--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@...> wrote: > > I agree. This has been an enjoyable discussion, although I > participated mostly as an observer. It has given me a bit > of a new perspective. On the other hand, I am not much > given to such analysis anymore. Still, I found some of the > distinctions made quite interesting.
Bear in mind, please, that what blusc0ut said about Lawson and me "ignoring" anything that is said about chakras is not true, at least in my case. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > Bluscout this is concise and well said. It is my opinion and experience > > too. In Fairfield, pursuit of the wider spiritual cultivation is what has > > been much of the history of the last decade or so. > > > > Beyond transcending is what is missed with just TM. Some people look > > pretty bad in fact for lack of dealing with the fitness of the subtle > > bodies. This is a lot of what the saints have come around helping people > > with in their spiritual progress. Bit by bit people are getting it. > > > > More recently John Douglas has been extremely helpful to the inner TM > > circle on and around campus with this. His darshan and also the processes > > as techniques he teaches are chakra based and have been very effective in a > > secular way that is more generally acceptable around here. Thus far people > > are not being kicked out of the domes for having seen John Douglas or > > practicing his techniques. Also, thus far the people organizing for him > > are still in the domes. > > > > And yet the various satsangs all around town attend to this more complete > > growth in their programming. It's very spiritual place in practice that > > way around Fairfield in fact. On the ground. > > > > -Dug in FF > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, blusc0ut <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Well it would mean some are reaching the "bottom" of the ocean (TC) in > > > > the bubble diagram, and others are only 'blanking out' at one of the > > > > subtle waves towards the bottom, in a laya (Non-TC). > > > > > > This is my opinion as well: Much of what is described in TM transcending > > > is only laya. Think of the sleeping elephants. They are blockages you > > > haven't dealt with. You are only partly awake. Some of these blockages > > > are the so-called knots associated with different chakras, so called > > > granthis. > > > > > > So actually only part of the system is 'awake', the other part sleeps. > > > The crucial difference is, that this partial transcending, mental laya, > > > is not the awakening of the Atma, the soul. > > > > > > Chakras, Soul, are not mentioned in the argumentation of Lawson and Judy. > > > If you mention them, they ignore it as if you have never said anything. > > > Ramana Maharshi says, that in awakening, there is a very fine nadi > > > between Sahasrara and heart, which gets activated, the socalled > > > atma-nadi. Shankara speaks of the same in his Brahma Sutra commentary. As > > > long as the Atma is not awakened, your transcendence will only be laya. > > > You could go on with laya forever, it doesn't lead to the Atma. Unless > > > you don't realize the Atma, according to Vedanta, there will not be any > > > realization. > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you think "that's OK" that seems like a pretty bad rationalization > > > > to accept. It's effectively resigning yourself to a limbo. > > > > > > > > > >
