--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > 1. Close mind. > > > > > > 2. Open book. > > > > > > > > > > Heh. So reading Sanskrit out loud without trying to > > > > > comprehend it requires a closed mind? > > > > > > > > B-b-b-but Lawson, that's what Barry *means*. > > > > Since you aren't going to be *using* your mind, > > > > you might as well close it; then you won't be > > > > tempted to try to make sense of the Sanskrit. > > > > > > > > <guffaw> > > > > > > > > > Seems to me that you have to have some semblance of an > > > > > open mind to bother with such a task, unless you're so > > > > > fanatical about MMY's teachings that you just assume > > > > > he's correct in the first place. > > > > > > > > However, there's no need for an open mind once > > > > you've already decided MMY isn't correct about > > > > *anything*. > > > > > > > > Pathological. > > > > > > Especially since BARRY is the one who has implied that > > > using the TM-Sidhis course, since it is not sanskrit > > > based, can't possibly work. > > > > Even though Lawson seems to be under the impression > > that I am some sort of God, and thus he must capitalize > > my name, I assure him that it is not true. It is *also* > > not true that I have ever suggested that the TM siddhis > > don't "work." Why, just the other day I stated explicitly > > that some who practice them have very real experiences > > indeed. It's just that I *also* stated that I believe > > those experiences are pretty much the result of the > > placebo effect. > > Actually, what BARRY stated was that he suspected > *all* techniques for self-realization were placebos. > > Which (as I pointed out) renders the notion of the > placebo effect completely meaningless and utterly > useless for making any kind of distinction between > spiritual techniques. > > > Another thing I have stated is that the TM siddhis, in my > > opinion, have absolutely nothing to do with what Patanjali > > was writing about in his Yoga Sutras. He was writing about > > the real thing. > > Patanjali was writing about the real *placebo effect*, > BARRY means. > > > The TM siddhis aren't. > > Aren't what? Aren't the real placebo effect? > What's a "fake" placebo effect, pray tell? > > > Are we clear now on what my position is? :-) > > The question is whether BARRY is clear on it. > > > > I mean, BARRY apparently believes that > > > reading/thinking sanskrit has some special effect... > > > > Nope. However, the placebo effect is multifaceted. For > > example, some True Believers have convinced themselves > > that when they hear words they don't understand it has > > good effects on them because of the powerful Woo Woo Rays > > trapped inside the words they don't understand. > > > > They have decided this because early in life they made > > a decision to trust Maharishi, and to not bother to think > > for themselves. > > Actually, some of them decided to check around > and discovered that MMY was by no means the only > person to maintain that Sanskrit (and other ancient > languages) had an effect that went way beyond the > semantic meanings of the words. Indeed, they > found it was a very common belief in spiritual> circles (including some conventional religious > circles, such as Judaism). > I suspect Barry is just f'ing around on this one- to negate the teaching of name and form is pretty rediculous. Reminds me of an experiment I did for my high school science fair, where I placed a sheet of metal covered with iron filings on top of a speaker and then by playing different frequencies through the speaker, different patterns were formed by the filings. Different frequencies, different effects. Same reason we like different kinds of music, and Barry brings up his musical preferences here, so why is not all music the same for him? Nah, he's jerking your chain...
On the other hand, if he is being serious, it is a case of him being seduced by the waking state mind and the ego, whereby transcendent experiences are ascribed to one's self. Transcending becomes something *special* that we are exquisitely mindful of, and rather than become a way to liberation, become a method for further self- aggrandizement. So its either BS or the other thing.
