--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > I have heard of the Shiva Puranas from a friend who loves to browse in used > bookstores and find long lost copies of Vedic literature. She has metioned > the Shiva Puranas a few times. I've been told that Shiva is my ishta devata > and that feels right to me. > > When Poonjaji read the Ribhu Gita at Lucknow did he read it in English or > Tamil?Â
In English, from the book I linked to, it just was newly published. His audience were mainly westerners. On a later trip I listened to Thuli Baba, who read the book in Tamil. That was at an Ashram in Tiru. There were many people from Lucknow there now, Poonjaji had just died, so we met up there again. It is interesting that I later became friends with an old Swami, whose grand grand grand father had translated the original Sanskrit into Tamil, he was the head of the mutt I mentioned. Ramana Ashram also published a much smaller condensed version of the Ribhu Gita in English. > What did you experience? It's a long time ago. I don't think I had any extraordinary experience from the reading, but I definitely liked it, and bought it later on that trip. I remember having read the Avadhut Gita before, with which I had great experiences. > It amazes me to think that Ramana found a book that describes his experience. > > In another thread you wrote: > Sahaja Yoga or Shri Mataji is not a very good example, because the lady > is really weird and it's really a Hindu cult, BUT, it's free, and it > works *very well* - at least for me. > > I took it, it's a kundalini raising initiation, and what shall I say, it > really did it. I dislike the lady, but the initiation gave me a strong > kundalini experience that lasted for two weeks. > > What do you mean when you say that your kundalini experience lasted for two > weeks? I had a clear perception of the Kundalini rising, and felt the effect of the experience for about a week, until it slowly faded. I didn't per-sue her technique, since meditation was more or less automatic. Also this is a long time ago. > ________________________________ > From: navashok <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 6:20 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an object? > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Very beautiful, navashok, thank you.àI love that part about > > > > renouncing the renunciation even.àI've never before heard of the > > > > Ribhu Gita.àIs it part of the Vedic literature? > > > > > > You could say so. It's part of the Shivarahasya Purana, and is to it, > > > what the Gita is to the Mahabharatam. It's a very fundamental Vedantic > > > scripture, and a favorite of Ramana Maharshi. > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shivarahasya_Purana > > > > > > It seems, that there was a Tamil translation of this book the library of > > > one of the older Ashrams in Tiruvannamalai - the Eshanya Math - > > > > > > http://wikimapia.org/20376193/ESANYA-MADAM > > > > > > and he read it there for the first time - and recognized that he finally > > > found a text which exactly described his experience. It is still being > > > read every day as part of the ceremonies at the Ramana Ashram, but in > > > Tamil. There is another Sadhu near Tiru, who's main teaching is the Ribhu > > > Gita, his name is Thuli Baba. > > > > http://www.gurusfeet.com/guru/thuli-baba > > > > > > I came across it, when Poonjaji (Guru of Gangaji, disciple of Ramana) > > > read it every day in the lecture hall in Lucknow. > > > > http://books.google.de/books?id=8XL-bc7TzRwC&dq > > More directly giving the quote > http://books.google.de/books?id=8XL-bc7TzRwC&lpg=PA295&vq=brahman&pg=PA155#v=snippet&q=155&f=false > > > > > > > > > I don't think we really have to let go of anything.àThat which is, > > > > is always letting go and holding on, That doesn't need any help from > > > > us.àBut I just walked to the library and the air was so fresh and > > > > the sun huge and orange on the western horizon.àThe branches of > > > > trees are still bare against the light blue sky, some birds are > > > > singing.àAt such a time Truth is a sweet companion. > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: navashok <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 6:17 PM > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an > > > > object? > > > > > > > > > > > > à> > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 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.ÃâàSo we might not feel deep, even > > > > > during TM.ÃâàAnd we shouldn't TRY to feel deep. > > > > > > > > Deep is only a word. A concept. Deep also is used in deep sleep. I > > > > sometimes say, that I am very high up. But you are right. > > > > > > > > > > In a similar way it seems, with the TMSP, we more and more experience > > > > > a mix of silence and liveliness together.ÃâàSo I extrapolate > > > > > from that that it's counter productive to try and experience PURE > > > > > silence. > > > > > > > > You can't try anyway. One has to remember that all these descriptions > > > > are concepts, and unless we let go of the concepts, we can't really get > > > > there. > > > > > > > > Here from the Ribhu Gita: > > > > > > > > "All is a built-up structure of words and meanings. The apprehension of > > > > all worlds does not exist. All holy waters are, indeed, unreal. All > > > > temples of gods, too, are unreal." > > > > > > > > "All being only Consciousness, the name "all" never is. Renouncing all > > > > forms, be of the certitude that all is Brahman." > > > > > > > > "All is Brahman; that is the Truth. The phenomenal world and prakriti > > > > (manifestation), verily do not exist. Renounce the remembrance of > > > > prakriti and resort to the remembrance of Brahman." > > > > > > > > "Then, renouncing even that, be firm in your own nature. Renouncing > > > > further this "established nature", remain only as the Self." > > > > > > > > "Renouncing the renunciation even, ever leave off the idea of any > > > > difference. Surrounding yourself yourself, abide in yourself yourself." > > > > > > > > "What the finger points out as "this" is a deceased thought; "this" is > > > > only of words and speech." > > > > > > > > " "All" is supposition. There is no doubt of this. "All" is unreal. > > > > There is no uncertainty of this. "All" is insignificant. There is no > > > > doubt of this. "All" is delusion. There is no doubt of this." > > > > > > > > (Rib.G 18, 24-30) > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
