > > by the original spear with which the Roman centurion, > > > Longinus, pierced the side of Christ during the > > > crucifixation. Longinus was a German, and his "spear of > > > destiny" was fated to play a magical role in the careers > > > of German leaders like Charlemagne, Otto the Great, and > > > Frederick Barbarossa. Dr. Stein said the spear inspired > > > in him the emotion expressed in the motto of the knights > > > of the holy grail: Durch Mitleid wissen, "through compassion > > > to self knowledge." > > > > > > Then he glanced at Hitler: > > > > > > Walter Stein found he was not the only one moved by the > > > sight of this historic spearhead. Adolf Hitler stood beside > > > him, like a man in a trance, a man over whom some dreadful > > > magic spell had been cast... The very space around him > > > seemed enlivened with some subtle irradiation, a > > > kind of ghostly ectoplasmic light. His whole physiognomy > > > and stance appeared transformed as if some might Spirit > > > now inhabited his very soul, creating within and around > > > him a kind of evil transfiguration of its own nature and > > > power. > > > > Ignoring the specific Newage "triggers" referred > > to here, and focusing on what I see as the more > > important aspect of things, this provides "meat" > > for a discussion. > > > > It seems to me that what is being described above > > can be seen throughout the TM movement, and in > > many other spiritual movements as well. It is, in > > many of them, the most important *part* of their > > spiritual path. > > > > What "it" is, IMO, is mistaking emotion for true > > spiritual experience. > > > > As anyone knows who has spent some extended time > > in samadhi, that is *not* an emotional experience. > > Emotions have been left far behind at that point. > > Same with any truly transcendental experience; > > emotion is one of the first things transcended. > > > > And yet, why are so many who think of themselves > > as on a spiritual path "emotion junkies." They > > seem to live for those things that inspire in them > > an upswelling of emotion -- the ceremonies, the > > costumes and symbols, the tales of power and > > stories of past masters, whatever. It really > > doesn't seem to matter what the "trigger" event > > is for such people; all that matters is that they > > get to feel this upswelling of emotion that they > > have come to associate with feeling "spiritual" > > or mistake for actual spiritual experience. > > > > IMO, this is a phenomenon that most often appears > > in spiritual traditions that have no technique > > to regularly provide *real* spiritual experience > > (long, extended periods of thought-free and > > emotion-free samadhi). In the *absence* of such > > real experience, seekers are often tempted to > > (or even encouraged to) settle for "second best," > > FEELING as if they had had some powerful exper- > > ience that they can consider "spiritual," just > > because they are in the grips of some overwhelm- > > ing emotional state. > > > > I think it's an issue worth pondering. If you > > look at things this way, *most* of the pomp, > > circumstance, costumes and silliness of the TM > > movement is an attempt to "trigger" emotional > > responses in the participants and/or in the > > people watching. Certainly a large percentage > > of the experiences claimed as "enlightenment" > > by Jim and Rory fall into the category of just > > some overwhelming emotion. The tendency towards > > "righteous anger" and feeling "more moral" than > > others we see so often here? -- more emotion. > > Bhakti? -- all emotion. > > > > Emotion is relative. It is *not* transcendental. > > And yet for centuries those who have no way to > > really achieve a truly transcendental state > > themselves have "settled for" emotion instead, > > and have built up a framework of "emotion- > > causing" triggers around themselves. These > > emotional triggers can take the form of costumes, > > or symbols, or ceremonies, or behavior (bowing, > > prostations), or identification (reading stories > > about the 'gods' or about 'saints'). The world > > we see about us that we consider "spiritual" > > is a vast playground of emotional triggers. > > > > And all that they are, from my point of view, > > is Yet Another Way To Fixate On The Relative. > > Not one of these emotional triggers IS transcend- > > ence, and few if any of them seem to bring *about* > > transcendence. What they bring about is a state > > of heightened emotion that many people have > > mistaken for something "spiritual," and which > > they have settled for *instead* of transcendence. > > > > Much easier to go for the real thing, IMO. > > >
