--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On Jun 9, 2009, at 1:01 PM, Richard M wrote: > > >> Since this has been discussed before here, ad nauseum, I did not feel > >> I needed to explain in any detail. > >> > >> The statement relies on the assumption that the traditional Patanjali > >> yogins were not lying and that they knew, through their lineal > >> instruction, what that state of consciousness was. However, given > >> that we've now replicated this finding in numerous other yogins, in > >> numerous independent labs, and that the same process now is > >> understood to underlie neuroplastic restructuring of the brain, I > >> have a significant degree of confidence in such statements--or I > >> wouldn't make them. > >> > > > > A circular line of reasoning remains circular no matter how many > > times you turn the handle. > > > > Putting back your snip: > > > > "Let me re-phase your statement slightly: > > > > We have tested these guys and found a pattern. We see that that > > pattern > > matches what samadhi looks like. Therefore we now know what samadhi > > looks like. Groan... > > > > Or is it: > > > > We don't know what samadhi is, but whatever it is, we know these guys > > have got it (how, if we don't know what samadhi is?). So now we've > > measured > > them, and as a result we now know what samadhi is. Groan..." > > > > You seem to have gone with version 2. But as a rider to "we know > > these guys have got it" you've introduced: "the assumption that > > the traditional Patanjali yogins were not lying and that they > > knew, through their lineal instruction, what that state of > > consciousness was". That doesn't do it for me. > > Not close to what I'm saying. You're misdirecting. > > Mis-parse it however you like Richard. It's a replicated scientific > finding published in a major journal that shows physiologic markers, > parallel to people in a certain meditative state, which they're able > to replicate at will, often for hours at a a time. >
Willful samadhi seems an oxymoron to me, but oh well. L.
