--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" > > <babajii_99@> wrote: > > > > [I wrote:] > > > > > > > > When the discussion started, the issue was (1). Vaj > > > > > had claimed that TMATBMMY required effort. Lawson > > > > > and I were disputing that claim. > > > > > > > > > > Vaj said: > > > > > > > > > > > I like Asanga's definition of mindfulness which shows how > > > > > > appropriate the description is in regards to manasika- > japa/TM: > > > > > > > > > > > > "What is mindfulness? The non-forgetfulness of the mind with > > > > > > respect to a familiar object, having the function of non- > > > > > > distraction." > > > > > > > > > > > > In the case of manasika-japa/TM the global > > > > > > conditioned 'familiarity' is with the mantra and "non- > > > > > > distraction" would refer to the vyuttana or outward, > > > > > > distracted tendency of the "outward stroke". Since this so > > > > > > precisely and accurately applies, what else need be said? > > > > > > One gains mindfulness through the practice of TM. > > > One gains non-forgetfulness through the practice of TM. > > > > Exactly. In the context of TM, the quote would apply > > as a DEscription, not a PREscription. > > > > > Experiencing subltle states of the mantra, requires the letting > go > > > of effort. > > > > However, this should not be understood to mean > > that we make an effort to let go! > > > > > We don't pound the mantra. We don't mind if the mantra fades > > > or slips away. We take it as it comes. > > > We don't mind if the mind is off on a thought; when we realize we > > > are off on a thought, we quietly come back to the mantra. Just > the > > > intention to "think" the mantra is enough. We never have to think > > > the mantra 'clearly'. > > > > For the record, my experience is that the realization > > that I was off on a thought is enough to evoke the mantra; > > there's no intervening intention to think it. > > My own belief is that this is ALWAYS the case, but we may not be > aware of it, at least at first, due to our inexperience with > subtler states of the thinking process.
That's *exactly* what I think. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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/
