--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@...> wrote: > > > On Apr 6, 2012, at 6:23 PM, Yifu wrote: > > > No. Many are in a state of "hazy Transcendence" - a type of partial opening > > of certain nerve centers with a cognitive awarenss of "Oh, thought has been > > transcended", initially after the fact.. Of course, probably not a genuine > > state of 3-rd eye awakening or traditional "Samadhi". > > ... > > There's no scientific evidence that your Guru Norbu Ripolche has gone > > beyone the Turiyatita or interiorized SOC. > > > What scientific evidence do you have of Mahesh�s enlightenment? I mean here > we have the guy who sold more mantras than anyone before SSRS came along, who > sold many of those mantras with quasi-scientific research. Surely there�s > an old dusty video tape of M. somewhere hooked up to an EEG blowing totally > coherent waves? How come the Big Reesh never ponied up to the EEG himself? > Hmmm. > > But it is a good point: what do these great yogis brains look like? Many > Tibetans have ponied up to the EEG, like the great Dzogchen practitioner and > scholar Younge Khachab Rinpoche and numerous others. > > But by far the most profound �change� I see around such people is their > circle of compassion is very large, while in most humans, the natural circle > of compassion and care is very limited to a few close friends and family. But > somehow they go way beyond that �close in� trend. > > �...way off the scale.�: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ1_Bmx7QdY
Vaj, I do not think there is scientific evidence of anyone ever, being enlightened. No one knows what the physiological parameters of enlightenment are. MMY never said he was enlightened. He talked about it incessantly. Some people assume he was enlightened based on their belief. If you are a follower of some teacher, but have not yet awakened, how does one ever able to conclude that such and such a teacher is enlightened? In a certain sense, it may not be necessary to have an enlightened teacher. All that is necessary is that the teacher be someone ahead of you in whatever direction you want to go. They can get you to the next step. If they do not know more than that one step, then you have to find another teacher, or be extremely lucky and fall into enlightenment without one. Most people who learned TM learned from unenlightened teachers who basically mechanically imparted a meditation technique. Some stayed with that technique, others went onto other teachers. Krishnamurti was regarded as enlightened, but he taught no meditation. I knew someone who was once his secretary, and that person seemed as clueless about enlightenment as most of the people that were interested in Krishnamurti. I saw Krishnamurti once. I have no memory of what he said, though today I find what he wrote much more interesting than then. Krishnamurti is one of those rare individuals who seems to have had a very light load of karma and naturally slid into an enlightened state early in life. This seems to be a very rare occurrence. Being enlightened does not seem to mean that one can lead someone else to that state of experience. At the very least it requires a good idea of what state of experience the typical human has and how that changes on the way to enlightenment. The physiological measurements of some of the Tibetan Buddhists and some Zen Buddhists seem more interesting than those of TM, but I do not think it has been established just what those measurements mean in terms of enlightenment. The pool of resources here seems very small. Suppose you, I, Barry, Curtis, Judy and Nabby were the subject of a scientific study. What on Earth would be concluded from measuring us? I think your comment about compassion was a good one. How compassionate do you feel you are? Exactly how does one validate compassion? Compassion and empathy are not the same thing. I suspect many people mistake empathy for compassion.
