--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozg...@...> wrote: > > sparaig wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote: > > > >> Robert wrote: > >> > >>> It is a delicate process to transcend thought...that is the reason for > >>> the checking, etc... > >>> Because unless we have the experience of transcending thought, then we > >>> can think that repeating a mantra, or chanting a mantra, is going to get > >>> you there...but then you have missed the point. > >>> The mantra starts out like 'any other thought', but is used as a vehicle > >>> to transcend, so it begins the process of noticing something about the > >>> thinking process, the act of experiencing more subltle levels of > >>> thinking, and then transcending the thinking process itself. > >>> All of this is very subtle and delicate, which is why it has been so > >>> misunderstood... > >>> It's not like using a hammer to pound a nail...which would be more akin > >>> to the techniques of western thinking...politically speaking. > >>> R.G. > >>> > >> The process in other traditions is called "samadhi." "Transcending > >> thought" is just a "westernization" of the same thing avoiding the > >> Sanskrit term. TM is certainly not unique in producing samadhi. ;-) > >> > >> > > > > We seem to have different ideas about how things work. > > > > And, you assume there is no difference between what TM does physiologically > > speaking and what other meditation techniques do. > > > > > > L. > No, many other meditation techniques are more powerful.
By what criteria, specifically? TM is "yoga > lite" and better than nothing (though some might debate that). How do > you define samadhi? > Good question. How do YOU? Define it? L.
