On Mar 28, 2009, at 7:59 PM, raunchydog wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote:
On Mar 28, 2009, at 5:24 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
This principle doesn't hold up all the way through the advanced
techniques or the defunct Chopra technique. But in any case I've
not met any TMer who could rightfully claim the kind of exposure
to different meditaitons that would make this claim valid and that
criticism goes doubly for Maharishi who according to his own
reports was a company man. But was have a few people here who
seem to have gone further and found out that it was not a unique
contribution.
Huh. I've taken chopra's primoridal sound technique and several
advanced techniques
about 4-5 of them, I think
We seem to have different ideas about how things work.
Lawson.
At one stage you are directing the mantra. This is not like any
other thought. That was my point.
I know all of these advanced techniques are on the web but I don't
like to piss people off unnecessarily by being more specific. I
remember how people into it feel about their secrets. But I hope
you get my point from that.
Vaj, You haven't a clue about the practice of TM.
Intersting opinion but WRONG. :-)
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
WRONG. No one is "enjoined to maintain mindfulness." That would
require effort. TM is effortless.
You weren't told to wait for the mantra? You don't remember to return
to the mantra when you're back in thoughts?
You need to get checked!
PS: Any technique cannot, by definition, be effortless. This is a
common TM fallacy. All it indicates is you've been indoctrinated in a
untenable belief and you fell for it. MMY actually admitted at Estes
Park that TM is not "effortless". It's just a marketing spiel parroted
by people who really aren't that familiar with meditation.
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!
WRONG. "The mantra may change in different ways. It can get faster
or slower, louder or softer, clearer or fainter. Its pronunciation
may change, lengthen or shorten or even may appear to be distorted
or it may not appear to change at all. In every case, we take it as
it comes, neither anticipating nor resisting change, just simple
innocence."
Read what I said again, you missed the point.
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.
WRONG. "When we become aware that we are not thinking the mantra,
then we quietly come back to the mantra. Very easily we think the
mantra and if at any moment we feel that we are forgetting it, we
should not try to persist in repeating it. Only very easily we start
and take it as it comes and do not hold the mantra if it tends to
slip away."
Non sequitur. Your response has nothing to do with what I'm saying!
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.
WRONG. This is a gross misunderstanding of TM.
No, it's actually the level of mantra practice where you must
repeatedly return to mantra. You just were just never told about
mantra practice...sorry. Not my fault you still parrot these
misunderstood ideas.
"Losing the mantra" just means the mind has transcended thought,
transcending even the mantra as a thought, as in "no mantra and no
thought." The mantra is a vehicle for transcending thought, a
comfortable, effortless ride to the transcendent. When your vehicle
arrives at its destination, you don't think, should I stay in the
car? get back in the car? drive the car some more? No. If you can
think a thought, you effortlessly pick up the mantra. "Losing the
mantra" is just the inward stroke of the mind and a thought is just
the outward strokes of mind due to normalization of the physiology.
Nothing more. If "one has to constantly re-engage the mantra as it
is lost" it's not TM. It places the practitioner is a deplorable
quandary, "Jeez, I lost the mantra AGAIN and I HAVE TO re-engage it.
Shit! They told me this was effortless, I must be doing it WRONG."
And so goes the doubt about one's practice and TM down the tubes.
Time for checking, doncha know.
I'm talking about the "outward" stroke RD, not the inward one. If you
keep returning on the outward stroke it's because your level of
attention was faulty...another thing you were apparently never told...
...here, have a cracker Polly.
