--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" > <willytex@> wrote: > > > > Judy wrote: > > > Jeepers, Curtis, it's been around for *millennia*. > > > The idea that specific sounds have specific effects > > > is just about ubiquitous in ancient cultures. > > > > > According to Mircea Eliade, the first mention of yogic > > meditation in India was made by the historical Buddha (circa > > 400 BC). No TM mantras are mentioned in Indian literature > > until after the Gupta Age. For example, there are no bija > > mantras mentioned in the Rig Veda. History in India begins > > with the historical Buddha, so where, exactly, is there > > any mention of bija mantras before that? Eliade says that > > yogic introspection is native to South Asia. > > I had hoped you would weigh in with some details Richard. Thanks.
Actually, it's a non sequitur to my point. Here's what you said that I was responding to: > This is the heart of this for me. Why do we assume that > effortlessly meditating with different sounds has a different > effect at all? And given how differently people react to > meditation when I taught, I really doubt that it would be > possible to create a causative connection between the mantra > rather than its use as the culprit in bad results. Think of > how many factors would have to be considered to claim > causation of the mantra as the problem. > > It makes more sense to me that this explanation appealed to > modern ears.
