--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69" <shukr...@...> wrote: > > Rather than degrade spiritual concepts into a > rhetorical flourish for your own nastiness, take > responsibility for your actions.
Physician, heal thyself. The point I am making is that the "proof of the pudding" is NOT in the claims, it's in the actual results of practicing the TM tech- nique. Thus we should have to look no further than the 30- to 40-year practitioners of TM *on this forum* for proof that the claims were true. I am suggesting that no such proof can be found, given the subset of loyal, 2X-per-day TMers on this forum, *including yourself*. Was *your* post above reflective of "line on water," or was it reactive and attached, lashing out (as you often do) at anyone who dares to challenge the TM dogma? It is YOUR actions, and the actions of the long- term TMers on this forum I am pointing to. THOSE are the actions that a person who is considering learning TM should look to to judge the truth of its claims. I don't practice TM, and haven't for over 30 years; my actions, whatever they may be, do not reflect on TM at all. But YOURS do. Here's a handy list to help out. When trying to judge whether TM's claims on its Web page and in its promotional materials and in its intro lectures are true, merely pay attention to the posts of the following people on this forum. They **ARE** the products of the TM technique; each of them has been practicing it for decades; each of them claims to believe that its claims are true. Therefore, each of them should be an example *of* those claims being true. Watch their posts and judge for yourself. If they don't live up to the claimed benefits of TM, then neither does TM itself: shukra69 authfriend (Judy Stein) off_world_beings nablusoss1008 WillyTex (Richard Williams) bill_hicks_ride (It's just a ride) babajii_99 (Robert) shempmcgurk bob_brigante wgm4u (BillyG) jr_esq (John) There are other posters on this forum who have said that they still practice TM occasionally, or who still practice it along with some other techniques, but to be "scientific" you should remove them from the "study." Instead, focus on the list of posters above, all of whom have claimed at one point or another to be regular practitioners of TH and only TM. If the claims about TM are true, then these people's posts should reflect those claims. Don't take my word for it...judge for yourself. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > One of the things I've been noticing most about > > this forum lately -- and yes, it does have some- > > thing to do with my tendency to post provocative > > or "button-pushing" items -- is what this forum > > reveals about the benefits or non-benefits of > > the long-term practice of meditation techniques. > > > > The *theory* of such practices, if one remembers > > Maharishi's metaphor for it, is that meditation > > *should* help a person to become more flexible, > > less rigid, less affected by stimuli to the point > > of becoming reactive to them or dwelling on them. > > The metaphor in question was the long-lasting > > nature of a line scratched in stone, and how long > > that endures vs. the ephemeral quality of a line > > drawn in water, and how quickly it goes away. > > > > If his theory was correct, then this forum, com- > > posed as it is of 30-to-40-year practitioners of > > meditation and other spiritual techniques, should > > reflect more of the "line on water" mentality than > > it does the "line on stone" mentality. > > > > But does it? > > > > Step out of the moment and the in-the-moment flow > > of posts and the emotion you invest them with > > before you press Send and LOOK at the TRENDS that > > are evident on this forum. **DO** most of the > > regular posters here -- especially those who align > > themselves with TM and Maharishi and his beliefs -- > > actually react to the things said here with flexi- > > bility, as if the things said affected them as > > little as a "line drawn on water," or **DO** they > > react with rigidity, as if the things said affect > > them *far* more strongly and permanently, more like > > a "line drawn on stone?" > > > > I think it's the latter. Just look at the *reactive* > > nature of the majority of posts on FFL. Someone says > > something and four or five people *react* to simple > > words as if someone had slapped them physically in > > the face. Someone posts something that disagrees > > with one of their mere *beliefs* ferchrissakes and > > they go nuts. And *then* look at how long they > > STAY nuts. THAT is the thing that amazes me most > > about FFL. There are people here who have been > > "acting out" over the same grudges for *years*, > > and show no signs of ever letting them go. > > > > Conversely, there are very few examples of posters > > making radical *changes* in their posting style, > > their beliefs, and/or their lives. I can think of > > only a few who have made visible and radical "shifts" > > over the years. Many others cling to the "same old > > same old" as if remaining as "consistent" as a line > > drawn in stone were a Good Thing. > > > > *Theoretically*, spiritual development is about being > > able to become more fluid, more flexible, more able > > to "roll with the punches" and react in less predic- > > table and destructive ways to the slings and arrows > > of outrageous fortune. But -- given Fairfield Life > > as an indicator -- does that theory seem to have > > *worked out* for most of the "spiritual" people here? > > > > And if not, will those whose "posting lives" make > > them candidates for "line on stone" poster boy or > > poster girl of the year react defensively to *this* > > post and turn it into yet another pile-on grudge-fest, > > and then do their best to keep the pile-on fest going > > as long as humanly possible, or will they allow this > > post to just be a line drawn on the water of their > > consciousness and move on to the next post? > > >
