I once heard SSRS say that Maharishi was capable of the deepest, longest and most profound meditation of any Saint he ever met.
--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Interesting post. > > On Mar 23, 2007, at 4:38 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > What if Maharishi was just never any *good* at effort > > and intent? What if the only way that *he* ever > > found to meditate was to sit there, occasionally > > thinking the mantra, but mainly lost in thoughts, > > in his case near-obsessive bhakti thoughts about > > Guru Dev? Knowing him as we do from working with > > him all these years and from his lectures, would > > it ever have occurred to him that there was anything > > *wrong* with sitting there for a whole meditation > > period lost in thoughts, with only a few scattered > > moments of transcendence and a few scattered "come > > back to the mantra" periods? I don't think it would. > > He would have found some way to *interpret* the > > near-constant thoughts as "something good is > > happening," because, after all, they were thoughts > > about his beloved guru. > > Maybe he wasn't good at samadhi? After all one of the observable > external hallmarks of genuine samadhi is that one can go into samadhi > for as long as one wishes, hours, days or weeks. Yet no such > externally observed state has been observed. Slapping the word "yogi" > onto a name is one thing, but being a real yogi is quite another. > > > What if the whole genesis of the patented "effortless" > > technique of TM is that Maharishi was just never very > > good at effort? Other monks in the ashram could prob- > > ably sit for hours without a thought, lost in samadhi, > > but he couldn't. > Exactly. > > I would expect if the teacher was capable of samadhi, we would see > evidence of that in the technique and thus, in his students. Or we'd > see signature high amplitude gamma wave activity. But at best, what > we see in TM is mental blankness for a few minutes--not a sign of > samadhi, but merely a basic mental absorbtion (shakti manifestions of > course can still occur with any mantra). > > What is interesting to me is the sleight of hand that suggested this > mental absorption was pure consciousness or samadhi. It fooled a lot > of people. >
