--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: <snip> > Really, in terms of the technical description of how > TM is practiced in the initial technique--it's not > truly like 'any other thought', as one is enjoined to > maintain mindfulness (or smriti to use the actual > technical term) both as the mantra first arises (waiting > or "monitoring" for the mantra to "appear") and one must > be mindful to return to the mantra--otherwise one would > potentially end up never returning to the mantra, but > remain distracted for the entire session!
One isn't "enjoined" to maintain "mindfulness" in TM. The instruction is, "When you become aware that you're not thinking the mantra..." That thought, that one isn't thinking the mantra, arises of its own accord, just like any other thought. In my experience, that thought itself is what triggers a return to the mantra; the mantra is the very next thought to arise, automatically (in my case, at this point it's not entirely clear that they're even two separate thoughts). And being "distracted" by other thoughts is part of the "outward stroke" of TM, not something to be avoided by monitoring whether one is or isn't thinking the mantra. > This is not like any other thought. The level of > mantra repetition where mantra continues continuously > like a spontaneous thought actually is ajapa-japa: > no effort or smriti, just constant ongoing awareness > of mantra 24/7/365. This, obviously, is not TM, has nothing to do with TM. > Technically the style of mantra repetition where one > has to return to the mantra still is called "faulty" > or "defective" in Sanskrit since one has to constantly > re-engage the mantra as it is lost. It's one of the > lower levels of mantra practice. If the goal is constantly to maintain the mantra, then losing the mantra would indeed be a "defect." But that's not TM. If TM can be said to have a "point," it's to *lose* the mantra--either by going off on a train of thought (which is said to be the release of stress), or by transcending. You're doing a fine job, Vaj, of documenting that TM *is* unique.
