--- sandiego108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I've had it up to my seventh chakra with this rant > > over the last several decades, "Invincibility, > > invincibility" what a pile of vedic cow droppings. > Its > > just so silly. first, wtf does it even mean? > > Invincibility of will, of desire, of intent? The > > inevitability of a space-time experience? > > > Actually kind of a brilliant ploy by Maharishi-- The > world is commonly > seen as having no relationship to us, except as an > external entity > that acts upon us in a way that most people would > like to improve. > > So the desire of a common man is to be "invincible" > to that, to be > armored from the challenges and complexities and > "negativity" of the > world, the means of which are TM and TMSP. Therefore > we continue to > practice TM and TMSP to gain "invincibility", and > gain quite another > thing altogether. > > The fellow was nothing if not one pointed.
Well, yes, the man was one-pointed, to say the least. But the problem with "invincibility" is that it is conceptualized from the ego, or at least understood by the majority of people as the fulfillment of desire. Its the same distortion present in taking Patanjali's "Avert the danger before it arises" as a recommendation for jyotish! Patanjali clearly states what the danger is and it is ignorance or the identification of the seer with the seen, not some relative fulfillment or the promise of s sidhi to be capable of such a thing. > > > ------------------------------------ > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >
