Minor suggested edits... :-)
________________________________ From: "lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 9:30 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Charlie Lutes - A series of lectures on spirituality relevant to Transcendental Meditators. - YouTube [Based on dogma we've chosen to believe is true, we think that...] The mind doesn't remember pure consciousness. [We further think that...] It notes the transition out of pure consciousness [which we're neither going to define nor prove the existence of for those who haven't experienced it like we have] . [We think that...] Most people think that the TM period is uniformly some special state of consciousness, but [we claim that...] actually [ (a word we use to imply certainty that doesn't exist) ] it is merely a situation where CC-like physiology is more likely to be present than outside of the TM period, so [we further claim that...] as the EEG trait of pure consciousness becomes stronger during TM, the transition of the brain from an actual episode of PC to more typical waking state activity becomes less abrupt, and we [ (the royal'we', that is, meaning that we TMers claim to speak for everybody) ] notice the occurrence of waking state activity soon[er] than [we (the royal 'we' again, meaning everybody) did] when the the contrast between waking state and PC was greater. [We believe that...] This gives rise to the illusion that we are [ (everybody is) ] remembering what PC is like. [We declare that...] We're not. We're [ (everybody is) ] actually [ (certainty again) ] becoming accustomed to being in CC [ (which we claim exists because we were told it does) ] during the TM period. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote : 1. Now if pure consciousness is transcendent and non-physical, no EEG pattern would ever reveal it, since no evidence of consciousness could ever be discovered scientifically as science only measures physical things. Thus all evidence that scientific evidence can somehow support the contention that meditation somehow results in states of consciousness must be false and misguided. The way out of this conundrum is to state that scientific evidence, EEG etc., does not in any way measure consciousness, rather it is measuring something else going on in the brain that the mind thinks is related to spiritual progress. Some would say what is measured is the experience of a silent, still mind. Consciousness is experiencing a silent, still mind. Because we can remember the experience, the mind must have some activity, but the mind did not experience consciousness, it recorded a facet of its own properties, which consciousness illuminated, but was uninvolved with. Because consciousness is said to be eternal, and unchanging ('truth') there can be no such thing as states of consciousness since different states requires change. Therefore these experiences we have as meditators do not represent states of consciousness, they simply represent relative states of the mind. And therefore enlightenment, assuming it exists, must represent something else entirely. 2. So if a "warning" in Maharishi's sense does not represent what it means to other people, what does it mean? How do you explain it, or explain it away? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <LEnglish5@...> wrote : That was a bit flippant of me, wasn't it? Cardmeister has already gone into detail about how different commentators interpret the warning differently. The most straightforward interpretation is that only the sense-related siddhis are impediments to samadhi. Maharishi takes a broader view, and assumes the "warning" applies to all the siddhis, but he doesn't consider it a warning in the sense that other people do. Charlie Lutes appears to simply have assumed that the traditional interpretation was right and MMY was wrong. End of story. But Fred Travis' research shows that practicing them produces an enhanced version of the same EEG pattern associated with pure consciousness, and that video I linked to earlier shows a before/after segment of someone who had been on teh Invicincible America course for 2+ years, and how much more enhanced the frontal EEG coherence was in the "after" picture when they were simply practicing TM. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote : What do you consider the modern tradition? The Shiva Samhita is generally thought to have been composed somewhere between 1600 to 1800 CE though one translator thinks it was composed perhaps around 1500 CE. This is hardly an old document, having been written long after the classic Vedic works. For example Yoga Vashistha, which was written somewhere between 900 to 1300, claims powers should not be pursued if you are on a path of self knowledge. The Yoga Sutras themselves were written somewhere between 100 and 500 CE. You know, it has never been clear to me whether Patanjali (or its author if not really Patanjali) was simply describing these things as a matter of knowledge, or actually recommending them as a practice. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <LEnglish5@...> wrote : Because Charley believed the modern tradition. You don't find the same warnings about Yogic Flying and other Siddhis in older sources, as far as I can tell. In fact, the Shiva Samhita says that practice of Yogic Flying "destroys the darkness of the world." L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mjackson74@...> wrote : And yet Charlie was fairly vocal in saying that Marshy made a mistake in teaching the TM Sidhi program. How do you account for that? ________________________________ From: nablusoss1008 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 7:39 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Charlie Lutes - A series of lectures on spirituality relevant to Transcendental Meditators. - YouTube Thanks for posting this. Lutes was a truly interesting American and a Seer. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <rick@...> wrote : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLty-nUj7w26oQPy7rubDw1ZcHLL98T8fq