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
