L This topic is about the distinction between the two techniques and how to highlight any differences between them. It is factually based. It is not a football contest of "my technique is better than your technique" and most certainly is not a thread for you to celebrate your visibly manifest and aggrandized self-image.
"You're just playing Sanskrit semantic games to avoid admitting that I am correct." Believe it or not, this thread is not about you. It started as a factual examination of the differences between these two similar but slightly variant techniques. Obviously your conclusions preceded your attempt to discuss this topic. Therefore those conclusions cannot validate any sequence of reasoning you introduce. But, by the way, I must agree with you. Empirical research using instrumentation to attempt to measure meditation has only been done over the past few years. Since no previous empirical research existed for those many centuries, all that pseudo-knowledge was really just mumbo-jumbo. But, because of you, it can now be told it was all just a bunch of belief systems targeting uneducated Indians and naive Westerners. Although propagated by gurus and jokies needing to get hold of bags of rupees, you have finally struck a blow for truth, goodness and ultimate certitude. Congratulations on your fine work. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote: > > You said: > "If we *****find our attention aware of thoughts***** occurring within > > > the mind, that in itself, does not constitute a reason or a need to > > > reintroduce the mantra. " > > You're just playing Sanskrit semantic games to avoid admitting that I am correct. > > REgardless, the proof is in the pudding. After 25 years of people practice the techniques that Sri Sri Ravi Shankar teaches, where is the research on people showing pure consciousness? > > > L
