--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > Very beautiful, navashok, thank you. I love that part about renouncing > > > the renunciation even. I've never before heard of the Ribhu Gita. Is > > > it part of the Vedic literature? > > > > You could say so. It's part of the Shivarahasya Purana, and is to it, what > > the Gita is to the Mahabharatam. It's a very fundamental Vedantic > > scripture, and a favorite of Ramana Maharshi. > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shivarahasya_Purana > > > > It seems, that there was a Tamil translation of this book the library of > > one of the older Ashrams in Tiruvannamalai - the Eshanya Math - > > > > http://wikimapia.org/20376193/ESANYA-MADAM > > > > and he read it there for the first time - and recognized that he finally > > found a text which exactly described his experience. It is still being read > > every day as part of the ceremonies at the Ramana Ashram, but in Tamil. > > There is another Sadhu near Tiru, who's main teaching is the Ribhu Gita, > > his name is Thuli Baba. > > http://www.gurusfeet.com/guru/thuli-baba > > > > I came across it, when Poonjaji (Guru of Gangaji, disciple of Ramana) read > > it every day in the lecture hall in Lucknow. > > http://books.google.de/books?id=8XL-bc7TzRwC&dq
More directly giving the quote http://books.google.de/books?id=8XL-bc7TzRwC&lpg=PA295&vq=brahman&pg=PA155#v=snippet&q=155&f=false > > > > > > I don't think we really have to let go of anything. That which is, is > > > always letting go and holding on, That doesn't need any help from us. > > > But I just walked to the library and the air was so fresh and the sun > > > huge and orange on the western horizon. The branches of trees are still > > > bare against the light blue sky, some birds are singing. At such a time > > > Truth is a sweet companion. > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: navashok <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 6:17 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an > > > object? > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > > > A professor at MUM once explained that as one progresses, especially > > > > from CC to GC, what happens can be described as the depth coming up to > > > > the surface of life.àSo we might not feel deep, even during TM.à> > > > And we shouldn't TRY to feel deep. > > > > > > Deep is only a word. A concept. Deep also is used in deep sleep. I > > > sometimes say, that I am very high up. But you are right. > > > > > > > > In a similar way it seems, with the TMSP, we more and more experience a > > > > mix of silence and liveliness together.àSo I extrapolate from that > > > > that it's counter productive to try and experience PURE silence. > > > > > > You can't try anyway. One has to remember that all these descriptions are > > > concepts, and unless we let go of the concepts, we can't really get there. > > > > > > Here from the Ribhu Gita: > > > > > > "All is a built-up structure of words and meanings. The apprehension of > > > all worlds does not exist. All holy waters are, indeed, unreal. All > > > temples of gods, too, are unreal." > > > > > > "All being only Consciousness, the name "all" never is. Renouncing all > > > forms, be of the certitude that all is Brahman." > > > > > > "All is Brahman; that is the Truth. The phenomenal world and prakriti > > > (manifestation), verily do not exist. Renounce the remembrance of > > > prakriti and resort to the remembrance of Brahman." > > > > > > "Then, renouncing even that, be firm in your own nature. Renouncing > > > further this "established nature", remain only as the Self." > > > > > > "Renouncing the renunciation even, ever leave off the idea of any > > > difference. Surrounding yourself yourself, abide in yourself yourself." > > > > > > "What the finger points out as "this" is a deceased thought; "this" is > > > only of words and speech." > > > > > > " "All" is supposition. There is no doubt of this. "All" is unreal. There > > > is no uncertainty of this. "All" is insignificant. There is no doubt of > > > this. "All" is delusion. There is no doubt of this." > > > > > > (Rib.G 18, 24-30) > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: navashok <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 6:42 PM > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is it possible for 'aware-ness' to be an > > > > object? > > > > > > > > > > > > à> > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It turns out that the EEG pattern of long-term TMers during TM > > > > > > > remains the same as the EEG pattern found in short-term TMers: > > > > > > > it's simple relaxation, no matter how long you have been doing > > > > > > > it. Pure Consciousness is just the same pattern in its most > > > > > > > extreme form. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In every other meditation technique with published research, you > > > > > > > see a shift away from simple relaxation towards something > > > > > > > different, as you become more experienced. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words, I wouldn't trust the words of a non-TM teacher > > > > > > > with regards to your TM practice. They literally don't understand > > > > > > > where you are at and can only attempt to transform your practice > > > > > > > into their practice. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ahem. Isn't another way of interpreting your first two > > > > > > paragraphs that there is no *progress* in TM? *You* > > > > > > are the one interpreting simple relaxation (which never > > > > > > gets deeper or more profound) with "Pure Consciousness." > > > > > > I doubt that scientists would. > > > > > > > > > > No progress in the technique... > > > > > > > > > > It is easy to start and easy to do and that doesn't change. > > > > > > > > > > What DOES change is how closely the state outside of TM comes to > > > > > resemble the state during TM. > > > > > > > > But that's not all that is supposed to change. The quality of > > > > experience is supposed to change as well *during* meditation - as > > > > stress is released. Think of the snowplough analogy - as resistances > > > > (stresses) are being removed, the way gets more clear, and the > > > > experience of transcendence will be clearer and more prolonged. > > > > > > > > And for advanced techniques - you will go into transcendence more > > > > slowly, so that you are more conscious of the process. The diving angle > > > > changes, how is that reflected in your theory? That, being more > > > > conscious of the 'transcending' (I still put it in bracelets as it is > > > > really a concept - transcendence is all pervading and cannot be > > > > isolated, especially if you want to experience it consciously.) > > > > > > > > So this process of being more conscious in the transcending process, > > > > whatever it is, has to be reflected in EEG, for all what it's worth. > > > > Initial transcendence is not clear transcendence, it is just a hazy > > > > slipping into it and out of it. We know it, as teachers, but it's not > > > > what you say to people. > > > > > > > > > > As for "not trusing non-TM teachers," I can say that TM > > > > > > teachers don't know diddleysquat except the stuff they > > > > > > were given to memorize and parrot. That's fine, as far > > > > > > as it goes, but it really doesn't go very deep, or have > > > > > > any relevance to the larger field of meditation. They > > > > > > know a little about one tiny technique, and nothing > > > > > > about any of the others. They are actually *prevented* > > > > > > from learning about any of the others, under pain of > > > > > > banishment. > > > > > > > > > > Well, ok bu... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just sayin'... If you dispute this, cite things that > > > > > > were taught to you on your TM Teacher Training course. > > > > > > Oh, that's right, you can't. Again, just sayin'... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where have I attempted to dispute anything about what is taught to TM > > > > > teachers? > > > > > > > > > > My impression has always been that TM teachers are technicians who > > > > > have been trained to handle things in a specific situation that has > > > > > been set up via the "7 steps." > > > > > > > > Apart from TM teachers just being 'loud-speakers' who parrot the > > > > teachings, they have the additional advantage that they saw a lot more > > > > tapes of Maharishi during all those courses. There he accidentally > > > > let's out sometimes some of his secrets, or he contradicts himself. > > > > With that you get a sort of different background on many things. And > > > > yes, TM teachers usually have a lot of experience on rounding courses, > > > > or later siddhi courses where you meditate a lot more. That *might* be > > > > a difference to some plain vanilla sidhas or meditators - it doesn't > > > > have to be. > > > > > > > > > Go too far outside that narrow field of expertise, and they're really > > > > > no better than anyone else, any more than an x-rray tech is competent > > > > > to be a lorry driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > L > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
