--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > First, "he did find consistent physiological differences between > > > TMers who reported 24/7 witnessing and those who didn't" does not > > > establish that those reporting 24/7 eperiences actaully are. Or that > > > they ARE cc as defined by MMY. > > > > Well, if there's a consistent physiological state found in TM that is > > greatly enhanced during periods associated in self-reports of > > samadhi, and that same pattern is found superimposed on people who > > report long-term (months or years at a time) "witnessing 24/7" but > > not in people who don't report such periods, which, BTW, fits MMY's > > definition of CC or at least the beginnings of CC, this seems > > indicative of some consistency between theory, physiology, and > > internal states. > > yes, "some" indication. It does not establish that those reporting > 24/7 eperiences actaully are. >
Any more than dream researchers doing the same thing can establish that someone reporting having dreams actually is... > > > > > > Second, it is more strange if someone is practicing TM for 30 years > > > and NOT to have some clear and extended periods of Consciousness > > being > > > conscious of itself. > > > > "extended" meaning months and years at a time in this case. > > > > The issue that Vaj is apparently pointing out, > > > and that I have previously, is that there appears to be a quick jump > > > from some extended periods of Consciousness being conscious of > > itself > > > -- or even just momentary during discussions, to being in Brahman > > > Consciousness -- brahma-chetana or beyond. And not much discussion > > of > > > the transition from a sustained dual state to the non-dual state. > > > > > > And some apparent muddled expositions of non-dual states -- with > > > dual-state charaacteristics. > > > > > > > > > Its for these two reasons, and others, that raise the possibilities > > of > > > sematic differences, and misinteretation of experiences as something > > > more than they are. Its not clear that such people DO fit the > > > definition of those states or the experience. > > > > > > > > > MMY's simple test for someone in Brahman Chetana is: "can they float?" > > > Yes, thats an interesting one. I have heard him say others "clear > ritam is the acid test for cc" and even at one point flying and > othersidhis are the test of cc. I would think having some flavor of a sidhi (e.g. spontaneous hopping) would be indicative of CC (witnessing along with activity), and perhaps the "real" CC of "no-return" would be indicated by floating during sutra practice though perhaps one could float before that time at least briefly, if not for the entire yogic flying practice-time. > > But some in the neo-satsong crowd disgard this is non-sense, "you > expect too much", "let go of your expectations", "MMY is wrong", > "there are 100 billion flavors of enlightenment" "define your own > characteristics of enlightenment"etc. > Sure, and perhaps they're right, but MMY's definitions are his own, and if you use his language without making it clear that you're not using his definitions, you're being, at the least, self-deceptive. 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/
