--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_re...@...> wrote: > > Some comments on this thread and recent TM research: > > --If in fact different TM mantras have different effects > on BP (which I personally do not believe) it is at least > possible that mantras were not chosen correctly when chosen > based on age and sex, rather than whether you were a kapha > type or whatever.
Speaking as an ex-TM Teacher, the criterion for selection of mantras on my teacher training course was by age only. That said, your personal mantra may vary considerably depending on which TTC your instructor attended. The selection scheme has... uh...varied considerably over the years. *That* said, I suspect that the individual mantra would not affect statistically-measurable results. The *use* of the mantra -- the instructions given for how to deal with it during TM instruction -- would IMO override any characteristics of the mantra itself. But that's just my opinion. > -- Bhairitu said: "The 'deities represent the qualities. > They were invented to explain abstract concepts to the masses." > This is an unsupported assertion. It could also be that the > abstract concepts were developed to rationalize beliefs in > deities. Religion is full of rationalization. Couldn't agree more. > --IIRC most if not all the BP research was on TM meditators > who were dong simple mediation and not using advanced > techniques, though I could be wrong. It would be counter-intuitive if it were otherwise. "Long-term" TM meditators have gotten "advanced techniques," almost by definition. Therefore they are no longer doing "vanilla" TM. > --All the research is inconclusive and most is poorly done. Couldn't agree more. Plus, I have yet to see a study which could not accurately be described as "drawing bulls-eyes around the arrows." The "results" were a foregone conclusion before the study began. Heisenberg would not be surprised at the study results. :-) > This problem continues. The most recent study widely publicized > by the TMO concerns the "benefits" of TM on breast cancer > patients. It is promoted as a controlled study but the control > group was not controlled for placebo. Just as a question, how exactly *does* one "control for placebo?" I'm honestly curious. > Plus, even though people were randomly assigned to a TM or no > TM group, those who volunteered for the study may very well > have been predisposed to believing that meditation could be > helpful for them. Again, it would be counter-intuitive to believe that they were not. For example, would a fundamentalist Christian who had been told that Eastern meditation was a shortcut to the Devil be likely to volunteer for a study in which they might have to learn and practice it? Duh...*of course* they expected results from meditation.
