[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine wrote: > I hope they broadcast it at some point so we can all see > for ourselves. I would guess that would happen, probably > fairly soon. > > Sal No you don't want to see it because it will be a positive, altruistic event and therefore go against everything you believe in.
Re: [FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
On Apr 4, 2009, at 4:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
Can be viewd here :
http://www.davidlynchfoundation.org/
Having finally had time to watch yesterday's press
conference, I'll spend a little time rapping about
my impressions of it. I have to say that 1) there
is little question that these people are all well-
meaning and that their hearts are in the right
places, but 2) many of them are *really* not
the sharpest pencils in the box.
Just watched it myself, Barry--fascinating, really.
I'd never seen David Lynch speak before. Now I know
why, if his quote in the subject line is an indication
of *how* he speaks.
He definitely could use some pointers on his public
speaking. Well-intentioned and nice, but
seemed to have some trouble getting to the point at times.
Ringo was jetlagged and thus
rambling and near-incoherent, but he was rambling
and near-incoherent nonetheless.
I thought Ringo was, as always, terrific,
zany and Ringo-like. He said he was jet-lagged
but I didn't see much evidence of it. He always knows
how to get a laugh.
Bob Roth looked like
he's training in preparation for entering the "Keith
Richards Who Can Look The Most Dead While Still Being
Technically Alive" contest.
He should have stayed off the stage.
Hagelin was comfortable in front of the cameras and
a good speaker, but on the whole his schtick reminded
me of the TV preachers who raise money while invoking
the "poor children."
Why do I always feel he reeks of condescension?
Maybe it's just me.
By comparison Russell Simmons
struck me as more intelligent. Donovan has *never*
been the sharpest pencil in the box, and upheld
that tradition masterfully.
I loved him, thought he looked and sounded great.
Paul Horn was cool; it was good to see him again.
He was terrific. If he really is 79, that's impressive.
On the other hand, it wasn't good to see Mike Love, who
is still the same near-illiterate asshole I knew and
tolerated so many years ago. ("It brought tears to my
mind.")
Way too full of himself, and holding at 10 divorces,
I think (at last count) along with numerous abuse charges,
not exactly a ringing endorsement for the mental clarity
TM is supposed to deliver.
Moby was good, except that he outgrew his idea
that TM involved ritual animal sacrifice...someone
should tell him about the Vedic horse sacrifice :-)
He at least can speak without interjecting "Like"
every 3 words...uh...like Mike.
As always, after trotting out the personalities, then
they trotted out the science, introduced again by a
surprisingly not-well-spoken Lynch.
While he was talking, did you catch how they panned
the audience on several occasions, and that numerous
reporters were laughing? It wasn't clear to me whether
or not it was friendly laughter.
I now understand
my Internet friend's stories about the years she spent
as Lynch's secretary and the difficulties she had
explaining simple facets of real life to him. The
teachers themselves, by comparison, were literate
and good presenters.
Personally, I watched it hoping to see Sheryl Crow,
and was a little disappointed she wasn't there. I like
her music, and she's not exactly hard to look at. But
no.
Anyway, on the whole I thought it was an *effective*
press conference, given what it attempted to do (sell
TM by getting people emotionally pumped up about the
poor "children at risk"). I hope the concert is good
and the attendees get their money's worth. The per-
formers are all professionals, so I'm pretty sure
that the music will be good.
As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really
do think that kids would benefit from learning a
simple form of meditation while still kids. That the
form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is
problematic because I honestly believe that the way
it's taught and explained in followup talks is
religously-based and thus inappropriate for American
schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes
of America's founding fathers. But the courts will
decide that.
But as for the concert itself, I hope that any lurkers
here who are attending enjoy it, and that they come
back and give us their first-hand impressions.
I hope they broadcast it at some point so we can all see
for ourselves. I would guess that would happen, probably
fairly soon.
Sal
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > > > > > > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > > > > > > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > > > > > > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > > > > > > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > > > > > > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > > > > > > > > > > Opinions based on assertions contrary to fact > > > > > aren't worth a whole helluva lot. > > > > > > > > > > IMO, of course. > > > > > > > > Really, Barry is just putting a negative spin on > > > > something you've put a positive spin on. > > > > > > (Says Lawson, completely ignoring everything else > > > I said in that post.) > > > > > > > Aside from monetary issues, you BOTH agree > > > > that the goal is to "grow the organization" (cult > > > > or otherwise). The money is merely a secondary goal > > > > in service of the first. > > > > > > Growing the organization is a secondary goal in > > > service of the primary goal, which is getting as > > > many people as possible to meditate in the belief > > > that widespread TM practice will bring about world > > > peace and reduce suffering etc. > > > > OK so growing the organization is secondary to growing > > the participation of folks in the organization. > > Last I heard, you could practice TM without participating > in the organization. IOW, increasing participation in the > TMO (or just increasing its wealth so it can do more stuff) > and increasing the number of people practicing TM are two > different things (albeit with some overlap, granted). > Yeah but the saying is pretty much that you're a TMer if you practice TM. If the goal is to get more people involved in TM then that isn't too much different than getting them involved in the TMO at least in the eyes of the folk who post in this forum. L.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: [...] > One of the things that happened during the course with kids is that he > held a little birthday party at a session for girl who broke down in > tears when he brought in a birthday cake. Her shitty family NEVER > celebrated her birthday. For some reason I can't imagine TM teachers > doing that. They would probably just say "keep meditating and things > will get better." ;-) > Huh. Big point on all TM courses I have EVER been on: celebrate everyone's birthday. L.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > > > > > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > > > > > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > > > > > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > > > > > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > > > > > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > > > > > > > > Opinions based on assertions contrary to fact > > > > aren't worth a whole helluva lot. > > > > > > > > IMO, of course. > > > > > > Really, Barry is just putting a negative spin on > > > something you've put a positive spin on. > > > > (Says Lawson, completely ignoring everything else > > I said in that post.) > > > > > Aside from monetary issues, you BOTH agree > > > that the goal is to "grow the organization" (cult > > > or otherwise). The money is merely a secondary goal > > > in service of the first. > > > > Growing the organization is a secondary goal in > > service of the primary goal, which is getting as > > many people as possible to meditate in the belief > > that widespread TM practice will bring about world > > peace and reduce suffering etc. > > OK so growing the organization is secondary to growing > the participation of folks in the organization. Last I heard, you could practice TM without participating in the organization. IOW, increasing participation in the TMO (or just increasing its wealth so it can do more stuff) and increasing the number of people practicing TM are two different things (albeit with some overlap, granted).
Re: [FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
Vaj wrote: > On Apr 4, 2009, at 5:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > >> As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really >> do think that kids would benefit from learning a >> simple form of meditation while still kids. That the >> form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is >> problematic because I honestly believe that the way >> it's taught and explained in followup talks is >> religously-based and thus inappropriate for American >> schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes >> of America's founding fathers. But the courts will >> decide that. >> > > While one did get a good feeling that kids meditating was a good > thing, I was more interested in that they are targeting 'kids at > risk'. What seems to be happening is, since it's getting harder for > the TM Meditation industry to target American kids without drawing > negative attention, they're now targeting the poor in third world > countries where such opposition is less likely. In America they seem > to be targeting the poor also where resistance would likely be less, > as resources to investigate or oppose are also much more feeble. In > other words, I have wonder if the TM meditation industry is targeting > the poor because they're an easy target. > > What it really boils down to is: what is the underlying motivation? Is > it to help kids, or is it targeted market segments to get the TM > Meditation industry back making money and recruiting fresh blood--at > 600 bucks a pop? Clearly if it was just for the kids, they could > easily pay a salary of 100,000 to a dozen or so teachers who could > teach for free for a living. But that is not what they're doing. > Therefore, there's a different underlying motivation. What is that > underlying motivation? Sort of like marketing cigarettes to kids? ;-) My guru taught a bunch of "at risk" kids meditation as one of his disciples was a juvenile probation officer. So as project he taught them. I never asked if he taught them mantra meditation which he might have because Indians are usually unaware of the church vs state thing in the US. And besides they don't see yoga as a religion but a science. Just because someone labeled the metaphors "Hindu Gods" doesn't mean it is a religion. But we're dealing with extremely ignorant westerners here. And as I implied my guru wouldn't have had to teach them mantra meditation either as we are allowed to teach a bunch of secular techniques many which one can locate in books. They are not as powerful as mantra meditation but are still calming. One of the things that happened during the course with kids is that he held a little birthday party at a session for girl who broke down in tears when he brought in a birthday cake. Her shitty family NEVER celebrated her birthday. For some reason I can't imagine TM teachers doing that. They would probably just say "keep meditating and things will get better." ;-)
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > [...] > > > > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > > > > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > > > > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > > > > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > > > > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > > > > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > > > > > > Opinions based on assertions contrary to fact > > > aren't worth a whole helluva lot. > > > > > > IMO, of course. > > > > Really, Barry is just putting a negative spin on > > something you've put a positive spin on. > > (Says Lawson, completely ignoring everything else > I said in that post.) > > > Aside from monetary issues, you BOTH agree > > that the goal is to "grow the organization" (cult > > or otherwise). The money is merely a secondary goal > > in service of the first. > > Growing the organization is a secondary goal in > service of the primary goal, which is getting as > many people as possible to meditate in the belief > that widespread TM practice will bring about world > peace and reduce suffering etc. > OK so growing the organization is secondary to growing the participation of folks in the organization. Seems a quibble there. I understand why you're quibbling (a bit) but saying you want to grow membership in an organization defined by participation in the practice of TM is not much different than saying you want to grow participation in the practice of TM... ;-) L
Re: [FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
On Apr 4, 2009, at 10:36 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: What is that > underlying motivation? Making the few people sticking to the belief system believe that TM is finally becoming "mainstream", as Paul naively parroted in the news conference. The triumphalist dream has finally come and the whole world will recognize how brilliant this tiny group of believers are. This is the big one gang, look, there are two BEATLES, celebrity royalty,on the side of TM! (which they don't regularly practice but are all for the idea of kids doing so.) Anybody ever thought of asking if their kids do? Or ever did? Sal
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > [...] > > > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > > > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > > > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > > > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > > > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > > > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > > > > Opinions based on assertions contrary to fact > > aren't worth a whole helluva lot. > > > > IMO, of course. > > Really, Barry is just putting a negative spin on > something you've put a positive spin on. (Says Lawson, completely ignoring everything else I said in that post.) > Aside from monetary issues, you BOTH agree > that the goal is to "grow the organization" (cult > or otherwise). The money is merely a secondary goal > in service of the first. Growing the organization is a secondary goal in service of the primary goal, which is getting as many people as possible to meditate in the belief that widespread TM practice will bring about world peace and reduce suffering etc.
Re: [FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
On Apr 4, 2009, at 7:33 AM, raunchydog wrote: The groups mentioned above are not trying to recruit people into their cult and finding them- selves unable to do so without marketing to kids. If the groups you mentioned teach for free, why are they not capable of implementing a program to teach as many kids in the schools as the TMO is willing and able to do? Um, because they're uninterested in trying to force kids to do something they don't want to? just a thought... Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
On Apr 4, 2009, at 6:59 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: No other organization is more capable, willing or funded enough to tackle a project of the magnitude proposed by the TMO. LOL. The TMO is **not** funding this. They are getting PAID $600 a head for every student they teach. They are doing what they've always done, trying to get someone else to pay for everything while sitting on bank accounts and real estate worth millions and millions of dollars. By comparison at least three groups I know of -- Mindfulness Meditation, Sahaja Meditation and Vipassana Meditation -- teach FOR FREE and always have. They don't look at what they do as a way of making money; the TMO does. No one else has ever come forward with the resources or a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. The groups mentioned above are not trying to recruit people into their cult and finding them- selves unable to do so without marketing to kids. Not to mention that the TMO as "capable" of anything except starting projects and then quickly running them into the ground is pretty funny. Seems like raunchy has been in a time warp for the last 30 years or so. Sal
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: [...] > > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > > Opinions based on assertions contrary to fact > aren't worth a whole helluva lot. > > IMO, of course. > Really, Barry is just putting a negative spin on something you've put a positive spin on. Aside from monetary issues, you BOTH agree that the goal is to "grow the organization" (cult or otherwise). The money is merely a secondary goal in service of the first. L.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 5:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > > decide that. > > While one did get a good feeling that kids meditating was a good > thing, I was more interested in that they are targeting 'kids at > risk'. What seems to be happening is, since it's getting harder for > the TM Meditation industry to target American kids without drawing > negative attention, they're now targeting the poor in third world > countries where such opposition is less likely. In America they seem > to be targeting the poor also where resistance would likely be less, > as resources to investigate or oppose are also much more feeble. In > other words, I have wonder if the TM meditation industry is targeting > the poor because they're an easy target. In Tucson, they're targetting charter school kids, who often are from wealthy families. Its more a matter of taretting people who don't object, then anything else, I think. > > What it really boils down to is: what is the underlying motivation? Is > it to help kids, or is it targeted market segments to get the TM > Meditation industry back making money and recruiting fresh blood--at > 600 bucks a pop? Clearly if it was just for the kids, they could > easily pay a salary of 100,000 to a dozen or so teachers who could > teach for free for a living. But that is not what they're doing. > Therefore, there's a different underlying motivation. What is that > underlying motivation? > But, the funding pays for the local TM teachers AND their management of the program. This frees the TM teachers up to do outreach to the current meditating population rather than try to seek more converts, which is a Very Good Thing from the perspective of the TM teachers since they are no longer required to preach to non-believers with no motivation to pay the huge TM fee upfront. E.G. rather than wasting their time trying to sell TM to adults directly, the local center brings in Sitar players to give mini concerts and/or Indian elders to talk up TM on the reservation and/or MIU faculty to talk up research, all of which is directed at believers, so there's no despondancy from trying to sell an expensive intro course to non-believers. It also gives the believers a better venue for promoting TM themselves to their non-believer friends. Its a LOT more effective to take someone to a pot luck dinner with a sitarist performing, where everyone chats about the performance, than drag them to an intro lecture where they are pitched a $2500 program. None of this may be a direct rationale on the part of the TM teachers or the TMO, but it is how it works out in practice. It's quite a practical system, I think and seems to have evolved spontaneously in the past few years. Much more sustainable than the old TMO, IMHO. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > When I asked what other meditation program has the resources to accomplish a > plan as far reaching as the TMO, you suggested three free meditations. I > doubt any of them has ever proffered a program equal to the goals of the TMO > for the schools. Maybe they don't charge for meditation but they usually > raise money for workshops, books and tapes, CD's DVD's, retreats and an > assortment of meditation aids, cushions, shawls, beads, and trinkets. Every > organization figures out a way to make money or it doesn't survive or have > the ability to promote itself. > > Besides the objection you have to TM raising money, which other organizations > do as well, the organizations that teach the meditation techniques you > suggest probably have the other taints you object to as well: cult and > religious roots. > > So there you have it. Horse a piece. However, the TMO can and will have a > successful TM program for thousands of kids in American schools while the > other meditation techniques you mentioned will not. Don't you have to ask > yourself why? Well said !
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > What is that underlying motivation? > > > > Making the few people sticking to the belief system > > believe that TM is finally becoming "mainstream", as > > Paul naively parroted in the news conference. The > > triumphalist dream has finally come and the whole > > world will recognize how brilliant this tiny group > > of believers are. > > I have to agree. Eh, its certainly a factor but... > > This is a move aimed at what really provides > the income for the TM movement -- True Believers. > With Maharishi gone, the people stuck with trying > to run a dying movement have realized that they > have to do something -- anything -- to "reinspire" > the Previously Faithful so that they will become > Faithful again and start writing those checks. > > In other words, it's a self-importance thang. Sure, but there's a "higher purpose" than simply getting people to donate the money. It's money for "a worthy cause" that all participants agree with that is the key here: > > Too many people "leaving the fold?" Give them an > aging rock star or two. Initiations at near-zero > and contributions drying up? Make them feel all > special as if they are the only ones who can save > the world. > Yep, but... > Hey, it worked for Maharishi for decades, right? :-) > For quite a while, yes. And he ensured it would continue to work by making his most regular donors "rajas" who were special in the eyes of the rest of the organization. You see cynical manipulation of the masses. I see enlightened awareness of how to get people to do something that is (presumably) good for them and the rest of Humanity. As HHTDL says: they use rituals and pomp and circumstance in Tibetan Buddhism "because it works." Lawson
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > What is that underlying motivation? > > Making the few people sticking to the belief system > believe that TM is finally becoming "mainstream", as > Paul naively parroted in the news conference. The > triumphalist dream has finally come and the whole > world will recognize how brilliant this tiny group > of believers are. I have to agree. This is a move aimed at what really provides the income for the TM movement -- True Believers. With Maharishi gone, the people stuck with trying to run a dying movement have realized that they have to do something -- anything -- to "reinspire" the Previously Faithful so that they will become Faithful again and start writing those checks. In other words, it's a self-importance thang. Too many people "leaving the fold?" Give them an aging rock star or two. Initiations at near-zero and contributions drying up? Make them feel all special as if they are the only ones who can save the world. Hey, it worked for Maharishi for decades, right? :-)
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > What is that > underlying motivation? > > Making the few people sticking to the belief system believe that TM is > finally becoming "mainstream", as Paul naively parroted in the news > conference. The triumphalist dream has finally come and the whole world will > recognize how brilliant this tiny group of believers are. This is the big > one gang, look, there are two BEATLES, celebrity royalty,on the side of TM! > (which they don't regularly practice but are all for the idea of kids doing > so.) Which belies your claim that the TMO is getting converts merely for the sake of getting a few bucks. The motivations are far more convoluted than simply immediate (or even long-term) profit. L.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: What is that > underlying motivation? Making the few people sticking to the belief system believe that TM is finally becoming "mainstream", as Paul naively parroted in the news conference. The triumphalist dream has finally come and the whole world will recognize how brilliant this tiny group of believers are. This is the big one gang, look, there are two BEATLES, celebrity royalty,on the side of TM! (which they don't regularly practice but are all for the idea of kids doing so.) > > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 5:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > > decide that. > > While one did get a good feeling that kids meditating was a good > thing, I was more interested in that they are targeting 'kids at > risk'. What seems to be happening is, since it's getting harder for > the TM Meditation industry to target American kids without drawing > negative attention, they're now targeting the poor in third world > countries where such opposition is less likely. In America they seem > to be targeting the poor also where resistance would likely be less, > as resources to investigate or oppose are also much more feeble. In > other words, I have wonder if the TM meditation industry is targeting > the poor because they're an easy target. > > What it really boils down to is: what is the underlying motivation? Is > it to help kids, or is it targeted market segments to get the TM > Meditation industry back making money and recruiting fresh blood--at > 600 bucks a pop? Clearly if it was just for the kids, they could > easily pay a salary of 100,000 to a dozen or so teachers who could > teach for free for a living. But that is not what they're doing. > Therefore, there's a different underlying motivation. What is that > underlying motivation? >
Re: [FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
On Apr 4, 2009, at 5:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > decide that. While one did get a good feeling that kids meditating was a good thing, I was more interested in that they are targeting 'kids at risk'. What seems to be happening is, since it's getting harder for the TM Meditation industry to target American kids without drawing negative attention, they're now targeting the poor in third world countries where such opposition is less likely. In America they seem to be targeting the poor also where resistance would likely be less, as resources to investigate or oppose are also much more feeble. In other words, I have wonder if the TM meditation industry is targeting the poor because they're an easy target. What it really boils down to is: what is the underlying motivation? Is it to help kids, or is it targeted market segments to get the TM Meditation industry back making money and recruiting fresh blood--at 600 bucks a pop? Clearly if it was just for the kids, they could easily pay a salary of 100,000 to a dozen or so teachers who could teach for free for a living. But that is not what they're doing. Therefore, there's a different underlying motivation. What is that underlying motivation?
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > By comparison at least three groups I know of -- > > > Mindfulness Meditation, Sahaja Meditation and > > > Vipassana Meditation -- teach FOR FREE and > > > always have. They don't look at what they do as > > > a way of making money; the TMO does. > > > > > > > No one else has ever come forward with the resources or > > > > a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. > > > > > > The groups mentioned above are not trying to > > > recruit people into their cult and finding them- > > > selves unable to do so without marketing to kids. This assumes the only reason anyone would want to teach meditation of any kind to kids is for recruiting purposes, which is obviously not the case. *You* just said, "I really do think that kids would benefit from learning a simple form of meditation while still kids." Are you really going to maintain that groups that teach meditation for free aren't teaching kids on a large scale because they aren't interested in recruitment? Do you really believe none of these groups thinks, as you do, that it would be good for the kids to learn meditation? > > If the groups you mentioned teach for free, why are they > > not capable of implementing a program to teach as many > > kids in the schools as the TMO is willing and able to do? > > You keep evading the point in an attempt to > obfuscate, Raunchy. Actually, that would be Barry who is evading Raunchy's point in an attempt to obfuscate. > The **TM organization** was not capable of > creating such a program. They had to get > someone to do it for them. The question is *why* the TMO hasn't done so on its own, not whether it's capable of doing so. Of course it is; goodness knows it has the resources. How many times have we seen the complaint that it doesn't teach for free given its vast financial coffers? But it has never been willing to teach TM for free in countries that could afford to pay for it. It got badly burned with the New Jersey program; from then until now it hasn't attempted a large-scale project but has been working with individual schools in ways that would be unlikely to inspire court challenges. We don't know who came up with the idea for Lynch's current program. Lynch's foundation was begun in 2005, so he's been doing this sort of thing for a while now. The fact is that at least so far, no other group that teaches meditation, for free or otherwise, has had a wealthy celebrity adherent who was willing to take on the effort and costs involved in such a project and use his/her popularity to promote it. And if there were a group that did have such an adherent, would it have the personnel and motivation to implement a similar program on the same scale? > So it's not really as if the TM movement GAVE > A DAMN about these kids. This is so silly it hardly merits comment. MMY's whole reason for teaching TM in the first place was that it was good for people. It's not impossible there are a few exceptions, but virtually everyone in the TMO is still motivated by MMY's messianism. They just see this > as a way to allow someone they normally would > never associate with (David Lynch) to do all > the P.R. and "heavy lifting" for them, while > they sit back and rake in $600 a head for each > student instructed. The "heavy lifting" is partly a matter of getting past the legal issue, as I suggested above, and partly the TMO's longstanding principle of not teaching for free in countries that have the resources to pay for it. And the TMO is hardly "sitting back," nor is it letting Lynch do "all the P.R." It's clearly a joint effort between Lynch and the TMO. > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. Opinions based on assertions contrary to fact aren't worth a whole helluva lot. IMO, of course.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > By comparison at least three groups I know of -- > > > Mindfulness Meditation, Sahaja Meditation and > > > Vipassana Meditation -- teach FOR FREE and > > > always have. They don't look at what they do as > > > a way of making money; the TMO does. > > > > > > > No one else has ever come forward with the resources or > > > > a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. > > > > > > The groups mentioned above are not trying to > > > recruit people into their cult and finding them- > > > selves unable to do so without marketing to kids. > > > > If the groups you mentioned teach for free, why are they > > not capable of implementing a program to teach as many > > kids in the schools as the TMO is willing and able to do? > > You keep evading the point in an attempt to > obfuscate, Raunchy. > > The **TM organization** was not capable of > creating such a program. They had to get > someone to do it for them. > > Their *theoretical* involvement in this pro- > gram consists of providing their services as > PAID OUTSIDE CONTRACTORS to the David Lynch > Foundation, at a cost of $600 per head. That > is (on the average) 10X more than the average > beginner's meditation course costs in America. > And many others are taught for free. > > So it's not really as if the TM movement GAVE > A DAMN about these kids. They just see this > as a way to allow someone they normally would > never associate with (David Lynch) to do all > the P.R. and "heavy lifting" for them, while > they sit back and rake in $600 a head for each > student instructed. > Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble > in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul > McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. > But the TMO is in it for the same reason they > have *always* been into it -- for the money and > to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > > > I just googled Sahaja Meditaion and here's what is got: > > http://www.sahajayoga.com.au/index.php > > I know nothing about it. I just Googled "meditation > for free." TM did not come up in the list. Surprise. > It's interesting you're willing to crap shoot a google without finding out if the organizations teaching the meditation techniques you suggest don't somehow wiggle your whiskers about money, cult and religion, when this is such an all consuming concern of yours about TM. Thanks for the tip. > > Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi is a very nice grandmotherly > > Indian lady who founded her meditation technique in 1970. > > This is a sample of her teachings: > > http://www.chicagoyoga.org/meditation-room/2/1 > > > > "Place the left hand in front of your lower abdomen, > > palm facing the body. Raise the left hand up vertically, > > until it reaches a position above your head. While the > > left hand is ascending, the right hand rotates around it > > clockwise, until both hands are above the head. Use both > > hands to tie a knot. Repeat three times and the third time > > tie the knot three times, fixing your attention and the > > Kundalini energy above the seventh chakra." > > > > Try it. Pat your head and rub your belly. Fun, isn't it? > O.K. Let's back things up a little. Barry you wrote #214244: > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > decide that." It's quite a concession on your part to say, "As for the program itself, I wish it well." Thank you for that, perhaps you harbor some faint hope that TM will actually help kids. I hope so as well. However, your well wishing comes with a huge BUT. Meditation can be helpful to kids, BUT, not TM because in your OPINION TM has the taint of money, cult, and religion. When I asked what other meditation program has the resources to accomplish a plan as far reaching as the TMO, you suggested three free meditations. I doubt any of them has ever proffered a program equal to the goals of the TMO for the schools. Maybe they don't charge for meditation but they usually raise money for workshops, books and tapes, CD's DVD's, retreats and an assortment of meditation aids, cushions, shawls, beads, and trinkets. Every organization figures out a way to make money or it doesn't survive or have the ability to promote itself. Besides the objection you have to TM raising money, which other organizations do as well, the organizations that teach the meditation techniques you suggest probably
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > > decide that. > > What other form of meditation would you propose? No other organization is > more capable, willing or funded enough to tackle a project of the magnitude > proposed by the TMO. No one else has ever come forward with the resources or > a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. > > The TMO is well aware of the legal pitfalls to teaching TM in public schools, > been there done that, and they have probably prepared for it. It's possible > someone will challenge TM in the schools, and it's also possible the courts > will rule that TM is not a religion and O.K. to teach in schools. By the time > such a case winds its way through the court, perhaps thousands of kids will > have learned TM. > > The concept of charter schools is on the rise. The Obama administration is > eager to implement innovative programs that help kids learn in such schools. > Charter schools as well as public schools could become a proving ground for > the effectiveness of TM. Either way my bet is that once TM gets rolling, and > kids are doing well with it, no one will want to stop it. > Technically charter schools (at least in AZ) are still public schools, but (again in AZ) they are beholden only to the state and not local, school boards, so they have a LOT more leeway in what they can do. Each charter school is basically a local school district in its own right, governed directly by the participants so the local community can't dictate what is or isn't taught to those kids. A mixed bag, to be sure. L
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > By comparison at least three groups I know of -- > > Mindfulness Meditation, Sahaja Meditation and > > Vipassana Meditation -- teach FOR FREE and > > always have. They don't look at what they do as > > a way of making money; the TMO does. > > > > > No one else has ever come forward with the resources or > > > a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. > > > > The groups mentioned above are not trying to > > recruit people into their cult and finding them- > > selves unable to do so without marketing to kids. > > If the groups you mentioned teach for free, why are they > not capable of implementing a program to teach as many > kids in the schools as the TMO is willing and able to do? You keep evading the point in an attempt to obfuscate, Raunchy. The **TM organization** was not capable of creating such a program. They had to get someone to do it for them. Their *theoretical* involvement in this pro- gram consists of providing their services as PAID OUTSIDE CONTRACTORS to the David Lynch Foundation, at a cost of $600 per head. That is (on the average) 10X more than the average beginner's meditation course costs in America. And many others are taught for free. So it's not really as if the TM movement GAVE A DAMN about these kids. They just see this as a way to allow someone they normally would never associate with (David Lynch) to do all the P.R. and "heavy lifting" for them, while they sit back and rake in $600 a head for each student instructed. Stop trying to portray the TMO as somehow noble in this endeavor. David Lynch might be, Paul McCartney and Ringo and the others might be. But the TMO is in it for the same reason they have *always* been into it -- for the money and to grow the cult. IMO, of course. > I just googled Sahaja Meditaion and here's what is got: > http://www.sahajayoga.com.au/index.php I know nothing about it. I just Googled "meditation for free." TM did not come up in the list. Surprise. > Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi is a very nice grandmotherly > Indian lady who founded her meditation technique in 1970. > This is a sample of her teachings: > http://www.chicagoyoga.org/meditation-room/2/1 > > "Place the left hand in front of your lower abdomen, > palm facing the body. Raise the left hand up vertically, > until it reaches a position above your head. While the > left hand is ascending, the right hand rotates around it > clockwise, until both hands are above the head. Use both > hands to tie a knot. Repeat three times and the third time > tie the knot three times, fixing your attention and the > Kundalini energy above the seventh chakra." > > Try it. Pat your head and rub your belly. Fun, isn't it? How would you know? WE all know that YOU didn't try it. JUST as you've never tried any of the other techniques of meditation you characterize here as "difficult" and as "not as good" as TM. You're just parroting the things you were taught to parrot, convinced that what you practice is "the best" practice because long ago, back when you were young and impres- sionable, someone TOLD you it was "the best" and you believed every word of it. And now you're a big fan of telling young and impressionable kids the same thing, so that they spend *their* whole lives doing what you did and settling for what they were told. Hmm. Programming begets programming...
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- > > > > What other form of meditation would you propose? > > The de-Easternized forms of mindfulness meditation > Vaj has talked about numerous times. > > > No other organization is more capable, willing or funded > > enough to tackle a project of the magnitude proposed by > > the TMO. > (snip) The only problem with that is, that the technique, just keeps the mind on a superficial level, without transcending and getting the breath to stillness...and it doesn't explain the different states of consciousness, and so much more...so, in my humble oppinion, TM is far superior to this 'mindfullness' stuff. Mindfulness, turns out to be 'mindlessness', as one is always off on a thought or emotion, and never transcends the field of thought of emotion...there is no vehicle to produce finer levels of thought, and therefore, like Psychanalysis keeps one from ever transcending thought and emotions. R.G.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > By comparison at least three groups I know of -- > Mindfulness Meditation, Sahaja Meditation and > Vipassana Meditation -- teach FOR FREE and > always have. They don't look at what they do as > a way of making money; the TMO does. > > > No one else has ever come forward with the resources or > > a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. > > The groups mentioned above are not trying to > recruit people into their cult and finding them- > selves unable to do so without marketing to kids. If the groups you mentioned teach for free, why are they not capable of implementing a program to teach as many kids in the schools as the TMO is willing and able to do? I just googled Sahaja Meditaion and here's what is got: http://www.sahajayoga.com.au/index.php Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi is a very nice grandmotherly Indian lady who founded her meditation technique in 1970. This is a sample of her teachings: http://www.chicagoyoga.org/meditation-room/2/1 "Place the left hand in front of your lower abdomen, palm facing the body. Raise the left hand up vertically, until it reaches a position above your head. While the left hand is ascending, the right hand rotates around it clockwise, until both hands are above the head. Use both hands to tie a knot. Repeat three times and the third time tie the knot three times, fixing your attention and the Kundalini energy above the seventh chakra." Try it. Pat your head and rub your belly. Fun, isn't it?
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > > decide that. > > What other form of meditation would you propose? The de-Easternized forms of mindfulness meditation Vaj has talked about numerous times. > No other organization is more capable, willing or funded > enough to tackle a project of the magnitude proposed by > the TMO. LOL. The TMO is **not** funding this. They are getting PAID $600 a head for every student they teach. They are doing what they've always done, trying to get someone else to pay for everything while sitting on bank accounts and real estate worth millions and millions of dollars. By comparison at least three groups I know of -- Mindfulness Meditation, Sahaja Meditation and Vipassana Meditation -- teach FOR FREE and always have. They don't look at what they do as a way of making money; the TMO does. > No one else has ever come forward with the resources or > a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. The groups mentioned above are not trying to recruit people into their cult and finding them- selves unable to do so without marketing to kids.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really > do think that kids would benefit from learning a > simple form of meditation while still kids. That the > form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is > problematic because I honestly believe that the way > it's taught and explained in followup talks is > religously-based and thus inappropriate for American > schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes > of America's founding fathers. But the courts will > decide that. What other form of meditation would you propose? No other organization is more capable, willing or funded enough to tackle a project of the magnitude proposed by the TMO. No one else has ever come forward with the resources or a plan to teach as many kids ANY meditation technique. The TMO is well aware of the legal pitfalls to teaching TM in public schools, been there done that, and they have probably prepared for it. It's possible someone will challenge TM in the schools, and it's also possible the courts will rule that TM is not a religion and O.K. to teach in schools. By the time such a case winds its way through the court, perhaps thousands of kids will have learned TM. The concept of charter schools is on the rise. The Obama administration is eager to implement innovative programs that help kids learn in such schools. Charter schools as well as public schools could become a proving ground for the effectiveness of TM. Either way my bet is that once TM gets rolling, and kids are doing well with it, no one will want to stop it.
[FairfieldLife] "Things get real good...from within." (was Re: New Conference)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 wrote:
>
> Can be viewd here :
> http://www.davidlynchfoundation.org/
Having finally had time to watch yesterday's press
conference, I'll spend a little time rapping about
my impressions of it. I have to say that 1) there
is little question that these people are all well-
meaning and that their hearts are in the right
places, but 2) many of them are *really* not
the sharpest pencils in the box.
I'd never seen David Lynch speak before. Now I know
why, if his quote in the subject line is an indication
of *how* he speaks. Ringo was jetlagged and thus
rambling and near-incoherent, but he was rambling
and near-incoherent nonetheless. Bob Roth looked like
he's training in preparation for entering the "Keith
Richards Who Can Look The Most Dead While Still Being
Technically Alive" contest.
Hagelin was comfortable in front of the cameras and
a good speaker, but on the whole his schtick reminded
me of the TV preachers who raise money while invoking
the "poor children." By comparison Russell Simmons
struck me as more intelligent. Donovan has *never*
been the sharpest pencil in the box, and upheld
that tradition masterfully.
Paul Horn was cool; it was good to see him again. On
the other hand, it wasn't good to see Mike Love, who
is still the same near-illiterate asshole I knew and
tolerated so many years ago. ("It brought tears to my
mind.") Moby was good, except that he outgrew his idea
that TM involved ritual animal sacrifice...someone
should tell him about the Vedic horse sacrifice :-)
He at least can speak without interjecting "Like"
every 3 words...uh...like Mike.
As always, after trotting out the personalities, then
they trotted out the science, introduced again by a
surprisingly not-well-spoken Lynch. I now understand
my Internet friend's stories about the years she spent
as Lynch's secretary and the difficulties she had
explaining simple facets of real life to him. The
teachers themselves, by comparison, were literate
and good presenters.
Personally, I watched it hoping to see Sheryl Crow,
and was a little disappointed she wasn't there. I like
her music, and she's not exactly hard to look at. But
no.
Anyway, on the whole I thought it was an *effective*
press conference, given what it attempted to do (sell
TM by getting people emotionally pumped up about the
poor "children at risk"). I hope the concert is good
and the attendees get their money's worth. The per-
formers are all professionals, so I'm pretty sure
that the music will be good.
As for the program itself, I wish it well. I really
do think that kids would benefit from learning a
simple form of meditation while still kids. That the
form of meditation being proposed is TM I think is
problematic because I honestly believe that the way
it's taught and explained in followup talks is
religously-based and thus inappropriate for American
schools given the Constitution and the clear wishes
of America's founding fathers. But the courts will
decide that.
But as for the concert itself, I hope that any lurkers
here who are attending enjoy it, and that they come
back and give us their first-hand impressions.
