Marek, Thanks for considering my speculations! I think the special sounds business was only important for branding. I thought in the beginning of teaching in India Maharishi only used the mantra Raam? Later the articulated system came out which would have helped if people were comparing mantras. It isn't as special if everyone has the same one.
I don't think the specialness is necessary for meditation to be valuable. Even the Christian monks I hung out with had a Jesus prayer from an ancient Hesychasm tradition. It is remarkably close to TM. I think this trick of the human mind has been discovered by many. So the extra pieces that Maharishi taught us made his the "best" are suspect for me. I'm not even sure most Indians did concentration meditations. I don't think Japa is done with effort is it? In any case I am slowly coming to my own conclusion that there are a lot of different ways to achieve this state of mind. I still haven't figured out what value it has if practiced a lot. I think like exercise, you might be able to get 80% of the value in a very short amount of time. Work in progress. Great bear story! One morning I came out to a strange sound. My cat was pulling out a guitar string with his teeth and letting it ring! He did it many times and was obviously enjoying it. I started hanging my guitars on the wall! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Comment below: > > ** > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boyboy_8 <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I too am no expert in the vagueries of mantra meanings. > The > > > > > > point is that they are phrases...meaningless sounds whose > > > > > > meaning is known? > > > > > > > > > > (Semantically) meaningless sounds whose *effects* > > > > > are known. > > > > > > > > I'm not sure how anyone could know this Judy. > > > > > > I wasn't making a claim, Curtis, I was correcting > > > what appeared to be boyboy's misunderstanding of > > > MMY's definition of mantras (see above--he has > > > "meaningless sounds whose meaning is known"). > > > > I figured that Judy. By now I am hip to your getting the teaching > > straight first and then deciding how you relate to it process. I > was > > challenging Maharishi's claim. It just doesn't seem as if it has > any > > support other than faith. > > > > > > > > I certainly don't "know" this myself, but then I > > > don't have access to whatever materials there are > > > about mantras in the Shankaracharya tradition. I > > > don't think MMY invented the notion, however. > > > > It seems as it these claims might come from the Tantric texts > because > > I can't think of any of the Vedic texts that deal with this level > of > > precision. I hope one of our Tantric scripture enthusiasts can > help. > > it sounds as if Maharishi was using a sort of scientific > sounding > > analogy here from his physics studies of vibrations. In most > > scriptures I have read they just lay out that these are the rules > and > > don't offer this kind of reasoning. It is sort of a modern > approach to > > thinking about them that would be unnecessary for a traditional > mind > > not trained to ask for such reasons isn't it? > > > > > > > > I mean, we can probably > > > > rule out a history of trying a bunch of different sounds > > > > experimentally and watching some people have bad experiences or > > > > have harm come to them right? > > > > > > On what basis can we rule it out? > > > > A lack of the knowledge of the scientific method? It seems to > apply > > modern standards of gaining reliable knowledge to a culture that > was > > resorting to a priest class with scriptural authority. If there > were > > such studies I haven't seen them being referenced in any > scriptures I > > read. Maharishi had a very complete set of Vedic scriptures on his > > stage in Seelisberg and I ferreted my way through the ones I had > not > > read before on my TTC. I did see lots of examples of people in > > scriptures making claims about a divine origin for beliefs. This > is > > even true in their Ayur Veda texts, there is no discussion of trial > > and error, it is all be decree of a sage who just "knows." > Maharishi's > > marketing brilliance was to connect the ancient ideas with the > modern > > concepts that gained credibility with us, but I am challenging > that it > > is based on anything real. It made the system sound scientific and > > more palatable. We spent months diving in to scriptures and > comparing > > them with modern science so I feel pretty confident that if this > was > > in the scriptures, we would have been using it. > > > > > **end** > > Curtis, this is great (above); I really appreciate how ruthlessly > and well thought-out your re-evaluation and challenge of all the > received wisdom we assumed we had, is. > > I've assumed the mantras emerged really early on, some sort of very > early-on primate or hominid type of "recognition and appreciation" > thing for some tribal/family sound; some kind of "eureka" moment > among early hominids that caught on, something with emotional > staying power.(*) I still totally groove on the last mantra I got > from Maharishi; meditation is mostly all dessert these days and if > I'm still hooked on this thing after nearly 40 years (minus my 10 > year hiatus) that would be some argument for some effect > specifically from the sounds themselves. > > But that's speculation and you're right that there's no evidence in > any of the Indian scriptural authority that refers to anything like > the scientific method. One of the things about Maharishi, though, > is the fact that he *did* experiment with tradition and technique, > at least at first. That was a real revolution when he first started > the movement. He kind of introduced the scientific method (to a > limited degree) into the whole field. Kind of. > > I think that a lot of the later stuff regarding reviving vedic life > may have been a kind of rubberband reaction to just how far he had > been willing to go in trying out all his techniques. Just > incredible hubris, when you think about it, but for lots and lots of > folks what he came up with just hit the spot, even if not for long > term. > > Anyway (and finally), I always look at this experiment with mantra > meditation (and any of the associated practices and lifestyles) as a > great opportunity *to* experiment. We come out of that mindset and > most of us here are still in one phase or another of the great > personal experiment. It's cool to debrief here. > > Marek > > (*) I remember reading an account of an Alaskan naturalist hiking > alone in the wilderness and hearing a huge thrummming noise > reverberating through the forest. He followed the noise some > distance and peering out from some hidden spot, he sees a huge > grizzly standing next to a large tree stump with a long, jagged > piece of wood jutting out. The grizzly pulls the big piece far back > and then lets it go; like a big guitar string it puts out the > tremendous thrummming. The bear keeps this up for 45 minutes or so; > over and over and over -- clearly taken up with the whole business. > The idea of some sound (mantra or proto-mantra) representing > something of real emotional value to early humans (or perhaps even > earlier) reminded me of that story. >
