--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 21, 2005, at 8:49 AM, sparaig wrote: > > >> > >> > >>> The spontaneous episodes of breath suspension during samadhi in > >>> TM are easily interupted, by tapping someone on the shoulder or > >>> otherwise getting their attention. How do you show that someone is > >>> truely paralyzed in your world BTW? > >>> > >> > >> It's something you would have to experience, it's just the best > >> > > way > > > >> to describe it. > >> > > > > So, where's the peer reviewed research on the phenomenon? > > Apparently there is and it's been going on a long time--since at > least 1955: > > "The most accomplished among these seven subjects, moreover, > exhibited "progressive and very spectacular modifications" in their > EEG records during their deepest meditations, including recurrent > beta rhythms of 18-20 cycles per second in the Rolandic area of the > brain, a generalized fast activity of small amplitude as high as > 40-45 cycles per second with occasional amplitudes reaching 30 to 50 > microvolts, and the reappearance of slower alpha waves after samadhi, > or ecstasy, ended. In summarizing their study, Das and Gastaut > concluded that: > > The modifications [we] recorded during very deep meditation are much > more dramatic than those known up till now, which leads us to suppose > that western subjects are far from being able to attain the yogi > state of mental concentration. > > It is probable that this supreme concentration of attention . . . is > responsible for the perfect insensibility of the yogi during samadhi; > this insensibility, accompanied by immobility and pallor often led > people to describe this state as sleep, lethargy, anesthesia, or > coma. The electroencephalographic evidence here described contradicts > such opinions and suggests that a state of intense generalized > cortical stimulation is sufficient to explain such states without > having to invoke associated processes of diffuse or local inhibition > (Das and Gastaut, 1955)." > > > > http://www.noetic.org/research/medbiblio/ch1.htm >
ITs really hard to generalize from an article from 1955. Scientific apparatus and techniques have matured greatly since then. Also, how do you know it was the specific technique you've been referring to? Even if given the same name, do you know if the teachers were from the same tradition? Telephone effect and all that... ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
