Annie Wolfbaiter,

Yer gettin amusing again.

Perhaps you were not here long enough to remember the endless thrashings
going on about "scientific research" – both for and again' TM.
Vag, Lawson and their various allies used to spend vast amount of
keystrokes attempting to demonstrate that the studies they sited were
definitive proof and they alone were correct.

Assumed, and therefore unexamined, the argumental premise was that these
instrumental readings /observations were causally relevant indications
about the nature of consciousness and the states thereof. The inevitable
assertion was that these studies proved that some specific type of
meditation was superior or inferior to the poster's own chosen
meditation method.

This premise has always been just another hypothesis, first leveraged by
Maharishi to make claims that TM was "scientific". Then the TMO
adverti$ing machine continued it in double time. The hypothesis itself
was only occasionally disputed by a few researchers - probably because
the premise was useful as a funding avenue.

Unrecognized, but more essential, the original sources did not have nor
did they need validation or approval from "official studies".

Thus, these so-called "comparisons" are in reality just
cheer-leading demo's – attempts to jack-up societal interest
while validating cherished beliefs …

A case in point is L. saying:

The specific health benefits (cognitive benefits may be a different
issue) of mindfulness are NOT, in general, comparable to those found in
TM, but mindfulness teachers are more easily created than TM teachers,
and the practice itself is less subject to distortion (being a
distortion in the first place, IMHO).

All of this only demonstrates the shallow understanding that passes as
TM-speak here on "F.F.Lifers Gone Wild".

FYI … the practice of Buddhist Samatha/Vipassana derived from the
original circle of practitioners living with Siddhartha Gautama. Later
the practices were remembered and organized into canonical recensions.
Much later it was all formalized as a praxis and detailed in the
Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa. Within the Theravada tradition of
Southeast Asia, this text is a repository of commentarial data about
these particular meditative traditions. However, it is not the only
authoritative reference source and other Theravada teachers are using
other resources. A teacher exemplifying this is Pa Auk Sayadaw.

The attempt to prove "we're better than those cross-eyed sadhu-s
still using those antiquated formulas" is akin to asserting that
Patanjali's Yoga Sutras are just cow-dung fodder because we have
proven that transcending is superior to all that old "renunciation
stuff".

My Tibetan teacher doesn't even call these kind of views
"bullshit" anymore. Rather he calls it
"bullshit-bullshit" - the inane bullshitting of the bullshit
itself.

Anyway, repeating these clarifications is just a waste of my time –
I've done it too many times before. Better to just mantrify it all
…

ôm gômaya gômaya svâhâ svâ-hâhâ

(o' bullshit bullshit hail the escaton!)




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" LEnglish5@ wrote:
> >
> > I pointed out that the most experienced mindfulness practitioenrs
tested have been Buddhist monks, and you end up lashing back with this?
> >
> >
> > You one insecure dude, dude.
>
> That empty man is one lasher alright. I think he has some sadistic
tendencies. He uses his intellect to pummel.
> >
> > L
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > No doubt - you possess definitive studies demonstrating
irrefutable
> > > correlation between empirical measurement methods and
> > > consciousness/states of consciousness. Why, they must be sitting
on your
> > > desk right now. You must have downloaded them from independent
> > > scientific research groups and major university programs that have
> > > finally defined "consciousness" and its correlates.
> > >
> > > Glory upon glory! Let's have the URL �!
> > >
> > > Also �
> > >
> > >
> > > O' so fulfilling that you have definitively demonstrated the
> > > superiority of TM over all those Buddhist methods. Awe inspiring
too for
> > > us to realize that you are not just another shill for the TMO!
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The most experienced practitioners of mindfulness that have been
> > > measured in the West are Buddhist monks with many thousands of
hours of
> > > practice.  Their EEG and brain imaging results have been compared
with
> > > Westerners allegedly trained in the same tradition. It's not just
MBSR
> > > and related clinical practices that have been tested.
> > > >
> > > > L
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So called "mindfulness" (as advertised and taught in the
Western
> > > world)
> > > > > is a meditation practice based upon Pali Buddhist scriptures
but
> > > > > truncated to the Western sense of "practicality".
> > > > >
> > > > > As conducted, it is founded upon the attentional function of
> > > > > observation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Get it? Observation!
> > > > >
> > > > > "Mindfulness meditation" is nothing more than observation of
the
> > > > > activities of the (omni)-perceptional process �
sensations,
> > > > > volitions, thoughts.
> > > > >
> > > > > While valuable as a self-monitoring process, it is shallow
when
> > > compared
> > > > > to the requirements of classical Buddhist dhyana-samaapatti
�
> > > total
> > > > > absorption in the "object" of attention through multiple level
> > > > > of subtly until the subtlest value of experience (neither
perception
> > > nor
> > > > > non-perception) is recognized.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I  never said that mindfulness is unhealthy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are many health benefits associated with mindfulness.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, the success is due mostly to a very nicely
coordinated
> > > effort
> > > > > by American Buddhists to publish research and promote its
practice.
> > > The
> > > > > specific health benefits (cognitive benefits may be a
different
> > > issue)
> > > > > of mindfulness are NOT, in general, comparable to those found
in TM,
> > > but
> > > > > mindfulness teachers are more easily created than TM teachers,
and
> > > the
> > > > > practice itself is less subject to distortion (being a
distortion in
> > > the
> > > > > first place, IMHO).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > L
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008
no_reply@
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"  wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/choke/201106/how-mindfulness-meditat\
\
> > > \
> > > > > ion-alters-the-brain
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > How Mindfulness Meditation Alters the Brain
> > > > > > > > Mindfulness quiets brain regions responsible for our
sense of
> > > self
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > TM, on the other hand, actually brings about a higher
> > > activation
> > > > > of some of the same regions of the brain that mindfulness
represses.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mindfulness represses self. TM broadens/expands/enhances
self.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > L
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems mindfulness is unhealthy yet it is having a huge
> > > success in
> > > > > the West today. Do you have any explanation for this ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to