Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : Blah, blah, blah. Lighten up, nobody attacked you . The fact remains that there exists a school where 9 shootings a month happen in the neighborhood, and a little girl has been known to run to school covered in fresh blood splattered on her when her uncle was shot, that has gone from being the worst school on virtually every measure, to among the best, and the school was declared happiest in San Francisco. And I haven't said anything against that school project, or children to meditate. What I was talking about was wrong labeling. And everything I said, is born out of my direct experience, not just of one moment, but of 25 years - and comparing notes so to say. For you it is blah, blah, because you don't understand. For me it is something I live with on a daily basis. All for practicing something that isn't really something... It's not me who named it transcendental. If you are selling air, you have to deal with it. ...or something. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Great rap, I just read it, I might actually have read it before. Also the other posts in this thread are really good. To ramble on a bit: Even the Maharishi, in one particular lecture, made it clear, that socalled TC or PC is NOT the source of thought. So he actually lied! But he, admitting to that, justified it that way: At one point, people would realize that everything is Brahman, and in a way, this Brahman is the source of everything, so in that sense it would be true again, and justified. He also had said, in a different lecture, that TC is not pure TC but, as he called it hazy TC, but it just sounds better if you say: transcendental consciousness instead of hazy transcendental consciousness. In the Beacon light of the Himalayas, which he credits for being the origin of TM, there is no mention at all for the transcending process described later at the second intro lecture. He mentions Atman and bliss, but no mention of refining the mantra. Instead he answers to people who have no experiences, to just repeat the Mantra more and longer, then the bliss of the Atma would come! So here clearly, one particular ontological item, transcendence, or Brahman if you prefer, gets connected with one particular experience, and people are told, this is that. I have one problem with this: if you get into a real very different form of Samadhi, like I did, and when you see, that these two experiences are totally unconnected, because it is the nature of this Samadhi to be very unconnected with anything, then you have two types of transcendence. Or experiences of the same ontological state, but they are not at all similar. For the one state, people told you that this is the state of beingness, for the other, you have virtually no explanation at all. So you might reject the first state, TM transcendence, as something lower, because you haven't yet managed to disconnect the actualy state you experienced, with the explanation given. Because it is one thing to change a practice or your experience, and it is yet another thing, to free yourself from all the ideological packaging. And to be honest, it took me years to see through this somehow, to break through the original conditioning, and I still may work on this. So here something is called, 'transcendence' and is sliced up into small packages of momentary glimpses, which are supposed to somehow add up later. They are momentary by definition, because, when you notice them, by definition, you already have a thought. So you can only have it by coming out of a half-conscious state. Transcending (in TM) is really forgetting, forgetting the mantra, and forgetting thought, but the moment you become aware, you have a thought. But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular experience, and any experience is by the mind. So in that sense, it is really like the Kinder surprise egg, the experience of TC is like the chocolate you get, and the transcendence which it is supposedly contained in this experience, is like the little toy in the void of it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
I can't say that this held my attention long enough to finish it, but I did
like his insight that the nature of desire -- especially in the context of
desiring enlightenment -- was to perpetuate desire itself.
From: aryavazhi no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 11:12 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Transcendence as a commodity, through the example of coke and the kinder
surprise egg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vydwrn_TQow
#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876 -- #yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp #yiv0950199876hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp #yiv0950199876ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp .yiv0950199876ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp .yiv0950199876ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-mkp .yiv0950199876ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-sponsor
#yiv0950199876ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-sponsor #yiv0950199876ygrp-lc #yiv0950199876hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-sponsor #yiv0950199876ygrp-lc .yiv0950199876ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876activity span
.yiv0950199876underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0950199876
.yiv0950199876attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv0950199876
.yiv0950199876bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 dd.yiv0950199876last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0950199876 dd.yiv0950199876last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0950199876
dd.yiv0950199876last p span.yiv0950199876yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv0950199876 div.yiv0950199876attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 div.yiv0950199876attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv0950199876 div.yiv0950199876file-title a, #yiv0950199876
div.yiv0950199876file-title a:active, #yiv0950199876
div.yiv0950199876file-title a:hover, #yiv0950199876 div.yiv0950199876file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876 div.yiv0950199876photo-title a,
#yiv0950199876 div.yiv0950199876photo-title a:active, #yiv0950199876
div.yiv0950199876photo-title a:hover, #yiv0950199876
div.yiv0950199876photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0950199876
div#yiv0950199876ygrp-mlmsg #yiv0950199876ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv0950199876yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv0950199876
.yiv0950199876green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv0950199876 o {font-size:0;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876photos div div {border:1px solid
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876photos div label
{color:#66;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv0950199876 .yiv0950199876replbq
{margin:4px;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-actbar div a:first-child
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-mlmsg
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv0950199876 input, #yiv0950199876 textarea
{font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv0950199876
#yiv0950199876ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv0950199876 code {font:115%
monospace;}#yiv0950199876 #yiv0950199876ygrp-mlmsg *
{line-height:1.22em;}#yiv0950199876
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
It's more like a fun thing, but it does contain some good insights. The part about the surprise egg, starts at min 3, and here the point is an extension of what he said earlier, here his point is that the actual consumer good is the chocolate at the surface, the surface, while the plastic toy in the middle, which is in the 'void' of the egg, is just a cheap plastic thingie, which sort of resembles the higher value. These things are actually known since long by marketing psychology, but they show how our mind works, and that's very true for spirituality or religion as well. You could argue in a similar way, that a special experience, that of transcending thought, is marketed by the TMO as the attainment of transcendence, but in reality, that is just the idea connected with it. To attain real samadhi, it would have to last longer, and it would have to be really fully conscious, that's IMO.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Yup. The TMO was selling access to something that *is going on at all times,
for everyone*, and marketing it as if it were something new.
To me, transcendence simply means looking past the distractions that we have
invented to convince ourselves that total silence is NOT present at every
moment.
At first we undistract ourselves only for a few moments, and the distractions
are so addicting that many don't even notice these moments. As you say, it
sometimes takes an extended period of thoughtless samadhi (several minutes or
hours) before one notices it, recognizes it as transcendence, slaps oneself
on the forehead, and recognizes that it has been present all along.
From: aryavazhi no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
It's more like a fun thing, but it does contain some good insights.
The part about the surprise egg, starts at min 3, and here the point is an
extension of what he said earlier, here his point is that the actual consumer
good is the chocolate at the surface, the surface, while the plastic toy in the
middle, which is in the 'void' of the egg, is just a cheap plastic thingie,
which sort of resembles the higher value. These things are actually known since
long by marketing psychology, but they show how our mind works, and that's very
true for spirituality or religion as well.
You could argue in a similar way, that a special experience, that of
transcending thought, is marketed by the TMO as the attainment of
transcendence, but in reality, that is just the idea connected with it. To
attain real samadhi, it would have to last longer, and it would have to be
really fully conscious, that's IMO. #yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543 --
#yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px
0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp #yiv2683994543hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp #yiv2683994543ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp .yiv2683994543ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp .yiv2683994543ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-mkp .yiv2683994543ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543ygrp-sponsor
#yiv2683994543ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2683994543
#yiv2683994543ygrp-sponsor #yiv2683994543ygrp-lc #yiv2683994543hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2683994543
#yiv2683994543ygrp-sponsor #yiv2683994543ygrp-lc .yiv2683994543ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2683994543
#yiv2683994543activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2683994543
#yiv2683994543activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2683994543
#yiv2683994543activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2683994543 #yiv2683994543activity span
.yiv2683994543underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2683994543
.yiv2683994543attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv2683994543 .yiv2683994543attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 .yiv2683994543attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2683994543 .yiv2683994543attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2683994543 .yiv2683994543attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv2683994543 .yiv2683994543bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2683994543
.yiv2683994543bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 dd.yiv2683994543last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2683994543 dd.yiv2683994543last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2683994543
dd.yiv2683994543last p span.yiv2683994543yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv2683994543 div.yiv2683994543attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 div.yiv2683994543attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv2683994543 div.yiv2683994543file-title a, #yiv2683994543
div.yiv2683994543file-title a:active, #yiv2683994543
div.yiv2683994543file-title a:hover, #yiv2683994543 div.yiv2683994543file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543 div.yiv2683994543photo-title a,
#yiv2683994543 div.yiv2683994543photo-title a:active, #yiv2683994543
div.yiv2683994543photo-title a:hover, #yiv2683994543
div.yiv2683994543photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2683994543
div#yiv2683994543ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2683994543ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv2683994543yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Right, absolutely right.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
This subject (transcendence hiding in plain sight) reminds me of a rap I used
to use back when I was still teaching meditation to explain how I viewed the
phenomenon of transcendence.
Interestingly enough, in the incident I describe in my true teaching story,
the trigger event that reminded me that silence (transcendence) was always
already present was a stick of dynamite exploding. Since I already wrote this
up a couple of years ago, I won't bother rewriting it now:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/316629
From: TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Yup. The TMO was selling access to something that *is going on at all
times, for everyone*, and marketing it as if it were something new.
To me, transcendence simply means looking past the distractions that we have
invented to convince ourselves that total silence is NOT present at every
moment.
At first we undistract ourselves only for a few moments, and the distractions
are so addicting that many don't even notice these moments. As you say, it
sometimes takes an extended period of thoughtless samadhi (several minutes or
hours) before one notices it, recognizes it as transcendence, slaps oneself
on the forehead, and recognizes that it has been present all along.
From: aryavazhi no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
It's more like a fun thing, but it does contain some good insights.
The part about the surprise egg, starts at min 3, and here the point is an
extension of what he said earlier, here his point is that the actual consumer
good is the chocolate at the surface, the surface, while the plastic toy in the
middle, which is in the 'void' of the egg, is just a cheap plastic thingie,
which sort of resembles the higher value. These things are actually known since
long by marketing psychology, but they show how our mind works, and that's very
true for spirituality or religion as well.
You could argue in a similar way, that a special experience, that of
transcending thought, is marketed by the TMO as the attainment of
transcendence, but in reality, that is just the idea connected with it. To
attain real samadhi, it would have to last longer, and it would have to be
really fully conscious, that's IMO.
#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079 -- #yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp #yiv0963733079hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp #yiv0963733079ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp .yiv0963733079ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp .yiv0963733079ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079ygrp-mkp .yiv0963733079ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079ygrp-sponsor
#yiv0963733079ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079ygrp-sponsor #yiv0963733079ygrp-lc #yiv0963733079hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079ygrp-sponsor #yiv0963733079ygrp-lc .yiv0963733079ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv0963733079
#yiv0963733079activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv0963733079 #yiv0963733079activity span
.yiv0963733079underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0963733079
.yiv0963733079attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv0963733079 .yiv0963733079attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0963733079 .yiv0963733079attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0963733079 .yiv0963733079attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv0963733079 .yiv0963733079attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0963733079 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv0963733079 .yiv0963733079bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv0963733079
.yiv0963733079bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0963733079 dd.yiv0963733079last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0963733079 dd.yiv0963733079last p
span {margin-right:10px;font
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Great rap, I just read it, I might actually have read it before. Also the other posts in this thread are really good. To ramble on a bit: Even the Maharishi, in one particular lecture, made it clear, that socalled TC or PC is NOT the source of thought. So he actually lied! But he, admitting to that, justified it that way: At one point, people would realize that everything is Brahman, and in a way, this Brahman is the source of everything, so in that sense it would be true again, and justified. He also had said, in a different lecture, that TC is not pure TC but, as he called it hazy TC, but it just sounds better if you say: transcendental consciousness instead of hazy transcendental consciousness. In the Beacon light of the Himalayas, which he credits for being the origin of TM, there is no mention at all for the transcending process described later at the second intro lecture. He mentions Atman and bliss, but no mention of refining the mantra. Instead he answers to people who have no experiences, to just repeat the Mantra more and longer, then the bliss of the Atma would come! So here clearly, one particular ontological item, transcendence, or Brahman if you prefer, gets connected with one particular experience, and people are told, this is that. I have one problem with this: if you get into a real very different form of Samadhi, like I did, and when you see, that these two experiences are totally unconnected, because it is the nature of this Samadhi to be very unconnected with anything, then you have two types of transcendence. Or experiences of the same ontological state, but they are not at all similar. For the one state, people told you that this is the state of beingness, for the other, you have virtually no explanation at all. So you might reject the first state, TM transcendence, as something lower, because you haven't yet managed to disconnect the actualy state you experienced, with the explanation given. Because it is one thing to change a practice or your experience, and it is yet another thing, to free yourself from all the ideological packaging. And to be honest, it took me years to see through this somehow, to break through the original conditioning, and I still may work on this. So here something is called, 'transcendence' and is sliced up into small packages of momentary glimpses, which are supposed to somehow add up later. They are momentary by definition, because, when you notice them, by definition, you already have a thought. So you can only have it by coming out of a half-conscious state. Transcending (in TM) is really forgetting, forgetting the mantra, and forgetting thought, but the moment you become aware, you have a thought. But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular experience, and any experience is by the mind. So in that sense, it is really like the Kinder surprise egg, the experience of TC is like the chocolate you get, and the transcendence which it is supposedly contained in this experience, is like the little toy in the void of it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
And also, one more thing here: You remember this guy channeling Maharishi, and this 30 November event with Jerry Jarvis? I know you all discussed it, and there is really nothing to all the stuff you already said, except, I found one particular analysis, or point he makes (or MMY makes through him), it's exactly this same issue of transcending, at about 1h 8min, and he basically comes to the same conclusion as myself, describing those two experiences, but never mind his description of the TM transcendence in detail, that's of course rubbish, like most of the lecture. Live Stream | 30th November http://www.30thnovember.com/live/ Live Stream | 30th November http://www.30thnovember.com/live/ The Presentation will be broadcast live at 12:00 Noon, Eastern Standard Time, on Sunday, November 30, 2014. View on www.30thnovember.com http://www.30thnovember.com/live/ Preview by Yahoo
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Regarding 'transcendence', at various stages in the development of experience, it seems that consciousness or awareness is a separate something, but eventually that character of experience evaporates and everything becomes integrated and there is no longer a separate accounting for awareness as distinct from the world or as distinct from whatever you regard what goes on in the body and mind, as that too is just an aspect of the world. Simplicity. It is just like is was before starting a spiritual path, except the mind is no longer jumping through hoops trying to understand the world. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : And also, one more thing here: You remember this guy channeling Maharishi, and this 30 November event with Jerry Jarvis? I know you all discussed it, and there is really nothing to all the stuff you already said, except, I found one particular analysis, or point he makes (or MMY makes through him), it's exactly this same issue of transcending, at about 1h 8min, and he basically comes to the same conclusion as myself, describing those two experiences, but never mind his description of the TM transcendence in detail, that's of course rubbish, like most of the lecture. Live Stream | 30th November http://www.30thnovember.com/live/ Live Stream | 30th November http://www.30thnovember.com/live/ The Presentation will be broadcast live at 12:00 Noon, Eastern Standard Time, on Sunday, November 30, 2014. View on www.30thnovember.com http://www.30thnovember.com/live/ Preview by Yahoo
Re: [FairfieldLife] The real nature of transcendence
Blah, blah, blah. The fact remains that there exists a school where 9 shootings a month happen in the neighborhood, and a little girl has been known to run to school covered in fresh blood splattered on her when her uncle was shot, that has gone from being the worst school on virtually every measure, to among the best, and the school was declared happiest in San Francisco. All for practicing something that isn't really something... ...or something. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : Great rap, I just read it, I might actually have read it before. Also the other posts in this thread are really good. To ramble on a bit: Even the Maharishi, in one particular lecture, made it clear, that socalled TC or PC is NOT the source of thought. So he actually lied! But he, admitting to that, justified it that way: At one point, people would realize that everything is Brahman, and in a way, this Brahman is the source of everything, so in that sense it would be true again, and justified. He also had said, in a different lecture, that TC is not pure TC but, as he called it hazy TC, but it just sounds better if you say: transcendental consciousness instead of hazy transcendental consciousness. In the Beacon light of the Himalayas, which he credits for being the origin of TM, there is no mention at all for the transcending process described later at the second intro lecture. He mentions Atman and bliss, but no mention of refining the mantra. Instead he answers to people who have no experiences, to just repeat the Mantra more and longer, then the bliss of the Atma would come! So here clearly, one particular ontological item, transcendence, or Brahman if you prefer, gets connected with one particular experience, and people are told, this is that. I have one problem with this: if you get into a real very different form of Samadhi, like I did, and when you see, that these two experiences are totally unconnected, because it is the nature of this Samadhi to be very unconnected with anything, then you have two types of transcendence. Or experiences of the same ontological state, but they are not at all similar. For the one state, people told you that this is the state of beingness, for the other, you have virtually no explanation at all. So you might reject the first state, TM transcendence, as something lower, because you haven't yet managed to disconnect the actualy state you experienced, with the explanation given. Because it is one thing to change a practice or your experience, and it is yet another thing, to free yourself from all the ideological packaging. And to be honest, it took me years to see through this somehow, to break through the original conditioning, and I still may work on this. So here something is called, 'transcendence' and is sliced up into small packages of momentary glimpses, which are supposed to somehow add up later. They are momentary by definition, because, when you notice them, by definition, you already have a thought. So you can only have it by coming out of a half-conscious state. Transcending (in TM) is really forgetting, forgetting the mantra, and forgetting thought, but the moment you become aware, you have a thought. But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular experience, and any experience is by the mind. So in that sense, it is really like the Kinder surprise egg, the experience of TC is like the chocolate you get, and the transcendence which it is supposedly contained in this experience, is like the little toy in the void of it.
