Book review: "Roots of TM: The Transcendental Meditation of Guru Dev & Maharishi Mahesh Yogi" by Paul Mason

Thank you, Paul Mason, for this book! 


The TM movement has an official story of how TM came to be spread to the world.  That story comes from the mouth of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.  But we know that Mahesh loved to embroider stories.  So - what does independent historical research reveal about Guru Dev, Mahesh, and TM?


Paul Mason doesn't give us his personal conclusions.  Rather, he researches and relates the facts, and lets us decide for ourselves.  What I have decided is that the procedure of Maharishi's Transcendental Meditation, of how to think the mantra, is virtually identical to one of the several meditation techniques taught by Guru Dev. 


But other aspects of Mahesh's Transcendental Meditation differ from his master's teachings.  Although Mahesh claimed to revere Guru Dev as "Divinity Incarnate," he disobeyed a number of his guru's wishes, and as the years progressed, altered more and more of his master's teachings.
 

From Guru Dev's instructions to meditate one hour, Mahesh decreased it to 30 minutes, then to 20 minutes.  From the necessity of sitting cross-legged to the acceptability of sitting in a chair.  From insistence on a straight spine during meditation to the acceptability of slouching.  From no money accepted, as per Guru Dev's strict rule, to a set fee. 


And then there is the choosing of the mantra, which is part of a guru's responsibility.  According to Guru Dev, only a perfect master is qualified to choose a mantra.  Guru Dev said (p. 98), "…[I]t is very difficult to obtain a perfect teacher.  The traditional Indian Scriptures are full of mantra…but until someone will tell which is fit…the pile…will really be next to useless…[O'bserving the energy and inclination of those devoted to spiritual achievement, in accordance to their qualification…the experienced guru…deduces the mantra of one's favored god which would be of benefit to the spiritual seekers."

Maharishi did not dispense the same mantras that his guru did.  Maharishi said, (p. 263), "It is very difficult for me to find what [mantras] he was using.  Because initiation is all in private.  And I was never interested in who was given what [mantra].  I was interested in myself."  

Not holding to Guru Dev's dual criteria for choosing mantras, (see above: aspirant's "energy and inclination" plus "favored god"), Mahesh reduced the criteria to only one: "favored god."  Mahesh explained (p. 259), "The gurus choose from the tendencies, from the cut of the face…I don't go into all these vibrations, botherations.  I ask [the aspirant] 'Which god you like?'…Ask him directly, 'What he likes?' and that is it." 

When he initiated Christians, Jews and Muslims, he could not very well ask, "Who is your favored god?"  And what could he possibly have asked when teaching atheists?!  So he made another change - to assign the mantras by age and sex.  I couldn't find any evidence in "Roots of TM" that there was any precedent for this criteria.  Later, Mahesh simplified the criteria yet again, to choose by age only.  Even in this he was inconsistent.  One year he would use one set of mantras and age; another year he would use another.  On occasion, he even broke these simple rules, for instance when he instructed some initiators to use teenage mantras for all adults, age 20 through 120.


And most paradoxically, was Mahesh disobeying his master by even teaching meditation?  Guru Dev had stated (p. 96), "…[N]ot everyone can be a guru.  Actually only members of the Brahmin caste are in the position to be a guru…."  Mahesh was from the Kshatriya caste, so according to his own guru, he was prohibited from teaching meditation.  (By the way, Mahesh was the secretary at the ashram.  Did you know that?) 

So how then did Mahesh justify teaching meditation?  Page 143:  "I thought, 'What to do, what to do, what to do?'  Then I thought, 'I should teach them all in the name of Guru Dev.  I should design a system, a system of puja [ritual or ceremony] to Guru Dev. ' "  This decision did not follow the letter of Guru Dev's teaching; do you think it followed the spirit of Guru Dev's teaching? 


What went through Mahesh's mind as he made these changes?  Did he tell himself that he was not really changing Guru Dev's teachings?  Did he tell himself that some of his divine Guru Dev's teachings were imperfect?   Did he decide he had surpassed his guru?  Did he rationalize that the changes didn't matter because he was teaching "inferior" Westerners?  What do you think? 


"Roots of TM" helped me understand the fourth possibility more.  As I read, I realized how different Mahesh's world was from the Western world.  I realized that underneath India's veneer of westernization, the traditional Indian ways are vibrantly alive.  It is entirely a different world view from the West's.


For instance, Guru Dev taught (p. 81):  "The man who gives suffering to the cow goes to hell.  [Intermixing of Indian culture with Western culture] has caused ignorance of the Hindu scriptures, that the cow and Absolute Divine Truth are the same.  This devout scriptural knowledge is disappearing."  


Or, on p. 47, Mahesh relates how it is to be brought up properly in an Indian family.  "The children...are told to bow down to your mother, your father, your elders, your school teacher.  It provides a great shield of security and assistance for the child....[as] this later on develops in devotion to Almighty...."


And this excerpt from the chapter "Yoga Teachings of Swami Brahmanand (Guru Dev.)"  Pps. 98-99, (paraphrased by this editor), "The principal teaching of Swami Brahmanand Saraswati was that one should routinely practice a system of [mental repetition of a word of benefit to the spiritual seeker] in order to...realize the purpose of one's life.... Realization comes from doing word repetition....By practicing, sins are destroyed...."


From p. 231, "During his stay in San Francisco, Maharishi received his first press coverage in the USA, and was rather surprised that the meditation had been dubbed a 'non-medicinal tranquilizer.'  His comment was, 'Cruel!  I feel like running away, back home.  This seems to be a strange country.  Values are different here.' "


This book is filled with gems.  Arrange them together in different ways, and many questions can be answered about Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, his guru and his Transcendental Meditation. 

Paul Mason is one of the world's leading English-language experts on Transcendental Meditation, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, and his guru, Swami Brahmanand Saraswti (Guru Dev).  He has written, co-authored, and translated from Hindi and Sanskrit over seven books on these topics.  He is a former co-editor for TM-Free Blog.   

New book published: "Roots of TM"

  

(Note:  In book cover photo above, Guru Dev is seated in center, surrounded by some of his close sannyasi [renunciant] disciples in traditional orange robes.  In front of dais, far right, is the young Brahmachari (bachelor student) Mahesh, later known as Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.  He is not wearing orange because he is not a sannyasi.  Those of his caste are not permitted to become sannyasis. - Laurie) 

Just published: 

ROOTS OF TM:

THE TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION
OF
GURU DEV & MAHARISHI MAHESH YOGI

by Paul Mason

more than 50 illustrations
304 pages, 234mm x 156mm

ISBN 978-0-9562228-8-6

UK £14.99   Europe €18.99   US $24.99  
Canada  $27.99  Australia $27.99

Paul Mason, the author of "Roots of TM" is a former contributor to TM-Free Blog.

"ROOTS OF TM" enables readers to better understand how and why Maharishi Mahesh Yogi spread the teaching of Transcendental Meditation around the world.

"ROOTS OF TM" provides background information on Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and his master, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, (also called "Guru Dev,") and provides a source book of information about their teachings and techniques.

"ROOTS OF TM" is not intended as a general guide to Indian philosophy, nor as a study of the many ancient spiritual practices of India, nor as a mantra handbook.

"ROOTS OF TM" offers information about Maharishi's "missing years," from the time when his master passed away through to the gradual build-up of his stated mission: "Why can't we spiritually regenerate the world through this technique?"

"ROOTS OF TM" contains numerous quotations and rare transcripts of lectures by Guru Dev and by Maharishi. Furthermore, it details the course of events that would eventually find Maharishi lecturing at the Masquers Club, an actor's social club in Hollywood. It also tells how Maharishi came to adopt a businesslike attitude to financial matters, and how he planned to create a headquarters in the Himalayas where he intended to train others to teach Transcendental Meditation.

"ROOTS OF TM" digs deeply into rare materials in order to give detailed profiles of the teachings of both master and disciple, thus affording readers an opportunity to make informed comparisons of both these teachers' methods and their objectives.


Author Paul Mason explains:
 

"By the mid-1960's the term 'Transcendental Meditation' became fixed after Maharishi Mahesh Yogi had already spread the message of meditation far and wide across the free world. Maharishi then became very famous himself, largely due to his public association with celebrities and in particular the world-famous pop group The Beatles, who in 1968 attended an advanced training course with him in India.

When I traveled to India in 1970, I did so by hitch-hiking from Britain; and, having traveled across many countries, finally found myself in North India. Possibly because The Beatles had done so before me, I decided to visit the ashram of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, for 'a cup of cocoa and a chat about philosophy.'  I therefore made my way to the pilgrimage town of Rishikesh, close by the foothills of the Himalayas. Having crossed the River Ganges and climbed up to Maharishi Ashram, I was introduced there to a practice referred to as 'Transcendental Meditation.'

The teaching of this 'Transcendental Meditation' or 'TM' is preceded by a short ceremony called a puja, conducted before a portrait of the ascetic Indian teacher Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, known to TM meditators as 'Guru Dev.'  [Note:  The TM organization says the puja is a 'traditional ceremony of gratitude.'  According to merriam-webster.com, 'puja' is defined as 'a Hindu act of worship or propitiation.' - Laurie]

Surprisingly, despite the fact that Swami Brahmanand Saraswati was a prominent and influential public speaker, Maharishi's organizations share but scant information about Guru Dev's life story and disclose nothing about his teachings.

Very little seemed to be known about the early life of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi or about the origins and history of the teaching of Transcendental Meditation, so I set myself to discover as much information as could be found.

In the 1990's I was commissioned by Element Books to write the biography of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, which was published as 'The Maharishi: The Biography of the Man Who Gave Transcendental Meditation to the World.'

Later, in 2007, an ambition was fulfilled when a three-volume set of books on Guru Dev was published, all based on my translations of Hindi works on Swami Brahmanand Saraswati.

Then, in 2013, I compiled a book entitled 'Dandi Swami: Tales of meetings with Dandi Swami Narayananand Saraswati, the Guru's Will, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi & the Shankaracharyas of Jyotir Math.'

'Roots of TM' is the distillation of decades of research into the teachings of Maharishi, Guru Dev, and the Shankaracharya tradition."

"Roots of TM" can be purchased through Amazon.
 
I (Laurie) haven't read it yet, but I hope to read it soon.  I would love to hear peoples' reaction to the book.  Personally, I'm most interested in learning if Maharishi spread the teaching of his Guru Dev whom he claimed to adore, or if he spread contrary teachings.
                                                

At Least Maharishi Never Claimed to Be God ???

 At Least Maharishi Never Claimed to be God

That was a comment I made to a former TMer.  I was comparing the teachings I received from Maharishi with the teachings of other gurus who had come from India to the West.  I was suggesting that in this particular area, we former TMers had less recovery work to do than former members of other groups who had been told that their guru was actually God.

My friend replied incredulously, "Never claimed to be God!  Mahesh claimed to be greater than God!"

Oh.  Oops.  Did I miss something?  My friend soon supplied me with the following quotation, from: 

http://www.ayurveda-florida.com/articles_ayurvedic_medicine_diet_lifestyle_dhanvantari_ayurveda_center_ayurveda_education_programs/Hinduism/mmy_on_role_of_a_guru.htm

The above is not a TMO site.  When and where this conversation took place is not recorded.  Read it and decide for yourself.

"MMY on Role of A Guru

Dr Hagelin: ‘Maharishi, there is a question on the special role of the teacher, the Guru, in gaining the full awakening of enlightenment. The reporter asks, “In every news conference, Maharishi pays tribute to his teacher and to the tradition of Vedic teachers for giving the knowledge and technique of Transcendental Meditation to gain enlightenment. Is the technique of Transcendental Meditation and other advanced programmes sufficient to gain enlightenment, or is there an indispensable role that a teacher plays to guide an individual on the path to enlightenment? And if so, what would that role be?” ’ Maharishi: ‘The role is that the teacher is absolutely woven into this knowledge. And when the knowledge is in our awareness, it is the total teacher that is in our awareness. It says in the Vedic Literature about the teacher, “Na Guror Adhikam, Na Guror Adhikam, Na Guror Adhikam.” There is nothing greater than Guru; there is nothing greater than Guru; there is nothing greater than Guru, because Guru is the embodiment of all that is greatest.

‘Guru is Brahm. “Gurur Brahma, Gurur Vishnur.” These are not the words of adoration; this is the description of the reality of Guru. Guru is on the level of Totality personified. When Guru speaks, it is the Totality that speaks. Words of the Guru are the words of the Veda. Veda is only heard from the Guru. So Guru means the Totality. If one is in the sense of Guru all the time, one is in the sense of total Natural Law and its total organizing power; there is nothing greater than that.

‘That is why Guru is completely natural in our awareness. It is not a matter of anything that is from outside or anything. It is completely natural. It is simple. It is Totality. It is a great thing. One knows it in being that level of relationship. “Na Guror Adhikam”—there is nothing greater than Guru, nothing greater than Guru.

‘Guru Purnima is the Full Moon of the Guru—one day of the year. In the Vedic Calendar, each day is attributed to some Devata, to some special creative intelligence—Sun, Moon, Shiva, Vishnu, and all. There are an enormous number of Devatas, embodiments of the Kriya Shakti. “Kriya Shakti” is the power of action. There are two things, basically: the silence and action, silence and activity, infinite silence and infinite activity, and both in perfect accord with each other. Perfect silence, perfect dynamism: this is Brahm—this is Totality.

‘The Guru is Totality. He has, as it is said in the Vedic Literature and with reference to what Dr John Hagelin just said, “Pripad Asyamritam Divi”. That means three-fourths is Amrit. “Amrit” means eternal. Three-fourths is eternal; one-fourth is juggling around.

‘Three-fourths is eternal. This is what makes us stand on our own feet eternally. We are embedded in the three-fourths of the unmanifest, as Dr Hagelin said. This unmanifest, this Avyakta, is three-fourths, and the manifest is one-fourth. Three-fourths is unmanifest; one-fourth is manifest. The changes take place in the unmanifest. What continues in the field of flow is three-fourths. So the dominant factor is three-fourths of Totality....We are announcing a very, very effective program where the achievements will be a matter of much shorter time. Centuries have gone and in every generation, the wise have been searching for it, searching for it, searching for it. But now, with the blessings of our Master and the spiritual Vedic Tradition of Masters, we are blessed. We are offering ourselves and all our achievements and all our understandings and all our knowledge and all our future programs to the lotus feet of Shri Guru Dev. Jai Guru Dev.’ "

I also recall Mahesh saying on one of my courses, "Guru is greater than God, for without him I would never have met my God."  But then, I also heard Sat Guru Maharaj Ji (aka "the little fat boy," an Indian child-guru who came to the West circa 1973) say those words too.

What do you think?  Was Mahesh just speaking in hyperbole about his own guru - or about himself, or was he actually trying to instill in his followers a belief that he himself was greater than God?  Have you wrestled with the belief that Maharishi might be God?

Unhooking From Maharishi's Teachings: Laurie Interviews Sudarsha about the Puja (Ceremony)

I (Laurie) left TM 30 years ago, after 10 years in the TM movement, and I have been "deprogramming" myself ever since. I now believe that everything I was taught on the TM Teacher Training Course while I was "rounding" (meditating many times a day) bypassed my critical thinking, and went straight into my belief system. Therefore, even today I am still finding unexamined beliefs inside myself that hook me into Mahesh Prasad Varma's system. (According to Wikipedia, "Mahesh Prasad Varma" may be Maharishi's given name.)

One of those beliefs was that the puja had magical powers. Mr. Varma told us that the word "puja" translates as "traditional ceremony of gratitude," but most other translators say it means "worship". On my TM Teacher Training Course in La Antilla, Spain, in 1974, Mr. Varma taught us that the puja must be performed before the person is instructed in TM. Without it, he said, TM cannot be successfully learned or practiced. He gave quasi-scientific and quasi-mystical reasons why this was so; and I was left with fear and trembling for the sacred, God-given puja.

Therefore, it was helpful to my recovery to learn that after his disillusionment with Mr. Varma's movement, Sudarsha, (one of the co-editors of TM-Free), successfully instructed many people in TM without first chanting the puja. I thought it might be helpful to other readers recovery too, to read about this, so I decided to interview Sudarsha. Here goes:

Laurie: How did you first hear of TM?

Sudarsha: I remember it like it was yesterday! It was in May of 1968. I had just finished another miserable day teaching high school English, and I decided to go for a walk rather than immediately take the bus home. I wandered into a drugstore, and there on a book rack was this childishly cuddly guy draped in white on the cover of a book. For some reason, I was fascinated and I bought it.

That night, I started to read it. He had written, "To be is to live." Those words struck me like lightening. I sat up straight and confirmed to myself, "This is it! This is what I've been searching for!" Sadly, the book didn't actually teach me anything. It just theorized and theorized. The title? "The Science of Being and Art of Living" by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. I felt hooked. Now I believe that I was more hooked by to have that final secret of how to do it than anything else. I wanted to learn to do this. Cleverly, Mahesh could rope us in by coming so close to telling us the secret, but just stopping short.

A week or so later, I found and bought an LP (a vinyl record - remember those?) of Mahesh giving a talk. His voice sounded so captivating. There was an address and phone number on the record sleeve. I phoned and made an appointment to learn TM.

L: What results did you get from TM?

S: Same results as everyone else: in the beginning TM felt good. I felt a sense of relief. As I think back on it now, I realize that "relief" is quite different from the "pure consciousness" or "source of thought" that Mahesh was promising, but I mistook the relief for what he was promising. Ultimately, I think it all comes back to "me": my understanding, my misunderstanding, my expectations, my desires, my greeds. But being a schoolteacher was stressful, and I was stressed. TM was a contrast to that, so it felt good.

L: What made you decide to become an initiator?

S: TM was easy to do and it felt good. It was only many years later that I began to believe that it operated on the basis of contrast and little more. Back then, though, I thought that this was good, worthwhile, valuable, a lot more satisfying than what I was currently doing. And, into the bargain, a lot more valuable to others. So I went to Estes Park, Colorado, USA, in 1970 and took the TM Teacher Training Course.

L: What was your understanding at that time of the reason for doing the puja?

S: That's complicated. It was what we were supposed to do; it was what Mahesh taught us; it somehow empowered us to "give" the mantra - he said it allowed us to pick up the mantra at the finest level. It was special, maybe even sacred.

But when I was finally given that piece of paper with the mantras written on it, and saw that they were selected not by some deep psycho-spiritual-physiological reasoning, but just by age and gender - well! There was a conflict! Something wasn't making sense, and it was very difficult to think about that, when I really wanted to teach TM because I thought it was really a good thing.

L: From today's vantage point, what do you think the puja is really about, or what is its purpose?

S: The puja was a nice touch. I suppose it was Mahesh's way of trying to flaunt his so-called tremendous devotion to Guru Dev. We know from what Paul Mason has written on his website about Guru Dev that some pundit wrote the puja for Guru Dev, and Guru Dev didn't like it. He said to tie it to a stone and throw it into the Ganges. Which the pundit did. Mahesh said, and I don't remember where, that he dove in and rescued it.

Some of the earliest initiators to be trained in India by Mahesh learned an ending which Mahesh later changed, probably in the early 1960's. Also, when I learned the puja, in 1968, there were only three parts to it: the Sanskrit words, the English translation and the movements we made with our hands, etc.

L: By 1974, when I learned it on my TM Teacher Training Course, there was also a fourth part, called "puja feeling." Mr. Varma said all four parts were essential for the puja to "work." So this whole business of "the purity of the teaching" and "doing the puja to preserve the purity of the teaching" is suspect.

S: I think now that what the puja actually does is simply what all ceremonies do: it draws attention away from everything else. Look how the Roman Catholic Church used the Mass to manipulate people all through the Middle Ages. In teaching TM, the puja is very useful because it is so strange - at least to Westerners - at least it was strange when TM hit the West in the 1960's. People being instructed get completely disoriented. They can't figure out what is going on. This is useful, because when the teacher says a mantra and asks the person to start repeating it, the person does so in a completely non-judgmental state. I believe this is one of the reasons why the first TM experience is so spectacular. It's a real contrast to how you were feeling an hour ago when you were walking to the TM Center.

L: How many people did you initiate using the puja?

S: Something near 800.

L: What experience did those students have with TM?

S: They had the prescribed experience, much like my own initial experience: it felt good, they experienced deep rest. I wonder now if what they experienced wasn't deep rest, but a contrast from their normal way of feeling, which they mistook for "deep rest," because that's what the TM teachers told them they would experience.

L: What led you to consider teaching TM without the puja?

S: That's a really tough question, Laurie, because I don't really remember all the details. I do remember being dissatisfied with what Mahesh had done with TM: adding the Science of Creative Intelligence, Six-Month Courses, Age of Enlightenment techniques, sidhi nonsense. It was obvious to me that the steps of initiation were the only thing that was useful, to lead an individual into a very quiet state so that thinking the mantra would be easy.

After I quit teaching at the TM Center, some friends showed an interest in TM. So I said, "OK, let's just sit quietly and I'll teach you how to do it," and very off-handedly did the steps of initiation starting with the "open the eyes; close the eyes" business from the checking notes. The results were the same. People were happy with the results. Another one of Mahesh's dogmatic superstitions bit the dust.

L: How many people did you instruct without the puja?

S: Maybe 25 or 30. I don't really remember. Those were very traumatic days. I was feeling very sad that I had wasted three months learning to teach TM when anyone could learn how to teach it in a weekend. All the hubbub of rounding for three months had just been brainwashing - or whatever the correct word for that is these days.

L: Were you nervous or guilty or scared about teaching TM without the puja? I know I would have been.

S: No. I hadn't bought into the superstitions of Maheshism. If nothing else, those two years when I was on TM's international staff intimately working side by side with Mahesh demonstrated to me, beyond any doubt, that Mahesh was making it up as he went along. There was no evidence at all that he was any kind of superhuman. Granted, he was very intelligent and quick-witted, and had a remarkably retentive memory. But so do lots of "normal" human beings. What Mahesh had that other people didn't have was the aura of specialness. That is to say, our attribution of mystical specialness to him . He let us believe that he had all sorts of knowledge and "blessings" from Guru Dev. Mahesh was also extraordinarily clever, and used his cleverness to manipulate others. He had a very amoral approach to what he did: if it benefitted his agenda, it was OK.

So, since I came to the conclusion that Mahesh was very human indeed - from direct contact with him - no, I had no nervousness, guilt or fear at all about dropping the puja. And as it turned out, dropping the puja had no effect on the learning or the practice of TM.

L: How did you choose the mantra for the non-puja initiates?

S: Same as I was taught. For some reason, back then it never occurred to me to experiment with mantras. How curious, because Mahesh himself had said that "any word would do," but back then, I only knew the mantras he taught me at Estes Park. I was still unable to think outside the box in this regard.

L: What results did the non-puja students have?

S: Same as all the people I taught the "orthodox" way.

L: Did they keep up with meditating? Did you "check" their meditations?

S: They all got checked, non-puja students and puja students alike. Both groups had the same outcomes: some continued , some said they thought it was silly, some said they didn't have time, some said it quit working....

L: Did you tell them what the mantras really meant?

S: Back then I didn't know what they meant. I found that out later.

L: Thanks so much, Sudarsha, for letting me interview you.

S: It was my pleasure, sort of. This is stuff people have a right to know. Mahesh was using his cleverness, his powers of persuasion, his amoral manipulation of others, without regard to their safety, well-being, or any other aspect of their lives. He simply used people for his own ends, something which is never taught or done by legitimate teachers.

I wonder if my answers are typical. I would find it really interesting - perhaps we could do a survey - to see how many other initiators discovered that the whole puja thing was just part of the phobia-induction that Mahesh used to make our minds like his.

Lying: A Core Practice of Transcendental Meditation. (A Seven-Part Series). Part 2: First Lie

What was the first lie you spotted? When did you first notice Maharishi Mahesh Yogi or the Transcendental Meditation organization (TMO) lying to you?

For me, possibly it was at the introductory lecture. The lecturers said that TM was not religious in nature. I knew that their leader, Maharishi, wore white robes, religious beads, long hair and beard, and had a name that included the word "Yogi." He taught something called "meditation," which I knew was a Hindu religious practice. On the wall behind the lecturers hung a large painting of an Indian yogi. The TM teachers called themselves "initiators." Initiators initiate people into spiritual mysteries, didn't they - not into scientific techniques, right? And the initiators talked slowly, ethereally, with a dreamy-eyed inspiration. They were pale and they glowed. Of course, none of these proved that TM was religious in nature, but it certainly gave me pause. I overlooked the contradictions because the initiators explicitly stated that TM was not
religious in nature. They also had an answer to the yogi/yoga question: "Just because Maharishi is a Hindu monk doesn't make this a Hindu religious practice. After all, Linnaeus was a Christian monk, and he studied genetics, but that doesn't make genetics a Christian sphere." And as for the painting on the wall, and as for calling themselves "initiators," well, that was all chalked up to "tradition." So although I suspected they were lying at that lecture, I couldn't prove it.

However, on initiation day I spotted my first clear-cut lie. At the preparatory lecture, the lecturers had promised that we initiates would not participate in the "non-religious traditional ceremony of gratitude"- we would just witness the initiator perform it. True, I had to bring my own fruit, flowers and handkerchief; but I reasoned that the TM center didn't have the refrigeration facilities to provide the fruit and flowers for everyone. However, before I entered the initiation room, I was instructed to remove my shoes. Once inside the initiation room, I was instructed to stand during the ceremony. I was given a flower to hold during the ceremony, and at one point the initiator took my flower and offered it up before the painting of the elderly yogi. And finally, at the end of the ceremony, the teacher reverently kneeled before the altar, and gestured for me to do the same. So the initiators were surely stretching the truth in assuring us that we were not "participants" in the ceremony.

How did I justify this deception in my own mind? Trying to remember now, 40 years later, this is what I think happened. First of all, I was anxious to learn TM. I was startled by the gleaming altar. I was disoriented by the Sanskrit chant. I was in over my head, so it was easier to just give in and obey than to question every inch of the way.

Second, this was the tail end of the 1960s. I lived by the 1960s mottos, "Don't trust anyone over 30" and "God is dead" and "Down with the System." If Western religion was corrupt, then the "mystical East" had the truth, and I was glad to be privy to its secrets. I interpreted the deception as a way of pulling something over on those ignorant adults, and I was flattered to be part of the deception.

And thirdly, at the first follow-up meeting on the day after initiation, when there was an opportunity to ask questions, I was too blissed out from my first meditations to embarrass the initiators with piddling questions such as how they could swear that we new students would not be participants in the ceremony.

How about you? When was the first time you became aware that the TMO was lying to you? And how did you deal, mentally and/or concretely with their first deception?

Was Transcendental Meditation's founder, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, enlightened?

This essay is another of my trips down memory lane. The topic today is "Was Maharishi enlightened?" This has been a crucial issue for me, because one of the linchpins that have held my entire TM belief system in place for years was the conviction that Maharishi was enlightened. The way I've thought about it is this: If he really was enlightened, then by definition his life would be in accord with the will of God. Therefore, if he was enlightened, it didn't matter that he lied, or that people (including myself) got hurt, or all those other things that made the TM organization so troubling. Because, if he really was enlightened, his thinking, understanding, decisions would all be in accord with God's Greater Plan. Even if I felt that his decisions were terrible, it was just due to my lack of broader insight. Even if there were lies and casualties along the way, God must have felt it was necessary for the greater good of the Great Plan.

Have other people struggled with these issues?

Here are some of the questions I've puzzled over in my attempt to unknot this mystery that affected my life for so many years:

Was Maharishi enlightened?

Did he say he was enlightened?
Did he hint that he was enlightened?
Did he want us to believe he was enlightened?
Did he believe he was enlightened?
What the heck is "enlightenment" anyway?
Does such a thing as "enlightenment" exist?
Was Maharishi's teachings on "enlightenment" the same as other Hindu or Buddhist teachings on it?
Did I used to think he was enlightened, or not? Why?

Do I think, now, that he was enlightened? Why?

How can a person tell if someone is enlightened?
Are supernormal powers a proof of enlightenment?
Did I ever see Maharishi exhibit supernormal powers?
Did I ever hear rumors of Maharishi exhibiting supernormal powers?
If I saw or heard of him exhibiting supernormal powers, what did I make of it at the time? What do I make of it now?

So many questions still floating around. Has this issue been part of your healing path, of un-knotting the puzzle? Of "clawing your way, millimeter by millimeter, out of the TM mindset" as TM-Free contributor Sudarsha calls it?

So, here are some of my memories and musings on a few of the questions above about Maharishi and enlightenment. I invite readers to contribute their own thoughts on the topic.

(1) Did Maharishi ever say he was enlightened? In my eleven years in the TM world, I heard him hint at it a few times. Once, at M.I.U., about 1980, he said that we should do whatever he told us to do because "I am in constant communion with the Absolute." That was the clearest I ever heard him on his status.

I remember on TTC Maharishi telling us about a TM prison program. Someone got up and said, "Maharishi, you're wrong." Maharishi bristled and demanded, "I? I am WRONG?!" in a tone indicating that it was absurd that he could be wrong about anything. Maybe because an enlightened person is never wrong?

I remember Maharishi bursting with laughter as he told us about the businessman who explained his philosophy of life to Maharishi. "HE was telling ME his philosophy of life!" he laughed, implying that it was hilarious for an unenlightened person to think they could instruct an enlightened person on how to live.

Then there were two poems he wrote. Does anyone aside from me know of this first poem that he wrote to Guru Dev? I'm quoting it from memory. The first verse went something like this:

"Love has set the heart on fire,
Hatred puts all fire out,
(Sorry, I can't remember the third line)
Hatred is poison for a godly sprout."

And the last verse went something like this:

"To my Guru Dev this is dedicated,
To Him who led me on a fortunate trail,
(And I can't remember the third line),
Strength to lift the all-repressive veil."

Then there is Maharishi's poem "Love and God." (This poem was put to music by Rick Stanley and is on one of his albums.) Maharishi waxes, like a mystic, about his relationship with God:

"...God my love,
Light of my life....
Thou art one,
The one becomes the many,
As one seed appears as many leaves....
In Thee I rest,
In Thee I dwell....
Lord, Thou art the goal in me,
My Lord, my love, my God."

(Again, this is from memory, so my apologies for any errors.)

He also said, "If it weren't for my Guru Dev, I would never have met my God."

The two poems, and his comment about Guru Dev, seem to me sincere expressions of a person with first-hand experience of God, or of enlightenment.

I remember in the summer of 1971 at Humboldt State College, someone asked Maharishi if it was true that the only thing standing in the way of enlightenment was the physical stresses in a person's body. Maharishi said yes. The questioner then asked if it was true that an enlightened person could manipulate the physical universe in any way they wanted. Again Maharishi said yes. The questioner then asked, laughing, if Maharishi would please remove the physical stresses from his body. Maharishi replied, laughingly, something like, "But then I would be depriving you of your free will, to reap the consequences of your own actions." Maharishi's response indicated to me that he did have the ability to manipulate the physical universe in any way he wanted - in other words, that he was enlightened.

(2) Did Maharishi have supernormal powers? Here are my first-hand experiences: I remember that when he entered a room, I felt a sort of magnetic force. When he looked around the room, I felt a magnetic light-energy fall on whomever he looked at. Once, my boyfriend gave Maharishi a flower. Afterwards, as he walked back towards his seat, the people whom he passed looked like they felt a wave of energy come from him, like a residue from Maharishi. I felt that energy when he sat down next to me. I also remember that on my TM Teacher Training course, Maharishi asked those of us who were having difficulty memorizing the puja (Sanskrit ceremony) to stand up. He looked around at all of us standing, and I felt energy pass through me. After that, I was able to memorize the puja easily. That ability to memorize continued for about 5 months, even back home at college. I also remember that one time, when I sat very near Maharishi, I felt overcome by something - power or energy or bliss or unconsciousness.

(3) What do I make of those experiences now? Maybe Maharishi had supernormal powers, maybe he was enlightened. Or maybe it was a matter of expectations or placebo effect or self-hypnosis. Or maybe it was transference.

(4) I have heard quite a few rumors (second and third hand) about Maharishi's superpowers. For instance, I heard that once, when his helicopter was running late, he made the clouds move by pointing his finger at them. Also, I read on TMFree that he told Doug Henning that he could heal Doug of cancer (but if he did so, then Doug would have to be born another time. Hmm, is this or is this not consistent with Maharishi's comment, above, that he wouldn't remove a person's stress because it would interfere with a person's free will?) Then, there was the friend of mine who told me that she had broken her leg, and after she talked with Maharishi, her leg started healing rapidly. And I heard that someone once asked Maharishi, "You say that enlightened people have supernormal powers, but can you prove it?" The story goes that Maharishi nodded, and then did something-or-other for about 30 seconds. The questioner said, "Thank you!" with great conviction. The second half of this rumored story is that this interchange between the questioner and Maharishi was videotaped, and that when the you get to the section after Maharishi nods, the tape has a 30-second outage. Another story I heard was that Maharishi was once in a car driving down the street somewhere in Africa, and as he drove past a stranger, he remarked, exhibiting precognition, "That man is going to be very helpful to us in spreading TM in Africa." I also remember in the book "A Hermit in the House" that Mother Olsen wrote that the room that Maharishi stayed in had a strong sacred energy in it. And I remember that sometimes someone at a TM symposium would lecture in a foreign language, and the rumor was that if someone asked Maharishi if he wanted a translator, that Maharishi would say, "No," because he had the ability to understand all languages since he was at home with the source of all languages.

These were all rumored stories. Were any of them true? I don't know. And if they were, what did it mean?

So those are some of my thoughts. Please share with us your comments, memories and musings on this topic, below!

New Books About Guru Dev

Paul Mason has published a set of three texts on the life and teaching of Guru Dev.

These are available at http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/gurudev.htm (see new book!)

I am in no way connected with the production of these texts and in no way benefit from their sale, but I wanted to let everyone know that they are available.

For me, there is a significant distinction to be made between the heuristic presentation of Maheshism and the far more traditional grounding of Guru Dev. While everyone will have to come to his or her own conclusion upon studying these texts, I know that Paul has made every effort to find the most meaningful translation and to supply every photograph and illustration available.

Sudarsha

Maharishi's Teachings on Sex and Gender Roles

When I learned TM in 1971, I was taught that TM did not require a change in lifestyle. Back then, Maharishi used to say that when a person started doing TM, their behavior automatically became better and better, therefore it was unnecessary for him to impose any rules of behavior on anyone. When I practiced TM only 20 minutes twice a day, what we were told was accurate - TM indeed did not require a change in belief or lifestyle.

But I discovered that when a person got more deeply involved in the TM organization, there were plenty of rules that Maharishi instituted. There were rules about sex and gender roles, and as the years went by, his rules became more and more anti-sex and anti-female.

So, I invite you to take a second trip with me down memory lane. (My first trip down memory lane was my essay "Acting Funny Around Money", published in TMFree on March 21, 2009.) This time, I'm recalling Maharishi's rules around sex and gender roles from 1971 to 1981 (the years I was in the TM movement), as well as how these rules played out in the lives and beliefs of his followers.

I'm writing this all from memory, so I'm sure some dates and incidents will be inaccurate. If you want, please correct my mistakes in the "Comments" section below. Also, if you'd like, share some of your own memories of sex and gender roles in Maharishi's universe, and how it affected the people who followed him. Or if you were involved in the TM organization after 1981, share with us what the new rules were. Some of your memories may be very personal, so be sure to only reveal as much as you're comfortable revealing. Or use a pseudonym - and if you do so, double check to make sure the "Comments" page is not pulling up and publishing your real name along with your anonymous name.

So here are my memories on Maharishi's changing rules on sex and gender roles.

1955 Publication of "Beacon Light of the Himalayas" by our Maharishi. Regarding Guru Dev, Maharishi wrote that Guru Dev sought as his guru someone of the highest calibre - therefore, naturally they would be a lifelong celibate.

1968? Rumor that Maharishi made sexual advances to Mia Farrow in his ashram in India.

1970? At the TM Teacher Training Course in California, USA, there was co-ed skinny dipping. (So I heard.)

1971 I was instructed in TM. "Requires no change in lifestyle. Person spontaneously acts better, more in accord with the laws of nature." (Paraphrased.)

1972 Humboldt State College, Arcata, California, USA, one month summer course. Maharishi asked the attendees if we could manage to refrain from having sex for just one month, during the course? [This was during the height of the "sexual revolution."] (Some of us didn't refrain, even so.)

1972 Humboldt. Questioner: "Maharishi, what is the purpose of sex?" Maharishi (looking uncomfortable): "Ask your doctor."

1972 Humboldt. Questioner: "Maharishi, what is the value of celibacy?" Maharishi: "Keeps the body a little cleaner, a little fresher."

1972 Humboldt. Questioner: "Jerry, [Jerry Jarvis, U.S. national director of Students International Meditation Society) does Maharishi have, like, a girlfriend or something?" Jerry: "Maharishi is a monk. He likes everybody."

1974? TM Teacher Training Course, January-May, 1974, La Antilla, Spain. Maharishi: "I'm almost scared to say it, but what this movement needs is a few good celibates."

1974 La Antilla. Questioner: "Max, [Max Fleischer (sp.?), director of the Teacher Training Course], if we find our sexual desires are overwhelming while we're on TTC, is it okay to act on them?" Max: "If you find that they're getting in the way of your being one-pointedly on the program, then take care of it, so that you can get back to your studies." (Note: And alternately, some people found that while they were rounding they had virtually no sexual urges.)

1974 La Antilla. Questioner: "Jerry [Jarvis] [or perhaps it was Max], is homosexuality bad for ones evolution?" Answer: You know, this is such a big, unknowable universe. Who's to say what is good or evil in the mind of the supreme Creative Intelligence as far as this little corner of the universe? [paraphrased.] Maharishi has said, 'It's interesting, but many people with this orientation - although Maharishi didn't use the word 'orientation' - have been very helpful to the movement.' "

1974 La Antilla. Maharishi: "I'm a monk. Seeing all these ladies in miniskirts embarrasses me...But I know they're the style, so it's okay to wear them back home." [paraphrased].

1974 La Antilla. Rumors that on a previous TTC, some single women got pregnant, and asked Maharishi if abortion was bad for their "evolution." Rumor had it that he replied that the soul doesn't enter the fetus until the third month, so before that, it's okay to have an abortion.

1974 La Antilla. We are told that women have "more delicate nervous systems" than men - that they take on stress more easily and they throw it off more easily.

1974 La Antilla. TTC Teacher: "At the initiation ceremony, female teachers should make sure they wear blouses that cover their shoulders."

1974? "M" group started. (Male celibates.)

1974 A TM teacher shares with me the rumor that Maharishi made sexual advances to female TM teachers, and that those teachers have since stopped teaching TM and stopped doing TM. She and I don't believe the rumor. "Maharishi? That's impossible. Probably he is just so full of cosmic love, and they misinterpreted it." We can understand if someone gives up teaching TM, but we are horrified that they would stop meditating.

1975 Academy for the Science of Creative Intelligence, Livingston Manor, New York, USA. Director of Housing: "We don't have enough bedrooms for all the staff. Perhaps if you're engaged, you and your girlfriend could double up."

1975: Livingston Manor. Director: "There are two types of life: single life and married life. When you live here, please think of yourself as being a guest in Maharishi's home, and don't do anything that would offend him." [i.e. Celibacy is the only approved behavior for non-married people.]

1975? Teacher Training Courses and Advanced Training Courses for TM teachers start being sex-segregated. Courses become "Men's courses, "Ladies' courses" and "Couples' courses." Women are officially referred to as "Ladies" i.e. "Ladies' courses," "Ladies' dining hall," "ladies' dorms," etc.

1975: Questioner: "Charlie, [Lutes, the elder statesman of the spiritual branch of the Spiritual Regeneration Movement, Maharishi's first Western organization] is it wrong to have sex if you're not married?" Charlie: "What, do we have some guilty consciences here? It should be done in love and kindness and respect. 'Everything in moderation,' isn't that what the Greek philosophers taught? Don't strain. If you really want to do it, don't force yourself not to. If you don't want to do it, don't force yourself to. No, I don't believe you need to perform a specific ceremony first (wedding) in order to make it morally okay to engage in this experience." [paraphrase]

1976 Livingston Manor, New York, USA. Rumors that our boss was a "bramichariya," a celibate for Maharishi. Rumors that someone found him in bed with a woman.

1976 Livingston Manor. Maharishi visits the video studio here. One of the camera people is a woman. Maharishi is shocked and asks, "You allow a lady to handle the cameras?" She is taken off cameras and put in charge of make-up.

1976 Livingston Manor. Told to me by a TM teacher: "Maharishi says that if you have sex and you're not married, it's absolutely the worst thing you can do for your evolution. When you have sex, you exchange karma with that person." Me: "What if you've already blown it?" He: "Ur, then stop immediately!"

1976 A woman on staff at South Fallsburg, New York, USA, confides to me that when there is a men-only one-and-a-half month ATR at South Fallsburg, the men ogle the female staff so mercilessly that the female staff have taken to wearing baggy sweaters in public.

1976 First rumor heard of "celibate marriages." Apparently encouraged by Maharishi for faster spiritual growth.

1977? TM-Sidhis "flying" halls are made sex-segregated.

1977? Staff woman expelled from Livingston Manor for having a man sleep over in her cabin. Rumor is that a man was not expelled for having woman visitor sleep over.

1977 TM teacher tells me, "Don't tell the TM Center that my fiance slept over my house, or they'll kick me out and blacklist me!"

1977? Women who have been instructed in the TM-Sidhas are told to "rest" (stay at home in bed) for the first three days of their menstrual period.

1978? Livingston Manor. All women and all gay men are told to leave, turning this into a celibate male facility.

1978? Sex-segregated groups sent to "trouble spots" around the world to levitate for peace.

1978? Female groups are not sent to trouble spots that are most rustic or dangerous.

1978? Female higher-ups start wearing saris. But not in the traditional Indian manner, where upper chest, arms, and midriff are visible. TM women cover all these areas with their saris.

1979 On TM-Sidhis course, women are encouraged to wear high necks, long sleeves and over-the-knee dresses when Maharishi is around, and even when he isn't.

1979 Creating Coherence Course, MIU, Fairfield, Iowa, USA. Men and women have separate dorms, separate "flying halls," separate sitting areas in meetings, separate dining halls, separate work crews.

1979 Creating Coherence Course. Staff are divided into "men's work crews" and "ladies' work crews." Men can choose from construction, painting, office work, grounds, electrical work, etc.; and women can work in the office. My request for a physically active job is met with astonishment by the man in charge. He thought women are more "delicate" than men and would prefer an indoor, sitting job where they can wear pretty clothes and not sweat. I explain that when I am physically active, I "experience bliss." Dumbfounded, he agrees to start a "ladies' painting crew," which I become a member of.

1979 MIU. During "Forest Academy" (rounding semester), students are encouraged to keep their "metabolisms low" by no kissing, etc .

1979 Creating Coherence Course. Married course participants are instructed to have no public displays of affection. This even extends to no public hand-holding.

1979 Creating Coherence Course. Married couples are instructed to always be together, to do everything together, to sit together at meals, to always walk next to each other, etc.

1979 Creating Coherence Course. Married couples count as one person: on CCC issues, the Director of the Men's Course gets one vote, the Director of the Ladies' Course gets one vote, the husband and wife Co-Directors of the Couples' Course, Maharishi explains, "are of course one person," and get one vote.

1980? Creating Coherence Course. I tell a woman friend that I would love to be on the construction crew and learn how to build houses. She says, "Oh, no, you don't want to be under a house in the mud. I can see you in a beautiful dress with a flower in your hair."

1980? Formation of "Purusha" one-year (?) courses for celibate men and "Mother Divine" one-year (?) courses for celibate women.

1980 Less and less women are appearing in high-ranking positions in the TM organization.

1980 Maharishi tells us that although the TM-Sidhis program will give us immortality, only people who have been life-long celibates can be immortal. He tells us that those sidhas who have ever had sex will not be immortal, but we will live a long time.

1980? CCC. Some higher-up tells the men, "Decide if you are going to be celibate or not. Either make a decision to live that way or to not live that way, but then stick with it. Don't just go back and forth on it."

1980 Someone asked Maharishi what to do if they weren't getting along with their spouse. Maharishi replied, "Do you sleep in the same room?" (Unclear what this meant. Perhaps he meant if they had sex they would get along better?)

1980? CCC. Freezing cold winters in Iowa. I wear woolen pants, and flannel long johns over them. Our supervisors at work are male bramichariyas. Word comes down, "Please don't wear your long johns in public. We have celibates working here; it makes them uncomfortable."

1980 CCC. Money before everything. Women are told that if they work for Sidha Corp. International, they can only take off two, not three, paid days of "resting" during their menstrual period.

1980 CCC. The TM-Sidhis seem to have various effects on peoples' sexual responses. For instance, as soon as I learn to "fly," I cease having interest in men or in sex. I find, at age 28, I have sexual urges only once a month. I assume I am in touch with my natural cycles, and feel very proud of my spiritual evolution. I also have heard about one married woman, after she learned the TM-Sidhis, still enjoyed cuddling, but she recoiled from having sexual relations with her husband. Then, there is the 27-year old female friend of mine who confides to me that following the meditation/"flying" program, she sometimes finds herself so sexually aroused that she actually has to masturbate in the "flying" hall. Another single woman friend of mine on CCC became pregnant. (This must have taken a great deal of initiative, since the courses were sex-segregated.) (She went on to have an abortion.)

1981 MIU. Discussion amongst women about a women's rights club on campus. One woman says, condescendingly, "Those woman who talk about 'women's liberation'; well, we know what women's liberation is really about." We all nod smugly in agreement.

1981 Evolving men's consciousness in the Age of Enlightenment: I am chatting with a male course participant
who is on the construction crew. I say that I would love to learn construction. He says, "I don't think it's right for women to do construction, because then they get more muscled, and they're no longer so attractive to men." I've always regretted that I didn't ask him what he thought about the value of high income, aerobic exercise, fresh air, weight-bearing exercise, useful skills, etc. for women.

That's the end of my reminiscences. Now it's your turn!

Still "not a religion:" Video of puja, the religious ritual central to TM initiation

A video of a group performance of the puja, a central part of TM initiation, is now available as a Google Video. This video, recorded from the TM movement's Maharishi Channel, shows Maharishi Mahesh Yogi leading the ritual in January 2006, with a group of "rajas" of the organization's "Global Government." Each of these "rajas" had generally paid one million dollars each to dress in white robes, wear golden crowns, and at the time this video was recorded, were occasionally physically present with the movement's founder during the last years of his life.

What you'll see in this video differs from TM initiation in that initiations are done in private, with the prospective meditator standing with the initiator performing the ritual. The initiate would have contributed to this ritual by bringing fresh fruit, flowers and a hankerchief beforehand; they would, of course, need to be present for this ritual, and would be encouraged to kneel at the end (which occurs in the video at about 9:40 when all participants bow while seated).

Other elements that can be seen in this video are the same as what an initiate can expect to see before being instructed in the practice of Transcendental Meditation, particularly the puja set and picture seen in front of each participant, the use of incense, flame, water and flowers, the motions of offering various items "to the lotus feet of Shri Guru Dev," and of course the "Holy Tradition," sung in Sanskrit.

The puja and its translation have long been freely available online. To follow along, visit the "TM 'Holy Tradition'" page at Trancenet. For a discussion of the religious meaning of the puja, alternate translations, and an exploration of its source in commonly available scraps of Sanskrit poetry, see "Whose puja is it, anyway?" also at Trancenet. Also check out TMFB contributor Laurie's four part series here, Revisiting TM Initiation.

Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 4: Bowing Down

(Note: This essay is fourth in a series. See also Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 1, posted 11/11/2008, Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 2: The Puja ("Traditional Ceremony of Gratitude"), posted 11/20/2008, and Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 3: The Mantra, posted 12/5/2008.)


There is a knock at the door of the initiation room. The initiator opens the door and welcomes in the initiate, who is carrying his basket of fruit, flowers, handkerchief and initiation form. The initiator takes the basket, and both sit down.

Fantasy Initiation #4

Question from initiate: May I ask you a few questions about all this before we begin?

Answer from initiator: Okay.

Q: I've heard that at the end of this traditional non-religious ceremony of gratitude, you bow down to the floor in front of the painting of Maharishi's teacher. Is that so?

A: We don't bow down. We kneel.

Q: OK, whatever you call it, isn't that a problem for you?

A: No. Why should it be?

Q: Well, I understand that you're Jewish.

A: Yes, I am, but so what?

Q: Well, isn't it against your religion to bow down -

A: We don't bow down. We kneel.

Q: - to kneel before anyone other than God?

A: Oh. I see what you're getting at. Over 600 published scientific research studies prove that Transcendental Meditation benefits an individual in every area of life. To preserve this precious teaching, the teacher teaches it exactly as given. The nonreligious ceremony of gratitude, which has been passed down for centuries, is the traditional way to remind the teachers of their responsibility to preserve the purity of the teaching, so that the student gets maximum benefits. That traditional ceremony includes certain age-old words, objects, and gestures, and it includes kneeling at the end. For maximum benefits for the student, the teacher promises not to deviate from the correct way to teach it.

Q: That's very nice. But couldn't Maharishi make an exception, for people whose religion prohibits them from bowing down -

A: We don't bow down. We kneel.

Q: - from kneeling before anyone other than God?

A: Oh no. Maharishi said that if he made an exception for one group, other people would say that he should make an exception for their group too, and before you know it, the purity of the teaching is lost.

Q: Well, that's reasonable. But you still haven't answered my original question.

A: Which was what?

Q: Don't you feel you're going against the precepts of your own religion by bowing down-

A: By kneeling.

Q: - by kneeling before someone other than God?

A: No. Maharishi explained that it is not a violation of my religion to kneel before a picture of Guru Dev.

Q: Oh. That's nice. I didn't realize that Maharishi was an expert on Judaism.

A: Well, he pointed out that religious people kneel all the time in front of things that are not God.

Q: They do?

A: Yes. They kneel in front of closets and cars.

Q: What?

A: He pointed out that even the most religious people kneel in front of their closets to tie their shoelaces, and in front of their cars to change a tire.

Q: But isn't that totally different? I mean, you're not worshipping the closet or the car.

Q: Well, Maharishi explained that kneeling at the end of the non-religious traditional ceremony of gratitude is just a procedure. Bowing down would be worship, but kneeling is just a physical procedure, just like kneeling in front of a car. So there's no conflict with any religion.

Q: Doesn't Maharishi's answer strike you as a little disingenuous?

A: No.

Q: Oh. Well, does this mean that you're going to have to give up teaching TM when you get older?

A: Of course not. Why would it?

Q: Suppose your joints get too stiff to bow dow- to kneel.

A: Oh, I see what you're getting at. No, I wouldn't have to give up teaching TM when I get old. One woman on our TM Teacher Training Course said she couldn't kneel due to arthritis. She said that if she got down, she wouldn't be able to get up again! The instructor told her that was OK, she wouldn't be required to kneel.

Q: But you just told me that Maharishi said he couldn't start making exceptions, or before you knew it the purity of the teaching would be lost. Well, here he's making an exception for people with arthritis. How do you explain that?

A: I don't know.

Q: Could it be a matter of intent? The person with arthritis wanted to bow dow- wanted to kneel but wasn't able to, while the religious person was able to kneel but refused.

A: I don't know.

Q: Or could it be a matter of obedience? The person with arthritis wanted to obey Maharishi but wasn't able to, while the religious person was able to obey Maharishi but wouldn't?

A: I don't know.

Q: Don't you think you're a little bit lacking in healthy curiosity?

A: No.

Q: Could it be about the relationship with Guru Dev? The arthritic woman wanted to worship Guru Dev but wasn't able to, while the religious person was able to worship Guru Dev but wouldn't?

Q: We don't worship Guru Dev. That would be against my religion, and Maharishi says that TM doesn't conflict with any religion. TM is a simple, natural, nonreligious, scientific technique.

Q: So that's that? The woman with arthritis isn't required to kneel?

A: Right. But they did tell her to make a comparable gesture at that point.

Q: Oh! What gesture did they tell her to make?

A: No, no. They didn't show her a comparable gesture to make. They told her, "Make a comparable gesture."

Q: You mean she made up the gesture herself?

A: Yes.

Q: Did she run it by Maharishi after she decided on one?

A: No.

Q: Well, then how could they assure the purity of the teaching if they let any old person invent part of the ceremony?

A: I don't know. I'm sure the instructors knew what they were doing.

Q: Why?

A: Well, they were chosen by Maharishi.

Q: Don't you think you're showing a slight lack of intellectual acuity here?

A: Of course not. Over six hundred published research studies prove that TM improves all areas of life, including intelligence.

Q: But how could this woman know what gesture of her own choosing might be comparable to kneeling if the only rationale for the kneeling was "it's just a physical procedure" and "that's the way it's always been done"?

A: Oh, wait. I just remembered another reason for kneeling. Maharishi said, "We kneel so that we should not fall."

Q: Oh. Did he say that if you didn't feel in danger of falling, then you didn't have to kneel?

A: No.

Q: Did you ever feel you were in danger of falling?

A: No.

Q: Do you think maybe you were doing the ceremony improperly?

A: Certainly not.

Q: I mean, if you had done it properly, perhaps then you would have felt like you were in danger of falling.

A: No, I do the ceremony properly. Every word, every gesture has been passed down for centuries, and they didn't let us graduate until we could do it all properly.

Q: Then if you were doing it properly, why didn't you feel like you were going to fall?

A: I don't know.

Q: Do you think Maharishi was perhaps saying what was expedient?

A: No. He wouldn't lie.

Q: Did you know that you don't recognize weakness in logic when you hear it?

A: I don't think that's true.

Q: Oh well. Let's get back to that woman who was told to "make a comparable gesture" to keep from falling. What would be a comparable gesture?

A: I don't know. I've never thought about it. I don't have arthritis.

Q: Hmm, do you think she could have pushed a few chairs together, and at that point she could lie down on the chairs?

A: Of course not. That's ridiculous.

Q: Maybe at that point in the ceremony, she could grab onto the furniture to keep from falling.

A: I really think you're making a joke out of this.

Q: I am not.

A: Lying on chairs, grabbing onto furniture. That's no way to show reverence.

A: But there's no need to show reverence. Isn't this simply about keeping from falling?

A: Of course it's about reverence. Part of the translation of the traditional non-religious ceremony of gratitude goes like this:

"White as camphor, kindness incarnate, the essence of creation garlanded with Brahman, ever dwelling in the lotus of my heart, the creative impulse of cosmic life, to That, in the form of Guru Dev, I bow down."

Q: Don't you mean "I kneel"?

A: No. This is the translation. "Guru in the glory of Brahma, Guru in the glory of Vishnu, Guru in the glory of the great Lord Shiva, Guru in the glory of the personified transcendental fullness of Brahman, to Him, to Shri Guru Dev adorned with glory, I bow down.

The Unbounded, like the endless canopy of the sky, the omnipresent in all creation, by whom the sign of That has been revealed, to Him, to Shri Guru Dev, I bow down.

Guru Dev, Shri Brahmananda, bliss of the Absolute, transcendental joy, the Self-Sufficient, the embodiment of pure knowledge which is beyond and above the universe like the sky, the aim of "Thou art That" and other such expressions which unfold eternal truth, the One, the Eternal, the Pure, the Immoveable, the Witness of all intellects, whose status transcends thought, the Transcendent along with the three gunas, the true preceptor, to Shri Guru Dev, I bow down.

The blinding darkness of ignorance has been removed by applying the balm of knowledge. The eye of knowledge has been opened by Him and therefore, to Him, to Shri Guru Dev, I bow down. Offering a handful of flowers to the lotus feet of Shri Guru Dev, I bow down."

Oops. I don't think I was supposed to tell you the translation.

Q: Why not?

A: Er, because you might misunderstand it.

Q: What might I misunderstand?

A: Well, there's the possibility you might think TM is religious in nature.

Q: Oh, come on. How could I possibly think anything else after hearing that translation?

A: See? You did misunderstand. TM is just a simple natural non-religious scientific technique. Or you -

Q: Did you notice that any time I ask you a potentially embarrassing question, instead of thinking it through, you answer by quoting Maharishi like you're a broken record?

A: I don't do that. - Or you might misunderstand and think we worship Guru Dev.

Q: How could I possibly think anything else after hearing that translation?

A: You see? You misunderstood that too. The traditional non-religious ceremony of gratitude is just a procedure. It's not a worshipping of Guru Dev.

Q: Then why did you keep saying, "I bow down"?

A: That's just the translation. Oh, I just remembered another reason why we kneel. At one lecture, Maharishi explained, "When I was designing the ceremony, when I came to the final line, I was so overcome with emotion that there wasn't anything I could possibly think of doing at that point except kneel."

Q: What?! Do you know how many times in the last five minutes you've insisted that this ceremony is ancient?

A: I'm sure Maharishi didn't mean that the way it sounds.

Q: Oh. What do you think he meant, then?

A: I'm sure it's an ancient ceremony. Maharishi wouldn't lie.

Q: I'm sure he wouldn't. When was it written?

A: I don't know.

Q: Who wrote it?

A: I don't know.

Q: What were the author's qualifications?

A: I don't know.

Q: What happens if you teach TM without doing the ceremony?

A: I don't know.

Q: What happens if you do the ceremony without kneeling at the end?

A: I don't know. I'm sorry. We didn't learn any of that on the course.

Q: Didn't you ever have any doubts, or try to find out?

A: No.

Q: Despite all Maharishi's contradictions?

A: Maharishi doesn't contradict himself. He teaches a simple, natural, non-religious scientific technique.

Q: You don't think he shades the truth?

A: Of course not.

Q: Don't you think he discourages you from questioning his word?

A: No.

Q: Don't you think you have an impaired capacity for logical thinking?

A: Of course I don't.

Q: Have you noticed that you often contradict yourself?

A: I don't. This is a scientific technique, backed up by science.

Q: Did you notice that you lie to your students?

A: I wouldn't do that!

Q Did you know that you lie to yourself and aren't even aware of it?

A: I really can't agree. I don't do any of those things. Over six hundred published research studies prove that TM benefits an individual in all areas of life. Well, any more questions? No? Alright then, shall we begin? I said, shall we begin? Excuse me? Sir? Shall we begin?

- end -

(Note: The author attended TM Teacher Training in La Antilla, Spain in 1974. What she learned there informs this article. People who attended other courses may have learned different things.)

Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 1

(Note: This is a four-part series. Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 2: The Puja ("Traditional Ceremony of Gratitude") was posted on November 20, 2008. Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 3: The Mantra was posted on December 5, 2008. Revisiting TM Initiation, Part 4: Bowing Down was published on January 1, 2009.)

Since leaving the TM movement 27 years ago, I have been impressed with how tenaciously my mind has held onto illogical TM beliefs, even though I have researched mind control, studied the dishonesty in the TM movement, been exit counseled, learned about suggestibility, etc.

I used to think that my indoctrination occurred on my five-month Teacher Training Course, where I meditated up to 12 times a day, leading to a state of heightened suggestibility. Later, I decided that the indoctrination came earlier, at a one-month course I had taken the previous year, where I meditated up to 6 times a day.

Now I realize that TM mind control started even earlier. I see now that some of the groundwork was already set in place by the day of "initiation" (personal instruction). I don't mean the specific beliefs were in place, like "Don't eat meat - it's bad for your spiritual evolution," but a basic mindset necessary for further indoctrination into the TM world view was already in place. These never-explicitly articulated, yet understood ground rules included: Don't ask awkward questions. Obey. Don't rock the boat. Overlook inconsistencies. Collude. Don't embarrass the teacher. Believe everything Maharishi says.

I did see people showing independent thought and asking difficult questions at the Introductory Lecture and the Preparatory Lecture. But by the time of initiation, I was already a lot more sheep-like. And the other people who learned TM the same day as me seemed to be, too. I mean, I don't recall hearing any pointed questions in the three days of follow-up.

So let's go back in time to the "Initiation." Fortunately for me and for you, the reader, I can tell you almost exactly what happened in your and my initiation room, even though it happened to me 37 years ago, because the initiators had to learn the initiation verbatim. My thanks to the website minet.org/steps.html. for writing up the initiation word-for-word.

In the waiting room, the assistant asks the initiate (student) to remove his/her shoes, and then, to carry the basket containing the fruit, flowers, handkerchief and initiation form, and to follow the assistant to the initiation room. The assistant knocks, the initiator welcomes the initiate in, the assistant departs, and the initiator closes the door.

The initiator offers the initiate one of two chairs and both sit down in front of an altar, set with a painting of Guru Dev on a raised dais, a brass tray, brass water holders with water, incense holder with incense, candlestick with candle, etc. The initiator takes the basket from the initiate and looks at the initiation form again.

Here is what the initiator has been memorized to now say, verbatim: "In this personal instruction, you will receive a mantra, or sound, and then the procedure how to use it properly. Once you know the mantra, or sound, by tradition, we keep it to ourself. Also, the actual procedure of meditation that you receive is to be kept private. For maximum results, all that we learn in private, we keep private. Do you agree? (Initiate agrees.)

Now, please come, stand here, (both stand) you would like to have a flower? (hands initiate a flower) and witness the ceremony which I perform in gratitude to the tradition of Masters who have given us this wisdom of integration of life. This is a picture of Guru Dev, His Divinity Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, Maharishi's Master, from whom we have this meditation. Now I'll begin -- and you just witness." (Initiator performs ceremony and then instructs initiate in how to do Transcendental Meditation.)

It is my opinion that in these twelve minutes, from taking off their shoes in the waiting room to hearing their mantra for the first time, the initiate has systematically relinquished more and more independent thinking and has fallen into the TM mindset. Let me explain why I believe that.

Let's return to the moment when the initiate and the initiator sit down in front of the altar. Let's slow down the initiation to a snail's pace, so that the initiate can maintain his/her ability to think independently and capacity to process inconsistencies. Let's see what questions the initiate might have asked if he/she were not already falling under the pressure to not ask awkward questions, to obey, to not rock the boat, to overlook inconsistencies, to collude, to not embarrass the initiator, and to believe everything Maharishi says.

My Fantasy Initiation:

Question from initiate: Is it okay if I ask you a few questions while I'm learning?

Answer from initiator: Sure.

(Stop the film! I would like to point out that, on Teacher Training, we were NOT taught to answer questions honestly. What we were taught to do was to give the answer that Maharishi wanted us to give. Thus, whenever I as a TM teacher was asked a question, I had four possible options:

1) If Maharishi had so instructed, answer truthfully.
2) If Maharishi had so instructed, answer with a prepared lie.
3) If Maharishi said to keep it a secret, find a way to hedge.
4) If Maharishi never told us what to say regarding a certain question, try to figure out what I think Maharishi would have wanted me to say - using the three choices above as guidelines - and say that.)

Start rolling the film again. Let's see what an initiation might look like if the initiate continues to use their critical thinking and does not fall under the TM unspoken ground rules. It is astonishing how many opportunities for slippage into unclear thinking exist in just 126 words.

Question from initiate: Is it okay if I ask you a few questions while I'm learning?

Answer from initiator: Sure.

Q: Why was I told to take off my shoes?

A: Um....It's part of the traditional ceremony of gratitude.

Q: Why do you take off your own shoes?

A: Same reason.

Q: But why did the assistant take off her shoes? She's not in the ceremony.

A: Um...tradition.

Q: You said I wouldn't participate in the ceremony, only watch it. Now you're asking me to take off my shoes. That makes me part of the ceremony.

A: Well, it's to show respect.

Q: I respect a lot of things, but I don't take off my shoes for them.

A: Well, it's the traditional way.

Q: Why was I instructed to bring fruit, flowers and a white handkerchief?

A: For the traditional ceremony of gratitude.

Q: But why those particular items?

A: Um...tradition.

Q: Why the fruit?

A: Well, it's symbolic.

Q: Fruit and flowers I can understand. But why a handkerchief?

A: Um...well originally it was a white cloth.

Q: But why?

A: Um....It's traditional. I'm sure you'll like the ceremony.

Q: But why are you doing a traditional Indian ceremony? We're Americans.

A: Um....Maharishi's request. For the teacher to remember to preserve the teaching in its purity.

Q: Then why not do it alone? Why do I have to be present?

A: Um....

Q: Is it in English?

A: No, it's in Sanskrit.

Q: Do you understand Sanskrit?

A: Just a little. I understand the translation of the ceremony.

Q: Will you translate it into English for me?

A: No.

Q: Why not?

A: Um....

Q: How do you know I'd be comfortable with its sentiments if you won't translate it?

A: Um...It's just a ceremony of gratitude.

Q: Then why won't you translate it for me?

A: Um....

Q: Will you explain the ceremony to me?

A: No.

Q: Why not?

A: Um....

Q: Well, that's all the questions I have for now. I'm ready to proceed.

Initiator: "In this personal instruction, you will receive a mantra or sound --"

Q: How do you choose the mantra?

A: Um...Well, by the individual's characteristics. We were carefully trained.

Q: What characteristics do you look at?

A: Um....

Q: Are you allowed to tell me how you choose the mantras?

A: No.

Q: Why not?

A: Um....to keep the purity of the teaching. So only people properly trained will teach.

Q: How many mantras do you choose from?

A: Um...a handful.

Q: How many?

A: Um....

Q: Are you not supposed to say?

A: That's right.

Q: Why not?

A: Um....

Q: I'm through with questions for now. Please go ahead.

Initiator: "In this personal instruction, you will receive a mantra, or sound, and then the procedure how to use it properly.
Once you know the mantra, or sound, by tradition we keep it to ourself --"

Q: Why?

A: To go inward.

Q: But you said it's the natural tendency of the mind to go to the Transcendent. So my saying it out loud or not wouldn't interfere with that.

A: Um....

Q: Why do you say "we." I'm the one who's learning it, not "we."

A: It's a little more polite to say "we."

Q: Why do you say "ourself?" That's not even a word.

A: Um....

Q: I'm through with my questions for now. Please go on.

Initiator: "Also, the actual procedure of meditation that you receive is to be kept private--"

Q: Why?

A: So that it's only taught correctly, by someone thoroughly trained.

Q: Please go on.

Initiator: "For maximum results, all that we learn in private, we keep private--"

Q: Why does it bring maximum results if all that I learn in private I keep private?

A: I just explained. To make sure it's only taught by thoroughly trained teachers.

A: No, you explained that to keep the purity of the teaching, I shouldn't teach it if I'm not trained. But you didn't explain why for maximum results, all that I learn in private I should keep private. Why will keeping it private lead to maximum results?

A: Um....

Q: When you say "all that I learn in private" do you mean just the mantra and how to meditate, or do you mean the ceremony, the altar, etc.?

A: Um....

Q: I'm done with questions for now. Please go ahead.

Initiator: "Do you agree?"

Q: Do you mean, do I agree to keep this private?

A: Right.

Q: If I don't agree to keep this private, then what happens?

A: Then I can't teach you.

Q: Well, I want to learn. This seems like a great technique. OK, I agree.

Initiator: "Now, please come, stand here--"

Q: Why should I stand?

A: To witness the ceremony.

Q: I can see it fine from my chair. Can't I stay seated?

A: No.

Q: Why not?

A: Um....

Q: You said I wouldn't participate in the ceremony, just observe it.

A: Um....

Q: Well, go on.

Initiator: "You would like to have a flower?--"

Q: Why would I want a flower?

A: Maybe you'd like to hold one.

Q: What for?

A: To feel part of the ceremony.

Q: But you said I'd just watch it, not participate.

A: Okay, don't take the flower.

Q: Go on.

Initiator: "And witness the ceremony that I perform in gratitude to the tradition of Masters who have given us this wisdom of integration of life --"

Q: "Tradition of Masters"? What does that mean?

A: One person taught the next, down through history. That's why we have Transcendental Meditation today.

Q: Then why is there only one person in the painting?

A: Um....I don't know. I guess that's traditional. That's Maharishi's direct teacher.

Q: What do you mean by "integration of life"?

A: One hundred percent inner life, 100% outer life.

Q: What do you mean by 100% inner life and 100% outer life?

A: Complete unfoldment of inner potential, complete successful activity in the world.

Q: Do you have 100% inner life and 100% outer life?

A: No.

Q: Do you know anyone who does?

A: No.

Q: Then how do you know that TM produces this?

A: Um...Well, Maharishi says so.

Q: Does Maharishi have 100% inner and 100% outer life?

A: Yes.

Q: How do you know?

A: Um....well, I know. He says so....Well, he never exactly says so. But you can tell....

Q: How can you tell?

A: Um....

Q: Did he get this 100% of inner and outer life by doing TM?

A: No, he got it by being in the presence of his teacher.

Q: Please go on.

Initiator: "This is a picture of Guru Dev, His Divinity Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, Maharishi's Master, from whom we have this meditation --"

Q: Why do you call him "His Divinity?"

A: Um....

Q: Is he God?

A: No.

Q: Do you worship him as a God?

A: No.

Q: Does Maharishi think he is a God?

A: Um...I don't think so.

Q: Please go on.

Initiator: "Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, Maharishi's Master, from whom we have this meditation--"

Q: But you just said you have the TM from a tradition of Masters. Now you're saying you have the TM from Guru Dev.

A: Um....

Q: Did these Masters only teach it to one other person, so that the technique was passed down from one person in each generation to one person in the next generation?

A: Um....I don't know.

Q: Or just like Maharishi trained teachers to teach it to many people, didn't these ancient sages teach it to many people?

A: Um...I don't know.

Q: How do you know these ancient teachers taught TM?

A: Um...well, it's part of the tradition.

Q: India is a country that has been in a lot of trouble for centuries. Are you saying that TM has been taught for centuries and yet India is such a mess?

A: Well, there were times when the purity of the teaching was lost. Guru Dev revived it and passed it on to Maharishi.

Q: So then there isn't really a "tradition of Masters." You're saying there were breaks in the teaching.

A: Um...yes.

Q: Never mind, go on with the lesson.

Initiator: "Now, I'll begin and you just witness."

Initiator begins to do ceremony, singing in Sanskrit and waving the fruit, flowers, water, candle, etc. around.

Q: Why are you holding that flower in that odd position?

A: Um....

Q: Why are you dipping the flower in the water?

A: Um...it's the traditional way to give gratitude.

Q: Why are you shaking the flower over your head?

A: It's traditional in India. It's different from the way we do things in America.

Q: Who devised this ceremony?

A: Um....

Q: How long ago was it invented?

A: I don't know.

Q: Why are you putting objects on the tray?

A: Um...Traditional way to give thanks.

Q: Are they gifts to Guru Dev?

A: Um, metaphorically, I guess.

Q: It's only a painting. The painting doesn't have any use for flowers and fruit.

A: Well, that's true.

Q: Why is the painting on a dais, higher than everything else?

A: I guess to honor him.

Q: What's in that bowl?

A: Sandalwood paste.

Q: What's sandalwood paste?

A: I'm not sure. I think it's ground up wood from the sandalwood tree.

Q: What's it for?

A: I think in India, people put it on their foreheads.

Q: Why?

A: I don't know.

Q: What's that stuff there?

A: That's camphor.

Q: What's camphor?

A: I don't know.

Q: What's it good for?

A: I don't know.

Q: What's that stuff?

A: Those are rice grains.

Q: Why are you placing them in front of the picture?

A: Traditional ceremony of gratitude.

Q: I can understand what a flesh-and-blood teacher could do with fruit or flowers. But what's he going to do with a few grains of rice?

A: I don't know.

Q: Why are you waving the candle and incense in circles in front of him?

A: Um....

Q: Now you're holding the flowers in your hands in a prayer position. Are you praying to Guru Dev?

A: No.

Q: Then what are you doing?

A: Um....

Q: Why are you kneeling?

A: It's the traditional ceremony of gratitude.

Q: Are you worshiping Guru Dev?

A: No.

Q: It looks like you're worshiping his picture.

A: No, I'm not.

Q: The Ten Commandments said "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me. Thou shalt not make graven images of God." I think this ceremony conflicts with my religion.

A: No, it doesn't.

Q: You said in the introductory lecture that TM doesn't conflict with my religion.

A: It doesn't.

Q: You don't even know what my religion is; so how can you know if it conflicts with my religion or not?

A: Um...TM is just a simple, natural non-religious technique.

Q: You said TM isn't a religion, but you're certainly kneeling in front of that painting like it's a religion.

A: Um....

Q: You gestured for me to kneel.

A: Um....

Q: I can't kneel before a graven image.

A: Okay, then stay standing.

Q: You told me that I would not participate in the ceremony, that I'd just witness it. But you just gestured for me to kneel.

A: Um....

----

End of article.