Just a reminder, cuz I don't want your enthusiasm for the sport of TMO-bashing to land you on the Silent Bench for a week. :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mjackson74" <mjackson74@...> wrote: > > Are you kidding? The schism has already taken place - there > are former TM teachers all over the place who either teach > their own brand of meditation or teach TM without the > Movement and its "re-certification" which in my opinion > was one of the sleazier moves M ever made - making tried > and true teachers pay to get re-certified. I mean, Jerry > Jarvis needs to get re-certified? March-y must-a needed > to get one of his nephews a new gold Bently for his birthday. While there was obviously a financial motive -- MMY could no longer charge for new "advanced" courses for TMers or TM Teachers because frankly no one was inter- ested in them -- I don't think that was the primary motive behind TM teacher "recertification." >From my point of view, it was more about "reindoctrination." As I remember it, the "recert" idea came up during a period in which MMY was trying to persuade large numbers of TM teachers to commit to teaching full-time, using the promise of a "lifetime salary" to entice them to do so. They were to open "Centers of the Age of Enlightenment" and teach courses there full-time, all of this supposedly paying for itself through course fees. The "recert" program, seen from the outside through my admittedly jaded eyes, was about making sure that anyone stupid enough to go for this was teaching 100%, pure, no-deviation-allowed TM Dogma *as it was defined at that minute*. All of the lectures had to be using the latest buzzwords and hype-language, and all of the many products (like A-V and S-V and yagyas) had to be sold equally. None of this "I only teach basic TM" stuff. The entire project was doomed from the start, as anyone with one foot still on the ground could have told them, because THERE WAS NO MARKET FOR WHAT THEY WERE SELLING. Almost no one was willing to pay the (then) $3000-a-pop asking price to learn vanilla TM, much less the $15,000 additional cost for the TM-Sidhis ($3K each for four mandatory "advanced techniques," and then an estimated $3K for the sidhi course). This attempt to get people to work full-time for a supposedly guaranteed salary was made during a period in which the number of initiations per month in the entire U.S. rarely cracked three figures. And for obvious reasons. They had not only priced them- selves out of the "introduction to meditation" market, they had bad-PRed themselves out of it, by making TM appear to be the *least hip choice available* to anyone wanting to learn to meditate. But as you point out, the whole "recert" idea was an obvious slap in the face of those who had dedicated years of their lives to teaching TM and, at the very least, paying lip service to the idea and the ideals of TM. Many TM teachers didn't teach very much any more, but they occasionally did if someone asked to learn. They even sent the money to the TMO, as they were supposed to. But now they were told that they couldn't even do that. The reaction was similar to Wayne and Garth's: "We're not worthy...we're not worthy." And they *weren't*. They weren't willing to pay *more than they had orig- inally paid for Teacher Training in the first place* to "re-learn" what they already knew how to do, just to get "certified" by *people they did not respect*. Most TM teachers just laughed it off and stopped giving even lip service to Maharishi and TM at that point. But as policy, I honestly think it was much more about CONTROL than it was money. Maharishi was trying to create a class of mindless "We'll do whatever you tell us to do, Maharishi" dweebs among TM teachers with no money, just as he had managed to do among the rich ones by offering them robes and crowns and a title for a million bucks a pop. More than the money, he wanted the LOYALTY of the mindless follower, someone who is *so* invested in the dogma as to be willing to be re-taught everything he or she had ever learned, and PAY FOR IT, as if they were being offered a privilege. "Recertification" was in a very real sense the Poor TM Teacher's counterpart to what the Rich TM Teachers were doing at the end -- building enormous phalluses to MMY's memory and calling them Maharishi Towers of Invincibility. If you couldn't pony up the bucks for that -- and thus be *truly* worthy of Maharishi's attention -- you could at least pay a few thousand bucks to be "recertified," and thus be allowed to still call yourself a TM teacher. Many decided that "honor" simply wasn't worth the money. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > > >> <anartaxius@> wrote: > > >> > > >>> 'Most people find this much harder to do than the simple mantra > > >>> practice; so why bother? The answer to that question has many sides to > > >>> it. I will only discuss one here. But before I can do that, we need to > > >>> first clarify an even deeper way in which mantra and mindfulness are > > >>> related. Because mantra is a repetitive rhythm, it sets up periodic > > >>> waves or vibrations in ones consciousness. Let me try to explain this > > >>> with a somewhat crude metaphor. You are probably familiar with > > >>> hand-held electrical vibrators that are used for massage. Imagine the > > >>> effect of holding such a vibrator in contact with the surface of a pool > > >>> of water. It would impart very regular pleasing patterns of ripples > > >>> throughout the water. Focusing on those patterns of ripples could > > >>> easily take you into a state of relaxation. This is one facet of how > > >>> mantra works. Its repetitive nature sets up rhythmic ripples throughout > > >>> the meditator's whole consciousness. The meditator then focuses on the > > >>> regularity of those ripples and rides them into deeper and deeper > > >>> levels of relaxation, concentration and integration. > > > > > > > > Xeno, are you a TM-teacher ? I ask because just as laudable the attempt > > > > from the above Buddhist to explain what TM is and how it works, anyone > > > > with direct experience knows the above is incorrect. But I applaude > > > > that at least he tries. > > > > Well, this is not how TM was explained to me, but it is someone else's > > attempt to understand it. This idea is nice, but I would say the part where > > he says the meditator 'focuses' is not correct. Most people who have not > > done TM tend to make that error of assuming there is some kind of focus. > > Actually there is, coming back to the mantra, but the aim is to make any > > adjustment in meditation as non focused as possible to avoid concentration, > > which you learn how from checking. However the idea of regularity of the > > ripples riding inward seems a plausible description, but it happens > > automatically, not by focus. > > > > Another mindfulness advocate, Adyashanti also makes a similar error in > > describing mantra meditation (he does not seem to write directly of TM), > > yet interestingly when he describes meditation, it sounds nearly exactly > > like TM in being non-concentrative, relaxed, and letting go, just minus a > > mantra, and he does not mind if people are using a mantra, he does not seem > > to mind if people are doing different kinds of meditation as long as there > > are results. > > > > There is always difficulty describing a mental process that is entirely > > experiential. In 1955 MMY referred to TM as 'mind control' though of course > > he did not mean control by virtue of force, but by virtue of a process that > > allows the mind to naturally collect itself. On the outer level however, in > > the TMO today and of yesterday, we see a lot of practices of mind control - > > not meditation - but systems that attempt to force conformity to various > > kinds of behaviour. Reminds me of George Orwell's novel 1984 with far more > > than a passing resemblance. > > > > I have this idea that the 'purity of the teaching' is really just knowing > > how to completely let go, something every great spiritual sage seems to > > know, but strange to say, there seems to be a lot of structure surrounding > > getting someone to experience how. But another factor seems to arise in > > spiritual movements as a result of that necessity of some kind of > > structured teaching. And that is what I call 'purity of the learning'. > > Somehow, spiritual organisations deteriorate in a way that involves seeing > > learners as objects which must conform to a certain view of how they > > understand a teaching, and that view is the view that 'the management' > > collectively holds to be true. As time goes on, if the practice is working, > > people become freer on the inside, but find the environment of the > > spiritual philosophy becoming more and more rigid and irrational and > > controlling. This is what a lot of meditators feel about the TMO, TM is > > great but the TMO - yuk! > > > > At some point this process of increasing rigidity and control implodes into > > the central tenets and practices for which the organisation was created and > > they become corrupted. So far TM, which is so very standarised in > > instruction has escaped this process. The increasing focus the organisation > > has on the memory and person of MMY though I think is a danger sign. Look > > what happened to Jesus. We do not know what he taught exactly. We know how > > the generations that followed viewed him and his mission, and if you > > compare the remaining records of what he supposedly said with the > > organisations that exist in his name today, the discrepancy is incredible. > > > > It is said in the Bible that Jesus would baptise one into spirit, not > > water, as John before him. So what could that have been? Maybe something > > like TM. If that was there then, 2,000 years ago, it certainly is not > > taught now. Long gone. But you do see mini revivals of the idea with small > > splinter churches today that talk of Christ Consciousness, and practice > > meditation techniques, but you do not see this in the major churches where > > such ideas get crushed by management. > > > > I really feel the Catholic Church is a good model to view to how the TMO is > > shaping up and transforming over time. Now the Mormon church, which is > > about 150 years old, already has splintered into about six different sects. > > The movement was mostly monolithic when MMY controlled the reigns, but now > > that he is gone, when will the first schism happen? I certainly do not > > know, but I suspect it will be soon. > > >
