--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <jpgillam@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It's possible that most TMers are not > > > > > in fact "transcending" in the full > > > > > sense of that word and are merely > > > > > experiencing "thought-free" states. > > > > > [snip]"transcending/transcendence/ > > > > > transcendent" are all English words, > > > > > and thus divorced from the original > > > > > Sanskrit definition/descriptions, > > > > > you can make them mean whatever you > > > > > want to and you can also assign whatever > > > > > neurophysiological finding you want as well. > > > > > > > > Vaj (or anyone), are the original Sanskrit > > > > definitions and descriptions of transcendence? > > > > > > > > > > How about "svaruupapratiSThaa of citi-shakti"? > > > > > > (puruSaartha-shuunyaanaaM guNaanaaM pratiprasavaH > > > kaivalyaM *svaruupapratiSThaa vaa citi-shakter* iti.) > > > > What does this ^ translate to, cardemaister? > > > > Taimni translates it like this: /Kaivalya/ is the state (of > Enlightenment) following the re-mergence of the /guNas/ because > of their becoming devoid of the object of the /puruSa/. > In this state > the puruSa is established in his Real nature which is pure > Consciousness. Finis [of Yoga-suutras].
Thanks. Maybe someday I'll be able to appreciate the subtleties of the terms above, but these days I define transcendence in a more boneheaded way: awareness aware of itself, as opposed to aware of thoughts or sense impressions. I remember Bevan talking about kaivalya once in 1979 or 1980 at MIU, but the subject was never pursued. Apparently people were not having sufficient experiences to justify a further investigation of the phenomenon.
