--- In [email protected], "Ingegerd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have had the same experience many times - and without thinking > what it is, I have used it as a technique for many years. If I > really want something seriously, a job, need for money, whatever, I > wish and forget - and the wishes is fullfilled in some way or > another. I do not know the mechanisms, but it works. > One of the strangest things that happened to me, was a winter day, > when I walked in the city, and I realized that a "yogi" was walking > with me, barefooted and without much cloths. He was very powerfull, > and filled me with a lot of energy. Then he disappeared. When I came > home, I found the letter from the TMOs lawyer threathen to sue me. > If I should describe the Yogi. he looked like Tat Wala Baba - maybe > Hanuman. I do not know. > Ingegerd
I have had also similar experiences of feeling somebody's presence very near me. Earlier I could also sometimes see their physical form as a light body. I have become a grandmother a few months ago. My son and his wife kept the boy's name secret before the christening. I had not a clue, what his name will be. The day before the christening my mother called me in the morning and told me that she had seen a very vivid dream, that felt totally real. In the dream the boy had already a name and she told me what it was. The dream felt so real that my mother was quite certain it will be his name. The next day in the church, when I heard that the name my mother mentioned actually was given to the boy, I first felt stunned and then thrilled. Many people present tried to explain this as a coincidence or a good guess. I later calculated the likelihood of guessing right and it was not very big. I think that these kind of occurrences are much more common that the likelihood of coincidences would permit. Irmeli > > --- In [email protected], "Irmeli Mattsson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have experienced many odd coincidences, that could be also > explained > > as just coincidences. I however think I have too many of them and > many > > of those really don't feel like a coincidences, even if some I see > as > > such. > > > > For a few years ago I was participating a vedic recitation weekend > > course by the TMO in Estonia in Tallinn. When I was walking on > > Saturday morning from my hotel to the course place, I realized I > don't > > have a notebook and on TM courses you don't have those available > for > > the course participants. About five minutes later I saw in front > of my > > feet on the pavement a notebook, picked it up and saw that it was > > unused and clean, and took it. > > > > Years ago, when my sons where 2 and 3 years old, and we lived in an > > apartment, a thought appeared that it would be good for the boys to > > spend the summer in the countryside. However at that time we had > not > > enough money to hire a summer cottage. And so I dropped the idea. A > > week after that my husband's colleague at work asked him if he > wants > > to hire a very cheap, but nice cottage, which he did. My husband > did > > not know of my thoughts about a summer place. And we spent there > many > > summers. It was the only time someone has offered us a summer > cottage > > and the only occasion, we where in need of one. > > > > What the physical reality mechanism behind these occurrences is I > > don't know. > > > > Irmeli > > > > --- In [email protected], "Ingegerd" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > A common story told to us on TM-courses - was about the > meditator > > > that wished for an apple and suddenly the apple was in his hand. > I > > > have never experienced such a thing, but I think from my mind it > is > > > possible from the consciousness to create material things. > Deepak > > > Chopra has explained it in a rational way. Everything starts > with a > > > vibration who creates a sound which creates a form. > > > Ingegerd > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I always thought that the connection that the TMO made to > quantum > > > > physics was always just a cute little analogy and nothing > more. > > > > Never took it seriously and I always hoped no one else would > > > either. > > > > > > > > Beyond being an analogy and using the platform of quantum > > > mechanics > > > > to serve as an illustration for how consicousness works, I > never > > > saw > > > > an actual connection between the working of the mind and > > > > consciousness and physics. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > File Under: TMO lies and marketing ploys; Boomeritis > Hinduism; > > > > Pseudo- > > > > > advaita > > > > > > > > > > Answers from biologist and physicist Ken Wilber. > > > > > > > > > > http://www.tinyurl.com/cmay6 > > > > > > > > > > The first question has to do directly with the relation of > > > modern > > > > > quantum physics and spirituality. In effect, does physics > prove > > > > God, > > > > > does the Tao find proof in quantum realities? > > > > > > > > > > Answer: "Categorically not. I don't know more confusion in > the > > > > last > > > > > thirty years than has come from quantum physics...." > > > > > > > > > > Ken goes on to outline the three major confusions that have > > > > dominated > > > > > the popular (mis)understanding of the relationship of > physics > > > and > > > > > mysticism. > > > > > > > > > > #1: Your consciousness does not create electrons. Unlike > > > > Newtonian > > > > > physics, which can predict the location of large objects > moving > > > > at > > > > > slow speeds, quantum physics only offers a probability wave > in > > > > which > > > > > a given particle, like an electron, should show up. But > here's > > > > the > > > > > funny thing: it is only at the moment that one makes the > > > > measurement > > > > > that the electron actually does "show up." Certain writers > and > > > > > theorists have thus suggested that human intentionality > > > actually > > > > > creates reality on a quantum level. The most popular version > of > > > > this > > > > > idea can be found in the movie What the Bleep Do We Know?!, > in > > > > which > > > > > we "qwaff" reality into existence. > > > > > > > > > > Ken suggests this is both bad physics and bad mysticism. As > for > > > > the > > > > > former, in his book, Quantum Questions, Ken compiled the > > > original > > > > > writings of the 13 most important founders of modern quantum > > > and > > > > > relativistic physics, to explore their understanding of the > > > > > relationship of physics and mysticism. Without exception, > each > > > one > > > > of > > > > > them believed that modern physics does NOT prove spiritual > > > > realities > > > > > in any fashion. And yet each of them was a mystic, not > because > > > of > > > > > physics, but in spite of it. By pushing to the outer limits > of > > > > their > > > > > discipline, a feat which requires true genius, they found > > > > themselves > > > > > face to face with those realities that physics categorically > > > > could > > > > > not explain. > > > > > > > > > > Likewise, none of those founders of modern physics believed > that > > > > the > > > > > act of consciousness was responsible for creating particles > at > > > > the > > > > > quantum level. David Bohm did not believe that, Schroedinger > did > > > > not > > > > > believe that, Heisenberg did not believe that. That belief > > > > requires > > > > > the enormous self-infatuation and narcissism, > or "boomeritis," > > > of > > > > the > > > > > post-modern ego, and Ken goes into the possible psychology > > > behind > > > > all > > > > > of that. > > > > > > > > > > #2: Quantum vacuum potentials are not unmanifest Spirit. > The > > > > > immediate problem with the notion that certain "unmanifest" > or > > > > > "vacuum" quantum realities give rise to the manifest world, > and > > > > that > > > > > the quantum vacuum is Spirit, is that it immediately > presupposes > > > > a > > > > > radically divided Spirit or Ultimate. There is Spirit "over > > > > here," > > > > > manifestation "over there," and it's only through these > quantum > > > > > vacuum potentials that Spirit actualizes manifestation—with > > > > Spirit > > > > > set apart from manifestation. > > > > > > > > > > As the great contemplative traditions agree, true nondual > Spirit > > > > is > > > > > the suchness, emptiness, or isness of all manifestation, and > as > > > > such > > > > > leaves everything exactly where it finds it. Nondual Spirit > is > > > no > > > > > more set apart from manifestation than the wetness of the > ocean > > > > is > > > > > set apart from waves. Wetness is the suchness or isness of > all > > > > waves. > > > > > By identifying Spirit with quantum potential, you are > actually > > > > > qualifying the Unqualifiable, giving it characteristics—"and > > > > right > > > > > there," Ken says, "things start to go horribly wrong, and > they > > > > never > > > > > recover. These folks are trying to give characteristics to > > > > Emptiness. > > > > > They therefore make it dualistic. And then things get worse > > > from > > > > > there...." > > > > > > > > > > #3: Just because you understand quantum mechanics doesn't > mean > > > > you're > > > > > enlightened. Physics is an explicitly 3rd-person approach to > > > > reality, > > > > > whereas meditative, contemplative, or mystical disciplines > are > > > > > explicitly 1st-person approaches to reality. Neither > perspective > > > > is > > > > > more real than the other, but each perspective does > disclose > > > > > different truths, and you cannot use the truth disclosed in > one > > > > > domain to "colonize" another. The study of physics, as a 3rd- > > > > person > > > > > discipline, will not get you enlightenment; and meditation, > as a > > > > 1st- > > > > > person discipline, will not disclose the location of an > asteroid > > > > (or > > > > > an electron). The "content" of enlightenment is the > realization > > > > of > > > > > that which is timeless, formless, and eternally unchanging. > The > > > > > content of physics is the understanding of the movement of > form > > > > > within time, i.e. that which is constantly changing. And if > you > > > > hook > > > > > Buddha's enlightenment to a theory of physics that gets > > > disproved > > > > > tomorrow, does that mean Buddha loses his enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > Ken goes on to suggest that what might be influencing > quantum > > > > > realities is not Suchness per se, but bio-energy or prana, > which > > > > may > > > > > be the source of the crackling, buzzing, electric creativity > > > that > > > > so > > > > > many theorists have tried to explain at the quantum level. > Of > > > > course, > > > > > it remains to be seen exactly what further research does and > > > does > > > > not > > > > > support. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/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/
