--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > <snip> > > > In our Philosophy of Science core course at MIU in 1977, David > > > Clay deconstructed the stress theory and clarified its > > > shortcomings. It was a clarifying if understated moments in my > > > Maharishi education. > > > > I'd be interested to hear whatever you remember of > > what he said. > > The gist of it was, as I recall, Judy (and we've already > established the reliability of my memory in another > thread), the stress theory doesn't explain enough of > the phenomena we observe as a result of people > practicing TM. Here I'm at a loss for an example, > though, so please permit me to continue with generalities. > > Simply removing stress doesn't explain all the creative > or growth characteristics of the practice of TM. Those > characteristics suggest a larger theory at work which > we may call the consciousness theory. It would seem > consciousness is a field of all possibilities which, when > tapped, makes manifest those possibilities daily life. > > Sound familiar now? > > The stress theory deals with removing something > physical; the consciousness theory deals wtih adding > something spiritual.
Sure, but MMY is very insistent that you can't really separate the two. Could it be stress, physical (neurological) impurities, that get in the way of tapping the field of all possibilities? For that matter, is it even *possible* to "add" anything spiritual, if we are That to begin with? > To relate this to earlier points in this thread, I would > say that from the point of view of Patrick Gillam in the > 1970s, it was way more compassionate for a TM teacher > to speak in terms of removing stress. From my point of > view now, I'd rather hear about consciousness. > > Perhaps other MIU alums from that era could elaborate > upon or correct what I've written above. George DeForest? > Peter Sutphen? > > Or maybe Rick Archer could get input from the teacher, David Clay. > You know everyone else, Rick, so I'm just assuming... > > ; ) > > - Patrick Gillam To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
