--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Apr 4, 2006, at 6:40 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > Like most of us, Ken was supportive with what he knew at first > > > > Well, no, "Ken" was not supportive of TM at first, > > to the contrary. > > Not sure what you mean. Can you quote a source?
Since you're so very knowledgeable about "Ken's" work, I'm surprised you aren't aware of this. He writes about TM without mentioning the name in "Eye to Eye," and in a couple of his earlier books does criticize it by name. >From "Eye to Eye": ---------- That the Ultimate State of Consciousness is not a state apart or in any way different from the Present State of Consciousness is the point so many people seem to miss. Hence, they misguidedly seek to engineer for themselves a "higher" state of consciousness, radically different from their present state of awareness, wherein it is imagined that the Supreme Identity can be realized. Some imagine that this particular and exclusive "higher" state of consciousness is connected with specific brain- wave patterns, such as predominant amounts of high amplitude alpha waves. Others maintain that an individual's neurological system must undergo several changes, evolving as it were to a point where this "higher" state of consciousness can finally emerge. Some even believe that physiological stress has to be removed through meditative techniques and *then* the "higher* state of consciusness will result. But all this chatter totally overlooks the inescapable fact that *any* state of consciousness that can be entered, or that emerges after various practices, must have a beginning in time, and thus is not and could never be the timeless and eternal Ultimate State of Consciousness. --------- At one point I proofread a couple of volumes of his "Collected Works." In one of them he mentioned TM very critically and got some detail completely wrong, can't remember what. Since he was making some revisions in these earlier works for the collected volumes, I pointed out to the editor at Shambhala that he had this fact wrong. She contacted him about it, and he decided to let the error stand, but told her his opinion of TM had changed and that he'd be writing more favorably about it in the future. > Skepticism is normal. This wasn't just skepticism by any means, sorry. ------------------------ 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/
