--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> > >
> > > http://what-buddha-
> taught.net/Books/Ajahn_Chah_Dangers_in_Samadhi.htm
> > >
> > > Wrong samadhi is where the mind enters calm and there's no
> awareness
> > > at all. ...the mind enters calm, and we don't want to come out
> to
> > > investigate anything. We just get stuck on that happiness ...
> With
> > > right samadhi, no matter what level of calm is reached, there is
> > > awareness. There is full mindfulness and clear comprehension.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Sigh. Samadhi is where the thalamus stops (or at least extremely
> reduces) accepting
> > sensory input from the outside world AND stops (or at least
> extremely reduces) allowing
> > cortical-thalamic-cortical feedback loops, while the brain remains
> in a restfully alert state.
> >
> > There are many things that can be described using the same words
> that might be used to
> > describe samadhi : "the mind calms down..." however, samadhi is
> NOT a state you can
> > deliberately induce or hold onto, by its nature, because
> any "holding on" or "deliberately"
> > implies thinking processes and those go away when the thalamus
> stops passing along the
> > internal sensory feedback loops we call "thinking."
> >
> >
> > EEG readings of someone in samadhi show that by the time they are
> able to consciously
> > note that they are in the pure state, they are no longer in that
> state, so this is another
> > example of the futility of attempting to accurately describe or
> hold onto the state.
>
> At the link, the guy appears to be talking
> about transcendental-consciousness-by-itself
> ("wrong samadhi") versus witnessing thoughts
> during meditation ("right samadhi").
>
