Meditation v TM philosophy
[Left-click mouse on above graphic image in order to animate it.]For centuries there have been individuals who have explored the possibilities of understanding and enjoying their lives better by practising some sort of meditation.
When I am at secondary school, about 12 or 13 years old, I hear about meditation and ask an Indian classmate how its done. He explains that it means to focus one's mind on something, say for example a cow. Later, at 17 years of age, I attempt to teach myself meditation, intuitively, though I don't sit thinking about a cow, instead I just observe the mind. I am struck by how much my thoughts and bodily sensations seem to interrupt the experience of being aware, fully aware - so I discontinue my attempts.
A year later I am in India and whilst there accept an invitation to discover more about meditation at the Maharishi's ashram near Rishikesh, North India. There it is explained to me that for the mind to 'transcend' thought and bodily sensations one loosely focuses on a 'mantra' until such time as the mantra gives way to a state of peace, serenity and the absence of thought. During the 'initiation' session I have this experience of no-thought blissful awareness and indeed it is wonderful.
Interestingly, rather than focus on being able to consistently re-arrive at the transcendental state, the TM teaching largely resorts to reinforcing Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's philosophies - that meditation will do this and that, that meditators have this sort of positive effect, that world-peace is attainable by so many people meditating etc etc etc. Yet Maharishi himself asserts that TM is not a belief system, that one will innocently find the effects of meditation. Does the fact that I have experienced the profound peace, tranquility and bliss that is the goal of such meditation mean I automatically will derive all the wish fulfilment stuff that the TM advocates seem so eager to promote? In order to answer that it is interesting to note how frequently Maharishi's own wishes and desires are thwarted, as are the aspirations of all so many of his well-meaning associates.
In reality, what are the effects of meditation? Does one automatically become more loving, more peaceful, more prosperous, more Hindu, more holy, more healthy, more wise, more charitable, more, more, more. Or does one become less bothered about money, less self-absorbed, less bothered by success and failure? These are the attributes traditionally assigned to those who practice meditation.
I would venture that the results of a 'good' meditation are similar in many ways to having a really, really good rest. But does a really good rest make one more moral? Enmasse does relaxation bring about world peace? Does resting make one less likely to consume liquor, or smoke marijuana, or indulge one's sexual appetite? Some might suggest that a well-rested system offers an even greater chance of enjoyment from these stimuli!
Seems to me meditation is not of itself, intrinsically moral (or immoral), or likely to promote health, or prosperity (or the reverse either).
Meditating might make one more 'aware' - I certainly subscribe to that view myself - but according to the TM philosophy a whole bunch of (good) stuff happens automatically. I question that. Actually, I don't believe that we even transcend 'automatically', it seems we are able to transcend if and when we really, really want/need to. Likewise, we become better people when we really, really want to. We give up smoking when we want to (if we do), etc etc etc.
Good luck to all in their meditations and try, if possible, to ignore the unrealistic expectations brought about due to hearing Maharishi's Hot Air.
When I am at secondary school, about 12 or 13 years old, I hear about meditation and ask an Indian classmate how its done. He explains that it means to focus one's mind on something, say for example a cow. Later, at 17 years of age, I attempt to teach myself meditation, intuitively, though I don't sit thinking about a cow, instead I just observe the mind. I am struck by how much my thoughts and bodily sensations seem to interrupt the experience of being aware, fully aware - so I discontinue my attempts.
A year later I am in India and whilst there accept an invitation to discover more about meditation at the Maharishi's ashram near Rishikesh, North India. There it is explained to me that for the mind to 'transcend' thought and bodily sensations one loosely focuses on a 'mantra' until such time as the mantra gives way to a state of peace, serenity and the absence of thought. During the 'initiation' session I have this experience of no-thought blissful awareness and indeed it is wonderful.
Interestingly, rather than focus on being able to consistently re-arrive at the transcendental state, the TM teaching largely resorts to reinforcing Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's philosophies - that meditation will do this and that, that meditators have this sort of positive effect, that world-peace is attainable by so many people meditating etc etc etc. Yet Maharishi himself asserts that TM is not a belief system, that one will innocently find the effects of meditation. Does the fact that I have experienced the profound peace, tranquility and bliss that is the goal of such meditation mean I automatically will derive all the wish fulfilment stuff that the TM advocates seem so eager to promote? In order to answer that it is interesting to note how frequently Maharishi's own wishes and desires are thwarted, as are the aspirations of all so many of his well-meaning associates.
In reality, what are the effects of meditation? Does one automatically become more loving, more peaceful, more prosperous, more Hindu, more holy, more healthy, more wise, more charitable, more, more, more. Or does one become less bothered about money, less self-absorbed, less bothered by success and failure? These are the attributes traditionally assigned to those who practice meditation.
I would venture that the results of a 'good' meditation are similar in many ways to having a really, really good rest. But does a really good rest make one more moral? Enmasse does relaxation bring about world peace? Does resting make one less likely to consume liquor, or smoke marijuana, or indulge one's sexual appetite? Some might suggest that a well-rested system offers an even greater chance of enjoyment from these stimuli!
Seems to me meditation is not of itself, intrinsically moral (or immoral), or likely to promote health, or prosperity (or the reverse either).
Meditating might make one more 'aware' - I certainly subscribe to that view myself - but according to the TM philosophy a whole bunch of (good) stuff happens automatically. I question that. Actually, I don't believe that we even transcend 'automatically', it seems we are able to transcend if and when we really, really want/need to. Likewise, we become better people when we really, really want to. We give up smoking when we want to (if we do), etc etc etc.
Good luck to all in their meditations and try, if possible, to ignore the unrealistic expectations brought about due to hearing Maharishi's Hot Air.
Someone recently suggested that Maharishi's real aggenda is to bring about a revival of the Vedic age. If that is true and he is successful then we can expect to see a lot more warring (check out what life in the Vedic age was really like from some impartial historian). More likely Maharishi just wanted lots and lots and lots of attention, which he got. Notwithstanding, there is a world of difference between advocating a method of transcendence and cooking up a fanciful philosophy of wish fulfilment - babies and bathwater.
Jai Guru Dev
Jai Guru Dev
|