Hey Bari2 - moksha/mukti, from the root muc means "to set free or release from bondage" and thus the English word "liberation" is accurate. As you pointed out, the translation of moksha as "enlightenment" is inaccurate. (See note below)*
Bari2: In fact I would submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist unless called upon to localize awareness. Not just regular TM'ers but TM teachers also a case in point is Susan Seagal's Collision with the Infinite. Bari2: If there is any difference between TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara Fyi - SSRS (whose sahaj meditation technique is the same) pointed out that all these bija mantras coalesce into omkara at the finest level of experience. He did, in fact, give me omkara with a mahamantra. *Aufklärung Clearing Up. There is no thing as "enlightenment" - as that term is used here o FFL. There has never been an "enlightenment" - whether discovered, realized or attained. That includes immediate insights or gradual understandings. There was only Aufklärung Clearing Up. Enlightenment? There never was and never will be such a thing - except as the title for a cultural movement in British history. This term was used as a title for an 18th century European cultural era, which in English was called "The Enlightenment" but originally in German was titled Zeitalter der Aufklärung - the Age of Clearing Up. Recently the term "enlightenment" became a silly Neo-Hindu neologism (i.e. post-Vvekananda) and Neo-Buddhist synonym for Japanese Zen "kensho" or "satori", particularly by euro-american buddhist writers. Any object, any state or any condition that has a beginning also has an end by definition. "Experience", also by definition, is a temporary appearance to a "perceiver". Any experience of "enlightenment" is likewise just a transient occurrence that is judged (after the "fact") to be "oh-so-significant". All this is utter make-believe. It is a false interpretation - both of Shankara's Advaita and of Buddhist Mahamudra and Dzogchen. --- In [email protected], Bhairitu wrote: > > Well my problem was that having been a TM teacher and I think you were > too, I *never* heard the term "TM Style Enlightenment". That's > something Lawson made up and we know Lawson was *not* a TM teacher. And > I think he made it up to support his argument. Lawson, please don't do > that. You're smart guy and shouldn't need to do such things. > > I've always found that the different levels as MMY defined them just > seems to confuse TM'ers and it's sort of irrelevant anyway. Once a > meditator (regardless of the technique) notices they still are > experiencing the transcendent coming out of meditation and carrying > through activity then they are on the road to moksha which is how many > other paths define it. You can call "moksha" enlightenment if you want > but the word "enlightenment" carries a lot of implications to westerners > that the abstract Sanskit term "moksha" does not. It's a growing state > which was what MMY was saying and other teachers say. In fact I would > submit there are TM'ers who are in CC but so confused because they are > looking for something flashier (I guess celestial visions) rather than > just an underlying silence or that experience that you don't exist > unless called upon to localize awareness. > > The problem with carrying on research between different schools is that > many of the more traditional schools don't give a damn about research. > They just make their techniques available and if it works for the > student fine and if it doesn't feel free to move on to something else. > And no need to validate by research. If there is any difference between > TM and other techniques it would be because of the lack of omkara which > would most likely produce a different brain activation pattern than a > technique without. But that's only a difference and different mantras > too should produce different patterns. > > On 07/18/2013 05:47 AM, doctordumbass@... wrote: > > Ok, but it is incorrect to refer to those two different expressions of the physiology, as two different types of enlightenment. > > > > Once liberation is achieved, it is exactly the same, no matter what the means. The eternal freedom achieved through the practice of TM, is identical to that achieved through any other means. If it isn't, it isn't Moksha. > > > > TM is a very reliable means to clean up the body and mind. However, there are no precursors to enlightenment. It results when we are somehow permanently attuned to, and living, the Grace of life. How we get there is a mystery that reveals itself, once we are established in total freedom. > > > > >
