--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:36 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:07 AM, sparaig wrote: > >> > >>> <tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlist@> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Vaj writes: > >>>> Actually he says you must *conquer* ("jayAt") samyama. This is > >>>> because samyama is mixed with chains of dhyana and dharana. It is > >>>> considered "external" to seedless samadhi. Seedless samadhi only > >>>> occurs when the triad of samyama is not present. > >>>> > >>>> Tom T: > >>>> Chapter and verse please. I would like to verify this claim. > >>>> Thanks Tom > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> See YS 3.3-3.10 > >>> > >>> Vaj likes to take a single translation that fits his notions about > >>> what MUST be the ase. > >> > >> No actually when I studied the YS it was looking at the 24 most > >> authoritative commentaries from the POV of the lineage of Patanjali. > >> > >>> That's fine. I like to look at several different translations and > >>> intuit how they fit in with > >>> what MMY says and taught me. There's no way to prove who is correct > >>> about this, despite > >>> what Vaj claims, until such time as perfect mastery of the sidhis > >>> is demonstrated in a > >>> labratory setting. > >> > >> Actually we were talking about Vyasas's comment. > >> > >>> > >>> Samyama involves subtle fluctuations of the mind. The sidhis take > >>> place at the most subtle > >>> level, but they are still fluctuations. That doesn't mean that > >>> seedless samadhi doesn't > >>> happen during sutra practice, just that the sidhis aren't manifest > >>> during that state (how > >>> could they be since sidhis are a relative, intentional thing?). > >>> Seedless samadhi is turiya, > >>> what Vaj likes to call the "fourth pranayama." But there is NO > >>> characteristic of the fourth. > >>> That's why nothing is said of it. > >> > >> There is quite a lot said on this is the supplementary texts. It's > >> very detailed and does require an authentic master of that tradition > >> to properly explain it. > >> > > > > Of course, YOU have found such a master, while MMY isn't... > > I've been very fortunate and no Mahesh is not a yogic Master, > although he is advertised as such and tries to dress the part... :-) >
Of course, you've spoken with people like Anoop Chandola, whose uncle was part of the group that selected Swami Brahmananda Saraswati to be Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, about what at least SOME of that gorup think of MMY, right? You spoke directly with Swami Shantananda like Anoop did? You spoke with Swami Vishnudevananda about MMY like Dr. Jay Coplin did? Yeah, you know ALL about MMY and what he is or isn't...
