--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity <no_re...@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, not everyone accepts the "universal being" schtick that is > basically a Hindu > > > > interpretation of the TC state. As I have pointed out before, a > strong atheist > > > > might well attain "God Consciousness" or "Unity Consciousness' ala > MMY's > > > > definitions and still remain a strong atheist. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just because YOU can't conceive of that happening doesn't mean its > impossible, > > > > or even unlikely. If these states really ARE natural states of > consciousness, > > > > then the number of interpretations of the states will be > unlimited. > > > > > > > > > > > > L > > > > > > Lawson, your point of view is interesting. But why do you believe > that these states may really be natural states of consciousness? > > > > Shurg, why not? Recent research on sucesful athletic champions and > managers > > shows they fall closer to the "enlightened" part of the Brain > Coherence Index > > than non-champions/unsucessful managers. If that research is > replicated by > > idependents it might lend credibility to MMY's theory that > enlightenment is > > natural whlie non-enlightenment indicates sub-optimal functioning. > > > Even if you accept this, isn't it a huge step from here to God > consciousness or Unity consciousness?
Of course it is. Even Fred Travis won't discuss scientific research on GC/UC, at least with me. And even if long term meditators > and champion athletes had similar brain patterns we don't know why and > it doesn't say anything about whether the meditators are also now > better, faster, smarter and closer to enlightenment. But I understand > your interest. This was my interest years ago, I just didn't see > things panning out. The meditators simply are not exhibiting > characteristics of highly effective people in any noticable way. > > > COmpared to WHOM? Someone else, or their younger selves? I can assure you that people DID notice a change when I first learned TM and when I first learned the TM-Sidhis. Whether or not this change was a result of TM/TM-Sidhis practice or not, I couldn't say. Likewise people notice when I have NOT meditated on a given day at least once. Whether this is a sign of not receiving ongoing benefits, a sign of the body lacking a specific physiological state it's used to or even a sign of addiction- withdrawal, I couldn't say. > > > Do you believe that TM can be taught without the puja? What is the > purpose of the puja? I know that MMY was always super paranoid about the puja. That may have been due to some mystical belief about its power, or a marekting belief, or simply him covering his mystical derriere since he was never supposed to become a guru but ended up fulfilling that function for many people anyway and the pujah was his way of claiming that he wasn't the guru, Gurudev was. > > > > > > God consciousness by MMY: > > > > > > "In Maharishi's (1972) description of higher states of > consciousness, the sixth state of consciousness, God consciousness, is > defined by the unbounded, self-referral awareness of cosmic > consciousness coexisting with the development of refined sensory > perception during the three relative states of waking, dreaming, and > sleeping. Perception and feeling reach their most sublime level, the > finer and more glorious levels of creation are appreciated, and every > impulse of thought and action is enriching to life (pp. 23-6?23-7). The > sixth state is referred to as God consciousness, because the individual > is capable of perceiving and appreciating the full range and mechanics > of creation and experiences waves of love and devotion for the creation > and its creator. Thus, in this state one not only experiences inner > peace, but profoundly loving and peaceful relationships are cultivated > with all others." http://www.mum.edu/m_effect/alexander/index.html > > > > > > > > > How would an atheist interpret the part about experiencing love and > devotion for the creator? > > > > > > He's stated it different ways in other talks on the subject, IIRC. > > > > > > > > > I note the phrase "profoundly loving and peaceful relationships are > cultivated with all others." Do you believe that MMY was in this state? > How do you reconcile it with his behavior which often showed impatience > with others. > > > > > > > How do I not I recall the story of him screaming at the Indian workers > who > > were slacking off while doing work, and when the TM students asked how > > he could justify that when he had said that one should always speak > kindly to > > other people and his response was "Yes, but you must speak to them > > in a language they can understand." > > Well that story doesn't put MMY in a good light. Sure it does. A bunch of TMers were on a bus tour in the UK, notorious for the same kind of worker-attitude as India, when the bus ran out of gas. Being mild-mannered TMers, we all just sat around waiting for something to happen. So did the bus driver, who had no raido or anything else. Finally, I repeated that story to several people and we all strode up one aftrer another and admonished him to do SOMETHING in rather gruff terms. FInally he wandered off and a few minutes later returned with help in the form of an AA vehicle with a can of gas. Had we not taken MMY's advice and "spoken to him in a language he could understand," we might have been sitting there for hours longer. And I would have been in serious trouble with the miliitary for being hours late to work (it's called "AWOL" and can lead to a courts martial and I had people in the military who would have loved to see that). Lawson
