--Precisely, Turg! Besides, as stated by a number of contributors, Buddhists can practice TM (like myself). Vaj is a discredit to Buddhism and his Guru, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche; because a fundamental tenent of Buddhism derived from the Lotus Sutra is that "expedient" means (i.e. ANY expedient means), can/should be used not only to LURE people from the mundane world into the Spiritual Path, but to assist them on the road to Enlightenment. Cf. the parable of the burning house where the Father lures the kids out of a burning house by offering candy...(or something like that). The umbrella of expedient means would of course, include "supermarket" methods, if they work. Some do! Besides, some of the items available in supermarkets are actually good for people: organic carrots for example.
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > On Jan 25, 2008, at 6:22 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > Me, I just find it interesting how MUCH of Shankara's > > > dick-size-contest mentality with regard to proving his > > > stuff "better" than Buddhism has permeated TM and MMY's > > > teaching. All very quietly. > > > > But unfortunately research actually shows forms of Buddhist > > meditation superior. > > Read my lips: I DON'T CARE !!! > > That's just Buddhist my-dick-is-longer-than-yours > stuff as far as I'm concerned. You've made judge- > ments about what constitutes "better" before most > scientists have even been convinced that anything > is going on in meditation, period. > > > In fact while forms of Buddhist meditation are > > ubiquitous in hospitals and pain clinics now, TM has been > > largely discarded. > > I don't doubt it, but that almost certainly has as > much to do with 1) the price of TM, 2) all of the > religious trappings that TM teachers demand be > attached to the teaching of TM, and 3) the general > distaste that most people feel for anything assoc- > iated with Maharishi at this point, not because of > any proven "superiority" experimentally. > > In other words, Vaj, I see your claims of "superiority" > as being EXACTLY the same as those made by TMers. Give > it a break, already. > > The issue is to get more research done on meditation > that is NOT influenced by or willfully distorted by > True Believers, is NOT used to promote a particular > brand name of meditation, and is NOT used to "prove" > any kind of "superiority" claim. > > The world needs to know whether meditation in ANY form > has any proven value, and the longer that adherents of > one brand name of meditation stay stuck in the "my tech- > nique's dick is longer than your technique's dick" or > "my technique's dick is 'better' than your technique's > dick" mindset keep quibbling, no one is going to believe > anything they publish or cite. > > Get OVER all this "better" and "best" and "superior" > stuff already. It's as embarrassing when Buddhists do > it as it is when TMers do it. >
