Vaj wrote: > Actually the reason we know Mahesh's view is > fallacious is because what he calls samadhi > actually is a state that is defined in Sanskrit, > very precisely, and it is an important sign of > beginning practice, but definitely not samadhi. > The word "samadhi" is not found in any of the 10 Upanishads commented on by Shankara Acharya. This is no small mattter, Vaj, and cannot be passed over, for if, as you say, it is precisely defined.
The term samadhi is actually a Yoga concept and it is defined almost exactly like Marshy has defined it: According to Marshy, samadhi is Yoga, the cessation of mental fluctuations, a state in which the Self remains by itself, alone, Kavailya, *isolated* from Prakriti, a witness to the Purusha which is completely separate. Patanjali agrees with this. For interested readers: Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental From: Willytex Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 23:26:37 -0500 Subject: Samadhi http://tinyurl.com/23p8t7
