On Jul 9, 2011, at 6:04 PM, emptybill wrote: > Oh so sorry but you're been given the con's own definition. > > There is no "transcending" defined in Buddhist meditation - which is the > source lineage for Alan Wallace's concentration training. The Sanskrit word > used by Buddhism is shamataa, from Sanskrit "shama" or "calm" plus the > Sanskrit word ending "taa" or "-ness". Thus the word is translated as > "calmness".
You're the one conning people. But such confusion is common in TM teachers like yourself. Both systems approach samadhi as a style of "calmness" (in this particular example). In fact, Maharishi Vedic Science makes a point of explaining that the "calm mind" is the actual definition of samadhi: sAma- "calm" and -dhi "mind", samadhi = "the calm mind". Where the two systems vary is in their View (Skt.: dRSTi). Since View determines Fruition, their styles of awakening are different, but the approaches share many similarities, esp. in regard to stages of mental quiesence. Furthermore, in the scientific realm we now know that Patanjali yogins in samadhi show the exact same EEG signature as Tibetan yogis in Rigpa. The difference is in how they use that state or stage, and apply it. This signature has never been seen in TMers.
