Very very well said!
________________________________ From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodle...@mail.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 3:36 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: a WONDERFUL formula --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote: > > MMY's TM theory is his attempt to explain his understanding of meditation and > enlightenment in modern terms. This understanding is colored by his religious > upbringing and obviously is biased in favor of his belief-system. > > His description of the behavior of a fully enlightened person assumes all the > perfectionism inherent in religious dogma, and you don't need to assume that > everything is literally true in order to appreciate the significance of his > attempt. > > Also, you (and I and many others) have made the mistake of assuming that the > behavioral patterns associated with the work in progress we call the > beginnings of Cosmic Consciousness is identical with the theoretical > end-point of a jivanmukti, or "fully" stress-free individual. > > The fact that someone is acting spontaneously at all times simply means that > they are sufficiently stress-free to always have some level of pure > consciousness present. That doesn't mean that they suddenly stop being the > person they were pre-CC. While one assumes that the worst aspects of > someone's personality might mellow with progression in CC/GC/UC, that doesn't > mean that they turn into a proverbial saint overnight -if ever. > > Besides, even the Christian saints weren't always pleasant people to be > around, even if they never "sinned" in Christian religious terms. > > And of course, MMY could be totally wrong about much or all of what he > claimed for enlightenment, regardless of how enlightened someone becomes by > TM standards. > > The real world generally isn't quite how the theorist theorizes it is, > afterall. So we can have our cake and eat it? Or throw it against the wall. And no one can say it's better or worse than doing the opposite? That's quite a philosophy to rally round. The best thing I can say about TM philosophy is that it's a mighty fine sales pitch, but just like my vacuum cleaner that didn't cure my asthma, TM didn't either. To refresh our memory, the idea behind exposure to the "unified field" is that we take on the supposed qualities of that and exhibit improved moral behaviour (amongst other things) The more meditation, the more moral we should become. We should look at the behaviour of many long term TMers as falsification of the theory not proof that it's more complicated and probably still working. Just as we should admit that the ME doesn't work because there are still earthquakes, not that it works because there might be a period of *more* earthquakes. I actually agree with you that Marshy was wrong. There is what actually happens to meditators (not all that much if we are honest) and there is the supporting dogma that everyone still clings to that makes TM out to be the most amazing thing of any kind ever. There comes a time to ditch optimism and replace it with realism, it won't sell as many yagyas but it's gotta be fairer on the domies, they might be able to make something of their lives if they had the comfort blanket of saving the world taken away. I think this is why people don't take TM science all that seriously. We all know that they are hardcore TBs, I've been to lectures by some of them and instead of getting a fair and balanced (and interesting) overview of what they were doing in their research it was all the usual crowd pleasing BS about cosmic consciousness. It's a bit premature to be making wild claims about unified fields when we don't know anything about them or even if it exists. No wonder the mainstream takes MUM with a pinch of salt! > L > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > > > > I still want to know how proponents of TM and its supposed benefits that > > are touted as being nearly miraculous can BE proponents of TM AND continue > > to tout its benefits when the actual real time real world activities of > > many long time meditators leave much to be desired. > > > > As an example the current situation of a MUM faculty member being fired for > > embezzling money from MUM and using some of the money to reward students in > > exchange for having sex with him. > > > > If TM in essence washes clean our stresses, AND spontaneously infuses the > > Unified Field and all its supposedly amazing qualities into the body, mind, > > emotions of the meditator, then how do people like this MUM faculty member > > wind up doing things like this? > > > > If the Unified Field is the most powerful force in existence, then it would > > seem that a human being's own mind has the power to overrule the natural > > spontaneous right behavior that comes from right action generated by an > > individual who's physiology and mind are increasingly infused with the > > Absolute. > > > > This poses a big problem to me, in that it either means the Absolute isn't > > as powerful as we were told it is, and any human whim can overrule it, or > > TM really doesn't have that great an effect in generating spontaneous right > > action, or in infusing the Unified Field into the individual's awareness to > > begin with. > > > > If as many have said here before, TM is fabulous and it does do all the > > stuff claimed for it, but individuals can choose to indulge in bad behavior > > whenever they want, then what good is TM ultimately? If meditators and > > sidhas of many years standing do these kinds of things then the scientific > > claims for TM fall a bit short. Have at it FFL. > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: curtisdeltablues <curtisdeltablues@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 12:48 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: a WONDERFUL formula > > > > > > > > Â > > Very cool response Lawson. I appreciate that. And I do dig that you put > > out research for us to think about concerning brain states in TM. I am > > still a work in progress in analyzing any of this, and find the initial > > biases daunting to cut through. But the subject is worthy of discussion > > and I'm very glad you continue to bring it up. > > > > The perspective of how this research gets scoffed at doesn't surprise me. > > And I hope that the more obvious biases of certain researchers doesn't mean > > that the topic itself gets ditched. In my lifetime I would like some more > > evidence whether TM or another form of meditation is worth my time. I am > > biased in favor of the experience of TM for myself through so much > > exposure. But if it turns out that some other practice is really better > > for my brain I would learn another one. > > > > I am less inclined to believe that the so called "higher states" of TM are > > anything close to what they are sold as. I think they might be an > > aberration that is undesirable, at least for me. > > > > Anyway keep posting this stuff, it feeds the minds on all perspectives of > > this issue. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > It is certainly true that I don't really *know* what meditation > > > techniques are better or best, or if the TM definition of enlightenment > > > is right or wrong or if the end-result of consistently produced coherent > > > gamma EEG from most other techniques isn't the same or better than the > > > end result of consistently produced coherent alpha EEG from TM. > > > > > > All theories can only be approximations of the "truth" anyway, and that > > > is assuming that there is "a" truth in the first place. > > > > > > but I run into a lot of people who insist that TM is just another mantra > > > technique, and if you point out that this conclusion was reached in the > > > 1970's based on looking at the EEG of "long term meditators" who had only > > > been practicing a year or three, while, the latest long-term research on > > > TM (and Buddhist techniques for that matter) looks at people who have > > > been meditating as long as 50 years, the same people just look at you > > > funny, insisting that the 1-to-3-year study can be extrapolated to the > > > 10-to-50-year study and if there are any differences found, it is due to > > > experimenter bias on the part of the TM researchers. > > > > > > That attitude, plus the attitude by many prominent researchers into > > > Buddhist meditation, that the breath suspension state found in PC during > > > TM is "just an idling state" rather than something profound, gets to me. > > > I mean, of course it is "just an idling state": that is what makes in > > > profound in the first place. > > > > > > Hence my hostility and arrogant tone. It's a response to what I perceive > > > as everyone else's arrogant tone. I'm very envious of Fred Travis' > > > ability to maintain some level of equanimity given all the innuendo and > > > veiled insults he gets from the rest of the scientific community. > > > Unfortunately, I take things personally, even if the criticism is leveled > > > against him, rather than me. > > > > > > > > > L > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, even if one practices and "masters" jhana techniques, one > > > > > > really isn't doing anything spiritually good. You can see signs of > > > > > > this in the entire world-wide Buddhist culture that celebrates > > > > > > people burning themselves alive as a good thing.> > > > > > > > > > > > > I am very interested in the research that distinguishes the different > > > > brain states in different meditation practices, and enjoyed your post > > > > up to here. But this seems like a very anti-intellectual statement > > > > bordering on fanaticism induced, credibility destroying, stupidity. > > > > > > > > Reading this reminds me that the chances that we are actually get to > > > > the bottom of what is a serious question is slim. > > > > > > > > I propose that neither side KNOWS, and should approach the research > > > > with a tad more appropriate humility. It would be interesting to know > > > > what effects each have without the assumption that one or the other > > > > exists on an apriori high ground of "spirituality" and its interpretive > > > > value judgements. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of the samatha practices that have been studied, start out as > > > > > simple relaxation techniques, producing some level of coherent alpha, > > > > > just as TM does. However, over time, practitioners start to show more > > > > > and more gamma EEG -the signature of paying attention to specific > > > > > objects of attention- both during and outside of meditation. > > > > > > > > > > As well, virtually all meditation techniques other than TM, tend to > > > > > compartmentalize the brain during practice, as well as suppressing > > > > > the specific portions of the brain thought to be responsible for our > > > > > "sense of self" -this last is proposed by some researchers, in > > > > > positive tones no less, as the reason why long-term meditators > > > > > (non-TM) become "selfless." > > > > > > > > > > The irony is that all eyes-closed techniques tend to activate the > > > > > same general regions of the brain. Scientists call this set of > > > > > regions the "default mode network" (DMN)and the current theory is > > > > > that it is the style of functioning of the brain, especially specific > > > > > parts of the brain, that activates during introspection, while the > > > > > outward attention suppresses the DMN and activates the parts of the > > > > > brain having to do with paying attention to things. > > > > > > > > > > The default way in which the DMN activates whenever you close your > > > > > eyes involves increasing alpha EEG and alpha coherence. This goes > > > > > right along with MMY's claim that any and all thoughts have a > > > > > tendency to settle down towards silence when let on their own. TM, > > > > > according to MMY, takes advantage of this natural tendency and merely > > > > > enhances what naturally goes on anyway. > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand, other techniques, regardless of how they are > > > > > described (effortless, effortless concentration, full-concentration, > > > > > etc), over the years start to produce the situation where the normal > > > > > activity of the DMN involves increased gamma EEG, which is a very > > > > > unnatural situation. At the same time, these techniques have > > > > > suppressed the self-centers of the brain, leading to a loss of sense > > > > > of self, also a very unnatural situation. > > > > > > > > > > So, even if one practices and "masters" jhana techniques, one really > > > > > isn't doing anything spiritually good. You can see signs of this in > > > > > the entire world-wide Buddhist culture that celebrates people burning > > > > > themselves alive as a good thing. > > > > > > > > > > Afterall, since they are without a "self," it's not wrong for them to > > > > > do violence to a specific living thing: their own physical body. > > > > > > > > > > L > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <emptybill@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So called "mindfulness", as taught in the Western world, is an > > > > > > incomplete practice. > > > > > > > > > > > > In the Buddhist traditions (the original source lineage), the > > > > > > practice > > > > > > of mindfulness is preceded by the practice of > > > > > > jhana/dhyana-samaapatti. > > > > > > Having successfully mastered regular 2-3 hour absorptions in the > > > > > > deep > > > > > > states of vitarka/vichara/priti/sukha, a practitioner is then fit to > > > > > > practice "mindfulness" (smrityupashtaana). > > > > > > > > > > > > Because this deep meditation was not mastered first, many people > > > > > > with 30 > > > > > > years > > > > > > of vipassana practice are now wondering why this method doesn't give > > > > > > "enlightenment" > > > > > > as detailed in the Pali and Sanskrit Buddhist scriptures. > > > > > > > > > > > > Incomplete practice is the reason. If you only do "mindfulness", you > > > > > > will indeed become > > > > > > more mindful but only on the surface level of the mind. Deep and > > > > > > abiding > > > > > > dhyana-samadhi is the prerequisite. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, we have experienced death many times. If death is a samadhi, > > > > > > then > > > > > > where has the > > > > > > "samadhi" gone? > > > > > > > > > > > > We are still here ... searching for fullfilment. > > > > > > This ain't no realm of samadhi. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dunno about death, but the drug method seems to be temporary, and > > > > > > > just > > > > > > because you have feelings that can be described a certain way, > > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > mean it's the real deal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at the long-term results of practicing mindfulness on a > > > > > > physiological level. Scary. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > L > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" awoelflebater@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forty-three years transcending through the lens of > > > > > > Saraswati(Knowledge of Nature), experience and understanding higher > > > > > > states of consciousness by the grace of Shankaracharya, a dose of > > > > > > stability and adventure, 3.5 grams dried psilocyben cubensis, two > > > > > > ounces > > > > > > lemon juice, a pinch of ginger in one shot and it ALL makes perfect > > > > > > sense! Five- plus hours of Transcendental awareness, unbounded, > > > > > > infinite, pure love ,compassion, mercy, empathy, spiritual in-site, > > > > > > joy > > > > > > and bliss. A *little* unorthodox? Yes, but what an experience! Dude, > > > > > > this must be Soma! P.S. my personal formula, do not try this at > > > > > > home... > > > > > > or any other place! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It sounds exactly like the NDE's I've been reading about > > > > > > > > lately. So, > > > > > > there are at least three ways to get to samadhi - drugs, meditation > > > > > > and > > > > > > death. Anybody know of a fourth way? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
