The problem with TM is that if you want something more then TM isn't
it. It's essentially "yoga lite". And that may work well for a lot of
people as a relaxation technique. There are some very powerful things
in yoga and some things that are overlooked by TM. Also from the theory
of mantra shastra, TM will only work for some people but not all.
Generally personal teachers have a method of ascertaining what kind of
mantra a person should be practicing. The process can be as simple as
what is often used in ayurveda.
TM also priced itself out of the market and never adapted to the changes
in societal lifestyles. The seven steps worked well in the mid 20th
century but as time moved on it needed to be revised probably to weekend
meetings workshop style which other organizations have done.
On 01/26/2016 07:24 AM, olliesed...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
I don’t see the problem as anything to do with TM or its instruction,
nor have I encountered anyone doing the program along with a normal
career and family life who has encountered any problems.
The issue seems to be those who have forsaken everything, in order to
chase enlightenment by copying Maharishi. Nature does not operate in
this way, a dog doesn’t suddenly decide to become a cat, so I am not
sure where anyone got the idea that living as faux-Indians and
meditating much more than is healthy, leads to salvation.
TM was not introduced as any sort of a lifestyle change. It was always
meant as an enhancement, not the be all and end all of our existence.
The other thing those in the movement seem to have missed is that
Maharishi never set himself up as a personal guru to anyone. As the
founder of TM, some people made an association with Maharishi that to
emulate what he did and said would gain the goal more quickly. But
that isn’t consistent about what even he said about TM, that it makes
you your own person, by eliminating stress.
That being the case, we can expect to face greater opportunities, and
a more dynamic life, than without TM. All that deep rest has to emerge
somewhere. It is also a reasonable expectation that some of us will
need therapy to understand and deal with these changes. Maharishi
could not help with that, because it was outside of his personal and
cultural context. The error was in assuming that his choice was the
right one, for the West. It wasn’t.
Yes, any dedicated spiritual pursuit enlarges our world for us, and it
is foolish to think that we can simply follow a template already laid
out by someone else, to gain eternal peace and fulfillment. TM is an
amazing technique, with far more to offer than most realize. But it
takes us working with ourselves, and perhaps some outside assistance,
to integrate it. Given its mechanical nature, eliminating stress and
opening us to ourselves, there is a lot to integrate.
So TM will bring up the elements that may be causing anger, though it
is the practitioner’s responsibility to do something about it, without
the assumption that it is someone else’s fault, or by trying to
meditate it away.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote :
What you mention about someone with anger issues mucking up the whole
meditating community, is an odd effect from a technique that has so
much to offer. We all know the background of Maharishi not seeing a
need for an integration of the study of psychology with the benefits
of TM, but this appears to now have resulted in a serious problem wrt
the movement's ongoing liveliness.
I guess the real question is: Why doesn't TM - if it has so much to
offer - not clear up people's anger problems?
It's hardly a rare thing, my overriding memories of working in the TMO
was of highly stressed, angry and generally dysfunctional people. Not
all of them by any means, but enough to make a casual observer wonder
what was going on. And what seemed to be going on was that these
people thought they were doing fine because they were On The Program
and thus their thoughts were in perfect accord with Natural Law.
Therefore any problems are with other people.
The sooner you all get out of the idea that meditation - of any sort -
makes your thoughts special in some way the sooner it will start
working like a proper organisation with people holding themselves
responsible for their actions rather than everyone trying to
rationalise why the leaders are hopeless when Marshy - in his infinite
wisdom - chose them for us.
To somehow believe that in the absence of any instruction except,
"take it easy, take it as it comes", and the diligent practice of TM,
that everything will magically sort itself out mentally, emotionally,
physically, socially, and financially, is pretty naive. Add to that
the inevitable "cart before the horse" attitude wrt behavior in
spiritual environments (faux emulation of "enlightened" living), and
you end up with a bunch of emotional powder kegs in the community.
Light is essential for seeing the world, but it is the shadows that
give everything its reality. Has anyone spoken to this angry person in
a clear and direct fashion, about this problem, or is that not possible?
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :
Really Great observation, Back_for_more about capable leadership
qualities in the abstract.
Fine, but add in a derangement or two and you get a nut.
Here in the movement we got someone in the middle of leadership of
our meditating community group who has ruled with some of those
leadership qualities in the abstract except that in character is
unable to be magnanimous and is out of balance with serious anger
management issues that have completely tied the group up and in effect
driven a whole movement off in to exile.
As you say below it is about relational balance.
I know someone who knows Donald. The Trump is full compulsive
obsessive. Not just a little but real. The person says that you don’t
want Trump running the country.
Where would US citizens go in to exile whence an evident nut like
Trump could come in to disruption and control of our lives? The
twentieth century had plenty of examples to draw on of that happening.
I am looking for balance in leadership. A good human being.
As part of the Iowa caucus cycle I have seen all three of the
democratic candidates and I am fine with either of them from this
standpoint of reasonable balance and self control.
#
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <awoelflebater@...> wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :
Anne , are you in a position to criticize Trump's negotiating skills?
If you are , I think the New York Times would love to have an
editorial from you, the National Review also!
Sure I am and so are you. Just watch him. He may have pushed and
bullied his way around the corporate world but these tactics don't
work as the leader of a country. My reasons for thinking this are
below in my initial post. It doesn't take much of a brain to
extrapolate from all of his bluster from the podium that his way or
the highway can only end in war and disaster. Perhaps he is all hot
air and were he to actually assume the office of the President of the
US he will turn out to be a contemplative, sane, rational, balanced
human being but from all evidence from the stump he appears exactly
the opposite. It is precisely because his techniques have worked in
his (corporate) world so far that he is stupid enough to think they
will work in the different context in his role as President (although
he will never assume office). I heard him say earlier on that he will
hire the best negotiators in the world as his advisors even though
they are "harrible, harrible human beings". Does this sound like a
good idea to you?
I grew up in a family where the patriarch (my father) was one of the
most powerful and influential CEO's in the world. He was brave, smart,
fair, decent and yet no push over. I grew up around this. I know that
no matter how tough and how big you think you are you have to combine
it with a balance that includes empathy, heart, wisdom and depth and
to understand and acknowledge your own fallibility and weaknesses. In
other words, you have to act like a human being. It is only then that
you command true respect instead of generating rancor, resistance and
resentment by others who you need to "deal" with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]"
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Friday, January 22, 2016 9:16 PM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Establishment Conservatives Against Trump
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :
Feste, he's not my ideal candidate either! However, he has just as
much qualifications as Obama did , if not more. At least Trump has
management, executive and negotiating skills and built his own
multi-billion dollar *empire*.
All Obama ever did was be a *community organizer*, whatever that is.
Whatever his academic achievements were are perceived as being based
on affirmative action based. How does an American student get a
Fulbright Scholarship? I've always heard those are reserved for
foreign students.
Trump's zero political office experience is perceived by many as a
plus. A lot of people are tired of being promised one thing and then
those promises abandoned. A lot of people are tired of career politicians.
Yeah, Trump is perceived as a *fighter*. Throw a punch at him and he
counters ten times harder. Wasn't it Obama that said" if they bring a
knife to a fight, we bring a gun"?
However, Trump is a negotiator, I've never known Obama to negotiate
anything. It's always my way or they high way.
If Trump is nominated, I think he's got a pretty good shot.He's
attracting a coalition that Republicans have dreamed of but rarely
get. There are a lot of independents that are attracted to him.
I think you are dreaming if you thing Trump is some great negotiator.
It is a different matter dealing with other politicians, other charged
circumstances with regard to hostile countries or crazy dictators. You
don't start telling them what they're going to do and the blowback
from stepping on some of these people's toes is far bigger than losing
a contract or some business deal going sideways. Pissing off the wrong
people because you're too narcissistic or too delusional to realize
you aren't the Big Man of Campus can result in actual war, not just
lost revenue. He may have been able to snowplow his way around the
business world but he has no idea about the ramifications were he to
try his strong arming in the political world as President. Trump is a
menace.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Friday, January 22, 2016 10:19 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Establishment Conservatives Against Trump
I still regard the Trump candidacy as an absurdity. Trump has no
qualifications to be US president. He has zero experience of political
office. He is unsuited by temperament to the office and would be a
dangerous person to be in that position of power. I do not believe he
has a chance of being elected.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote :
Mike, thanks so much for your insights, very helpful.
I think the Tea Party totally screwed up the Republican Party and I
also think Trump, for that situation, is just what the doctor ordered.
Why does the RP hate Cruz? Just because he questions them? Or
something more specific?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* "Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... [FairfieldLife]"
<FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*Sent:* Friday, January 22, 2016 8:53 AM
*Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Establishment Conservatives Against Trump
It really is a dilemma isn't it. Trump is not a true conservative but
a populist. Trump is attracting people from all over the place. Many
undecideds, which is what Republicans have been after for years. Yet,
they don't trust the guy with his *New York* values which are ultra
liberal. He is to the left of most establishment Republicans but to
the right of any Democrat, which is why I think moderate(liberal)
Republicans are starting to find him a bit more acceptable. Ether him
or Cruz, and that blows the mind of establishment Republicans. Cruz
just won't play ball with his *superiors* and that really pisses them
off! As long as the race is between the two, the Republican
establishment will eventually line up behind Trump whether they like
him or not because they hate Cruz.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* "emptybill@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
*To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
*Sent:* Friday, January 22, 2016 7:57 AM
*Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Establishment Conservatives Against Trump
Why establishment conservatives are on the rally against Trump.
Against Trump
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservative-movement-menace>
image
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservative-movement-menace>
Against Trump
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservative-movement-menace>
Share article on Facebookshare Tweet articletweet Plus one article on
Google Plus+1 Print Article Email article Adjust font size AA AA AA AA
AA AA AA by ...
View on www.nationalreview...
<http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservative-movement-menace>
Preview by Yahoo
