--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, blusc0ut <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > I may be in the Sahasrada chakra as well, which, I found > > > gives me an added attention span, actually a higher > > > ability to concentrate. I just mention it, not for anyone > > > to practise, but it is certainly possible. Maybe Vaj knows > > > what I am talking about, I am sure Rory would. > > > > Can't comment on this at all. > > Judy, you ask all kind of questions about japa, and relate > it to your definitions of TM, giving the analogies you > learned. > > Yet, when I give you my experience just as above, there is > nothing you can say. How can I continue with this dialoque? > It is really impossible.
Well, it may be impossible for you, but it's not because I wasn't able to comment on the bit of esoterica you came up with above. GMAB! > I think that you extend certain analogies too much, > which are nothing else than teaching devices. Analogies > like the dye/dry of the cloth, or the bubble diagram are > just illustrations. They have a point but their > implication is in no way absolute. Just like the bubble > diagram, it illustrates a certain aspect, but you are > confining the whole thing to this one aspect. I'm really not. The dying-the-cloth analogy is just a starting point. I think we get way off track talking about japa, which is why I was trying to pin down the distinction between japa and TM, and then get back to TM specifically via the dying-the-cloth analogy. > If you ask me about my experience about japa and/or > transcendence with activity, I have to refer you to > experiences as I just described them above. You describe the results of your japa practice, not your experience of the practice as a practice. > To me Japa is watering the root, which is the root of the > aswatha tree, with its roots above, at the sahasrada, and > the stem leading to the heart, and the branches leading > from there to all other centers of the body. This is, as > I say, my spontaneous experience. Nice analogies. ;-) > As Maharishi says, bliss is most important, bliss rejuvenates > the nervous system. Well, that's what it is, 24 hrs bliss > (or in that direction). The model of the refinement of the > mantra is something given in the beginning. Say more about this. I'm not sure how it connects with what we've been talking about. > The antogonism you construct between meditation and activity "Antagonism" is a strange word to use; and *I* didn't "construct" the difference between meditation (TM) and activity. > is undermined by the TM techniques which follow p/v TM > itself. I don't see that it does undermine it. > The advanced techniques are defined as slowing down the > transcendence process, so that it happens more consciously, > the siddhis are supppsed to actually introduce activity in > transcendence. So, the whole division between ONLY > transcendence and ONLY activity is already blurred. I don't think that's correct, because these practices aren't *done* during activity. > The problem is that all these concepts are like the boat > that you carry along, after reaching the other shore. That > is to say, there is a time, the concepts should be dropped, > they have fulfilled their purpose. Yes, yes, I know, but we can't talk about these things without using concepts. If you don't want to continue, that's OK. I'm sorry we couldn't get into it any further, but I appreciate the conversation.
