--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > Edg, in my opinion the adherence to the "Gotta > do the puja" thang comes from many sources. One > is the overall "Maharishisez" EQUALS "gotta" > mindset that was drilled into us for so many > years or decades. > > Another is the fact that many teachers really > *did* feel a "buzz" from doing puja. I never > felt much of one, but some did, and they assoc- > iate that buzz with magical thinking and feel > that something about *their* buzz helped give > their initiates a buzz, too. > > Yet another is the dogma about something magical > being "transmitted" from the "holy tradition" > when one does puja. If you tend to believe this, > you're pretty much going to placebo-effect your- > self into having a buzz, even if one didn't > really happen.
There were also many stories of people seeing these robed, older men walking around the room while puja was going on during initiations-of some saying they saw "the guy in the picture" (Guru Dev) in the room, of children claiming to see these types of things, and the person being initiated seeing the very beings the puja was specifically to invoke. I heard these stories second and third hand. I never had this happen while I was initiating, altho there were a few times while doing the puja alone, when I suddenly found myself on my knees in front of the table and feeling great devotion to Guru Dev. > > But I think that the biggest obstacle to even > *conceiving* of teaching TM without a puja is > that MOST HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED BEING > TAUGHT MEDITATION TECHNIQUES THAT WAY. > > I have. I've been taught TM techniques *with* > a puja, and any number of other techniques > *without* a puja. Sometimes the "teaching > process" was individual, sometimes it was in > a big room with no more mystery surrounding > it than the teacher saying, "Meditate on > this <mantra/visual/whatever>" to 500 people > at a time. > > Having experienced both ways of teaching, and > having *taught* meditation both ways, I honestly > don't feel that there is any appreciable dif- > ference in terms of the "quality" of what the > student learns and their resulting ability to > meditate effectively. > > But that's just me. I'm not heavily attached to > dogma about this stuff, and I'm not attached in > the least to "Maharishisez." That has the same > relevance to my life as "BozoTheClownsez." > Others are going to feel differently about > this depending on what *their* attachments are > to all of the points above, and I for one am not > going to try to talk them out of those attach- > ments. > > What I *do* agree with is that to become widely > popular today (as opposed to during the 70s), a > technique is pretty much going to need to be > taught in a secular fashion, free of rituals > that most people would interpret as religious. > That is why mindfulness is making so many inroads > into society as a whole; you can teach it with > no "trappings" whatsoever, and it's still the > same practice. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > "do.rflex" wrote: > > > The training at TTC included clear, specific explanations by > > > Maharishi about what indeed takes place as the mantra is given - > > > which my own experience teaching has repeatedly confirmed. > > > > So, are you equally comfortable the to give an > > "official-as-decreed-by-MMY" second lecture in which you are required > > to shuck and jive the folks about the mantra being selected for them > > especially with ultra specificity and cosmic oogabooganess? > > > > Or will you tell them that "It's your age that determines the mantra, > > we don't know where Maharishi got them for sure, we don't know why > > they can be thought to be more life supporting than other Hindu > > mantras, and that 90% of those who get these mantras quit the practice > > withing a few months, or that the siddhi program doesn't use Sanskrit?" > > > > It's one thing to create an aura of mystique such that the punters get > > a good shove to interiority by a theatrical framing, but the taste of > > it always kept coming back up on me like a tuna fish sandwich. The > > ends doesn't seem to justify the means; really now, are you espousing > > that the TM teacher fool or skew or outrightly dis-educate people into > > a holy program? WTF? > > > > Edg > > >
