--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, blusc0ut <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, blusc0ut <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > If you think its not OK, then you have missed the point. > > > > As MMY points out, at least according to HIS theory, you > > > > can fail to "transcend" (no thoughts no mantra) every > > > > time you meditate until your last meditation before > > > > enlightenment, and you're still doing just fine. > > > > > > But down with that goes Sankaras 'No mantra can ever make > > > you free'. Because then you just do mantra japa (+ day > > > dreaming) and claim this leads to enlightenment. Just sayin' > > > > Read what Lawson wrote again: "Until your last meditation > > before enlightenment." In this theoretical situation, > > you've released almost all your stress without experiencing > > TC-by-itself, > > But I thought in TM theory, you release stress through > transcendence?
In both senses, the process and the end point. > So you release stress through the positive vibration > of the mantra? Then don't ask about japa in activity. Stress is said to be released through the settling of the nervous system during meditation. The nervous system settles as the attention is drawn to the "charm" of the mantra. As you know, it's entirely possible for thoughts to interrupt the mantra before you get to TC-by-itself, and such thoughts are considered to be release of stress triggered by the nervous system settling. Whether the nervous system can settle to the same degree in eyes-open activity via japa, I don't know, but I'm dubious. > > but in this last meditation you *do* > > experience TC-by-itself, and that releases the last few > > stresses. > > > > To put it another way, the mantra makes you *almost but not > > quite* free, and then when you *lose* the mantra in your > > last meditation and finally experience TC-by-itself, that > > dissolves the last stress and you become completely free. > > So it isn't the mantra that takes you that final step to > > freedom. > > > > Mind you, this is *theoretical* only. > > Exactly! It's all, all, all theoretically. These are all > theoretical constructs. To some extent, but this one is theoretical in the sense that it's not the usual experience. Other theoretical constructs, in contrast, are usually borne out by experience. > What do you think Maharishi is referring to when he says, > that the knowledge on one level of consciousness is a lie > on the next level? > > That you have to FORGET all so-called knowledge when you > actually want to GET there? Sure. > So, questioning some of the assumptions you learned with > your starters meditation is obviously something you should > consider, provided you take Maharishi serious. Sure. I do. I've not just questioned but shed a number of them. > But, of course, there must be some desire to KNOW, some > desire to find out, instead of repeating the standard model > ad infinitum. I am not heretical. I am just following what > Maharishi said. And here you are, citing the theoretical construct "No mantra can ever make you free" to argue that TM can't bring enlightenment. What I'm suggesting is that the theoretical construct of MMY that Lawson cited is not inconsistent with the theoretical construct of Shankara that you cited. But you haven't addressed my explanation of how that could be the case; you've gone off on a different tack entirely. > > > It may or may not have > > ever actually happened this way. But it does fit what you > > quote Shankara as saying (although it would be helpful to > > have more context).
