--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 3, 2007, at 9:58 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > > wrote: > >> Unlike your Clear Light meditation, in which it takes decades > >> of practice to accomplish anything approaching effortlessness. > > > > I don't understand why the effortless thing is such a big deal. For > > me, the glaringly obvious elephant in the corner is people who have > > allegedly moved on to better paths than TM who spend significant > > amounts of time online, lashing out at TM. If their current path is so > > superior and advanced, why spend so much time wallowing in that kind > > of spiritual insecurity and ego drama? > > > Simply because, within the traditions themselves (including Hindu > traditions), the question of what effortlessness is, is well defined, > known and understood. > > When it is lied about or used falsely to promote a certain item it > therefore raises eyebrows. For a long time--largely due to > overwhelming naivete or fear of questioning authorities--this glaring > error went unquestioned and the lie came to be believed by large > numbers of people. The fact still remains that so many people > *believed what they were told*. And so therefore it should not be > real surprise that when you don't Question Authority that it will be > hard for some people to grok the principle if they accepted an > untruth for a long, long time. So there's a certain amount of inertia > that needs to be overcome when this denial is institutionally > engrained. Such mass-indoctrinated untruths can even take on their > own egregore--a folie à plusieurs (this is what seems to have > happened in the TMO IMO). > > Why is it important? It is important because the distinction between > truly effortless meditation and meditative paths which use subtle > effort are very basic distinctions between two contrasting types of > meditative praxis. It's basic. This experiential distinction becomes > more important as one progresses on the path--but it's also important > for having the ability to speak to other styles of meditation > practitioners in an authentic way. If the person you are talking to > doesn't know any better, you wouldn't notice any overt difference > (other than the fact that you have propagated your own unknowing > error on to others). If they do know the difference, of course they > will stop taking you seriously. > > .02 USD > For someone who doesn't know what they are talking about, you almost sound convincing. Better leave TM to the practioners, and you keep up with your Buddhist meditation...
I can appreciate your dependence on hearing about and parroting traditions (or long-term habitual beliefs), from others. Legally it is called 'hearsay', and not considered valid, by the way. However, the true way to know something and speak authoritatively about it, vs. just mouthing ego-bound beliefs, is to DO IT. Like the Nike ad says, JUST DO IT. Otherwise you become like the critic who hasn't seen the movie.
