--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <richardhughes103@> > wrote: > > > > > > I'd love to see Tony Nader fly, it would make my day! I can't > > > think of a reason why someone wouldn't want to demonstrate > > > sidhi powers. The old "I don't want to be remembered as a > > > circus act" excuse doesn't wash, if you want people to > > > believe you know what you're talking about I can think of > > > no better way. > > > > I can -- knowing what you're talking about. :-) > > Fair enough, but I'm thinking more along the lines > of the TMO claiming that the sidhis they teach are > the real deal yet I haven't seen any evidence. If > they produce a genuine flyer we wouldn't be able > to critisize that the TMSP is all wishful thinking > and that MMY knew what he was talking about at least > as far as the sidhis are concerned.
I'm glad you included that last phrase, Richard. That shows why I like you so much. Proof of flying would prove ONLY that Maharishi was right about ONE siddhi being possible. It would prove NOTHING about what benefits he perceived for being able to perform that siddhi, and it would prove NOTHING about anything else he said about anything. The problem with "miracle groupies" IMO is that they don't realize this. They think that if Jesus was able to walk on water that "proves" that *everything* he ever said was not only true, but Truth. They make an unconscious association in their minds between the ability to perform a siddhi and being RIGHT. I make no such association. > Actual enlightenment > is another story and harder to measure than any sidhi. Yup. Personally, I do not believe that it can be or ever will be measured and quantified. I'd like to be proven wrong about this, but so far I have not. > > Seriously, that is the component that was missing > > in many of Maharishi's pronouncements. He clearly > > had no grasp of the *issues*, much less his > > proposed "solutions" to them. > > > > Ok, I *know* that most folks here don't believe > > that I witnessed siddhis being performed. But I did, > > *whatever* caused me to witness them. So did liter- > > ally hundreds of other people who attended Rama's > > talks. So did having witnessed these things convince > > everyone that he knew what he was talking about? > > > > No, it didn't. I have seen someone I brought to a > > talk (a TMer) exclaim during the meditation "He's > > levitating!" or "Shit...he just disappeared," and > > then, the next day, claim that she had seen and > > experienced nothing whatsoever out of the ordinary. > > In a matter of hours she had managed to "blot out" > > any memories of what she had seen and experienced > > and *admitted* seeing and experiencing the night > > before. > > I wonder why? A feeling they were duped in some way? In her case, I heard from mutual friends she talked to why she reacted the way she did. She was a diehard TM True Believer, "sold out" to Maharishi not only as her guru, but the *only* guru, The Best. What she found threatening at the talk I took her to was that she *liked* the teacher, and experienced some things around him that she had never experienced with Maharishi. She blotted out the memory of having done this out of a sense of GUILT over having been "unfaithful" to her guru. No shit. Isn't that amazing? Isn't it SAD? > Cognitive dissonance due to jealousy that a non-TMer > was doing something amazing? There was some of that, too. She turned into an anti- Rama fanatic. She also refused to go out with me again. :-) > I know plenty who think > that they are party to the ultimate knowledge and > everyone else has only partial understanding at best. And, as I wrote about earlier, chances are that these SAME people tend to react to anything that suggests that their knowledge is not quite "ultimate" by lashing out or closing down. Right? > I'd be a bit different regarding this example, but > I'd have to be very sure that I was witnessing an > actual event. As a proof of actual, violate-gravity levitation, absolutely. But to hearken back to your previous excellent post about savants, that's only part of the picture. If most of the people in a room witnessed levitation, even if it could not be scientifically proved to be "an actual event," wasn't it still an *event*? Isn't the fact that hundreds of people witnessed it inter- esting in itself? > I said the other day that I'd seen people > in flying rooms do stuff that appeared to be some sort > of hang time but it's more likely the way they were > moving when airborne giving the impression of being in > the air just a *bit* too long as it was still just a > parabolic curve they were on. If you get a chance, try to see films of Nijinksi dancing. He was famous *because* of his ability to appear as if he was hanging in midair. > Or am I just rationalising > a genuine example of levitation to fit it into my > unconscious idea of how reality should be? Hey, maybe it > was Nablus I saw :-) Anything is possible. What I like most about you is that you seem to realize that anything IS possible, and you don't close yourself off to any of the possible answers. If there even ARE answers. > > The SAME thing would happen with a large percentage > > of people if someone in the TMO *could* fly, and > > demonstrated it. Only a small percentage of those > > witnessing the phenomenon would 1) believe that they > > had actually seen it, or 2) ascribe "knowing what > > he's talking about-ness" to the person who flew. > > > It's just human nature, Richard. Over the years I > > have heard many, many people here say, "All the TMO > > would have to do is demonstrate levitation and all > > of the doubts would stop." It's simply not true. > > It's something that people who have never witnessed > > such phenomena themselves believe. > > > > Those who have know better. In a remarkably short > > time, these phenomena become "background," and > > assumed, and kinda ho-hum. I found myself sitting > > in lecture halls or out in the desert thinking, > > "Oh...he's levitating again...big deal." > > I'm trying to decide how much a big deal levitation > is than finding four-leaved clovers with the mind, > they both involve some sort of extra addition to what > we need to explain the general human experience. Exactly. The former is just a little rarer than the latter, that's all. > It's just that levitation requires rewriting the rule- > book to such a larger extent that very little would > remain and while people may get used to it as "background" > I think a good few scentists would be more than a > little interested, which is why I think a demonstration > would be the best thing for the TMO as it demonstrates > not just levitation but a mastery of currently understood > physics. Actually, it doesn't demonstrate "mastery" at all, merely an example of something that wasn't fully understood by science previously. The fact that someone can levitate doesn't prove anything about his ability to understand WHY he can levitate. > And unlike finding clovers it can't really > be explained as simply luck by any sceptics. They'll find other ways of explaining it away. > > Besides, as far as I can tell, there is NO > > RELATIONSHIP between being able to perform > > siddhis and one's state of consciousness, or one > > "knowing what he's talking about." Apples and > > oranges. The non-enlightened can perform siddhis, > > and many of the enlightened cannot. > > > > Again, it is the *rarity* of these phenomena > > (together with self-serving dogma from spiritual > > traditions) that claims that there is a link > > between siddhis and enlightenment. I perceive > > no such link. Back in the early days of his > > teaching, neither did Maharishi. He gave several > > talks at Squaw Valley in which he said that being > > able to perform siddhis had NO relationship to > > one's state of consciousness. Later he changed > > his tune, "coincidentally" after he had found > > a way to make money by claiming to teach people > > siddhis. > > > > Bottom line is that my experience tells me that > > demonstrations of people flying -- REAL, unfaked > > demos of people flying -- would convince only a > > small percentage of people that the phenomenon > > was actually taking place. The others would find > > a way to make it "go away," and to pretend that > > they had never seen what they saw. I've seen it > > happen over and over and over and over. > > I'll be happy to join you in saying that but only > *after* I've seen it for myself. Fair enough. > I think there > is desperation among TBs I know that people will > one day be flying, any rumour gets passed around > with a knowing smile that we're on the right track. Exactly. It's a form of codependent relationship IMO. > > Again, it's just human nature. A lot of the people > > HERE who claim that they would like to see siddhis > > being performed would wind up denying that they > > had seen them. >
