--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <compost1uk@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > You mention "My decisions are based on objective criteria as well as
> > > subjective criteria". But I think all of what you say relates to
> > > objective stuff? So I'm wondering - what was your SUBJECTIVE
> > > experience of TM? Did it do anything at all for you? Did it have
> > > anything at all going for it would you say?
> >
> > Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that
> > I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they
> > seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before
> > meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to
> > me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became
> > believers in the techniques and are long time meditators.
> >
> > I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who
> > finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like
> > reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it
> > tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill
> > and transcend.
> >
> > My meditation experiences frequently were of thee "when can I get up"
> > or "only five minutes have passed?" type. Sometimes I could go quite
> > a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of
> > positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit
> > and family.
> >
> > I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it
> > was over because I had a WTF moment.
> >
>
> That's interesting and I quite "get it".
>
> Unlike you though, I have always enjoyed TM so it's no real effort to
> do it. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't be here and I wouldn't have
> persevered (it wasn't *perseverance* ;-) ).
>
> Because I enjoy it and it seems to be (subjectively) profound - I feel
> there must be something to it. Quite what I'm not sure. If you
> describe it as "restful alertness" then I don't think that's a misuse
> of language. That term might seem a bit prosaic, but I am more
> inclined to think it has a deeper significance than, say, Curtis would
> allow.
>
> As for the Vajs and Knapps of this world - I don't recognise the
> "dangerous" TM they froth and fret about (in the former case at least
> with such self-regarding and zealous fervour). That comes from both my
> own experience and from all the folks I have met down the years who
> have done TM.
>
> Of all the people who have been around the planet in my lifetime, I
> feel MMY embodied something genuinely special. Having said that, I
> can't say the same for any of the folks I met in the TMO - which is on
> the face of it puzzling.
>
> Bottom line? Thinking about it 'duz me 'ead in'.
>
Thank you. This was a nice post. I think Knapp does not believe
that TM is troublesome for most people but it can be for some
especially when people do a lot of rounding. I think that his concerns
relate more to the cultish relationship that some can have with the
TMO. That does not seem to be an issue with the people who frequent
this forum.
