[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, richardatrwilliamsdotus richard@...
wrote:
cardemaister:
Well, that's another nice Sanskrit dilemma, you've
lead me into! :D
Namely 'caNDaalii' seems to be the nominative singular
*feminine* form from 'caNDaala(H)' (masc.), whereas
'kuNDalii' is the nominative singular *masculine*
from 'kuNDalin'...
I'm surprised you didn't know that caNDaali refers to
the homophone of 'kuNDalI'. I'm even more surprised that
Vaj didn't realize that Bikram's Hatha Yoga generated
inner heat - Tummo.
Well, homophones are way more common in languages
like English (and perhaps also for example French),
whose spelling is old-fashioned, so to speak.
In languages like Finnish with probably the most
phonetic spelling amongst all the languages of this planet,
they are fairly rare, and (almost?) always also
homonyms. Like for instance 'sataa' ('it rains', or
'a part of a hundred' [so called partitive case
form]), 'kuusi' ('spruce' or 'six'[sic-s!]).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophone
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
According to Swami Sivananda Saraswati, Kundalini yoga is really considered a Laya yoga. PaliGap: No one seems much interested in 'karma yoga' do they. It all depends on what you mean by 'karma' yoga. Most of these yoga designations were made up by Swami Vivekananda in his book 'The Yogas and Other Works). But karma Yoga in it's most basic form is just like TM practice, as described in the Gita: meditation on the Ishvara, or the Pranava, which is similar to TM practice, followed by activity that supports nature. Karma Yoga is described in the Bhagavad Gita, as a yoga of selfless and altruistic activities. So, karma means action or activities. Karma yoga is based on karma, obviously, but also on the theory of reincarnation. According to Karma Yoga, humans are born with and develop sanskaras, which can be positive or negative, from previous lives. Sanskaras (volitions) are what drive people to perform actions in their present life. The process of acrueing karma will continue as samsara in a never-ending cycle of rebirth. According to the enlightenment tradition, this endless round of becoming can be brought to an end, through Yoga, that is, in addition to normal evolution, an adept of Yoga can burn up his karma through the practice of Yoga, until the sum total of sanskaras is zero. When that happens, the yogin is 'Liberated' from samsara, and has reached enlightenment, that is, they have *isolated* the Purusha from the prakriti. Not sufficiently glamorous, arcane and esoteric perhaps. 'Hatha Yoga' or 'Kundalini Yoga' is actually a late invention compared to yogic meditation. According to what I've read, Hatha Yoga was invented by the Nath siddhas during the Gupta Age in India.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
cardemaister: Well, that's another nice Sanskrit dilemma, you've lead me into! :D Namely 'caNDaalii' seems to be the nominative singular *feminine* form from 'caNDaala(H)' (masc.), whereas 'kuNDalii' is the nominative singular *masculine* from 'kuNDalin'... I'm surprised you didn't know that caNDaali refers to the homophone of 'kuNDalI'. I'm even more surprised that Vaj didn't realize that Bikram's Hatha Yoga generated inner heat - Tummo. Almost all yogis know that Hatha Yoga is Kundalini Yoga. And, 'TM Rounding' is Hatha Yoga alternated with Mantra Yoga. The process of 'rounding' and alternating activity and rest, produces 'Tummo' the inner heat. This has been demonstrated by yogis in the lab. Hatha Yoga produces heat. In fact, all activity produces heat! But, what is referenced here is specifically 'inner heat', the heat that burns up accumulated karma, according to Theos Bernard. Hatha Yoga, the yoga of force, was developed by Matsyendra, one of the most illustrious of the yogi Mahasiddhas, numbering 84, according to the Nath tradition. According to David Gordon White, It was especially within two tantric sects, the Western Transmission and the Yogin Kaula (transmitted by Matsyendra), that a practical concomitant to this speculative - and in some cases gnoseological or soteriological - metaphysics came to be elaborated. This was Hatha Yoga, the method of violent exertion, whose system of the six chakras (wheels [or circles] of transformation) became the centerpiece of the doctrine and practice of the Nath Siddhas - who claim their origins in the person and teachings of Matsyendranath. Works Cited: 'A Six Month Course in Yoga Asanas' by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi Rishikesh, International SRM Publications, 1962 'The Alchemical Body' Siddha Traditions in Medieval India by David Gordon White Chicago: University Press, 1996 Paper. 596 pages. Illustrated. Bibliography. Index. Page 5. 'Hatha Yoga' by Theos Bernard, M.A., Llc., P.hD. New York: Columbia U. Press, 1932 Illustrated. Partial Translations of Hatha Yoga Pradapika. Out of print. Rare. A classic.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, richardatrwilliamsdotus richard@... wrote: In the context of yoga, 'caNDaalii' fairly probably refers to heat... Vaj: It's also a close homophone of kundali (kuNDalI)... According to the Cologne Sanskrit Lexicon, the Sanskrit word 'kuNDalin' refers to snake that is 'coiled'. If you are a TM practitioner, you would have probably experienced the kundalini rising effect many times. I don't know why Vaj is being disingenuous about this, since most of us are yogis on this forum and already know this. Go figure. According to Swami Sivananda Saraswati, Kundalini yoga is really considered a Laya yoga. No one seems much interested in 'karma yoga' do they. Not sufficiently glamorous, arcane and esoteric perhaps. The kundalini yoga energy can be awakened and a corresponding enlightenment experience can be attained by yogic techniques, such as pranic breathing, kriyas, hatha yoga asanas, and mantra meditation. Benson has demonstrated that a deep meditation, like TM practice, is a conscious mental process that induces a set of integrated physiologic changes termed the relaxation response. In one study a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to identify brain regions that are active in simple meditation. In another study, it was recorded that there was a skin temperature reduction on the palms of the hands during the experience of mental silence, arising as a result of a single 10 minute meditation session! Works cited: 'Kundalini Yoga' By Swami Sivananda Saraswati The Divine Life Society, 2007 Page page 32. 'Functional brain mapping of the relaxation response and meditation' By Herbert Bensin and Sara Lazar Neuroreport, May 15, 2000 Volume 11, Issue 7; pp. 1581-1585 'Changing Definitions of Meditation: Physiological Corollorary' By Manocha, Black, Ryan, Stough, and Spiro Journal of the International Society of Life Sciences, Vol 28 (1), March 2010 Read more: 'Kundalini Demystified' By David T, Eastman Yoga Journal, September 1985 pp. 3743
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@... wrote:
the o-sound is long: ~ saw-muh, because in Sanskrit, the o-sound
represents the former diphthong 'au' (~ as in 'how'; cf. om, aum).
LoL!
Well, yikes, after listening to the pronunciation of
'how' on translate.google.com, I'd say that the Finnish
pronunciation of 'au' in, say, 'sauma' (seam) might be quite a lot closer to
Sanskrit 'au', as e.g. in 'saumya', meaning 'relating
to soma' ('saumya' is so called vRddhi derivative from 'soma').
So, 'how' sounds to me rather like 'huh-aw'... :o
One might expect the google pronunciation represents
standard (American?) English pronunciation? E.g. Texans
prolly pronounce for instance 'how' quite differently
from that of translate.google.com...??
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
On Jan 11, 2012, at 2:51 AM, cardemaister wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: mahaa-snepa Lobsang Rampa was a phony fiction writer. These are not instructions for heat yoga (caNDAlI-yoga). That word 'caNDAlI' (caNDaalii; ~~chun-duh-lee) is interesting. Its root seems to be 'caNDa', which according to Monier-Williams *probably* comes from 'candra' (shining, bright, lovely; moon; so, a bit playfully, it can be thought of as having a connection with 'soma' which also means, amongst other stuff, 'moon'[sic!]). According to Macdonell, 'caNDa' means for instance 'burning, violent'. According to M-W, caNDaala is 'man of the lowest stratum of society', and furthermore, offspring of a shuudra man and a braahman woman. The form 'caNDaalii' is a feminine gender form (nom. sing.) of the word 'caNDaala', meaning 'a caNDaala woman'. In the context of yoga, 'caNDaalii' fairly probably refers to heat, but that meaning we couldn't find in any of the dictionaries online... PS. Let's let the fancy flow: so, in Sanskrit 'candra' means 'lovely' and 'moon', etc; 'soma' means 'moon', etc; in Finnish 'soma' means 'cute, lovely'. The only difference between Finnish 'soma' and Sanskrit 'soma' is that in the latter the o-sound is long: ~ saw-muh, because in Sanskrit, the o-sound represents the former diphthong 'au' (~ as in 'how'; cf. om, aum). LoL! The word has some hidden meanings for initiates that you generally will not find in even yoga dictionaries as they're concealed in the twilight language. It's also a close homophone of kundali (kuNDalI).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
In the context of yoga, 'caNDaalii' fairly probably refers to heat... Vaj: It's also a close homophone of kundali (kuNDalI)... According to the Cologne Sanskrit Lexicon, the Sanskrit word 'kuNDalin' refers to snake that is 'coiled'. If you are a TM practitioner, you would have probably experienced the kundalini rising effect many times. I don't know why Vaj is being disingenuous about this, since most of us are yogis on this forum and already know this. Go figure. According to Swami Sivananda Saraswati, Kundalini yoga is really considered a Laya yoga. The kundalini yoga energy can be awakened and a corresponding enlightenment experience can be attained by yogic techniques, such as pranic breathing, kriyas, hatha yoga asanas, and mantra meditation. Benson has demonstrated that a deep meditation, like TM practice, is a conscious mental process that induces a set of integrated physiologic changes termed the relaxation response. In one study a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to identify brain regions that are active in simple meditation. In another study, it was recorded that there was a skin temperature reduction on the palms of the hands during the experience of mental silence, arising as a result of a single 10 minute meditation session! Works cited: 'Kundalini Yoga' By Swami Sivananda Saraswati The Divine Life Society, 2007 Page page 32. 'Functional brain mapping of the relaxation response and meditation' By Herbert Bensin and Sara Lazar Neuroreport, May 15, 2000 Volume 11, Issue 7; pp. 1581-1585 'Changing Definitions of Meditation: Physiological Corollorary' By Manocha, Black, Ryan, Stough, and Spiro Journal of the International Society of Life Sciences, Vol 28 (1), March 2010 Read more: 'Kundalini Demystified' By David T, Eastman Yoga Journal, September 1985 pp. 3743
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, richardatrwilliamsdotus richard@... wrote: In the context of yoga, 'caNDaalii' fairly probably refers to heat... Vaj: It's also a close homophone of kundali (kuNDalI)... According to the Cologne Sanskrit Lexicon, the Sanskrit word 'kuNDalin' refers to snake that is 'coiled'. Well, that's another nice Sanskrit dilemma, you've lead me into! :D Namely 'caNDaalii' seems to be the nominative singular *feminine* form from 'caNDaala(H)' (masc.), whereas 'kuNDalii' is the nominative singular *masculine* from 'kuNDalin' (the lemma of that word), whose corresponding *feminine* form is 'kuNDalinii' (the shakti of kuNDalii?). That is (I believe) 'caNDaalii'(fem.) and 'kuNDalii'(masc.) represent two different kinds of inflectional paradigms in Sanskrit! :o If you are a TM practitioner, you would have probably experienced the kundalini rising effect many times. I don't know why Vaj is being disingenuous about this, since most of us are yogis on this forum and already know this. Go figure. According to Swami Sivananda Saraswati, Kundalini yoga is really considered a Laya yoga. The kundalini yoga energy can be awakened and a corresponding enlightenment experience can be attained by yogic techniques, such as pranic breathing, kriyas, hatha yoga asanas, and mantra meditation. Benson has demonstrated that a deep meditation, like TM practice, is a conscious mental process that induces a set of integrated physiologic changes termed the relaxation response. In one study a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to identify brain regions that are active in simple meditation. In another study, it was recorded that there was a skin temperature reduction on the palms of the hands during the experience of mental silence, arising as a result of a single 10 minute meditation session! Works cited: 'Kundalini Yoga' By Swami Sivananda Saraswati The Divine Life Society, 2007 Page page 32. 'Functional brain mapping of the relaxation response and meditation' By Herbert Bensin and Sara Lazar Neuroreport, May 15, 2000 Volume 11, Issue 7; pp. 1581-1585 'Changing Definitions of Meditation: Physiological Corollorary' By Manocha, Black, Ryan, Stough, and Spiro Journal of the International Society of Life Sciences, Vol 28 (1), March 2010 Read more: 'Kundalini Demystified' By David T, Eastman Yoga Journal, September 1985 pp. 3743
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
Here is an exercise that enables one to keep warm in cold weather... Vaj: Lobsang Rampa was a phony fiction writer. These are not instructions for heat yoga (caNDAlI-yoga). Candali (kundalini) is a Sanskrit translation of a Tibetan word - Tummo. But, in fact, 'Heat Yoga' was popularized by Bikram Choudhury. Bikram Yoga's goal is to obtain general health through hatha yoga poses and pranyama. Bikram Choudhury believes that the heated studio helps with deeper stretching, while reducing stress and tension. You can find the detailed instructions in Bikram's 'Pranayama Series' of Hatha Yoga poses, which are very similar to the instructions of T. Lobsang Rampa! Go figure. However, the practice of Tibetan 'Tummo', is the yoga of generating 'inner' heat. This practice has been described in detail by W.Y. Evans-Wentz in his book 'Tibetan Yoga and Secret Doctrines'. Tummo is a siddha meditation technique, similar to the practice of TM. According to MMY, this yoga technique, pranyama, when followed by deep meditation, accompanied by a non-semantic mnemonic, such as a bija mantra, produces an intensely blissful feeling. According to the Kagyu tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, Tummo was developed by the Mahasiddha Naropa, as a set of practices in the 'Six Yogas of Naropa', to be used in order to recognize the true nature of the mind. Read more: 'Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism' According to the Esoteric Teachings of the Great Mantra Om Mani Padme Hum By Lama Anagarika Govinda E.P. Dutton Co, 1960
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
On Jan 10, 2012, at 11:01 AM, richardatrwilliamsdotus wrote: Here is an exercise that enables one to keep warm in cold weather... Vaj: Lobsang Rampa was a phony fiction writer. These are not instructions for heat yoga (caNDAlI-yoga). Candali (kundalini) is a Sanskrit translation of a Tibetan word - Tummo. Actually gtum mo is a Tibetan translation of the Sanskrit. But, in fact, 'Heat Yoga' was popularized by Bikram Choudhury. Bikram Yoga's goal is to obtain general health through hatha yoga poses and pranyama. Different type of heat yoga Willy. Bikram Choudhury believes that the heated studio helps with deeper stretching, while reducing stress and tension. You can find the detailed instructions in Bikram's 'Pranayama Series' of Hatha Yoga poses, which are very similar to the instructions of T. Lobsang Rampa! Go figure. However, the practice of Tibetan 'Tummo', is the yoga of generating 'inner' heat. This practice has been described in detail by W.Y. Evans-Wentz in his book 'Tibetan Yoga and Secret Doctrines'. Tummo is a siddha meditation technique, similar to the practice of TM. Were you ever instructed in TM? I've been instructed in both TM and chandali-yoga and they're actually nothing alike.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
If Gingrich or Ron Paul find out about this - they'll want DHSS to teach pranyama to the homeless. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@... wrote: From Cyril Henry Hoskin's a.k.a. Tuesday Lobsang Rampa's book Wisdom of the Ancients: Here is an exercise that enables one to keep warm in cold weather. It is something much practiced in Tibet where a lama can sit unclothed on ice, and even melt ice around him and dry off wet blankets draped around his shoulders. Here's how you do it. Sit comfortably ... and make sure that you really ARE sitting with your spine upright. You must have no tensions or pressing worries for the moment. Close your eyes, and think of yourself saying, 'OM, OM, OM', telepathically. Close your left nostril, and take us much air as you can through the right nostril. Then close the right (your thumb is the best for this because it is the most convenient), and retain the breath by pressing your chin hard against your chest, bring your chin up close to your neck. Hold your breath for a time, and then gradually exhale through the left nostril by closing the right nostril (again the thumb is easiest here). Careful note -- in this particular exercise one always breathes in through the right nostril, and always breathes out through the left nostril. You should do this from a start of ten breathings, during which you gradually increase the time of breath retention, up to some fifty times, but you must increase your breath retention very gradually, there is no need to rush, and while on the subject here is a little note which may free you from worry: when you have been doing it for some time, and you are doing it with deep breath retention, you may find that you perspire from the roots of the hair. That is perfectly safe, perfectly normal, and really does increase the health and cleanliness of the body.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
Here is an exercise that enables one to keep warm in cold weather... Vaj: Lobsang Rampa was a phony fiction writer. These are not instructions for heat yoga (caNDAlI-yoga). Candali (kundalini) is a Sanskrit translation of a Tibetan word - Tummo. Actually gtum mo is a Tibetan translation of the Sanskrit. Tummo is a Tibetan word. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tummo But, in fact, 'Heat Yoga' was popularized by Bikram Choudhury. Bikram Yoga's goal is to obtain general health through hatha yoga poses and pranyama. Different type of heat yoga Willy. Hatha Yoga with 'pranyama' is heat yoga. All the tantric hatha yogis practiced a form of pranyama and meditation. That's what Hatha Yoga is - producing the inner heat in order to burn off the accumulated karma. Bikram Choudhury believes that the heated studio helps with deeper stretching, while reducing stress and tension. You can find the detailed instructions in Bikram's 'Pranayama Series' of Hatha Yoga poses, which are very similar to the instructions of T. Lobsang Rampa! Go figure. However, the practice of Tibetan 'Tummo', is the yoga of generating 'inner' heat. This practice has been described in detail by W.Y. Evans-Wentz in his book 'Tibetan Yoga and Secret Doctrines'. Tummo is a siddha meditation technique, similar to the practice of TM. Were you ever instructed in TM? Yes, I was taught how to meditate by the Maharishi himself. I've been instructed in both TM and chandali-yoga and they're actually nothing alike. It has not beem established that you know TM or any other yoga practice. Who was your guru? In fact, TM is Kundalini Yoga. The pranyama exercises and meditation leading up to 'tummo' or the generating of the inner heat, are described by Evans-Wentz in his book 'Tibet's Great Yogi Milarepa'. Other western witnesses of this practice include the adventurer Alexandra David-Néel and Lama Anagarika Govinda, whom I cited in a previous post. Several scientific studies have been conducted that show the physiological effects of Tummo and it has been shown that this practice is very similar to TM practice - rounding with hatha yoga and deep meditation utilizing bija mantras. Read more: 'The Six Yogas of Naropa' Tsongkhapa's Commentary By Glenn H. Mullin (Translator) Snow Lion, 2005 Work cited: 'Body temperature changes during the practice of g Tum-mo yoga' By Herbert Benson and Jeffrey Hopkins et al. Nature Magazine, January 21, 1982. Nature 295. Pages 234 - 236.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone tried this?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: mahaa-snepa Lobsang Rampa was a phony fiction writer. These are not instructions for heat yoga (caNDAlI-yoga). That word 'caNDAlI' (caNDaalii; ~~chun-duh-lee) is interesting. Its root seems to be 'caNDa', which according to Monier-Williams *probably* comes from 'candra' (shining, bright, lovely; moon; so, a bit playfully, it can be thought of as having a connection with 'soma' which also means, amongst other stuff, 'moon'[sic!]). According to Macdonell, 'caNDa' means for instance 'burning, violent'. According to M-W, caNDaala is 'man of the lowest stratum of society', and furthermore, offspring of a shuudra man and a braahman woman. The form 'caNDaalii' is a feminine gender form (nom. sing.) of the word 'caNDaala', meaning 'a caNDaala woman'. In the context of yoga, 'caNDaalii' fairly probably refers to heat, but that meaning we couldn't find in any of the dictionaries online... PS. Let's let the fancy flow: so, in Sanskrit 'candra' means 'lovely' and 'moon', etc; 'soma' means 'moon', etc; in Finnish 'soma' means 'cute, lovely'. The only difference between Finnish 'soma' and Sanskrit 'soma' is that in the latter the o-sound is long: ~ saw-muh, because in Sanskrit, the o-sound represents the former diphthong 'au' (~ as in 'how'; cf. om, aum). LoL!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. John, just as an exercise in challenging previously- unchallenged assumptions, why would you *want* to predict the future? I mean, where's the fun in that? I've never been able to become the least bit interested in astrology or Jytoish or palmistry or reading tea leaves or any other predictive technology that can sup- posedly predict the future. I simply do not see the fuckin' point. I want the future to be a *surprise*, man. I want it to fill me with awe and jumpstart my sense of mystery and make me go Whoa! I never saw *that* coming. That is what the essence of life *IS* for me. Why would I ever want to *spoil* that by seeing the future? Big whoop. The best that can happen is that you've spoiled fuckin' Christmas, man, and X-rayed the packages to find out what they contain before opening them. Where's the fun in that? The worst that can happen is that you buy into a self-fulfilling prophecy such that you cause to happen what you've been told will happen. Again, big whoop. I fully agree with you that keeping a Dream Journal can be a very useful thing, but for a completely different reason. Dreams tend to be hard to remember when you wake up. Keeping a Journal of them that you write in immedi- ately after waking can help you to remember them. But digging through them for symbols, and trying to analyze them to discern the future? Just not my idea of fun. If it's yours, I wish you well with that. The more you know the more successful you are in accomplishing your objectives. Jyotish can do this. But most of all, it helps you understand yourself and the cosmos. Don't you mean it helps you to *convince yourself* that you 'understand' yourself and the cosmos? I do not personally believe that anyone in history has ever 'understood' the cosmos, and never will. That's the stuff of ego and hubris, and not my interest. If it's yours, more power to ya. How do you know that what you believe is true? If you don't know, then your belief is foolish! If you know, then who is your authority? If it's you yourself, then why should we believe you? Dreams can also help you determine what Nature is trying to tell you. Again, to rephrase, dreams can help to convince you that you 'understand' what you believe nature is trying to tell you. You answer my question about unchallenged assumptions with more unchallenged assumptions, John. This one involves a sentient Nature that is trying to tell you something. Since I don't believe in a sentient Nature, I am not terribly interested in what it has to tell me. But again, if that's your idea of a fun time, go for it. snip fairytale story of Daniel that John doesn't seem to realize is not history My questions above apply here too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: The more you know the more successful you are in accomplishing your objectives. Jyotish can do this. But most of all, it helps you understand yourself and the cosmos. Don't you mean it helps you to *convince yourself* that you 'understand' yourself and the cosmos? I do not personally believe that anyone in history has ever 'understood' the cosmos, and never will. That's the stuff of ego and hubris, and not my interest. If it's yours, more power to ya. How do you know that what you believe is true? I don't. I do not consider *anything* I believe to be true, in any sense. It is merely what I believe at the moment. If you don't know, then your belief is foolish! I would suggest that the situation is reversed. Anyone who claims to know something that he cannot is foolish. If you know, then who is your authority? I do not know, and recognize NO authority. Not one, on the whole planet or off-world. IMO, anyone who trusts in authorities is even more foolish than the person who believes that he knows. Are we clear now? If it's you yourself, then why should we believe you? Excuse me? Where did I ever claim either to know, or to ask you to believe me? I think you are projecting your *own* desires onto me. I have no need to be believed. That is *your* hangup, and THE CORRECTOR's. I merely spout opinion, based on my belief in the moment. The next moment any of those beliefs could change. I don't give a shit whether anyone believes my opinion or agrees with it. What they believe does not affect me in any way. Dreams can also help you determine what Nature is trying to tell you. Again, to rephrase, dreams can help to convince you that you 'understand' what you believe nature is trying to tell you. You answer my question about unchallenged assumptions with more unchallenged assumptions, John. This one involves a sentient Nature that is trying to tell you something. Since I don't believe in a sentient Nature, I am not terribly interested in what it has to tell me. But again, if that's your idea of a fun time, go for it. snip fairytale story of Daniel that John doesn't seem to realize is not history My questions above apply here too. I think I answered them above. You are talking *belief* and claiming it is knowledge. I am busting you on that. IMO it's only belief, and will remain so forever, no matter how much you claim to know and no matter how many authorities you cite. But thanks for the bounceback.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
TurquoiseB: I do not consider *anything* I believe to be true, in any sense Nihilism can also take epistemological, metaphysical, or ontological forms, meaning respectively that in some aspect knowledge is not possible or that contrary to our belief, some aspect of reality does not exist as such... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Turq: John, just as an exercise in challenging previously-unchallenged assumptions, why would you *want* to predict the future? We can remember the past, so why couldn't we see the future? If our actions in the present have an effect on the future, why couldn't we effect the past as well? Reed more: 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality by William Arntz, Betsy Chasse, and Mark Vicente HCI, 2007 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' Marlee Matlin, Elaine Hendrix, John Ross Bowie, Robert Bailey Jr., Barry Newman 20th Century Fox, 2005
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: You are entitled to your opinion. But I am merely paraphrasing what is available in the jyotish shastras. When Jyoitish was formalized people had many notions that have been overturned by the growth of human understanding. The religious context and the class system knowledge-power rigidity of that period made it very hard to change people's wrong ideas. Even with the impressive name shastra the views expressed are also someone's opinion. Someone who came from a culture that lacked the knowledge we have gained since that time. Personally, I have kept a diary of my dreams for several months to determine what these dreams mean to my life. Here is where our intuition and statistics starts to come into conflict. The statistical question is how many months are actually required to make a solid case? And how likely is it to find coincidences of the nature you discovered below? This is something our natural minds totally suck at. Our intuition can't grasp this so we have to rely on the field of statistics and probability thoery. In one of the dreams, there was a sequence where I was taking a bus ride to visit my old alma mater for one reason or the the other. I met some people whom I did not know before. After a few days of this dream, I found out that my neighbor next door to me also graduated from my university through an alumni brochure that was incorrectly delivered into my mail box. Here is a Wiki description of the birthday paradox: In probability theory, the birthday problem, or birthday paradox[1] pertains to the probability that in a set of randomly chosen people some pair of them will have the same birthday. In a group of at least 23 randomly chosen people, there is more than 50% probability that some pair of them will have the same birthday. Such a result is counter-intuitive to many. For 57 or more people, the probability is more than 99%, and it reaches 100% when, ignoring leap-years, the number of people reaches 366 (by the pigeonhole principle). To test this theory out yourself, you should keep a diary of your dreams to see if any of them preplays any of the actual occurences in your life. You can understand why I am skeptical that such a test really proves what it FEELS like it should prove. I even suggested the experiment before I started thinking about it more and seeing the problems with the design. It naturally made sense to me! It could be tested in principle, but these elements would have to be a part of the design. 1. We would need to know how many months of recording dreams and how many events would be needed to make it statistically significant. 2. We would need to decide on some parameters of what constitutes a connection. In the kind of open ended personal design we are subject to shaping. Of course we also have the issue of how our perception is going to filter to look for any connections with the dream we just had. We are scanning our experience with a strong bias. I don't know how to get around this because this is self-reported and we have thousands of possible experiences to choose from. It seems to me that this would make the likelihood of finding SOMETHING that seems to relate very high. There are many other variable to control for and I am not an expert in testing design. But in principle it seems like there could be a way to find out if there is something to this thoery. In its current form is appears to be unfalsifiable. But this is unlikely to ever happen because people who view shastras as having authority are not interested in more than personal confirmation of the belief. There is no way to prove it false given this testing procedure. And for hundreds of years humans have been satisfied with their anecdotal evidence and intuitive pseudo-testing. What would be the motive to REALLY find out? This natural tendency of our minds (where have I heard THAT before?) to impose order our of chaos, to put things together and to assign connections or to notice the naturally occurring coincidences and to see patterns is a strength and a weakness of our minds. Depending on the context is either pretty benign (this dream belief) or catastrophic, medical superstitions. Our minds are very susceptible to being convinced of things that we should only be confident about with better testing practices. But REALLY testing things is hard. As a species we are also overfond of easy and quick. I have an experience that happens to me. I will be reading something on the Web and then turn to the radio or TV and the same topic will be being discussed. It feels like it happens a lot. It really does. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Last night I tired of the somewhat boring dream I was having and decided to spice it up and willed that I was at a dinner party with more interesting fellow dream-beings. Poof! I was in Windows On The World (which no longer exists but for me is still a cool place because I had many memorable conversations there), sitting at a dinner table overlooking New York City with a number of cool people. We had a really cool conversation. Some of the conversationalists are still living, some are not. If John's theory were correct, I should have run into Basho and the Sixth Dalai Lama and Oscar Wilde on the street today. These people that appeared to you may be symbols in your life. They could represent your ideals. If you ignore their meanings, then you are not realizing the potential that are available to you. Boy, not to mention the symbolism of the Windows on the World location (which was at the top of one of the World Trade Center towers, for non-New Yorkers). One might interpret this dream as the subconscious recognition that the perception of oneself as a combination of Basho, the Sixth Dalai Lama, and Oscar Wilde may not have quite so firm a foundation as one might hope--and that it's a *very* long way down should it suddenly collapse.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
To test this theory out yourself, you should keep a diary of your dreams to see if any of them preplays any of the actual occurences in your life. You can understand why I am skeptical that such a test really proves what it FEELS like it should prove. I even suggested the experiment before I started thinking about it more and seeing the problems with the design. It naturally made sense to me! It could be tested in principle, but these elements would have to be a part of the design. 1. We would need to know how many months of recording dreams and how many events would be needed to make it statistically significant. 2. We would need to decide on some parameters of what constitutes a connection. In the kind of open ended personal design we are subject to shaping. Of course we also have the issue of how our perception is going to filter to look for any connections with the dream we just had. We are scanning our experience with a strong bias. I don't know how to get around this because this is self-reported and we have thousands of possible experiences to choose from. It seems to me that this would make the likelihood of finding SOMETHING that seems to relate very high. There are many other variable to control for and I am not an expert in testing design. But in principle it seems like there could be a way to find out if there is something to this thoery. In its current form is appears to be unfalsifiable. But this is unlikely to ever happen because people who view shastras as having authority are not interested in more than personal confirmation of the belief. There is no way to prove it false given this testing procedure. And for hundreds of years humans have been satisfied with their anecdotal evidence and intuitive pseudo-testing. What would be the motive to REALLY find out? This natural tendency of our minds (where have I heard THAT before?) to impose order our of chaos, to put things together and to assign connections or to notice the naturally occurring coincidences and to see patterns is a strength and a weakness of our minds. Depending on the context is either pretty benign (this dream belief) or catastrophic, medical superstitions. Our minds are very susceptible to being convinced of things that we should only be confident about with better testing practices. But REALLY testing things is hard. As a species we are also overfond of easy and quick. I have an experience that happens to me. I will be reading something on the Web and then turn to the radio or TV and the same topic will be being discussed. It feels like it happens a lot. It really does. Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. You should submit your proposal to a university or a government agency for funding. Personally, I don't have the time to spend for this effort. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. Since statistics are not intuitive to our minds we are really poor judges of the truthfulness of this sort of claim. We are constantly imposing order on randomness as a reflex, you can't avoid it. But knowing that our mind has this tendency can help avoid being sure of things that don't hold up to a more rigorous test. Glilovich's Book How We Know What Isn't So, the Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life, studies these cognitive errors. http://www.amazon.com/How-Know-What-Isnt-Fallibility/dp/0029117062/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1266784011sr=8-1 We have all had thousands of dreams that predicted nothing. When there seems to be a connection our mind goes eureka! The world makes sense because we are overlaying our pattern on the randomness. We dreamt about a person and they called us, or we passed them on the street, or wrote to us, or someone mentioned them to us. We remember our dream and overvalue it as proof of our belief about the trans-personal nature of our minds. But we haven't kept s journal of dreams and connections in our daily life
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. John, just as an exercise in challenging previously- unchallenged assumptions, why would you *want* to predict the future? I mean, where's the fun in that? I've never been able to become the least bit interested in astrology or Jytoish or palmistry or reading tea leaves or any other predictive technology that can sup- posedly predict the future. I simply do not see the fuckin' point. I want the future to be a *surprise*, man. I want it to fill me with awe and jumpstart my sense of mystery and make me go Whoa! I never saw *that* coming. That is what the essence of life *IS* for me. Why would I ever want to *spoil* that by seeing the future? Big whoop. The best that can happen is that you've spoiled fuckin' Christmas, man, and X-rayed the packages to find out what they contain before opening them. Where's the fun in that? The worst that can happen is that you buy into a self-fulfilling prophecy such that you cause to happen what you've been told will happen. Again, big whoop. I fully agree with you that keeping a Dream Journal can be a very useful thing, but for a completely different reason. Dreams tend to be hard to remember when you wake up. Keeping a Journal of them that you write in immedi- ately after waking can help you to remember them. But digging through them for symbols, and trying to analyze them to discern the future? Just not my idea of fun. If it's yours, I wish you well with that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. You should submit your proposal to a university or a government agency for funding. Personally, I don't have the time to spend for this effort. And I would? A bit dismissive, eh? You already KNOW this is true, from your experience. And finding out if you really do have this remarkable ability or are just fooling yourself would be too much of an inconvenience, beneath your level of surety. This is very common among people with unusual abilities. I wonder why that is? Must just be an exceptionally busy bunch. Probably filling their days winning their state's Power Ball Lottery games and spending all the money. Anyway, thanks for an interesting discussion. To test this theory out yourself, you should keep a diary of your dreams to see if any of them preplays any of the actual occurences in your life. You can understand why I am skeptical that such a test really proves what it FEELS like it should prove. I even suggested the experiment before I started thinking about it more and seeing the problems with the design. It naturally made sense to me! It could be tested in principle, but these elements would have to be a part of the design. 1. We would need to know how many months of recording dreams and how many events would be needed to make it statistically significant. 2. We would need to decide on some parameters of what constitutes a connection. In the kind of open ended personal design we are subject to shaping. Of course we also have the issue of how our perception is going to filter to look for any connections with the dream we just had. We are scanning our experience with a strong bias. I don't know how to get around this because this is self-reported and we have thousands of possible experiences to choose from. It seems to me that this would make the likelihood of finding SOMETHING that seems to relate very high. There are many other variable to control for and I am not an expert in testing design. But in principle it seems like there could be a way to find out if there is something to this thoery. In its current form is appears to be unfalsifiable. But this is unlikely to ever happen because people who view shastras as having authority are not interested in more than personal confirmation of the belief. There is no way to prove it false given this testing procedure. And for hundreds of years humans have been satisfied with their anecdotal evidence and intuitive pseudo-testing. What would be the motive to REALLY find out? This natural tendency of our minds (where have I heard THAT before?) to impose order our of chaos, to put things together and to assign connections or to notice the naturally occurring coincidences and to see patterns is a strength and a weakness of our minds. Depending on the context is either pretty benign (this dream belief) or catastrophic, medical superstitions. Our minds are very susceptible to being convinced of things that we should only be confident about with better testing practices. But REALLY testing things is hard. As a species we are also overfond of easy and quick. I have an experience that happens to me. I will be reading something on the Web and then turn to the radio or TV and the same topic will be being discussed. It feels like it happens a lot. It really does. Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. You should submit your proposal to a university or a government agency for funding. Personally, I don't have the time to spend for this effort. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. Since statistics are not intuitive to our minds we are really poor judges of the truthfulness of this sort of claim. We are constantly imposing order on randomness as a reflex, you can't avoid it. But
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. John, just as an exercise in challenging previously- unchallenged assumptions, why would you *want* to predict the future? I mean, where's the fun in that? I've never been able to become the least bit interested in astrology or Jytoish or palmistry or reading tea leaves or any other predictive technology that can sup- posedly predict the future. I simply do not see the fuckin' point. I want the future to be a *surprise*, man. I want it to fill me with awe and jumpstart my sense of mystery and make me go Whoa! I never saw *that* coming. That is what the essence of life *IS* for me. Why would I ever want to *spoil* that by seeing the future? Big whoop. The best that can happen is that you've spoiled fuckin' Christmas, man, and X-rayed the packages to find out what they contain before opening them. Where's the fun in that? The worst that can happen is that you buy into a self-fulfilling prophecy such that you cause to happen what you've been told will happen. Again, big whoop. I fully agree with you that keeping a Dream Journal can be a very useful thing, but for a completely different reason. Dreams tend to be hard to remember when you wake up. Keeping a Journal of them that you write in immedi- ately after waking can help you to remember them. But digging through them for symbols, and trying to analyze them to discern the future? Just not my idea of fun. If it's yours, I wish you well with that. The more you know the more successful you are in accomplishing your objectives. Jyotish can do this. But most of all, it helps you understand yourself and the cosmos. Dreams can also help you determine what Nature is trying to tell you. If you can remember, there's a story of an Egyptian king who had a puzzling dream. When he asked his advisors to interpret the dream, none of them could do it. However, only a Jewish young man by the name of Daniel was able to interpret the dream. He told the king that the dream was an omen stating that the king's realm will experience seven years of drought. He recommended that the king should prepare for this drought by storing the grains in preparation for the drought. Thus, Daniel was appointed as administrator for the king and became powerful in the kingdom.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: Your idea of statistically proving that dreams predict the future is excellent. John, just as an exercise in challenging previously- unchallenged assumptions, why would you *want* to predict the future? I mean, where's the fun in that? I've never been able to become the least bit interested in astrology or Jytoish or palmistry or reading tea leaves or any other predictive technology that can sup- posedly predict the future. I simply do not see the fuckin' point. I want the future to be a *surprise*, man. I want it to fill me with awe and jumpstart my sense of mystery and make me go Whoa! I never saw *that* coming. That is what the essence of life *IS* for me. Why would I ever want to *spoil* that by seeing the future? Big whoop. The best that can happen is that you've spoiled fuckin' Christmas, man, and X-rayed the packages to find out what they contain before opening them. Where's the fun in that? The worst that can happen is that you buy into a self-fulfilling prophecy such that you cause to happen what you've been told will happen. Again, big whoop. I fully agree with you that keeping a Dream Journal can be a very useful thing, but for a completely different reason. Dreams tend to be hard to remember when you wake up. Keeping a Journal of them that you write in immedi- ately after waking can help you to remember them. But digging through them for symbols, and trying to analyze them to discern the future? Just not my idea of fun. If it's yours, I wish you well with that. The more you know the more successful you are in accomplishing your objectives. Jyotish can do this. But most of all, it helps you understand yourself and the cosmos. Don't you mean it helps you to *convince yourself* that you 'understand' yourself and the cosmos? I do not personally believe that anyone in history has ever 'understood' the cosmos, and never will. That's the stuff of ego and hubris, and not my interest. If it's yours, more power to ya. Dreams can also help you determine what Nature is trying to tell you. Again, to rephrase, dreams can help to convince you that you 'understand' what you believe nature is trying to tell you. You answer my question about unchallenged assumptions with more unchallenged assumptions, John. This one involves a sentient Nature that is trying to tell you something. Since I don't believe in a sentient Nature, I am not terribly interested in what it has to tell me. But again, if that's your idea of a fun time, go for it. snip fairytale story of Daniel that John doesn't seem to realize is not history
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really and it doesn't affect *how* the machine runs because it's job is just - in the case of consciousness - to allow the creation of metaphors and patterns out of those metaphors, which is what all our thoughts are. The job of science here is to let us know which of the maps we create corresponds to what's actually happening. I'm very dubious that we can make a definitive distinction between creating patterns out of metaphors, on the one hand, and knowing what's actually happening, on the other. How do we know our notions of what's actually happening aren't really just more of those same metaphors and patterns? There's no such thing as pure information--there's always an interpretation involved, always some pattern-making. FWIW, in jyotish, dreams are part of the field of higher knowledge, the 9th house. Dreams are considered the work activity during our sleeping conscious, just as our careers/professions are the activities during our waking consciousness. As such, these dreams are influenced by the planets that are placed in the 9th house at birth or are transiting the house at the present time. For example, a benefic planet like Jupiter, a significator of a biped, would cause dreams to be about a person or people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukr...@... wrote: so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really and it doesn't affect *how* the machine runs because it's job is just - in the case of consciousness - to allow the creation of metaphors and patterns out of those metaphors, which is what all our thoughts are. The job of science here is to let us know which of the maps we create corresponds to what's actually happening. I'm very dubious that we can make a definitive distinction between creating patterns out of metaphors, on the one hand, and knowing what's actually happening, on the other. How do we know our notions of what's actually happening aren't really just more of those same metaphors and patterns? There's no such thing as pure information--there's always an interpretation involved, always some pattern-making. FWIW, in jyotish, dreams are part of the field of higher knowledge, the 9th house. Dreams are considered the work activity during our sleeping conscious, just as our careers/professions are the activities during our waking consciousness. As such, these dreams are influenced by the planets that are placed in the 9th house at birth or are transiting the house at the present time. For example, a benefic planet like Jupiter, a significator of a biped, would cause dreams to be about a person or people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. Since statistics are not intuitive to our minds we are really poor judges of the truthfulness of this sort of claim. We are constantly imposing order on randomness as a reflex, you can't avoid it. But knowing that our mind has this tendency can help avoid being sure of things that don't hold up to a more rigorous test. Glilovich's Book How We Know What Isn't So, the Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life, studies these cognitive errors. http://www.amazon.com/How-Know-What-Isnt-Fallibility/dp/0029117062/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1266784011sr=8-1 We have all had thousands of dreams that predicted nothing. When there seems to be a connection our mind goes eureka! The world makes sense because we are overlaying our pattern on the randomness. We dreamt about a person and they called us, or we passed them on the street, or wrote to us, or someone mentioned them to us. We remember our dream and overvalue it as proof of our belief about the trans-personal nature of our minds. But we haven't kept s journal of dreams and connections in our daily life for months to really test it. And when we do our mind's shaping tendency is right there to interpret the day as good after a pleasant dream. Even bad things that turn out as a good thing in the end are counted in evidence for our minds magical ability to predict the future. Dream contents may have creative uses, but I don't believe predicting the future is one of them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really and it doesn't affect *how* the machine runs because it's job is just - in the case of consciousness - to allow the creation of metaphors and patterns out of those metaphors, which is what all our thoughts are. The job of science here is to let us know which of the maps we create corresponds to what's actually happening. I'm very dubious that we can make a definitive distinction between creating patterns out of metaphors, on the one hand, and knowing what's actually happening, on the other. How do we know our notions of what's actually happening aren't really just more of those same metaphors and patterns? There's no such thing as pure information--there's always an interpretation involved, always some pattern-making. FWIW, in jyotish, dreams are part of the field of higher knowledge, the 9th house. Dreams are considered the work activity during our sleeping conscious, just as our careers/professions are the activities during our waking consciousness. As such, these dreams are influenced by the planets that are placed in the 9th house at birth or are transiting the house at the present time. For example, a benefic planet like Jupiter, a significator of a biped, would cause dreams to be about a person or people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. It's also a view shaped by what I call slacker spirituality, one that sees dreams as a passive experience that happens to you, not as another state of consciousness that you have as much control over as you do the waking state. I practiced Tibetan dream yoga for many years, and gained somewhat of a facility with lucid dreaming, or waking up in the dream. Once you do that you are no longer merely a passive viewer of the dream, but a fully interactive participant in it. Don't like the circumstances of the current dream you find yourself in? Just change it. Poof! You're in another setting among more sympatico dream-mates. Personally I have as little respect for John's dreams as prognosticators as I do for Western science's or Maharishi's dreams as stress release, but that's because I get to *participate* in my dreams in ways that they do not seem able to do. Does this make me any better than anyone else? Nope, just different than the mainstream dream slackers. Does it have any practical benefits? Nope, none that I can attest to, other than providing yet another state of consciousness in which one can practice mindfulness. But is lucid dreaming more FUN? Definitely. :-) We have all had thousands of dreams that predicted nothing. When there seems to be a connection our mind goes eureka! The world makes sense because we are overlaying our pattern on the randomness. We dreamt about a person and they called us, or we passed them on the street, or wrote to us, or someone mentioned them to us. We remember our dream and overvalue it as proof of our belief about the trans-personal nature of our minds. The above (about dream yoga) said, I agree completely. I do not and have never viewed dreams as a mechanism for prognostication, and hopefully never will. They are for me merely another state of consciousness in which to practice mindfulness. Last night I tired of the somewhat boring dream I was having and decided to spice it up and willed that I was at a dinner party with more interesting fellow dream-beings. Poof! I was in Windows On The World (which no longer exists but for me is still a cool place because I had many memorable conversations there), sitting at a dinner table overlooking New York City with a number of cool people. We had a really cool conversation. Some of the conversationalists are still living, some are not. If John's theory were correct, I should have run into Basho and the Sixth Dalai Lama and Oscar Wilde on the street today. Was my dream conversation with them real? Who the fuck knows, and who the fuck cares. All I know is that I woke up laughing at one of Oscar Wilde's one-liners, one that I've never read in any of his books (and I've read them all). The man is fuckin' FUNNY, alive or dead, waking state or dream state.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. It's also a view shaped by what I call slacker spirituality, one that sees dreams as a passive experience that happens to you, not as another state of consciousness that you have as much control over as you do the waking state. Yet another example of Barry expressing his opinion while putting down those who disagree with him. Why is it that he has such difficulty saying anything positive and just leaving it at that, without adding a bunch of negativity? snip Personally I have as little respect for John's dreams as prognosticators as I do for Western science's or Maharishi's dreams as stress release, but that's because I get to *participate* in my dreams in ways that they do not seem able to do. Does this make me any better than anyone else? Nope, just different than the mainstream dream slackers. They're slackers and you aren't, but that doesn't make you any better than they are. R-i-i-i-i-g-h-t. snip If John's theory were correct, I should have run into Basho and the Sixth Dalai Lama and Oscar Wilde on the street today. Actually, what he said was that there was a good chance that you would. Tough luck it passed you by.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
enjoyable is too simple dreams of enemy=victory laughing man=quarrels commit murder=good health wealth=poverty --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really and it doesn't affect *how* the machine runs because it's job is just - in the case of consciousness - to allow the creation of metaphors and patterns out of those metaphors, which is what all our thoughts are. The job of science here is to let us know which of the maps we create corresponds to what's actually happening. I'm very dubious that we can make a definitive distinction between creating patterns out of metaphors, on the one hand, and knowing what's actually happening, on the other. How do we know our notions of what's actually happening aren't really just more of those same metaphors and patterns? There's no such thing as pure information--there's always an interpretation involved, always some pattern-making. FWIW, in jyotish, dreams are part of the field of higher knowledge, the 9th house. Dreams are considered the work activity during our sleeping conscious, just as our careers/professions are the activities during our waking consciousness. As such, these dreams are influenced by the planets that are placed in the 9th house at birth or are transiting the house at the present time. For example, a benefic planet like Jupiter, a significator of a biped, would cause dreams to be about a person or people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukra69@ wrote: so then thats why some consider it a good test of a new gem to judge by the dreams you get when you put it on , that is telling you how it affects the 9th (also luck This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. Since statistics are not intuitive to our minds we are really poor judges of the truthfulness of this sort of claim. We are constantly imposing order on randomness as a reflex, you can't avoid it. But knowing that our mind has this tendency can help avoid being sure of things that don't hold up to a more rigorous test. Glilovich's Book How We Know What Isn't So, the Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life, studies these cognitive errors. http://www.amazon.com/How-Know-What-Isnt-Fallibility/dp/0029117062/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1266784011sr=8-1 We have all had thousands of dreams that predicted nothing. When there seems to be a connection our mind goes eureka! The world makes sense because we are overlaying our pattern on the randomness. We dreamt about a person and they called us, or we passed them on the street, or wrote to us, or someone mentioned them to us. We remember our dream and overvalue it as proof of our belief about the trans-personal nature of our minds. But we haven't kept s journal of dreams and connections in our daily life for months to really test it. And when we do our mind's shaping tendency is right there to interpret the day as good after a pleasant dream. Even bad things that turn out as a good thing in the end are counted in evidence for our minds magical ability to predict the future. Dream contents may have creative uses, but I don't believe predicting the future is one of them. You are entitled to your opinion. But I am merely paraphrasing what is available in the jyotish shastras. Personally, I have kept a diary of my dreams for several months to determine what these dreams mean to my life. In one of the dreams, there was a sequence where I was taking a bus ride to visit my old alma mater for one reason or the the other. I met some people whom I did not know before. After a few days of this dream, I found out that my neighbor next door to me also graduated from my university through an alumni brochure that was incorrectly delivered into my mail box. To test this theory out yourself, you should keep a diary of your dreams to see if any of them preplays any of the actual occurences in your life.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. It's also a view shaped by what I call slacker spirituality, one that sees dreams as a passive experience that happens to you, not as another state of consciousness that you have as much control over as you do the waking state. I practiced Tibetan dream yoga for many years, and gained somewhat of a facility with lucid dreaming, or waking up in the dream. Once you do that you are no longer merely a passive viewer of the dream, but a fully interactive participant in it. Don't like the circumstances of the current dream you find yourself in? Just change it. Poof! You're in another setting among more sympatico dream-mates. Personally I have as little respect for John's dreams as prognosticators as I do for Western science's or Maharishi's dreams as stress release, but that's because I get to *participate* in my dreams in ways that they do not seem able to do. There are meanings of your dreams even if you change them or actively participate in them while its occurring. It is apparent that you are not understanding the metaphors and the symbolisms that your dreams are presenting to you. If you analyze your dreams they may be actually telling you something that you are not aware of. The above (about dream yoga) said, I agree completely. I do not and have never viewed dreams as a mechanism for prognostication, and hopefully never will. They are for me merely another state of consciousness in which to practice mindfulness. Your dreams may not be prognosticate for you because you fail to understand the metaphors and symbolisms being conveyed. Last night I tired of the somewhat boring dream I was having and decided to spice it up and willed that I was at a dinner party with more interesting fellow dream-beings. Poof! I was in Windows On The World (which no longer exists but for me is still a cool place because I had many memorable conversations there), sitting at a dinner table overlooking New York City with a number of cool people. We had a really cool conversation. Some of the conversationalists are still living, some are not. If John's theory were correct, I should have run into Basho and the Sixth Dalai Lama and Oscar Wilde on the street today. These people that appeared to you may be symbols in your life. They could represent your ideals. If you ignore their meanings, then you are not realizing the potential that are available to you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
John, have you ever considered shortening your replies to THE CORRECTOR-approved one-liner, Only my view is right; yours is wrong? :-) You'd be saying the same thing, but more effic- iently. Do less, accomplish more. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: This is true. Dreams are good indicators of things to come. If the dreams are enjoyable then the near future should be good as well. For example, if you dream of someone just before you wake up, there's a good chance you will meet this person during the same day. I think this is an example of one of our mind's cognitive pitfalls called shaping. We tend to remember things that fit patterns and forget those that do not. It's also a view shaped by what I call slacker spirituality, one that sees dreams as a passive experience that happens to you, not as another state of consciousness that you have as much control over as you do the waking state. I practiced Tibetan dream yoga for many years, and gained somewhat of a facility with lucid dreaming, or waking up in the dream. Once you do that you are no longer merely a passive viewer of the dream, but a fully interactive participant in it. Don't like the circumstances of the current dream you find yourself in? Just change it. Poof! You're in another setting among more sympatico dream-mates. Personally I have as little respect for John's dreams as prognosticators as I do for Western science's or Maharishi's dreams as stress release, but that's because I get to *participate* in my dreams in ways that they do not seem able to do. There are meanings of your dreams even if you change them or actively participate in them while its occurring. It is apparent that you are not understanding the metaphors and the symbolisms that your dreams are presenting to you. If you analyze your dreams they may be actually telling you something that you are not aware of. The above (about dream yoga) said, I agree completely. I do not and have never viewed dreams as a mechanism for prognostication, and hopefully never will. They are for me merely another state of consciousness in which to practice mindfulness. Your dreams may not be prognosticate for you because you fail to understand the metaphors and symbolisms being conveyed. Last night I tired of the somewhat boring dream I was having and decided to spice it up and willed that I was at a dinner party with more interesting fellow dream-beings. Poof! I was in Windows On The World (which no longer exists but for me is still a cool place because I had many memorable conversations there), sitting at a dinner table overlooking New York City with a number of cool people. We had a really cool conversation. Some of the conversationalists are still living, some are not. If John's theory were correct, I should have run into Basho and the Sixth Dalai Lama and Oscar Wilde on the street today. These people that appeared to you may be symbols in your life. They could represent your ideals. If you ignore their meanings, then you are not realizing the potential that are available to you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: And where is all that stored in your brain? Where did the data of the experiences come from? I'd say it was invented in the same way that the dreaming mind conjurs up all sorts of fantastic stuff. See, that's where I just get boggled. I see stuff in my dreams that I've *never* seen before, either live or in photos or drawings, haven't read about, etc. Plenty of what I see *is* familiar, but some of it simply ain't. Hmmm, depends what you mean by never I get stuff that's wild but hasn't ever happened (I hope) but it's still feasible in a monster-ish or sci-fi way. The acid halucinations are also stuff from the world but in ways you wouldn't think of, just a kind of spontaneous modern art. Like I was sitting in a church once and looked up at the beams of light shining through the rafters and saw a troop of gorillas sitting as they do when resting in trees, just the mind making more out of shadows that was there but a striking image. What do can you see that hasn't existed before? It's all made up of concepts of various things, unless your mind is truly out there! Well, I don't have a particularly out there mind, I don't think. Most of the examples I can recall offhand are architectural. I have several recurring dreams, each set of dreams having a common theme and common type of architectural setting, but each individual dream takes place in a different structure radically unlike any I've ever been in. Some sets take place in realistic structures, some in shockingly impossible ones, all highly detailed. None of the details, as far as I can tell, are like anything I've ever seen in real life. I guess if an architect had such dreams, you could make a case that he was creating structures from his imagination in his dreams just as he does in real life, except without any limitations. But I'm not an architect, and in real life I'm not creative in the sense of coming up with brand-new stuff. (Symbolically, I strongly suspect the buildings in these recurring dreams represent my mind, my subjective state, in which I'm wandering around exploring with some dim purpose, or trying more or less successfully to get from one place to another.) (On the other hand...I just learned yesterday something I'd never heard, although apparently it's been public knowledge for awhile--that Francis Crick came up with the double helix while high on LSD. For some reason I get a huge kick out of that.) I always thought that he had dreamed about two mating snakes entwined. Are you thinking of Kekule intuiting the structure of the benzene ring? He claimed to have had a vision of a snake eating its own tail while daydreaming. Or maybe Crick did say he'd dreamed it because he didn't want it known that he used LSD. It didn't come out that he had until after he died. Either one underlines the point that the conscious mind isn't what does any of the actual thinking, that's all done deep down, the aware part of us just forms an outline of the problem. But where does the data come from that the deep-down part of the mind is using? I don't see how the brain can *create* data de novo. snip Did I say it's our brains that control it? Yes, you did--see quote above, because it's our brains that control it! I know, I was kidding. A case of not thinking before typing. Got it. No more than windows vista is controlled by the chip in this computer, it allows it happen but doesn't know or care whether it does or not. So where does that leave us? Not being able to trust our own instinctive opinions about what happens in our minds I guess, which could be worrying but most people just ignore it - if they ever given it any thought that is. Why is the thought that we can't trust our instinctive opinions about what happens in our minds so trustworthy? I have the sense that this approach just circles back and bites itself in the butt. Gut feeling is a bad thing to go on as we are too good at kidding ourselves. Your analogy to Windows Vista sorta breaks down here, doesn't it? (Assuming the OS is functioning properly, that is.) I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really and it doesn't affect *how* the machine runs because it's job is just - in the case of consciousness - to allow the creation of metaphors and patterns out of those metaphors, which is what all our thoughts are. The job of science here is to let us know which of the maps we create corresponds to what's actually happening. I'm very dubious that we can make a definitive distinction between creating patterns out of metaphors, on the one hand, and knowing what's actually happening, on the other. How do we know our notions of what's actually happening aren't really just more of those same metaphors and patterns? There's no such thing as pure information--there's always an interpretation involved, always some pattern-making. FWIW, in jyotish, dreams are part of the field of higher knowledge, the 9th house. Dreams are considered the work activity during our sleeping conscious, just as our careers/professions are the activities during our waking consciousness. As such, these dreams are influenced by the planets that are placed in the 9th house at birth or are transiting the house at the present time. For example, a benefic planet like Jupiter, a significator of a biped, would cause dreams to be about a person or people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: And where is all that stored in your brain? Where did the data of the experiences come from? I'd say it was invented in the same way that the dreaming mind conjurs up all sorts of fantastic stuff. See, that's where I just get boggled. I see stuff in my dreams that I've *never* seen before, either live or in photos or drawings, haven't read about, etc. Plenty of what I see *is* familiar, but some of it simply ain't. Hmmm, depends what you mean by never I get stuff that's wild but hasn't ever happened (I hope) but it's still feasible in a monster-ish or sci-fi way. The acid halucinations are also stuff from the world but in ways you wouldn't think of, just a kind of spontaneous modern art. Like I was sitting in a church once and looked up at the beams of light shining through the rafters and saw a troop of gorillas sitting as they do when resting in trees, just the mind making more out of shadows that was there but a striking image. What do can you see that hasn't existed before? It's all made up of concepts of various things, unless your mind is truly out there! (On the other hand...I just learned yesterday something I'd never heard, although apparently it's been public knowledge for awhile--that Francis Crick came up with the double helix while high on LSD. For some reason I get a huge kick out of that.) I always thought that he had dreamed about two mating snakes entwined. Either one underlines the point that the conscious mind isn't what does any of the actual thinking, that's all done deep down, the aware part of us just forms an outline of the problem. Physicists have a saying called the BBBs - baths, buses and beds- which is where most good ideas seem to pop into awareness. Einstein kept plasters near his shaving mirror in case he cut himself having one his revelations whilst shaving. I think you'll love this book. The author is very into finding common patterns behind psychedelic experience. He gets awfully heavily at times into using psychedelics to save the world, but you can skip over those parts. Sounds interesting, you'll have to let us know when it comes out. snip Did I say it's our brains that control it? Yes, you did--see quote above, because it's our brains that control it! I know, I was kidding. A case of not thinking before typing. No more than windows vista is controlled by the chip in this computer, it allows it happen but doesn't know or care whether it does or not. So where does that leave us? Not being able to trust our own instinctive opinions about what happens in our minds I guess, which could be worrying but most people just ignore it - if they ever given it any thought that is. Gut feeling is a bad thing to go on as we are too good at kidding ourselves. Your analogy to Windows Vista sorta breaks down here, doesn't it? (Assuming the OS is functioning properly, that is.) I don't see the analogy breaking down but our OS can, the two interact more in the human body than in the computer. We have the feedback system of the fight/flight response for instance so we can be scared of things that aren't real and it'll be the same as if they were. If you don't take the analogy that far and think of some- thing like the TM explanation of mental activity, it doesn't have any actual parallel in the mind but we accept it as a good explanation regardless. It's a software option that thinks it knows how the machine that supports it functions but doesn't really and it doesn't affect *how* the machine runs because it's job is just - in the case of consciousness - to allow the creation of metaphors and patterns out of those metaphors, which is what all our thoughts are. The job of science here is to let us know which of the maps we create corresponds to what's actually happening. I think it's coming along well, that Horizon doc I posted from youtube yesterday had some fascinating things in it, I'd watch it if you get the chance.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: But the hopping is supposed to be due to this controlling of natural laws. God knows why, it's not like we are going to jump in the air and stay there. Someone once asked Marshy whether this would be how levitation happened and he said that we would waft lightly into the air then float back down. Judy: I can't recall how Hagelin explained hopping in terms of the probabilities business... According to John Hagelin, the universe is non-deterministic and the concept of an objective measurement is meaningless. Non-determinism of quantum systems follows directly from the 'Schrödinger Equation'. Objective measurement pertains to the 'Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle'. Read more: 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality By Betsy Chasse, Mark Vicente, and William Arntz HCI, 2007 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' 20th Century Fox DVD, 2004 http://tinyurl.com/yaf4xqy According to John Hagelin? And a bunch of links to that piece of new age tedium What the bleep? At last we can be sure you are just winding us up!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: snip the brain may be the most amazing thing in existence but it's still a physical structure that evolved, unless there is something *really* weird going on. How we go about translating the explanation into our own experience might turn out to be the tricky bit. Don't think there's any question that *is* the tricky bit. I meant to comment earlier, if psychedelic and mystical experience--as well as a lot of paranormal experience-- is all generated by the physical brain, the brain is not just more amazing than we imagine, but possibly more amazing than we *can* imagine (to steal a phrase from Eddington). I hope not! But it could well be trickier than a lot of people think. Or then maybe not. This is the BBC documentary I mentioned weeks ago. Worth an hour of anyone's time I reckon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7YtpH3M_sY Just for kicks, here's Huxley on the reducing valve concept (from Varieties of Religious Experience): Each one of us is potentially Mind at Large. But in so far as we are animals, our business is at all costs to survive. To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funnelled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet. I find it interesting to contemplate the possibility that the physical brain has evolved to select and make available those features of Mind at Large that had the greatest survival value while selecting others to be screened out (because they weren't necessary, or would interfere with those that are screened in). It's a great idea but so far the smallest structure found in the brain is several orders too large to be making use of the quantum world, so I wonder which bit of us is doing the funnelling? Another question would be, whether anyone with a vested interest in a particular viewpoint would accept a reductionist explanation at all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: As far as JH is concerned it is happening. But not long enough to be measured by any device that tells you whether gravity is operating or not. The only sign of something happening is the burst of brain-wave coherence that happens the instant before liftoff. According to JHs Pphysics of flying lecture the point of lift off *is* gravity being re-ordered. But how would you measure whether there was an instant of gravity being reordered? When someone takes off :-) Seriously though, that is the explanation given in the talk. What we need is a floater to settle it completely. Can't be much longer now surely... snip Yeah, well... We did have one account way back on alt.m.t from TM teacher Susan Seifert of actually hovering, once. Very interesting description of what it felt like. I've never been able to find it again in the alt.m.t archives. I'll believe it when I see it and probably be sceptical then. In fact you'd have to film it and have every lab on earth check it for fraud before I'd consider it wasn't faked. Well, sure, that's a given. All we know from her description is what she says about an experience she had. But from what I know of her, she isn't the faking type; regardless of what actually physically took place, I'm sure she did have the experience she described. It's just that what she described isn't what I would have expected a delusion of hovering to feel like. That's why I found it so interesting. As for experiencing it, I have done, totally effortless leaping about. One of the nicest experiences I ever had, like drifting through clouds of the sweetest heaven... But more easily explained as the awareness part of the mind being totally not focussed on what the body was doing, someone more credulous may attribute it to something rather more mystical don't you think? To me, there's something quite odd about the mental repetition of a near-nonsense phrase generating that kind of experience, even if it's explained as you suggest. I think there's something quite odd about everything that happened from learning TM onwards! Talk about a weird trip. My flying course was full of out of body experiences and cases of rapid healing - some would say miraculous - including in myself. What caused it all or whether it would happen again I cannot say, it's that fleeting, non-repeatable nature of the unexplained that leaves it open to (mis)interpretation. No-one will ever see what I have and it's hard to take a reductionist attempt to fit my experience into what is already known. It doesn't stop me trying though, we are so good at kidding ourselves we don't have to be not the faking type to be the unintentionally gullible type and being in a belief system like the TMO is surely a headstart towards taking all sorts of strange stuff seriously. Or is it, or isn't it? snip Whole philosophical issue here of the reality status of subjective experience, the extent to which it's an illusion. We might well be able at some point to map the brain's rewiring down to the last synapse without getting anywhere near the answer to that one. We are very close to it already without mapping the last synapse. We know how much brain activity is needed to trigger consciousness, where things are stored in the brain and even where consciousness arises. Only a matter of time before it's sussed completeley, I'm very dubious that anything we can map or measure scientifically will tell us whether all subjective experience is an illusion. (Just for one thing, it's other brains doing the interpreting of the data.) Brains thinking about brains. That is a wild idea. Interesting that the brain doesn't instinctively know what it is. Greek brains thought that it was for keeping blood cool. One of the intersting bits of mind to observe is that parts of consciousness do things that the other bits aren't aware of. How does that work? How can part of my brain conjure up nightmares. And why bother? Consciousness is actually a very small part of what the brain does and isn't responsible for most of what we attribute to it. And it seems to take up not much room in the brain at all. Pretty amazing all the same. snip Same issue with psychedelics. I'm editing a book recounting the author's extensive personal experimentation with LSD where this comes up in connection with experiences that are so fantastic it seems highly unlikely, in an Occam's razor sense, that they could have originated with anything stored within the physical brain. Been there, a wild ride, I travelled in time, met god,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip No-one will ever see what I have and it's hard to take a reductionist attempt to fit my experience into what is already known. It doesn't stop me trying though, we are so good at kidding ourselves we don't have to be not the faking type to be the unintentionally gullible type and being in a belief system like the TMO is surely a headstart towards taking all sorts of strange stuff seriously. Or is it, or isn't it? I wasn't into any of the strange stuff part until I began having experiences I couldn't explain otherwise. And these were NOT experiences that had been suggested to me. They weren't even flashy experiences, just *novel* ones. snip I'm very dubious that anything we can map or measure scientifically will tell us whether all subjective experience is an illusion. (Just for one thing, it's other brains doing the interpreting of the data.) Brains thinking about brains. That is a wild idea. Interesting that the brain doesn't instinctively know what it is. Greek brains thought that it was for keeping blood cool. One of the intersting bits of mind to observe is that parts of consciousness do things that the other bits aren't aware of. How does that work? How can part of my brain conjure up nightmares. And why bother? Well, I was thinking more about the nature of consciousness, why we're not zombies (in the philosophical sense). Trying to figure out what consciousness is via the use of consciousness. snip Been there, a wild ride, I travelled in time, met god, became god, explored all past lives, and swam ina sea of infinity more times than I could count. And where is all that stored in your brain? Where did the data of the experiences come from? I'd say it was invented in the same way that the dreaming mind conjurs up all sorts of fantastic stuff. See, that's where I just get boggled. I see stuff in my dreams that I've *never* seen before, either live or in photos or drawings, haven't read about, etc. Plenty of what I see *is* familiar, but some of it simply ain't. (On the other hand...I just learned yesterday something I'd never heard, although apparently it's been public knowledge for awhile--that Francis Crick came up with the double helix while high on LSD. For some reason I get a huge kick out of that.) Except it happens when you're awake. I'd always see greek gods in the clouds for instance. Really beautiful living statues with the same sort of religious awe you get when deeply transcending. Why gods? Maybe that's the language of the subconscious. You never see what you expect to see though, it's quite impressive what you can come up with at a moments notice. But the brain is like that anyway but with halucinogens it all gets turned up to 11. The sense get crossed too, smelling colour that's an interesting one. An illusion made out of illusions! But very similar to the smell of bliss one gets after meditation sometimes. There is so much interesting potential research here. That's for sure. snip It's the way we usually create the illusion within ourselves of there being a three dimensional world that gets changed, the contents are removed or altered by the unconscious dreamscape taking over. No idea what you mean here--could you elaborate? Simply that the world we think we perceive is an illusion created from sense data. A large part of mental activity is in keeping this illusion accurate enough so we can get through the day. Drop a hit of acid and it all goes haywire with senses getting crossed and what seems like the part of the brain that does vision playing around and seeing what it can make of what's coming in. Gotcha. And you get to know what goes on deep down in your mind by the sort of things you see. There has to be an internal predeliction for something for it to be chosen as resembling what's out there and then the usual illusion gets transformed into gods, devils, something funny or sexy. We all have a different trip but it always sounds kind of similar, our shared unconscious perhaps. The quality of it depends a lot on how happy you are inside. I must've been very happy. I think you'll love this book. The author is very into finding common patterns behind psychedelic experience. He gets awfully heavily at times into using psychedelics to save the world, but you can skip over those parts. snip I'm pretty well convinced that the brain mediates consciousness rather than creating it, that the brain is a sort of reducing valve, as Huxley put it, for something infinitely (you should pardon the term) vast. In this sense, expansion of consciousness is a matter of getting the brain's reducing function out of the way, neutralizing it, bypassing it, evading it, shutting it down. I instinctively
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Start off to hop now and fly later... Well, know that yogic flying is something you do. And those that don't do it so well, get rooted out of the paid stipend on the Invincibility America course. No yogic fly, no money for program. Fair is fair. JGD, -Buck
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what... PaliGap: That was very interesting. Thanks. I see it the same way... LOL!!! According to John Hagelin, the universe is non-deterministic and the concept of an objective measurement is meaningless. Non-determinism of quantum systems follows directly from the 'Schrödinger Equation'. Objective measurement pertains to the 'Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle'. Read more: 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality By Betsy Chasse, Mark Vicente, and William Arntz HCI, 2007 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' 20th Century Fox DVD, 2004 http://tinyurl.com/yaf4xqy
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: As far as JH is concerned it is happening. But not long enough to be measured by any device that tells you whether gravity is operating or not. The only sign of something happening is the burst of brain-wave coherence that happens the instant before liftoff. According to JHs Pphysics of flying lecture the point of lift off *is* gravity being re-ordered. Ask Nablus he'll tell you about staying in the air longer than is humanly possible (his interpretation of his experience not mine) Yeah, well... We did have one account way back on alt.m.t from TM teacher Susan Seifert of actually hovering, once. Very interesting description of what it felt like. I've never been able to find it again in the alt.m.t archives. I'll believe it when I see it and probably be sceptical then. In fact you'd have to film it and have every lab on earth check it for fraud before I'd consider it wasn't faked. As for experiencing it, I have done, totally effortless leaping about. One of the nicest experiences I ever had, like drifting through clouds of the sweetest heaven... But more easily explained as the awareness part of the mind being totally not focussed on what the body was doing, someone more credulous may attribute it to something rather more mystical don't you think? snip The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what. The most I can say is that hopping feels involuntary, like a sneeze, and that it feels as though it's triggered by an impulse generated by the sutra (or in a group setting, sometimes by an impulse generated by somebody else doing the sutra). I used to think something else was going on too, but after a while I dropped that idea and couldn't fly anymore and stopped doing the siddhis altogether some years ago. I think that without a belief that it's somehow leading somewhere the body can't be bothered to help. And you need more of a belief than just that it's helping personal development. That stopped ages ago too and simply because it obviously wasn't (my eyesight got worse not better) I can only speak for myself here, others may get a lot out of it. I sure have. As far as believing that hopping leads to flying is concerned, the most I can say is that I don't rule it out, but that isn't what keeps me at it. (Not sure deteriorating eyesight is a particularly strong criterion, BTW.) It's an excellent demonstration that the eyesight sidhi doesn't work. The fact I can't fly, walk through walls or jump tall buildings in a single bound (well, no more than I used to) takes care of the rest. As far as getting the intended results I declare the whole thing a failure. Others say they do it for the personal growth reason only, I told myself that too but the fact I felt much better when I quit leads me to suspect that aspect wasn't all it's cracked up to be. You may differ, I know many who still do it and good luck to them, I'd rather go for a bike ride nowadays. snip Ah, consciousness has so many ways of being transformed into something that amazes us and tricks us into thinking that it's more than it is or that strange powers are involved. I've always thought the study of meditation could give us a better idea of how it works because all this bending it out of shape will be measurable in the brain and could give us an idea of how the illusion is created by seeing how the brain re-wires itself when we think we are experiencing some sort of unified being. The technology to do this is improving all the time. Whole philosophical issue here of the reality status of subjective experience, the extent to which it's an illusion. We might well be able at some point to map the brain's rewiring down to the last synapse without getting anywhere near the answer to that one. We are very close to it already without mapping the last synapse. We know how much brain activity is needed to trigger consciousness, where things are stored in the brain and even where consciousness arises. Only a matter of time before it's sussed completeley, the brain may be the most amazing thing in existence but it's still a physical structure that evolved, unless there is something *really* weird going on. How we go about translating the explanation into our own experience might turn out to be the tricky bit. Same issue with psychedelics. I'm editing a book recounting the author's extensive personal experimentation with LSD where this comes up in connection with experiences that are so fantastic it seems highly unlikely, in an Occam's razor sense, that they could have originated with anything stored within the physical brain. Been there, a wild ride, I travelled in time, met god, became god, explored all past
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: As far as JH is concerned it is happening. But not long enough to be measured by any device that tells you whether gravity is operating or not. The only sign of something happening is the burst of brain-wave coherence that happens the instant before liftoff. According to JHs Pphysics of flying lecture the point of lift off *is* gravity being re-ordered. But how would you measure whether there was an instant of gravity being reordered? snip Yeah, well... We did have one account way back on alt.m.t from TM teacher Susan Seifert of actually hovering, once. Very interesting description of what it felt like. I've never been able to find it again in the alt.m.t archives. I'll believe it when I see it and probably be sceptical then. In fact you'd have to film it and have every lab on earth check it for fraud before I'd consider it wasn't faked. Well, sure, that's a given. All we know from her description is what she says about an experience she had. But from what I know of her, she isn't the faking type; regardless of what actually physically took place, I'm sure she did have the experience she described. It's just that what she described isn't what I would have expected a delusion of hovering to feel like. That's why I found it so interesting. As for experiencing it, I have done, totally effortless leaping about. One of the nicest experiences I ever had, like drifting through clouds of the sweetest heaven... But more easily explained as the awareness part of the mind being totally not focussed on what the body was doing, someone more credulous may attribute it to something rather more mystical don't you think? To me, there's something quite odd about the mental repetition of a near-nonsense phrase generating that kind of experience, even if it's explained as you suggest. snip Whole philosophical issue here of the reality status of subjective experience, the extent to which it's an illusion. We might well be able at some point to map the brain's rewiring down to the last synapse without getting anywhere near the answer to that one. We are very close to it already without mapping the last synapse. We know how much brain activity is needed to trigger consciousness, where things are stored in the brain and even where consciousness arises. Only a matter of time before it's sussed completeley, I'm very dubious that anything we can map or measure scientifically will tell us whether all subjective experience is an illusion. (Just for one thing, it's other brains doing the interpreting of the data.) snip Same issue with psychedelics. I'm editing a book recounting the author's extensive personal experimentation with LSD where this comes up in connection with experiences that are so fantastic it seems highly unlikely, in an Occam's razor sense, that they could have originated with anything stored within the physical brain. Been there, a wild ride, I travelled in time, met god, became god, explored all past lives, and swam ina sea of infinity more times than I could count. And where is all that stored in your brain? Where did the data of the experiences come from? Love to hear what you think of the book when it comes out; I'll let you know when it does if you're interested. Guy's very analytical about all this stuff, did a lot of studying up on various theories of what goes on with psychedelics (which appear to be undergoing a revival, BTW). Took around 50 trips over a period of years, documented them at the time in a journal in some detail. Not anything I want to try, but gee, it's fascinating. Got bored of it in the end. I think it's the same sort of thing as TM but the mind is being forced to do it rather than by it settling down which makes it more intense but the loss of spatial dimension and the inability to keep track of time are very similar. Also quite a bit of correspondence to the TM model of development of consciousness, but very haphazard, confusing, often frightening and unpleasant, and, as you go on to say, not lasting. It's the way we usually create the illusion within ourselves of there being a three dimensional world that gets changed, the contents are removed or altered by the unconscious dreamscape taking over. No idea what you mean here--could you elaborate? I think the Freudian idea of man subconsciously thinking himself superior or godlike in order to stay motivated is where all this spiritual stuff comes from. Some sort of drug or spiritual practise comes along and it cracks us open inside. It's all in the mind and the mind is in our heads. Or you could postulate that thinking oneself superior or godlike comes from unconscious knowledge that one *is* superior or
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
But the hopping is supposed to be due to this controlling of natural laws. God knows why, it's not like we are going to jump in the air and stay there. Someone once asked Marshy whether this would be how levitation happened and he said that we would waft lightly into the air then float back down. Judy: I can't recall how Hagelin explained hopping in terms of the probabilities business... According to John Hagelin, the universe is non-deterministic and the concept of an objective measurement is meaningless. Non-determinism of quantum systems follows directly from the 'Schrödinger Equation'. Objective measurement pertains to the 'Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle'. Read more: 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality By Betsy Chasse, Mark Vicente, and William Arntz HCI, 2007 'What the Bleep Do We Know!?' 20th Century Fox DVD, 2004 http://tinyurl.com/yaf4xqy
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: snip Therefore it's easy to conclude to sidha's hops are due to some sort of muscle jerking. Height and length of trajectory also seems to correlate with physical fitness and athletic prowess, i.e. gymnasts tend to be better yogic hoppers. So in other words, it's a scam preying on people with weak powers of discrimination. It would be, if it were being claimed that muscle power wasn't involved. But of course that isn't what's being claimed. It's *really* easy to conclude that hopping is a function of muscular effort *when Yogic Flyers testify to that effect*. Next straw man, please...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Feb 12, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Hugo wrote: I have to say my first experience was pretty amazing but it never repeated itself despite years spent doing long progs. I think it's tricky to judge for ourselves whether it's hypnosis/suggestion or something real and spontaneous. I think people make very bad witnesses, especially to something they believe in. We can kid ourselves so easily, especially when in a strong belief system like the TMO. The things they teach about consciousness seem bizarre to me now but were so plausible at the time. It's been known for hundreds, maybe thousands of years, that if you do a fast, bastrika pranayama, it causes a hopping phenomenon known in Sanskrit frog-hopping. It's not associated with levitation-as-a-spiritual practice. Really? I wonder why MMY didn't teach us that technique to practice for Yogic Flying, then. (Was there some connection between this comment and what it was purportedly responding to, just curiously?)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: It's been known for hundreds, maybe thousands of years, that if you do a fast, bastrika pranayama, it causes a hopping phenomenon known in Sanskrit frog-hopping. It's not associated with levitation-as-a-spiritual practice. I think it's purely coincidental that some flyers go into very loud, very powerful rapid hyperventilation before taking off. Happens to me once in a while. It's totally spontaneous--scared me the first time it occurred. Hadn't seen anyone else do it at that point. It's never made me lightheaded or dizzy, though. Only lasts for a few seconds. And I don't hop any differently than when it doesn't happen.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: snip the brain may be the most amazing thing in existence but it's still a physical structure that evolved, unless there is something *really* weird going on. How we go about translating the explanation into our own experience might turn out to be the tricky bit. Don't think there's any question that *is* the tricky bit. I meant to comment earlier, if psychedelic and mystical experience--as well as a lot of paranormal experience-- is all generated by the physical brain, the brain is not just more amazing than we imagine, but possibly more amazing than we *can* imagine (to steal a phrase from Eddington). Just for kicks, here's Huxley on the reducing valve concept (from Varieties of Religious Experience): Each one of us is potentially Mind at Large. But in so far as we are animals, our business is at all costs to survive. To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funnelled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet. I find it interesting to contemplate the possibility that the physical brain has evolved to select and make available those features of Mind at Large that had the greatest survival value while selecting others to be screened out (because they weren't necessary, or would interfere with those that are screened in).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
enlightenment. But all roads lead to Rome. You are just on one that has a hill hiding the city from view at the moment. OffWorld Oh yeah, but anyhoo (z = sh): klezo 'dhikataras teSaam avyaktaasakta-cetasaaM *avyaktaa hi gatir duHkhaM dehavadbhir avaapyate* Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman because *the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult*. BG XII 5
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. Don't they? How are we supposed to progress from stage 1 (hopping) to stage 2 (floating) if some sort of extra gravity defying process isn't involved? They aren't claiming anybody's doing anything but hopping yet. But the hopping is supposed to be due to this controlling of natural laws. God knows why, it's not like we are going to jump in the air and stay there. Someone once asked Marshy whether this would be how levitation happened and he said that we would waft lightly into the air then float back down. In his 'physics of yogic flying' lecture Hagelin claims that the normal run of events from the quantum level upwards that gives us what we call reality, with it's tendency for things to obey what appear to be immutable laws but are in fact statistical probabilites, can be changed to favour things that appear miraculous if you are operating from a level beyond which gravity has it's effects. I think we have to assume that he believes this, or is at least happy to be on record trying to convince others to believe it. So I think it should be put to the test. It isn't *happening* yet. How can you put something that isn't happening to the test? As far as JH is concerned it is happening. Ask Nablus he'll tell you about staying in the air longer than is humanly possible (his interpretation of his experience not mine) I remember someone in the TMO saying that attempts to measure brainwaves while hopping are fatally flawed because the sudden movement has a much larger effect on measured activity than doing the sutra, so how than can claim that maximum coherence is achieved at lift off is beyond me. *AT* liftoff, at the instant before the body starts moving. The bottom line then is whether or not anything unexplainable is happening and they should be looking at it. Unless they don't have the confidence in the technique I'm not sure what else they could test at this stage. The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what. The most I can say is that hopping feels involuntary, like a sneeze, and that it feels as though it's triggered by an impulse generated by the sutra (or in a group setting, sometimes by an impulse generated by somebody else doing the sutra). I used to think something else was going on too, but after a while I dropped that idea and couldn't fly anymore and stopped doing the siddhis altogether some years ago. I think that without a belief that it's somehow leading somewhere the body can't be bothered to help. And you need more of a belief than just that it's helping personal development. That stopped ages ago too and simply because it obviously wasn't (my eyesight got worse not better) I can only speak for myself here, others may get a lot out of it. Whether that has anything to do with coherence of brain waves, I couldn't say. I don't know whether it has anything to do with levitation either. And I don't have a clue how you could test it. There are other associated odd experiences, including of bubbling bliss. One of mine is that I am much bigger than my body, as if I'm watching this little body hop up and down in the middle of a sort of big cloud of me. Ah, consciousness has so many ways of being transformed into something that amazes us and tricks us into thinking that it's more than it is or that strange powers are involved. I've always thought the study of meditation could give us a better idea of how it works because all this bending it out of shape will be measurable in the brain and could give us an idea of how the illusion is created by seeing how the brain re-wires itself when we think we are experiencing some sort of unified being. The technology to do this is improving all the time. I know someone who designs software for MRI scanners at Imperial college in London but I could never impress upon him that meditation is something other than just thinking about things, so he wouldn't give up any time in the lab to let me stick my head in his machine. They do have a queue round the block of people studying serious health problems so I don't really
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: [snip] The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what. The most I can say is that hopping feels involuntary, like a sneeze, and that it feels as though it's triggered by an impulse generated by the sutra (or in a group setting, sometimes by an impulse generated by somebody else doing the sutra). [snip] Anyway, when somebody insists nothing out of the ordinary is happening, I can only say that's not my experience; and that if they were to have the same experience, they would have to acknowledge that at least an out-of-the-ordinary *experience* is taking place. Maybe that's all it is. But I doubt it's all just suggestion. I don't know how you *could* suggest some of the experiences when they're virtually impossible to describe. That was very interesting. Thanks. I see it the same way. There is no doubt in my mind that something very odd (and therefore very interesting) IS going on. I do think it *might* be an artefact of something like hypnosis, suggestion or group hysteria (which, rather like *explanations* of puzzling phenomena by *just* placebo might only have the effect of removing the mystery from place A and putting it into place B IMO. A point that I think Barry has made on occasions). I'm not sure anyone knows too much about hypnosis, suggestion, group hysteria etc. But there are two ideas that I think I've heard - one of which counts against the *something profound happening* idea, and one which perhaps supports it. Isn't it true that there is supposed to be a small proportion of the population that can't be hypnotised? Perhaps, say 10%? So the fact that there seems to be ditto a small number who never *hop* might suggest that what's going is not incompatible with hypnosis or some such? If this IS a solid fact about hypnosis (big if), then it would be interesting to see if it was the SAME percentage that fails to attain lift off? The other thing though about hypnosis (eg as a cure for smoking) is that I believe the effects wear off over time. Which is why hypnosis, though effective, is not ultimately much use. (Heavy disclaimer on all of this. I've probably got it all wrong!). Now I don't do my Siddhi program regularly any more (I'm retro i.e. just pure TM for me. A la Shemp you might say). Furthermore when I DID do it, it was often not in a group. But my experience was (and is) that (a) I did just as well in or out of the group, and (b) even after a gap of years and years, I have been able to revisit it and get pretty much the same experience. That suggest to me that there *might* be some difficulty in the idea that it is *just* hypnosis, suggestion or hysteria.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Feb 12, 2010, at 4:27 AM, Hugo wrote: But the hopping is supposed to be due to this controlling of natural laws. God knows why, it's not like we are going to jump in the air and stay there. Someone once asked Marshy whether this would be how levitation happened and he said that we would waft lightly into the air then float back down. If some sort of actual anti-gravity effect was going on, the sidhas would not follow the standard parabolic arc seem in TM sidhas and common in any trajectory where the body is not acted on by some other force other than gravity (e.g. wind). It's just very basic physics. Therefore it's easy to conclude to sidha's hops are due to some sort of muscle jerking. Height and length of trajectory also seems to correlate with physical fitness and athletic prowess, i.e. gymnasts tend to be better yogic hoppers. So in other words, it's a scam preying on people with weak powers of discrimination.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote: If some sort of actual anti-gravity effect was going on, the sidhas would *not* follow the standard parabolic arc seem in TM sidhas and common in any trajectory where the body is not acted on by some other force other than gravity (e.g. wind). It's just very basic physics. Therefore it's easy to conclude to sidha's hops are due to some sort of muscle jerking. Height and length of trajectory also seems to correlate with physical fitness and athletic prowess, i.e. gymnasts tend to be better yogic hoppers. So in other words, it's a scam preying on people with weak powers of discrimination. I've been in flying rooms for a couple decades. Every year or two I decide to take a look at other flyers. I look at the flyers' muscular effort then I look at the trajectory they follow. I've developed a pretty good sense of how much power it takes to get, say, a ball in the air and the path it takes. Y'all have developed this judgement as well. I get very worried when it comes to me that these people aren't even doing yogic hopping. They are twitching, cooperatively moving the legs and arms to facilitate lift off, and following the path one would take in their air from the amount of physical effort they exerted. I also examine my own hopping. It's very evident that there is no levitation involved. If I hold my muscles very taut, I won't get a micron off the foam. After this, it takes a few weeks to forget what I've re-discovered and become innocent once again with yogic flying. All I can say is that when one performs the sutra, there is at the beginning stage of practice a very strong desire to hop. Maybe that's step 0.01 of yogic flying. -- I have outlived my pecker. -- Willie Nelson
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Feb 12, 2010, at 11:10 AM, It's just a ride wrote: On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote: If some sort of actual anti-gravity effect was going on, the sidhas would not follow the standard parabolic arc seem in TM sidhas and common in any trajectory where the body is not acted on by some other force other than gravity (e.g. wind). It's just very basic physics. Therefore it's easy to conclude to sidha's hops are due to some sort of muscle jerking. Height and length of trajectory also seems to correlate with physical fitness and athletic prowess, i.e. gymnasts tend to be better yogic hoppers. So in other words, it's a scam preying on people with weak powers of discrimination. I've been in flying rooms for a couple decades. Every year or two I decide to take a look at other flyers. I look at the flyers' muscular effort then I look at the trajectory they follow. I've developed a pretty good sense of how much power it takes to get, say, a ball in the air and the path it takes. Y'all have developed this judgement as well. I get very worried when it comes to me that these people aren't even doing yogic hopping. They are twitching, cooperatively moving the legs and arms to facilitate lift off, and following the path one would take in their air from the amount of physical effort they exerted. I also examine my own hopping. It's very evident that there is no levitation involved. If I hold my muscles very taut, I won't get a micron off the foam. After this, it takes a few weeks to forget what I've re- discovered and become innocent once again with yogic flying. All I can say is that when one performs the sutra, there is at the beginning stage of practice a very strong desire to hop. Maybe that's step 0.01 of yogic flying. Actual yogic fliers in the Himalaya jump straight up as their training progresses. It typically requires about 8 feet of movement, which would be physically impossible.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: Actual yogic fliers in the Himalaya jump straight up as their training progresses. It typically requires about 8 feet of movement, which would be physically impossible. We tend to forget that the main purpose of Yogic Hopping might well be to wake up Da Snake! ; )
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: If some sort of actual anti-gravity effect was going on, the sidhas would *not* follow the standard parabolic arc seem in TM sidhas and common in any trajectory where the body is not acted on by some other force other than gravity (e.g. wind). It's just very basic physics. Therefore it's easy to conclude to sidha's hops are due to some sort of muscle jerking. Height and length of trajectory also seems to correlate with physical fitness and athletic prowess, i.e. gymnasts tend to be better yogic hoppers. So in other words, it's a scam preying on people with weak powers of discrimination. I've been in flying rooms for a couple decades. Every year or two I decide to take a look at other flyers. I look at the flyers' muscular effort then I look at the trajectory they follow. I've developed a pretty good sense of how much power it takes to get, say, a ball in the air and the path it takes. Y'all have developed this judgement as well. I get very worried when it comes to me that these people aren't even doing yogic hopping. They are twitching, cooperatively moving the legs and arms to facilitate lift off, and following the path one would take in their air from the amount of physical effort they exerted. I also examine my own hopping. It's very evident that there is no levitation involved. If I hold my muscles very taut, I won't get a micron off the foam. After this, it takes a few weeks to forget what I've re-discovered and become innocent once again with yogic flying. All I can say is that when one performs the sutra, there is at the beginning stage of practice a very strong desire to hop. Maybe that's step 0.01 of yogic flying. Or maybe it's the hour long tape you watch of Marshy in a dark room full of incense and the expectation that you are there to learn to fly and the first stage is hopping? I have to say my first experience was pretty amazing but it never repeated itself despite years spent doing long progs. I think it's tricky to judge for ourselves whether it's hypnosis/suggestion or something real and spontaneous. I think people make very bad witnesses, especially to something they believe in. We can kid ourselves so easily, especially when in a strong belief system like the TMO. The things they teach about consciousness seem bizarre to me now but were so plausible at the time. An experience can be amazing without breaking any natural laws, until someone does that's all we have. After 30 years I'm not expecting any sidhi mastery but I'd be overjoyed if it someone did, be nice to know that everything we thought was right is in fact wrong!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Feb 12, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Hugo wrote: I have to say my first experience was pretty amazing but it never repeated itself despite years spent doing long progs. I think it's tricky to judge for ourselves whether it's hypnosis/suggestion or something real and spontaneous. I think people make very bad witnesses, especially to something they believe in. We can kid ourselves so easily, especially when in a strong belief system like the TMO. The things they teach about consciousness seem bizarre to me now but were so plausible at the time. It's been known for hundreds, maybe thousands of years, that if you do a fast, bastrika pranayama, it causes a hopping phenomenon known in Sanskrit frog-hopping. It's not associated with levitation-as-a- spiritual practice.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote: It's been known for hundreds, maybe thousands of years, that if you do a fast, bastrika pranayama, it causes a hopping phenomenon known in Sanskrit frog-hopping. It's not associated with levitation-as-a-spiritual practice. I think it's purely coincidental that some flyers go into very loud, very powerful rapid hyperventilation before taking off. I vary rarely do any hyperventilation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, It's just a ride bill.hicks.all.a.r...@... wrote: On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: It's been known for hundreds, maybe thousands of years, that if you do a fast, bastrika pranayama, it causes a hopping phenomenon known in Sanskrit frog-hopping. It's not associated with levitation-as-a-spiritual practice. I think it's purely coincidental that some flyers go into very loud, very powerful rapid hyperventilation before taking off. I vary rarely do any hyperventilation. kaayaH paañca-bhautikaM shariiram -realization might cause sparsha-tanmaatra associated with vaayu to react exactly that way?? :0
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , cardemaister no_re...@... wrote: enlightenment. But all roads lead to Rome. You are just on one that has a hill hiding the city from view at the moment. OffWorld Oh yeah, but anyhoo (z = sh): klezo 'dhikataras teSaam avyaktaasakta-cetasaaM *avyaktaa hi gatir duHkhaM dehavadbhir avaapyate* Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman because *the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult*. BG XII 5 I don't care about Brahman. Why should I? I'm having too much bliss and fun on the the journey. :-) OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. Don't they? How are we supposed to progress from stage 1 (hopping) to stage 2 (floating) if some sort of extra gravity defying process isn't involved? They aren't claiming anybody's doing anything but hopping yet. But the hopping is supposed to be due to this controlling of natural laws. God knows why, it's not like we are going to jump in the air and stay there. Someone once asked Marshy whether this would be how levitation happened and he said that we would waft lightly into the air then float back down. I can't recall how Hagelin explained hopping in terms of the probabilities business. Vaguely remember something about the body doing its best to obey the impulse to fly, just enough to get off the ground, but not enough to stay up. snip I think we have to assume that he believes this, or is at least happy to be on record trying to convince others to believe it. So I think it should be put to the test. It isn't *happening* yet. How can you put something that isn't happening to the test? As far as JH is concerned it is happening. But not long enough to be measured by any device that tells you whether gravity is operating or not. The only sign of something happening is the burst of brain-wave coherence that happens the instant before liftoff. Ask Nablus he'll tell you about staying in the air longer than is humanly possible (his interpretation of his experience not mine) Yeah, well... We did have one account way back on alt.m.t from TM teacher Susan Seifert of actually hovering, once. Very interesting description of what it felt like. I've never been able to find it again in the alt.m.t archives. snip The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what. The most I can say is that hopping feels involuntary, like a sneeze, and that it feels as though it's triggered by an impulse generated by the sutra (or in a group setting, sometimes by an impulse generated by somebody else doing the sutra). I used to think something else was going on too, but after a while I dropped that idea and couldn't fly anymore and stopped doing the siddhis altogether some years ago. I think that without a belief that it's somehow leading somewhere the body can't be bothered to help. And you need more of a belief than just that it's helping personal development. That stopped ages ago too and simply because it obviously wasn't (my eyesight got worse not better) I can only speak for myself here, others may get a lot out of it. I sure have. As far as believing that hopping leads to flying is concerned, the most I can say is that I don't rule it out, but that isn't what keeps me at it. (Not sure deteriorating eyesight is a particularly strong criterion, BTW.) snip Ah, consciousness has so many ways of being transformed into something that amazes us and tricks us into thinking that it's more than it is or that strange powers are involved. I've always thought the study of meditation could give us a better idea of how it works because all this bending it out of shape will be measurable in the brain and could give us an idea of how the illusion is created by seeing how the brain re-wires itself when we think we are experiencing some sort of unified being. The technology to do this is improving all the time. Whole philosophical issue here of the reality status of subjective experience, the extent to which it's an illusion. We might well be able at some point to map the brain's rewiring down to the last synapse without getting anywhere near the answer to that one. Same issue with psychedelics. I'm editing a book recounting the author's extensive personal experimentation with LSD where this comes up in connection with experiences that are so fantastic it seems highly unlikely, in an Occam's razor sense, that they could have originated with anything stored within the physical brain. I'm pretty well convinced that the brain mediates consciousness rather than creating it, that the brain is a sort of reducing valve, as Huxley put it, for something infinitely (you should pardon the term) vast. In this sense, expansion of consciousness is a matter of getting the brain's reducing function out of the way, neutralizing it, bypassing it, evading it, shutting it down. snip I've had millions of wild experiences meditating and hopping about, the thing is whether it's out of the ordinary in the sense of normal mental functioning being changed in a biophysical and thus subjective experiental way, or in a violation of physics kind of way, which is what JH claims. Will one lead to the other? If not, how long can they keep telling people that it will before they start asking
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [snip] The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what. The most I can say is that hopping feels involuntary, like a sneeze, and that it feels as though it's triggered by an impulse generated by the sutra (or in a group setting, sometimes by an impulse generated by somebody else doing the sutra). [snip] Anyway, when somebody insists nothing out of the ordinary is happening, I can only say that's not my experience; and that if they were to have the same experience, they would have to acknowledge that at least an out-of-the-ordinary *experience* is taking place. Maybe that's all it is. But I doubt it's all just suggestion. I don't know how you *could* suggest some of the experiences when they're virtually impossible to describe. That was very interesting. Thanks. I see it the same way. There is no doubt in my mind that something very odd (and therefore very interesting) IS going on. I do think it *might* be an artefact of something like hypnosis, suggestion or group hysteria (which, rather like *explanations* of puzzling phenomena by *just* placebo might only have the effect of removing the mystery from place A and putting it into place B IMO. A point that I think Barry has made on occasions). Yup yup yup. I think I can pretty much rule out group hysteria in my own case because I've gone for long stretches without doing it in a group. The solo experiences aren't as lively, but they don't diminish over time. And again, neither hypnosis nor suggestion seems reasonable to me given that it's just about impossible to communicate what some of the experiences are like. How can anything be suggested that can't be clearly described? What it boils down to for me, at the very least, is that strange, powerful experiences (not even referring to hopping per se, but the ancillary stuff) can be generated by the mental repetition of a few words that don't even really make much sense. I mean, that's just weird. That ties into what I said to Hugo about some of the experiences people have had on psychedelics. Where the hell do they *come* from? I'm not sure anyone knows too much about hypnosis, suggestion, group hysteria etc. But there are two ideas that I think I've heard - one of which counts against the *something profound happening* idea, and one which perhaps supports it. Isn't it true that there is supposed to be a small proportion of the population that can't be hypnotised? Perhaps, say 10%? So the fact that there seems to be ditto a small number who never *hop* might suggest that what's going is not incompatible with hypnosis or some such? If this IS a solid fact about hypnosis (big if), then it would be interesting to see if it was the SAME percentage that fails to attain lift off? Possibly. I'm pretty sure I'm on the low end of the suggestibility range, based on my non-TM-related experience. (Just as one example of many, given my political and social views, I should have been a sucker for Obama as far back as his 2004 Democratic Convention speech. I had great expectations for that speech, but despite its rapturous reception, I was disappointed. And I kept hoping I'd been wrong well into primary season but just never could tune in to what so many other people found irresistably compelling.) The other thing though about hypnosis (eg as a cure for smoking) is that I believe the effects wear off over time. Which is why hypnosis, though effective, is not ultimately much use. (Heavy disclaimer on all of this. I've probably got it all wrong!). I think you'll find hypnosis experts who deny both premises (the first in particular) as well as those who support one or another or both. But as you say, we don't have a really good handle on hypnosis to begin with. Now I don't do my Siddhi program regularly any more (I'm retro i.e. just pure TM for me. A la Shemp you might say). Furthermore when I DID do it, it was often not in a group. But my experience was (and is) that (a) I did just as well in or out of the group, and (b) even after a gap of years and years, I have been able to revisit it and get pretty much the same experience. That suggest to me that there *might* be some difficulty in the idea that it is *just* hypnosis, suggestion or hysteria. For me, as noted, the group experience is livelier than solo, but I always hop either way (long time since I've been in a group). Can't speak to (b), though. The materialist types wouldn't accept either (a) or (b) as evidence. As you rightly suggest above, they have such profound faith in the power of suggestion to account for most any subjective experience that rather than solving the mystery, it just moves it from one place to another.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thank you thank you thank you. I'm snowed in here and this is manna from heaven! No problem curtis, but is wasn't posted with you in mind but for that serious soul who might read it and not necessarily respond. At least not with the endless drivel we have become so all too familiar with coming from your keyboard. If I was looking for some serious soul it wouldn't be from anyone impressed with what we have heard from Maitreya so far. So you have actually heard from Maitreya curtis ? How impressive ! May I ask where and when ? Or only more drivel and gross inaccuracies ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
...this photo of the flying girl is a vile fucking lie. False advertising that is this low and creepy is rare even in today's media. Well, I must have seen a dozen advertisements in the past five years using a 'yogic flying' motif. But I never saw this picture used by the TMO, and I've got probably one of the largest collections of photos of 'yogic flyers'. Nab: ...did you forget to take your medicine again or are you just plain stupid? The TMO never publized this picture. I'd go with the plain stupid, Nab, and this picture wasn't published by the TMO. You're the one doing the lying. If so, then these people are certainly posting false information about the TMO.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: So you have actually heard from Maitreya curtis ? How impressive ! May I ask where and when ? Or only more drivel and gross inaccuracies ? That raises a significant theological question Nabby, I'm glad you brought it up. I was assuming as Turq mentioned that Creme was speaking for Maitreya with the intimacy of perhaps the president's press secretary. So if his descriptions of Maitrey's teachings might be filled with drivel and gross inaccuracies the question is how far off could he be? For example could he have it all wrong about the message of love and peace and could Maitreya be coming to bring not peace but the sword as a previous savior claimed? Could he be coming to institute Sharia law everywhere? How bungled could Creme have gotten his message? Now on to the concept of drivel and why I might take the time to challenge the idea that Creme has added anything positive to humanity with his little ruse. Imagine a man visitng the doors of my poorest neighbors and giving them magic pennies. He didn't sell them, he gave them and would take nothing in return. He told them that these were prosperity pennies and all the person had to do to activate them was to put them under their sofa seat cushion when they watched TV. The pennies would activate and draw money from all sorts of unknown places and would arrive in the mail very soon. So the good people believed and watched so much TV sitting on their magic pennies that they lost their jobs and eventually got their first notice of eviction. Now imagine another many knocking on their door and telling them that the pennies were bullshit and despite the good feeling they gave at first were a distraction from the reality of life. If you don't pay you don't stay is the rule of apartments and you have to work to make money. But one person objected and said but we hate our jobs and they are very hard and pay us very little. This man gave us hope and you are a bad man to take that hope away. So the question is who was helping' the people more, the skeptic or the magic penny man? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thank you thank you thank you. I'm snowed in here and this is manna from heaven! No problem curtis, but is wasn't posted with you in mind but for that serious soul who might read it and not necessarily respond. At least not with the endless drivel we have become so all too familiar with coming from your keyboard. If I was looking for some serious soul it wouldn't be from anyone impressed with what we have heard from Maitreya so far. So you have actually heard from Maitreya curtis ? How impressive ! May I ask where and when ? Or only more drivel and gross inaccuracies ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willy...@... wrote: ...this photo of the flying girl is a vile fucking lie. False advertising that is this low and creepy is rare even in today's media. Well, I must have seen a dozen advertisements in the past five years using a 'yogic flying' motif. But I never saw this picture used by the TMO, and I've got probably one of the largest collections of photos of 'yogic flyers'. Nab: ...did you forget to take your medicine again or are you just plain stupid? The TMO never publized this picture. I'd go with the plain stupid, Nab, and this picture wasn't published by the TMO. You're the one doing the lying. If so, then these people are certainly posting false information about the TMO. In what way is it false? Are you saying people can't do this? Do you think the picture is faked by someone hopping but without saying the magic words? Does real yogic flying look different? Does it matter that it's not an offical TM picture in any way other than that it features a female doing something un-dignified?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WillyTex willytex@ wrote: [Edg wrote:] ...this photo of the flying girl is a vile fucking lie. False advertising that is this low and creepy is rare even in today's media. Well, I must have seen a dozen advertisements in the past five years using a 'yogic flying' motif. But I never saw this picture used by the TMO, and I've got probably one of the largest collections of photos of 'yogic flyers'. Nab: ...did you forget to take your medicine again or are you just plain stupid? The TMO never publized this picture. I'd go with the plain stupid, Nab, and this picture wasn't published by the TMO. You're the one doing the lying. If so, then these people are certainly posting false information about the TMO. In what way is it false? Are you saying people can't do this? Do you think the picture is faked by someone hopping but without saying the magic words? Does real yogic flying look different? Does it matter that it's not an offical TM picture in any way other than that it features a female doing something un-dignified? What set Edg off was the idea that the TMO was using it in its promotional materials to sell the TM-Sidhis course. Even for those of us who know what Yogic Flying actually involves, it's suspicious. I've never seen anyone, live or in TMO-sanctioned materials, male or female, hop that high. And if folks had never seen anything but that photo, they might be gullible enough to believe it showed actual levitation. But it turns out the photo isn't from the TMO; and it may not even be of a TM Yogic Flyer. (My guess is that the woman was using a trampoline.) The TMers who used the photo on their unofficial fan Web sites as a purported example of Yogic Flying should have been more skeptical themselves. But there are plenty of other photos and videos on the sites of real Yogic Flying that make it pretty clear folks are bouncing on foam. Most TMO-sanctioned photos these days do as well. The big question that's still at issue is whether Yogic Flying is anything more/other than voluntary hopping up and down and has results not obtainable by such hopping. If not, the whole thing is either a scam or a mass delusion no matter what photos are used.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Hugo, you like science. I'm completely uninterested in whether the TMO used a silly photo to insinuate that people were actually levitating or not. That's a done deal, game over. The TMO not only used such photos in the early days of the TM-sidhi courses, they *told* prospective suckers in meetings in TM centers that people were levitating. People who had *never even been on one of the courses yet* said that they had seen this with their own eyes. (This happened repeat- edly in the local center that was in the National TM Headquarters in Pacific Palisades. I sat there once listening to such a sales spiel sitting next to a good friend who had just returned from her TM-sidhi course. Her comment: He's lying. And furthermore he's high up enough in the movement to *know* that he's lying.) But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Simply set up high-speed cameras as TM-sidhas known for their ability to fly well do their program, and fly. But instead of sitting on foam, they're sitting on a big, at-least-one-foot-deep water bed. If my physics is correct, any muscle force exerted downwards would be dissipated by the water in the bed, and they'd never budge off the surface. If they *do* budge off the surface in such an experiment, then something good may be happening. :-) It seems foolproof to me. So much so that one would think that the TMO would jump on it like Iowa farmers on candy corn at the State Fair. If several of their frequent flyers can get off the surface of a water bed, then they've proved that there may be something to it other than muscle exertion. If they cant, well...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. Don't they? How are we supposed to progress from stage 1 (hopping) to stage 2 (floating) if some sort of extra gravity defying process isn't involved? In his 'physics of yogic flying' lecture Hagelin claims that the normal run of events from the quantum level upwards that gives us what we call reality, with it's tendency for things to obey what appear to be immutable laws but are in fact statistical probabilites, can be changed to favour things that appear miraculous if you are operating from a level beyond which gravity has it's effects. I think we have to assume that he believes this, or is at least happy to be on record trying to convince others to believe it. So I think it should be put to the test. A set up like Barry's idea would do fine, it may not answer the quantum question (which I think is BS of course) but it would be interesting to see if anything unusual at all is happening. If they were really interested in what science can do for the age of enlightenment they would be doing just this. If they havn't already. I remember someone in the TMO saying that attempts to measure brainwaves while hopping are fatally flawed because the sudden movement has a much larger effect on measured activity than doing the sutra, so how than can claim that maximum coherence is achieved at lift off is beyond me. The bottom line then is whether or not anything unexplainable is happening and they should be looking at it. Unless they don't have the confidence in the technique
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: The bottom line then is whether or not anything unexplainable is happening and they should be looking at it. Unless they don't have the confidence in the technique The no-the-emperor-really-does-have-clothes, move here is to shift the claim to something even less provable, World Peace! So now it doesn't matter that no one is doing anything physically amazing. The other move is to the brain waves and the claim that this is making flyers better in a globally vague way. (Feel good, that's better, feel bad, that's better too. Just a little purification of the path. The path to where? To somewhere better, better health, better mind, better relationships, everything better! They have shifted the claim from an easily falsifiable hypothesis to one harder to falsify. Pretty slick. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. Don't they? How are we supposed to progress from stage 1 (hopping) to stage 2 (floating) if some sort of extra gravity defying process isn't involved? In his 'physics of yogic flying' lecture Hagelin claims that the normal run of events from the quantum level upwards that gives us what we call reality, with it's tendency for things to obey what appear to be immutable laws but are in fact statistical probabilites, can be changed to favour things that appear miraculous if you are operating from a level beyond which gravity has it's effects. I think we have to assume that he believes this, or is at least happy to be on record trying to convince others to believe it. So I think it should be put to the test. A set up like Barry's idea would do fine, it may not answer the quantum question (which I think is BS of course) but it would be interesting to see if anything unusual at all is happening. If they were really interested in what science can do for the age of enlightenment they would be doing just this. If they havn't already. I remember someone in the TMO saying that attempts to measure brainwaves while hopping are fatally flawed because the sudden movement has a much larger effect on measured activity than doing the sutra, so how than can claim that maximum coherence is achieved at lift off is beyond me. The bottom line then is whether or not anything unexplainable is happening and they should be looking at it. Unless they don't have the confidence in the technique
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Hugo, you like science. I'm completely uninterested in whether the TMO used a silly photo to insinuate that people were actually levitating or not. That's a done deal, game over. The TMO not only used such photos in the early days of the TM-sidhi courses, they *told* prospective suckers in meetings in TM centers that people were levitating. People who had *never even been on one of the courses yet* said that they had seen this with their own eyes. (This happened repeat- edly in the local center that was in the National TM Headquarters in Pacific Palisades. I sat there once listening to such a sales spiel sitting next to a good friend who had just returned from her TM-sidhi course. Her comment: He's lying. And furthermore he's high up enough in the movement to *know* that he's lying.) But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Simply set up high-speed cameras as TM-sidhas known for their ability to fly well do their program, and fly. But instead of sitting on foam, they're sitting on a big, at-least-one-foot-deep water bed. If my physics is correct, any muscle force exerted downwards would be dissipated by the water in the bed, and they'd never budge off the surface. If they *do* budge off the surface in such an experiment, then something good may be happening. :-) It seems foolproof to me. So much so that one would think that the TMO would jump on it like Iowa farmers on candy corn at the State Fair. If several of their frequent flyers can get off the surface of a water bed, then they've proved that there may be something to it other than muscle exertion. If they cant, well... I'm all for experiments like this. I think they tried it on a sort of trapeze with rubber straps that cancelled out body weight which would have the same effect without getting the floor wet. It wasn't conclusive as they were trying to measure the brainwaves and not whether they were experiencing weightlessness. I'm sure you could build a perfect contraption with springs or hydraulics that would remove all doubt. I remember when the heavenly mountain site was set up, people were saying that the increase in coherence would start people floating and that once one person was up in the air we all would be! Ah, what a time of optimism that was, I remember almost believing it. Of course, they said the same thing when the pundit project started too. If they don't provide some evidence soon te optimism will wear off for the Nabluses and Willytexes of the world then the TMO will really be in trouble...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodle...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. Don't they? How are we supposed to progress from stage 1 (hopping) to stage 2 (floating) if some sort of extra gravity defying process isn't involved? They aren't claiming anybody's doing anything but hopping yet. In his 'physics of yogic flying' lecture Hagelin claims that the normal run of events from the quantum level upwards that gives us what we call reality, with it's tendency for things to obey what appear to be immutable laws but are in fact statistical probabilites, can be changed to favour things that appear miraculous if you are operating from a level beyond which gravity has it's effects. I think we have to assume that he believes this, or is at least happy to be on record trying to convince others to believe it. So I think it should be put to the test. It isn't *happening* yet. How can you put something that isn't happening to the test? I remember someone in the TMO saying that attempts to measure brainwaves while hopping are fatally flawed because the sudden movement has a much larger effect on measured activity than doing the sutra, so how than can claim that maximum coherence is achieved at lift off is beyond me. *AT* liftoff, at the instant before the body starts moving. The bottom line then is whether or not anything unexplainable is happening and they should be looking at it. Unless they don't have the confidence in the technique I'm not sure what else they could test at this stage. The *experience*, or at least my experience, is that something else *is* going on, but I have no idea what. The most I can say is that hopping feels involuntary, like a sneeze, and that it feels as though it's triggered by an impulse generated by the sutra (or in a group setting, sometimes by an impulse generated by somebody else doing the sutra). Whether that has anything to do with coherence of brain waves, I couldn't say. I don't know whether it has anything to do with levitation either. And I don't have a clue how you could test it. There are other associated odd experiences, including of bubbling bliss. One of mine is that I am much bigger than my body, as if I'm watching this little body hop up and down in the middle of a sort of big cloud of me. Another is that sometimes at the apex of a hop, it becomes absolutely crystal-clear for the barest instant that levitation is occurring--just for that instant--and that if I could maintain that experience, I wouldn't come down. But I can't, so I do. It isn't a *thought* but an experience; I don't know how to explain it any better than that, but it's very distinct. It's more than simply not feeling the pull of gravity at that instant. It's more like being in the zone, when everything seems to be working together without effort, part of that everything being the impulse generated by the sutra. Anyway, when somebody insists nothing out of the ordinary is happening, I can only say that's not my experience; and that if they were to have the same experience, they would have to acknowledge that at least an out-of-the-ordinary *experience* is taking place. Maybe that's all it is. But I doubt it's all just suggestion. I don't know how you *could* suggest some of the experiences when they're virtually impossible to describe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo fintlewoodlewix@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip But here's where the science comes in. Several times on this forum I have suggested an experiment that, given my last-time-I-studied-it-back-in-high-school knowledge of physics, would prove one way or another whether the flying in Yogic Flying is due to anything other than muscle exertion. Except that it would be an attempt to disprove a straw man, which isn't very scientific. Nobody denies muscular exertion is involved, at least these days. Don't they? How are we supposed to progress from stage 1 (hopping) to stage 2 (floating) if some sort of extra gravity defying process isn't involved? They aren't claiming anybody's doing anything but hopping yet. So why not call it yogic hopping? That would be truthful. Calling it yogic flying is not. You believe it is an entirely involuntary action, right? How do you explain in the film that all begin hopping together, all know where the corner of the foam pad is, and all start hopping when the camera happens to be filming? I was a hopper for several years. It was obvious to me towards the end of that time that the biggest thing going on in those rooms was group think and group action. Now that was what30 years ago. Nothing has changed. Nothing. Same old hopping, albeit with a few more strained knees and backs. This isn't yogic flying. It's the yogic equivalent of waiting for godot.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfr...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip They aren't claiming anybody's doing anything but hopping yet. So why not call it yogic hopping? That would be truthful. Calling it yogic flying is not. As long as folks know what's involved before they plunk down their money for the course, what it's called doesn't bother me much. Lots of things aren't called exactly what they are, for PR purposes. You believe it is an entirely involuntary action, right? How do you explain in the film that all begin hopping together, all know where the corner of the foam pad is, and all start hopping when the camera happens to be filming? I wouldn't swear the guys in the video weren't helping things out a little. I wasn't there. All I can tell you about is my own experience. I *have* experienced being one of several people who all started hopping at pretty much the same time, either because we all thought the sutra at the same time at the beginning of the session, or because (as it seemed) the impulse generated by the sutra had become so lively after folks had been hopping for a while that all it took to get a bunch of folks to hop was for one person to think the sutra and activate the impulse for all of them. It's a bit silly to ask why they all started to hop while the camera was filming. The camera was there to film them hopping, and presumably it would keep running as long as it had to to get hopping on film. As to knowing where the edge of the foam is, in my experience one generally doesn't lose the sense of where one is in relation to the room's layout or the objects or people in it. One is aware of getting close to an obstacle of some kind, another person or a wall or the edge of the foam, in this case, and that awareness is enough to kill the impulse if necessary, or to lead one to turn around and hop in the other direction. I was a hopper for several years. It was obvious to me' towards the end of that time that the biggest thing going on in those rooms was group think and group action. What can I say? I'm sorry you didn't have the kind of experiences I've had. In a group, there's plenty of group stuff going on. Maybe some people are just following along intentionally, but the stuff I'm talking about-- the hopping impulse (as it seems) being lively in the group's somehow shared consciousness--has been very distinct and clear to me. Now that was what30 years ago. Nothing has changed. Nothing. Same old hopping, albeit with a few more strained knees and backs. This isn't yogic flying. It's the yogic equivalent of waiting for godot.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Ghanesh, To put it mildly, yes, mildly, this photo of the flying girl is a vile fucking lie. False advertising that is this low and creepy is rare even in today's media. Well, the links won't open for me, but I doubt that that picture comes the The They as you like to call blame everything on. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , wayback71 waybac...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Agreed, phony photos are fraud and misleading. But on a personal level, the video where the guys were shown bouncing about and then interviewed brought up all the old feelings about being around the domes - things like: do these people Really feel so blissful, and if so, why don't I, why did I always sit there feeling full of doubts? Some of these men being interviewed appear very genuine, refined, gentle, happy people. So do they really have these internal experiences of energy, bliss and regularly? Yes I do. A lot. But I am not all meek and mild all the time, and I don't really want to be either. In fact, if you think that is an outward sign of something special, then you may be mistaken. Anyways, yes, people do have those experiences a lot. But the bottom line is, that as world consciousness rises, who knows, maybe you'll have them more than them, and get there faster. Nothing is as linear as people like to think on the road to enlightenment. But all roads lead to Rome. You are just on one that has a hill hiding the city from view at the moment. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Looks like a case for THE CORRECTOR. Will she come running in to defend the poor sod taken to the verbal cleaners by Edg, or is that only something she does for those abused by her arch-nemesis? Curious minds want to know... :-) If there's anybody here who *genuinely* doesn't understand the difference, lemme know. I'll be happy to explain.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Feb 10, 2010, at 9:40 AM, Duveyoung wrote: And, hey, especially to do so here where this effrontery has been deconstructed endlessly -- do you know that 99% of the readers here think you're mentally ill, Ghanesh? Well, not mentally ill, because we're all civilized enough not to laugh at the truly ill, Are you kidding? What about Judy? Many FFL readers live to watch Curtis lead Judy around on a leash, like a demented poodle who resists proper training. Judy is FFL's poster child for the TM-Sidhi!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Feb 10, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Vaj wrote: On Feb 10, 2010, at 9:40 AM, Duveyoung wrote: And, hey, especially to do so here where this effrontery has been deconstructed endlessly -- do you know that 99% of the readers here think you're mentally ill, Ghanesh? Well, not mentally ill, because we're all civilized enough not to laugh at the truly ill, Are you kidding? What about Judy? Judy? Are *you*kidding, Vaj?? What about EDG? Many FFL readers live to watch Curtis lead Judy around on a leash, like a demented poodle who resists proper training. Judy is FFL's poster child for the TM-Sidhi!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
On Feb 10, 2010, at 8:49 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Looks like a case for THE CORRECTOR. Will she come running in to defend the poor sod taken to the verbal cleaners by Edg, Cue up the music from The Charge of the Light Brigade in the background... or is that only something she does for those abused by her arch-nemesis? Curious minds want to know... :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Were you ever comfortable with this kind of ruse? Doesn't it gall you that the TM technique's reputation is befouled by such chicanery? Do you think the TMO is well served by this? And, heh, look at Barry slavering that we two mix it up. His bib is all soaked with drool, and he's banging his sippy cup on his highchair's tray. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Looks like a case for THE CORRECTOR. Will she come running in to defend the poor sod taken to the verbal cleaners by Edg, or is that only something she does for those abused by her arch-nemesis? Curious minds want to know... :-) If there's anybody here who *genuinely* doesn't understand the difference, lemme know. I'll be happy to explain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Ghanesh, To put it mildly, yes, mildly, this photo of the flying girl is a vile fucking lie. False advertising that is this low and creepy is rare even in today's media. Oh ye of little faith... I'm not supposed to talk about this, but there's a super-advanced Yogic Flying technique given to only a few select TM-Sidhas. When perfected, it enables one to levitate standing up, no foam needed. Much more practical, much easier on the knees and back: [levitation via wet spot] http://www.flickr.com/photos/36189...@n02/4345640561/ http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/09/how-to-levitate-by-s.html http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/09/how-to-levitate-by-s.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Were you ever comfortable with this kind of ruse? Doesn't it gall you that the TM technique's reputation is befouled by such chicanery? Do you think the TMO is well served by this? Lemme put it this way: It would bother me a lot more if this type of photo were all the public ever saw of Yogic Flying. But considering that there's also scads of videotape of actual flying sessions, in which folks are seen hopping up and down on foam--some of these sessions even having been held in public with press invited--I'm not about to slit my throat. I doubt there are many who get to a flying hall for the first time and are crushingly disappointed to find that nobody is actually hovering. I think it would be extremely difficult to reach the point of the TMO cashing one's check without having a pretty good idea of what to expect. That said, sure, I could wish the TMO were 100 percent squeaky-clean. I could wish the TM critics here were 100 percent squeaky-clean. But if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. It is what it is, hypocrisy and all. And, heh, look at Barry slavering that we two mix it up. His bib is all soaked with drool, and he's banging his sippy cup on his highchair's tray. That too. Notice, though, that he set it up so he can have the illusion of winning whether we mix it up or not.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Were you ever comfortable with this kind of ruse? Doesn't it gall you that the TM technique's reputation is befouled by such chicanery? Do you think the TMO is well served by this? Lemme put it this way: It would bother me a lot more if this type of photo were all the public ever saw of Yogic Flying. But considering that there's also scads of videotape of actual flying sessions, in which folks are seen hopping up and down on foam--some of these sessions even having been held in public with press invited--I'm not about to slit my throat. I doubt there are many who get to a flying hall for the first time and are crushingly disappointed to find that nobody is actually hovering. I think it would be extremely difficult to reach the point of the TMO cashing one's check without having a pretty good idea of what to expect. That said, sure, I could wish the TMO were 100 percent squeaky-clean. I could wish the TM critics here were 100 percent squeaky-clean. But if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. It is what it is, hypocrisy and all. And, heh, look at Barry slavering that we two mix it up. His bib is all soaked with drool, and he's banging his sippy cup on his highchair's tray. That too. Notice, though, that he set it up so he can have the illusion of winning whether we mix it up or not. Judy knows what Barry is thinking, you see. She knows what all of us are thinking. It's just how she rolls
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Curtis, Urp! GAWD! I'm still laughing at my error about his name. Thanks for your pointing it out -- from you I can take any criticism...well maybe most if not any. Heh. I've been doing a lot of writing at the BuddhaAtTheGasPump Yahoo group. Over there we have an agreement to be gentle, and I love doing that there, but here, BAM I get to do High Noon shootouts. It feels yin-yangy and balanced to pingpong between the two experiences. Rick runs the other group also, and he's keeping us civil there -- everyone is honored and respected as sincere minds. Surrendering to that, I've found profits aplenty. Here the challenge is to not try to amp up negativity beyond the usefulness of such, over there the challenge is to not amp up positivity into syrupy dreck. Me like. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Nice to see you Edg, like a FFL reunion. Isn't it wonderful that in the video every single flyer happened to have the same innocent impulse to fly at the same time and it just happened to be when the camera was on? And nobody lost the impulse during the wave till they got to the other side of the room like in every single other group flying wave I have been in? It was a perfect photo finish and it wasn't contrived by people trying to make their butt bouncing look more consistent than it ever is without the cameras rolling, it was innocent and real. The will of GOD...er..I mean nature. The marketing branch of nature. And they went to Mother Divine and found a beautiful young...oh wait a secondoh sorry I just got sent a picture of the Mother Divine group and they are not bouncing anywhere...they found an MIU student so happy to have her picture taken she wouldn't challenge the obvious scam. (Kudos for the Criss Angel reference, you beat me to it) Very thin man with camera with a 35mm lens. Voice very soft somewhere between Michael Jackson and that British tranny who tried to pick me up in an airport bar: (Hey, I didn't to the loo with him so stop snickering.) OK now I am going to set up the camera down here and I need you to get out of full lotus so you can jump really high, you know, innocently. Sweet young thing: Hey wait a second the last time some guy shot me from this angle my picture ended up in cameltoe.com. You aren't some kind of perv are you? Dude giggling nervously: No, er...I am on Purusha. We wear special silk loincloths so we don't ever get boners or have any desire to see your...what was the name of the Website again?(takes out pen) Girl agitated now: I knew it! I should have bailed out when you asked me to wear my Mod square buckle belt for flying. Dude now agitated too: Oh please I need this picture and if you don't let me take it I have to take one of the Mother Divine crones...er I mean ladies. I'll tell you what, let me take the picture and I'll get you into the private Shivarattri ceremony with a bunch of rich horny doners. They will go nuts for you,dump their starter wife who has been hitting the Ayur Vedic kapha diet a bit too hard,and you will be set up for life. Nothing but course after course covered in red coral beads and wrapped in the softest shatoosh shawls. You'll be given seasonal bastis. Dude grins a little too wide at this. Girl looks alarmed: Hey I told you to knock of the pervy stuff. Dude pulls himself together: Sorry I mean, you will have a separate dining hall at courses so you will never have to rub shoulders with the poor losers on any course. Girl looks pleased: Done, but you had better Photoshop out any sign of toe from this angle. Dude giggles nervously: I'll take special care of that area in a completely pure way. (Writer runs out of steam and can't really stick this landing, shifts gears.) Edg, while I share your outrage at the flim flam flummery of this obvious bullshittery, I hope that Elephant Boy (get your magic mythology straight!) posts often. Ghanesh, To put it mildly, yes, mildly, this photo of the flying girl is a vile fucking lie. False advertising that is this low and creepy is rare even in today's media. It is an instant proof of the TMO's intent to defraud at every opportunity -- right from the get-go the prospective audience is told a lie bigger than any Criss Angel ever promulgated. So I gotta ask, Ghanesh, how fucked up are you to pass this garbage along? And, hey, especially to do so here where this effrontery has been deconstructed endlessly -- do you know that 99% of the readers here think you're mentally ill, Ghanesh? Well, not mentally ill, because we're all civilized enough not to laugh at the truly ill, but you are laughed at derisively as a mindless robotic re-puking drone. You may think you've
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Joe geezerfr...@... wrote: Judy knows what Barry is thinking, you see. She knows what all of us are thinking. It's just how she rolls Sometimes I think THE CORRECTOR spent too much time as a sailor on a ship out of Hong Kong, and took its name to heart. Found on the Net with the caption, No, you Titan yours! [http://i.imgur.com/8dcJK.jpg] http://i.imgur.com/8dcJK.jpg http://i.imgur.com/8dcJK.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: -- do you know that 99% of the readers here think you're mentally ill, Ghanesh? ... *Mental illness* [noun] -:- Hearing the voices of 99% of FFL readers 'in your head'.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
[image: PatanjaliFlyingSutraSanskrit.jpg]
FWIW, most of the devanaagarii text above is from Vyaasa's
BhaaSya. It mentions as stages of Yogic Flying (have no
idea whether those are to be taken literally...):
-- walking on water (jale paadaabhyaaM viharati)
-- walking on a spider's web (uurNa-naabhi-tantu-maatre vihRtya)
-- walking on rays (of Sun?? -- rashmiSu viharati)
-- going through space at will (yatheSTam aakaasha-gatir asya bhavati)
Vyaasa seems to mention as an alternative to light stuff like
cotton fiber, the smallest particles (paramaaNubhyaH samaapattiM
labdhvaa):
paramANu [parama + aNu - card] m. an infinitesimal particle or atom (30 are
said to form a mote in a sun-beam) Ya1jn5. Yogas. MBh. c. (cf. %{bhRtya-p-}) ;
the passing of a sun-beam past an atom of matter Pur. ; n. 1/8 of a Ma1tra1
VPra1t. ; %{-kAraNa-vAda} m. the atomistic system of the Vais3eshikas , Sam2k.
; %{-tA} f. infinite minuteness , the state of an atom Ragh. BhP. ; %{-maya}
mf(%{I})n. consisting merely of atoms BhP. ; %{-Nv-aGgaka} m. ` subtle-bodied
'N. of Vishn2u L. 1.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Agreed, phony photos are fraud and misleading. But on a personal level, the video where the guys were shown bouncing about and then interviewed brought up all the old feelings about being around the domes - things like: do these people Really feel so blissful, and if so, why don't I, why did I always sit there feeling full of doubts? Some of these men being interviewed appear very genuine, refined, gentle, happy people. So do they really have these internal experiences of energy, bliss and regularly? If so, Wow is what I say. And also, I am jealous, cause I don't have that - not regularly, not despite years and years of TMing. I don't care about the flying, I care about the internal experience. I have had some great ones, but not often at all. Truth is - I want me some of what they claim they got . Were you ever comfortable with this kind of ruse? Doesn't it gall you that the TM technique's reputation is befouled by such chicanery? Do you think the TMO is well served by this? And, heh, look at Barry slavering that we two mix it up. His bib is all soaked with drool, and he's banging his sippy cup on his highchair's tray. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Looks like a case for THE CORRECTOR. Will she come running in to defend the poor sod taken to the verbal cleaners by Edg, or is that only something she does for those abused by her arch-nemesis? Curious minds want to know... :-) If there's anybody here who *genuinely* doesn't understand the difference, lemme know. I'll be happy to explain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Wayback, I'm thinkin ya might like BuddhaAtTheGasPump. Yer dripping with sincerity. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 waybac...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Agreed, phony photos are fraud and misleading. But on a personal level, the video where the guys were shown bouncing about and then interviewed brought up all the old feelings about being around the domes - things like: do these people Really feel so blissful, and if so, why don't I, why did I always sit there feeling full of doubts? Some of these men being interviewed appear very genuine, refined, gentle, happy people. So do they really have these internal experiences of energy, bliss and regularly? If so, Wow is what I say. And also, I am jealous, cause I don't have that - not regularly, not despite years and years of TMing. I don't care about the flying, I care about the internal experience. I have had some great ones, but not often at all. Truth is - I want me some of what they claim they got . Were you ever comfortable with this kind of ruse? Doesn't it gall you that the TM technique's reputation is befouled by such chicanery? Do you think the TMO is well served by this? And, heh, look at Barry slavering that we two mix it up. His bib is all soaked with drool, and he's banging his sippy cup on his highchair's tray. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Looks like a case for THE CORRECTOR. Will she come running in to defend the poor sod taken to the verbal cleaners by Edg, or is that only something she does for those abused by her arch-nemesis? Curious minds want to know... :-) If there's anybody here who *genuinely* doesn't understand the difference, lemme know. I'll be happy to explain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: Wayback, I'm thinkin ya might like BuddhaAtTheGasPump. Yer dripping with sincerity. I know, I can't help it - the sincerity - right now. It just is there right now in my life. I am seriously disappointed with TM and don't feel at all like finding a new path at this point, and yet wish I had one. Probably a brain and DNA situation. I will check out the Buddha thing, been meaning to for a while now. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 wayback71@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Judy, Just to say it: I believe that flying is possible. I even believe that maybe the TM method can lead to such prowess, but to show folks midair as if at least someone somewhere can fly and here`s the photo is flat out fraudulent, and the TMO's very first posters about the siddhis lied exactly like this. Agreed, phony photos are fraud and misleading. But on a personal level, the video where the guys were shown bouncing about and then interviewed brought up all the old feelings about being around the domes - things like: do these people Really feel so blissful, and if so, why don't I, why did I always sit there feeling full of doubts? Some of these men being interviewed appear very genuine, refined, gentle, happy people. So do they really have these internal experiences of energy, bliss and regularly? If so, Wow is what I say. And also, I am jealous, cause I don't have that - not regularly, not despite years and years of TMing. I don't care about the flying, I care about the internal experience. I have had some great ones, but not often at all. Truth is - I want me some of what they claim they got . Were you ever comfortable with this kind of ruse? Doesn't it gall you that the TM technique's reputation is befouled by such chicanery? Do you think the TMO is well served by this? And, heh, look at Barry slavering that we two mix it up. His bib is all soaked with drool, and he's banging his sippy cup on his highchair's tray. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Looks like a case for THE CORRECTOR. Will she come running in to defend the poor sod taken to the verbal cleaners by Edg, or is that only something she does for those abused by her arch-nemesis? Curious minds want to know... :-) If there's anybody here who *genuinely* doesn't understand the difference, lemme know. I'll be happy to explain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wayback71 waybac...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Wayback, I'm thinkin ya might like BuddhaAtTheGasPump. Yer dripping with sincerity. I know, I can't help it - the sincerity - right now. It just is there right now in my life. I am seriously disappointed with TM and don't feel at all like finding a new path at this point, and yet wish I had one. Probably a brain and DNA situation. I will check out the Buddha thing, been meaning to for a while now. He may be nearer than you think: The Master's article for Share International magazine, January - February 2010 A glorious enterprise by the Master , through Benjamin Creme, 10 January 2010 When humanity sees Maitreya, whether they recognize Him or not, they will feel obliged to support Him or to reject Him and all He stands for: sharing, justice and peace. Thus will men be divided and known. Thus will the Sword of Cleavage perform its destined task, and thus will Maitreya know the readiness of men for change. Appearing before men as one of them, the Great Lord ensures that men follow and support Him for the truth and sanity of His ideas rather than for His status. Nevertheless, it matters not whether they recognize Him as Maitreya, as the Christ, or simply as a man Whose wisdom coincides with their own aspiration for justice and peace, for a better world for all men. Gradually, we must assume, many will begin to see Maitreya as the One awaited by all religious groups under their various names, and will call Him thus. Some will say: He must be the Mahdi, while others will declaim: Krishna has come again, the law is fulfilled! Others will ask: Surely he is the Messiah, come at last, while still others will see Him as the Christ or Maitreya Buddha. All will see Him as their Expected One, fulfilling their hopes and come to fulfill their needs. Maitreya will neither affirm nor deny these claims nor should those among His workers who believe they have recognized Him. Not until the Day of Declaration will Maitreya acknowledge His true identity and status. On that glorious day men will know, beyond all gainsaying, that their long wait has not been in vain, that help, indeed, is at hand, that the Teacher is ready to aid and guide. That He comes as an Elder Brother rather than a Saviour, ready to take the lead to save our planet, and to enable men themselves to restore sanity to their lives and ways of living. Solution Maitreya will show that our problems are many but solvable. That the solution to all is already in our hands. That the simple act of sharing, alone, has the power to transform life on Earth for the better. He will ask for man's trust, as an Elder Brother, that He will not lead them into other than their destined path of harmony and love, that they have nothing to fear but their fear, and that the way ahead already has the blueprint of the Divine. Thus will Maitreya ease the way for men to embark on a transformation huge in scope, involving all men and women everywhere, a transformation which will launch humanity into a glorious enterprise, the restoration of Planet Earth to its rightful place among its sister planets of our system. http://tinyurl.com/ykmwx68 http://tinyurl.com/ykmwx68
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Duveyoung Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:11 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying? Wayback, I'm thinkin ya might like BuddhaAtTheGasPump. Yer dripping with sincerity. Edg That's http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BuddhaAtTheGasPump
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
Thank you thank you thank you. I'm snowed in here and this is manna from heaven! by the Master , through Benjamin Creme, Thats gotta hurt! 10 January 2010 When humanity sees Maitreya, whether they recognize Him or not, they will feel obliged to support Him or to reject Him That certainly covers the bases. In fact people reading what I write here will be compelled in a similar way. and all He stands for: sharing, justice and peace. See the devil is in details, Bin Laden is for these things too its just that for him justice means infidel's heads on the end of sticks. Thus will men be divided and known What is with the use of thus? Was this written for teenage girls into the Twilight series? Thus Like it wasn't pretentious enough once... will the Sword of Cleavage Is that another name for giving a pearl necklace? perform its destined task, and thus I'm not gunna stop pointing this out till you cut the old timey pretense...saying thus makes nothing more impressive. It just sounds like you read to much historical fantasy fiction or vampire novels. will Maitreya know the readiness of men for change. Oh I get it, another deservability loophole. I know how this works, nothing changes but it is OUR fault. I didn't know Ashcraft and Jurrell drafted the preemptive non-liability documents for the second coming. Appearing before men as one of them, Wait no winged horse? Dude you know you are competing with Avatar right? You need to pull a little more out of your butt than that. Don't you read any mythology? Crack a book and come back with a more marketable idea than coming back as one of the rag tag crew on this planet. But if you do insist on this plan at least study up on the forms of hot Hollywood actresses because some of them can get quite a lot of attention just driving to the 7-11. Don't bother coming back as a dude unless you look like Taylor Lautner but forget about the straight guy vote if you do. the Great Lord ensures that men follow and support Him Got more than a little Sig Heil in your plan, thought so. It always ends up in a beer garden, why is that? for the truth and sanity of His ideas rather than for His status. So you really ARE new to planet earth aren't you? We are up to our necks in truth and sanity ideas but it is implementing them in the rugby scrum of primate politics that we have trouble with. You can save your breath if you think it is a lack of ideas that is the problem here. Nevertheless, it matters not whether they recognize Him as Maitreya, as the Christ, Nicely played cuz I'm thinking mostly not. or simply as a man Whose wisdom coincides with their own aspiration for justice and peace, for a better world for all men. Yeah, you are the first guy with that plan. You might want to stop by the White House first thing and see if you can get some pointers on what to do with your ass once it gets handed to you. Gradually, we must assume, many will begin to see Maitreya as the One awaited by all religious groups under their various names, and will call Him thus. I'm seeing a pattern. More absurd the phrase, more likely you're going to drop in a thus. Some will say: He must be the Mahdi, while others will declaim: Krishna has come again, the law is fulfilled! You aren't too up on your Hindu myths I see. See Krishna was the last guy, it is Kalki who is coming back next. And if you need an atheist to get your earth myths straight, you may not have the aptitude for this role. Others will ask: Surely he is the Messiah, come at last, while still others will see Him as the Christ or Maitreya Buddha. All will see Him as their Expected One, fulfilling their hopes and come to fulfill their needs. Just to clarify, is this the Jewish or the Christian messiah that yo are referring to cuz this is kind of a touchy point down here so you may want to brush up on the differences. And what have you got for atheists cuz we already have Sam Harris and he is not going to be easy to top messiah-wise for us. Maitreya will neither affirm nor deny these claims nor should those among His workers who believe they have recognized Him. Playing it coy, nice touch. Not until the Day of Declaration will Maitreya acknowledge His true identity and status. On that glorious day men will know, beyond all gainsaying, that their long wait has not been in vain, that help, indeed, is at hand, that the Teacher is ready to aid and guide. That He comes as an Elder Brother rather than a Saviour, ready to take the lead to save our planet, and to enable men themselves to restore sanity to their lives and ways of living. Wait a second did Jonathan Favreau write this? You just reworked an Obama campaign speech didn't you? Solution Maitreya will show that our problems are many but solvable. That the solution to all is already in our hands. That the simple act of sharing, alone, has the power
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@... wrote: Thank you thank you thank you. I'm snowed in here and this is manna from heaven! No problem curtis, but is wasn't posted with you in mind but for that serious soul who might read it and not necessarily respond. At least not with the endless drivel we have become so all too familiar with coming from your keyboard.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Anyone Tried Yogic Flying?
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thank you thank you thank you. I'm snowed in here and this is manna from heaven! No problem curtis, but is wasn't posted with you in mind but for that serious soul who might read it and not necessarily respond. At least not with the endless drivel we have become so all too familiar with coming from your keyboard. If I was looking for some serious soul it wouldn't be from anyone impressed with what we have heard from Maitreya so far. It would be from this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ROzGihgCj8feature=related
