--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Apr 17, 2006, at 4:58 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > I am actually quite serious: I really do believe that the technique > > desribed in the pdf is > > quite distorted and won't go as "deep" as TM. Ironically for the > > very reason why it asserts > > that it goes deep: it advocates control and makes value-judgements > > about getting lost in > > thoughts, > > Actually in this method people would eventually transcend for > significantly longer amounts of time, the important thing being > meditational stability and vividness. It is only when you are able to > dive deep enough and long enough, do the emotional and mental > obscurations dissolve. And of course you do return back to discursive > thought. > > It does not advocate "control" but leaves it to the individual to > find a medium between attention and total relaxation. When this is > not done properly you get problems like those often seen in TM: > falling asleep and slouching, bad asana or posture--see the old > thread here on "torpor" during TM practice and the numerous reports > of sleeping during TM. For a good example of bad vs. good posture see > the CBS sunday morning video recently which showed slouching TMer's > and then a group of mindfulness meditators in excellent posture. If > you talk to experienced meditators who observe TMers, one of the > common observations is that TMers "don't know how to sit". And it > causes problems, particularly with excessive thoughts.
Or perhaps this is all projection on your part... > > > The TM insight is that getting lost in thoughts in integral to the > > process -- its the outer > > stroke where healing takes place. Without that healing, you won't > > have the long-term > > opportunity to go deeper. > > All beginning meditators will have an aspect of their practice where > they return to discursive thought and then return to their meditative > object. If you read the article (which it would seem you did not) you > would see clearly where the mechanics of this are clearly described > as the preliminary stages of this method--but it is only a beginning > part. Eventually attentional stability and vividness increase. Not > attaining this and being stuck in continuous patterns of discursive > thought is likened to trying to look at a star through a telescope > while bouncing about on a bicycle--there is no stability with which > examine consciousness with. How does consciousnes examine itself? And what the hell is "discursive thought?" > > > > > This last is a freebie since when it happens, its quite dramatic, > > and even the most > > dedicated Buddhist practitioners haven't shown signs of breath > > suspension, at least as > > reported in any research published in the last few decades. > > TM has a lowered metabolic rate (in terms of O2 consumption) that is > only about 1% different than sleeping. Advanced Buddhist meditators > go about 6 times deeper than that. But is this a good thing? What does it mean? What is the relationship between O2 consumption and transcendence? What is the relationship between o2 consumption and health? > > > My son scanned the pdf over my shoulder and I asked him if it > > sounded like it was as easy > > as TM. He pointed out the effort and control passages and agreed > > with me that it sounded > > like TM practice that had gotten distorted over time. > > Actually the techniques mentioned in the article have a long and > continuous history of producing fully enlightened Buddhas. > Of course they do... 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/
