--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 18, 2007, at 9:32 PM, authfriend wrote: > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 18, 2007, at 7:02 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 18, 2007, at 5:58 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > > > > > C'mon, BillyG, you know MMY is explicit that he > > > > > believes the order of Patanjali's Eight Limbs > > > > > got reversed--that samadhi should be *first*, > > > > > not last, and that all the other limbs, > > > > > including Yama and Niyama, are the *result* of > > > > > samadhi: If you're experiencing samadhi on a > > > > > regular basis, you *are* practicing all eight > > > > > limbs simultaneously, spontaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > And some fools actually believed him. Clearly he is clueless > > > > on the reality of the YS. > > > > > > Translation: MMY has a different view than > > > Vaj does. > > > > Rather: Translation: Mahesh has no idea about the YS but > > fooled a lot of people. > > > Translation: MMY has a different view than > > Vaj does. > > Correct translation: Mahesh holds incorrect views in regards to > stages of meditation as described in the YS of Patanjali. But > Mahesh's version is more marketable, even if it happens to be > a untrue.
Translation: MMY has a different view than Vaj does. <snip> > > > > > Since there is NO EEG evidence for samadhi in TM after > > > > > almost 50 years, that belief has proven truly foolish > > > > > indeed. > > > > > > > > Translation: For Vaj's definition of "EEG evidence > > > > for samadhi." > > > > > > Actual translation: modern science's definition of EEG evidence > > > for legitimate samadhi. > > > > Fact: "Modern science" doesn't *have* a definition > > of EEG evidence for "legitimate samadhi." > > Actually it has since at least the 1950's. No, it hasn't. > Interestingly this is the same as traditional definitions There is no traditional definition of EEG evidence for "legitimate samadhi." > and science has been able to verify the claims. No, it hasn't (and can't). What science can do is measure EEG and correlate the measurements with subjective reports of samadhi. But then, of course, you're back to the issue of how to define samadhi. And all you've verified is that certain EEG signatures are correlated with what people will say when they're asked what their experience was at the point when that signature was measured. Just as with dreaming: You can't verify that people have had a vivid fantasy experience at the point when the EEG signature correlated with reports of such experiences is measured, only that this is what they've reported. And the definition "vivid fantasy experience" is a *lot* narrower and more specific than the various definitions of samadhi.
