> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > In any event, the point here is that unless one is doing > a non-dual form of quiescence/transcendence meditation, > there will--by it's very nature always be not only some > dualism or some subtle meditational "effort" involved.
To continue this morning's train of thought in the context of meditation, perhaps a style of meditation that involves trying to move from "What is" to "What should be" (whether that "should be" is coming back to the mantra or achieving transcendence) is, in Buddhist terms, indulging and thus perpetuating the desire/aversion cycle and taking the actor further away from immersion in "What is." Whereas a technique of meditation that involves nothing more than paying attention to "What is" or even a concentrated focus *on* "What is" is facilitating immersion in "What is." ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
