I'd be interested in your response to Lawson's questions, Bhairitu, if you have 
one. 

 

 You sure have a "lofty" opinion of Maharishi.  He's just an Indian guy who was 
a monk and decided to teach meditation.  There are lots of folks like that in 
India.  ;-)  
 Years ago my cousin, a real estate agent, recommended Napoleon Hill's "Think 
and Go Rich".  I read some it but what stood out was that it was like the  
TM-Sidhi's program and this book was published in the early 20th century.  IOW, 
there is nothing new under the sun.  The techniques of samyama have been around 
for ages.  They are at the core of much of Indian yoga and philosophy.
 
 We don't understand consciousness very well.  This goes for the scientific 
community too which is just beginning to study it.  What I meant about the 
placebo effect is why if you give one group a real medicine and another a sugar 
pill why does the second group still get results?  I've tested this myself and 
am able to manifest the effects of herbs and vitamin supplements (especially 
minerals) without actually taking them.  I can also shift my body state by 
doing samyama on the desired state. 
 
 If people here haven't watched it yet and indeed it is a long interview, 
Rick's interview with Robert Svoboda, whose ayurvedic workshops I attended, is 
VERY insightful.  I like how he talks about modern medicine and his opinion 
which I've thought for years is they often don't know why some medicine will 
work and they make it sound like it is a supernatural phenomenon.  Whereas 
natural healers who actually pay attention to biochemistry and physics do 
understand how something works.
 
 On 04/11/2014 10:59 AM, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... wrote:
 
   One assumes that Maharishi chose a subset of the siddhis mentioned in 
Patanjali that he thought were most beneficial, as he didn't include all of 
them in the TM-SIddhis practices -not even all of  the ones he originally 
experimented with.
 

 If you look at the categories of practices, they appear to cover a very broad 
range, so I'm curious: which vital/important categories of siddhis do you think 
he left out?
 

 I mean, in theory, just about anything could be seen as potentially a siddhi, 
when the action is performed by a fully enlightened person. What activities 
would provide better "stitches" between relative and absolute, do you think?
 

 L
 
 
 ---In [email protected] mailto:[email protected], 
<noozguru@...> mailto:noozguru@... wrote :
 
 Of course.  They are very interesting and powerful techniques.  They do things 
that are not taught in the TM Sidhis.
 
 On 04/10/2014 10:04 AM, salyavin808 wrote:
 
   Hey cool, Bhairitu got the real deal! Do you still do them?
 
 ---In [email protected] mailto:[email protected], 
<noozguru@...> mailto:noozguru@... wrote :
 
 On 04/10/2014 05:10 AM, salyavin808 wrote:

   
 
 
 We were all disappointed when we found out it was in English, I was hoping for 
some super-mantra things.


 
 The tantric siddhis I learned are "super-mantra things".  They're all in 
Sanskrit.  But we also translated them.  And they work pretty much the same way 
that sutras in English do.  
 


 



 



Reply via email to