--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2006, at 2:44 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> > >
> > > In any event, the point here is that unless one is doing
> > > a non-dual form of quiescence/transcendence meditation,
> > > there will--by it's very nature always be not only some
> > > dualism or some subtle meditational "effort" involved.
> >
> > To continue this morning's train of thought
> > in the context of meditation, perhaps a style
> > of meditation that involves trying to move
> > from "What is" to "What should be" (whether
> > that "should be" is coming back to the mantra
> > or achieving transcendence) is, in Buddhist
> > terms, indulging and thus perpetuating the
> > desire/aversion cycle and taking the actor
> > further away from immersion in "What is."
> In Shamatha, the Buddhist style of transcendence-style meditation,  
> they achieve the automatic stage of transcendence (like Judy  
> describes in her experience) as an early stage in the overall 
> of things and then proceed to more and more stable and vivid  
> investigations of "pure consciousness" until one simply transcends  
> the entire session --and can do so for hours at a time. In Dzogchen-
> style Shamatha, one simply rests in the natural state. For people 
> who  do not require reference points (like a mantra, the breath, 
> etc.) this can work quite well.

But what does it do for you in daily life?  In TM, of
course, experiences during meditation are fundamentally

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to