For several years I have been intensely conflicted by the need to reconcile my meditation practice with my psychological beliefs. Maharishi, the founder the Transcendental Meditation programme, which I have been practicing, regularly, for over 24 years, does not support traditional psychology. Maharishi does not believe in going to the past and resume old pains, in order to heal from the consequences of faulty upbringing and other deep childhood emotional scars, experienced for this or that reason. This conflict has such a hold on me that it caused me serious existential crisis, through which I managed to navigate and learn what I could; none of which, however, has brought me closer to an answer. Is Transcendental Meditation really opposite to therapy? Now that I have to post my psychological position, this conflict has made itself very present in my mind, and I have not come any closer to solve it.

However, when I decided to enroll here at CSPP and become a psychologist, I must have had a sense that the two practices are not conflictual. But then, if I only had an hour available in life, and I had to choose between spending it doing therapy (me as client) or meditating, I am certain I would choose to meditate. Meditation would better prepare me to die, or would it? Why not choose the comfort of the relationship, instead? This is my conflict. How do I translate it into a psychological position?

I believe is possible. I believe that meditation entails a higher form of development, or consciousness development, and that psychotherapy applies more to the relational field of human life. How to balance the two? This is precisely my dilemma.

Maharishi is the greatest humanist. He believes each person should develop his full potential, just like Maslow did. However, a main difference between the two is that, in order to transcend, or to have a peak-experience, Maslow implied that one had climbed through the lower levels of his pyramid. Maharishi, instead, believes that everyone, everywhere, can transcend and self-actualize. Now, this is really cool.

My psychological position must encompass both the development of consciousness by the use of a transcendental technique and compassionate, caring, supportive counseling.

If, like Cushman suggests, (in "Constructing the Self, Constructing America", p.282), psychotherapy centers around the implicit and explicit ideas of client and therapist about what it means to be human -with which I fully agree -than my psychological position cannot be any less than one that sees the practice of psychotherapy, and change, indissolubly jointed with the practice of consciousness development.

But my struggle was, and is, to reconcile, harmonize, or what have you, what I practice, what I believe, and what I actually do in activity (that is, in between meditations).

No knowledge has been more total, truer, or more fulfilling, for me, than the knowledge I absorbed from the TM movement, structured and delivered by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. School knowledge, limited and imperfect, does not even come close to the totality and the integrity of Maharishi's knowledge.

This conflict between practice and activity, total and imperfect knowledge, has been a predominant existential issue for me, which I actually attempted to bring into therapy.

But my therapist did not meditate, had not experienced what I was trying to describe to him, and it was difficult for me to discuss the issue..

(this topic continues to be dealt with in next posting)