A professor at MUM once explained that as one progresses, especially from CC to GC, what happens can be described as the depth coming up to the surface of life. So we might not feel deep, even during TM. And we shouldn't TRY to feel deep.
In a similar way it seems, with the TMSP, we more and more experience a mix of silence and liveliness together. So I extrapolate from that that it's counter productive to try and experience PURE silence. ________________________________ From: navashok <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 6:42 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an object? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > It turns out that the EEG pattern of long-term TMers during TM remains > > > the same as the EEG pattern found in short-term TMers: it's simple > > > relaxation, no matter how long you have been doing it. Pure Consciousness > > > is just the same pattern in its most extreme form. > > > > > > In every other meditation technique with published research, you see a > > > shift away from simple relaxation towards something different, as you > > > become more experienced. > > > > > > In other words, I wouldn't trust the words of a non-TM teacher with > > > regards to your TM practice. They literally don't understand where you > > > are at and can only attempt to transform your practice into their > > > practice. > > > > Ahem. Isn't another way of interpreting your first two > > paragraphs that there is no *progress* in TM? *You* > > are the one interpreting simple relaxation (which never > > gets deeper or more profound) with "Pure Consciousness." > > I doubt that scientists would. > > No progress in the technique... > > It is easy to start and easy to do and that doesn't change. > > What DOES change is how closely the state outside of TM comes to resemble the > state during TM. But that's not all that is supposed to change. The quality of experience is supposed to change as well *during* meditation - as stress is released. Think of the snowplough analogy - as resistances (stresses) are being removed, the way gets more clear, and the experience of transcendence will be clearer and more prolonged. And for advanced techniques - you will go into transcendence more slowly, so that you are more conscious of the process. The diving angle changes, how is that reflected in your theory? That, being more conscious of the 'transcending' (I still put it in bracelets as it is really a concept - transcendence is all pervading and cannot be isolated, especially if you want to experience it consciously.) So this process of being more conscious in the transcending process, whatever it is, has to be reflected in EEG, for all what it's worth. Initial transcendence is not clear transcendence, it is just a hazy slipping into it and out of it. We know it, as teachers, but it's not what you say to people. > > As for "not trusing non-TM teachers," I can say that TM > > teachers don't know diddleysquat except the stuff they > > were given to memorize and parrot. That's fine, as far > > as it goes, but it really doesn't go very deep, or have > > any relevance to the larger field of meditation. They > > know a little about one tiny technique, and nothing > > about any of the others. They are actually *prevented* > > from learning about any of the others, under pain of > > banishment. > > Well, ok bu... > > > > > Just sayin'... If you dispute this, cite things that > > were taught to you on your TM Teacher Training course. > > Oh, that's right, you can't. Again, just sayin'... > > > Where have I attempted to dispute anything about what is taught to TM > teachers? > > My impression has always been that TM teachers are technicians who have been > trained to handle things in a specific situation that has been set up via the > "7 steps." Apart from TM teachers just being 'loud-speakers' who parrot the teachings, they have the additional advantage that they saw a lot more tapes of Maharishi during all those courses. There he accidentally let's out sometimes some of his secrets, or he contradicts himself. With that you get a sort of different background on many things. And yes, TM teachers usually have a lot of experience on rounding courses, or later siddhi courses where you meditate a lot more. That *might* be a difference to some plain vanilla sidhas or meditators - it doesn't have to be. > Go too far outside that narrow field of expertise, and they're really no > better than anyone else, any more than an x-rray tech is competent to be a > lorry driver. > > > L >
