Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 23, 2009, at 12:56 AM, raunchydog wrote:


Raunchydog wrote:
"I'm not asking you to buy anything. Just answer the question. Why  
do researchers find "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and not in  
people simply relaxing or in other meditation techniques? No answer  
implies you either don't know the difference between alpha  
brainwaves in relaxation and "frontal alpha coherence" in TM or you  
are afraid to admit you're the one pedaling BS and not Travis."


First of all "researchers" do not find this significant only TM  
RESEARCHERS do. And therein lies your problem. You apparently have a  
very short memory span, but despite having posted this numerous times  
before, here's the state of the art opinion on TM "alpha coherence":


"Within a bandwidth
of perhaps 2 Hz near this spectral
peak, alpha frequencies frequently produce
spontaneously moderate to large coherence
(0.3–0.8 over large interelectrode distance
(Nunez et al., 1997). The alpha coherence
values reported in TM studies, as a trait
in the baseline or during meditation, belong
to this same range. Thus a global increase
of alpha power and alpha coherence might
not reflect a more “ordered” or “integrated”
experience, as frequently claimed in TM literature..."

-The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness

The alpha coherence fraud is what they've decided to run with. It's  
common in many relaxation response-style meditation forms, but since  
it's known by neuroscientists to be so common in even non-meditating  
humans, no one considers it amazing or special. In fact, as I said,  
it's common in commercial relaxation techniques, TM just being one of  
many:


"To summarize, alpha global increases and
alpha coherence mostly over frontal electrodes
are associated with TM practice when
meditating compared to baseline (Morse,
Martin, Furst, & Dubin, 1977). This global
alpha increase is similar to that produced
by other relaxation techniques. The passive
absorption during the recitation of the
mantra, as practiced in this technique, produces
a brain pattern that suggests a decrease
of processing of sensory or motor information
and of mental activity in general. Because
alpha rhythms are ubiquitous and functionally
non-specific, the claim that alpha
oscillations and alpha coherence are desirable
or are linked to an original and higher
state of consciousness seem quite premature."

-The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness




> Whoa. Let's stop you right there. Not "researchers", but "TM zealot
> researchers", claiming independent views but espousing "zig heil" TM
> movement sputum.
>

What a cop-out. For the second time Vaj has not answered my  
question. Instead of simply saying, "Yes, TM produces "frontal alpha  
coherence" in TM'ers and does not compared to Buddhist or  
Mindfullness meditation and is therefore unique, he snips my  
question and makes up some BS saying he doesn't have to answer  
because he objects to the word "researchers" when in fact I was  
citing research by Travis. He can't answer the question honestly  
because he would have to admit that TM uniquely produces "frontal  
alpha coherence." I'm not saying TM is better than any technique he  
wants to do, just that it appears to be unique if no other technique  
can produce "frontal alpha coherence". He poses as a man of science  
but he is not open to a discussion of "frontal alpha coherence" and  
why it is only found in TM'ers.


Please see the above. You've fallen for "the uniqueness lie" on top of  
the "the alpha coherence lie", two major lies propagated by this  
organization. Please try to use more rigor in your observations, will  
ya RD from now on? I realize you're relatively new here, but these two  
lies have already been dealt with here log ago and conclusively  
addressed. In the future when you forget that, please refer back to  
this message number (or you could save a copy to your HD). Thanks.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > This exchange illustrates perfectly what I've been
> > saying for some time now. When Vaj is challenged,
> > instead of rising to the challenge, he fades...and
> > dances...and sings...and stands on his head...and
> > twists and turns...and wiggles his ears...and thumbs
> > his nose...but he NEVER RESPONDS TO THE CHALLENGE.

(I should have added to this list of tactics, he also
speaks in tongues, using Sanskrit or Tibetan lingo
to give himself an air of authenticity.)

> HaHa and BINGO ! 
> Could it be because he is faking it all ?

Well, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. It's
either because he's faking it, or because he's 
afraid he'll fail to explain himself convincingly;
so rather than risk failure, he doesn't try at all.

When you don't have surface-to-air missiles or
sufficiently accurate anti-aircraft guns, you send
up a barrage of shells that explode in the general
vicinity of the target to create a kind of cloud of
lethal interference, hoping the bombers will run
into bits of shrapnel from the explosions, or will
have to abort their mission to avoid the flak.

The behavior I described has been amazingly 
consistent from Vaj over the years, not just here
but on alt.m.t as well. And I'm hardly the only
person to remark on it.

(And no, it's not just that he does respond and we
*disagree* with his response. I mean, of course we
disagree with his general putdowns of TM/MMY/TMO/TMers,
but he uses those to avoid addressing the specific
issues under discussion. On the issues, he doesn't
provide anything substantive enough to disagree with
him *about*.)

Of course, there's also the outright *lies* he tells,
but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "authfriend" 
wrote:
>
> This exchange illustrates perfectly what I've been
> saying for some time now. When Vaj is challenged,
> instead of rising to the challenge, he fades...and
> dances...and sings...and stands on his head...and
> twists and turns...and wiggles his ears...and thumbs
> his nose...but he NEVER RESPONDS TO THE CHALLENGE.>>

Is he ranting on about some unpulished study again?

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[off_world_beings]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , Vaj  wrote:

> No, not at all, I'm familiar with brain measurements and neuroscience>

Lol ! You have a high school education...and what else?

> > If you ever had to own up to the fact that TM produces EEG
> > brainwaves not achievable in other techniques, your raison d'être
> > would crumble >>

That's strange, I seem to remember from way back the TM movement ONLY
claiming that they get the same physiological and brainwave results in
the first 3 months as a 20 year Tibetan Buddhist adept. That was their
main point and repeated many many times, and all you seem to have done
is prove the ooint that the TM scientists said. All of the subjects in
the unpublished studies you site are are long-term reclusive devotees.
Well done in proving what the TM-scientists and others have been saying
for decades Vaj.

OffWorld

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> This exchange illustrates perfectly what I've been
> saying for some time now. When Vaj is challenged,
> instead of rising to the challenge, he fades...and
> dances...and sings...and stands on his head...and
> twists and turns...and wiggles his ears...and thumbs
> his nose...but he NEVER RESPONDS TO THE CHALLENGE.

HaHa and BINGO ! 
Could it be because he is faking it all ?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> 
> "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that  
> results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> 
> Paul Ekman,
> University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> 

maitryaadiSu (= maitrii, karuNaa, muditaa, and stuff) balaani.

I 33 and III 24

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Hi RD:
> 
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 8:50 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:28 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in  
> > other
> > > > > > meditation practices?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Travis isn't talking about "just" alpha which anyone can  
> > demonstrate
> > > > doing biofeedback, listening to music, daydreaming etc. He's  
> > talking
> > > > specifically about alpha coherence in the frontal lobes of the
> > > > brain, which no one has found in other forms of meditation or in
> > > > people just relaxing. He's comparing three types of meditation
> > > > techniques and TM is the only one that produces "frontal alpha
> > > > coherence." Since relaxation and other forms of meditation can't
> > > > reproduce it, it must be unique to TM. The fact that we don't know
> > > > what it "means" doesn't negate its uniqueness, maybe it just means
> > > > "something good is happening."
> > >
> > > Sorry, not buying it. It's no wonder Travis is viewed at with
> > > suspicion as this is total BS.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not asking you to buy anything. Just answer the question. Why do  
> > researchers
> 

Raunchydog wrote: 
"I'm not asking you to buy anything. Just answer the question. Why do 
researchers find "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and not in people simply 
relaxing or in other meditation techniques? No answer implies you either don't 
know the difference between alpha brainwaves in relaxation and "frontal alpha 
coherence" in TM or you are afraid to admit you're the one pedaling BS and not 
Travis."

> Whoa. Let's stop you right there. Not "researchers", but "TM zealot  
> researchers", claiming independent views but espousing "zig heil" TM  
> movement sputum.
> 

What a cop-out. For the second time Vaj has not answered my question. Instead 
of simply saying, "Yes, TM produces "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and 
does not compared to Buddhist or Mindfullness meditation and is therefore 
unique, he snips my question and makes up some BS saying he doesn't have to 
answer because he objects to the word "researchers" when in fact I was citing 
research by Travis. He can't answer the question honestly because he would have 
to admit that TM uniquely produces "frontal alpha coherence." I'm not saying TM 
is better than any technique he wants to do, just that it appears to be unique 
if no other technique can produce "frontal alpha coherence". He poses as a man 
of science but he is not open to a discussion of "frontal alpha coherence" and 
why it is only found in TM'ers. 

> All I'm getting is 'should I angle my sputum-bucket closer to the  
> Unified Field of TM or the patient? Oh, I'm sorry...the patient?
> 
> 

Vaj is derogatory about TM as usual. No axe to grind? Ha!

> > find "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and not in people simply  
> > relaxing or in other meditation techniques? No answer implies you  
> > either don't know the difference between alpha brainwaves in  
> > relaxation and "frontal alpha coherence" in TM or you are afraid to  
> > admit you're the one pedaling BS and not Travis.
> 
> No, not at all, I'm familiar with brain measurements and neuroscience,  
> so this type of begging argument just doesn't effect me like it does  
> the 'willing believers'. I learned a long time ago not to trust these  
> folks, and it's sad to say: I see the same patterns even after MMY  
> croaked.
> 

Although Vaj poses as a man of science, he still won't answer the question. 
Does he think there is no such thing as "frontal alpha coherence" and it has 
never been observed in TM'ers? Travis presents his proof that it exists 
uniquely in TM. Where's Vaj's proof that it doesn't? So Vaj has trust issues 
with the TM folks. Fine. Why would that prevent him from answering my question? 
He's copping out, pretending he's so above it all that he doesn't have to stoop 
to answer. Cop-out.

> >
> > If you ever had to own up to the fact that TM produces EEG  
> > brainwaves not achievable in other techniques, your raison d'être  
> > would crumble and we would see a lot less of you, your Buddhist  
> > mumbojumbo and continuous attempts to discredit TM. For what?
> 
> Well that's an interesting statement. I'm sad to say, I do not believe  
> it is a supportable argument my dear. One needs to be able to  
> objectively and scientifically observe phenomenon for which we credit  
> so-called "research". The observations and syllogisms seem almost  
> childish to me: to render some thing available, now, to "me". Childish.
> 

What a condescending putz. I can almost feel him looking down his patronizing 
nose at us. If he is so objective, you'd think he'd at least be c

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[authfriend]

This exchange illustrates perfectly what I've been
saying for some time now. When Vaj is challenged,
instead of rising to the challenge, he fades...and
dances...and sings...and stands on his head...and
twists and turns...and wiggles his ears...and thumbs
his nose...but he NEVER RESPONDS TO THE CHALLENGE.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Hi RD:
> 
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 8:50 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:28 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in  
> > other
> > > > > > meditation practices?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Travis isn't talking about "just" alpha which anyone can  
> > demonstrate
> > > > doing biofeedback, listening to music, daydreaming etc. He's  
> > talking
> > > > specifically about alpha coherence in the frontal lobes of the
> > > > brain, which no one has found in other forms of meditation or in
> > > > people just relaxing. He's comparing three types of meditation
> > > > techniques and TM is the only one that produces "frontal alpha
> > > > coherence." Since relaxation and other forms of meditation can't
> > > > reproduce it, it must be unique to TM. The fact that we don't know
> > > > what it "means" doesn't negate its uniqueness, maybe it just means
> > > > "something good is happening."
> > >
> > > Sorry, not buying it. It's no wonder Travis is viewed at with
> > > suspicion as this is total BS.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not asking you to buy anything. Just answer the question. Why do  
> > researchers
> 
> Whoa. Let's stop you right there. Not "researchers", but "TM zealot  
> researchers", claiming independent views but espousing "zig heil" TM  
> movement sputum.
> 
> All I'm getting is 'should I angle my sputum-bucket closer to the  
> Unified Field of TM or the patient? Oh, I'm sorry...the patient?
> 
> 
> > find "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and not in people simply  
> > relaxing or in other meditation techniques? No answer implies you  
> > either don't know the difference between alpha brainwaves in  
> > relaxation and "frontal alpha coherence" in TM or you are afraid to  
> > admit you're the one pedaling BS and not Travis.
> 
> No, not at all, I'm familiar with brain measurements and neuroscience,  
> so this type of begging argument just doesn't effect me like it does  
> the 'willing believers'. I learned a long time ago not to trust these  
> folks, and it's sad to say: I see the same patterns even after MMY  
> croaked.
> 
> >
> > If you ever had to own up to the fact that TM produces EEG  
> > brainwaves not achievable in other techniques, your raison d'être  
> > would crumble and we would see a lot less of you, your Buddhist  
> > mumbojumbo and continuous attempts to discredit TM. For what?
> 
> Well that's an interesting statement. I'm sad to say, I do not believe  
> it is a supportable argument my dear. One needs to be able to  
> objectively and scientifically observe phenomenon for which we credit  
> so-called "research". The observations and syllogisms seem almost  
> childish to me: to render some thing available, now, to "me". Childish.
> 
> Just to own up here: Zen students were able to quickly master the  
> "alpha" challenge and we know what the concomitants are of "alpha".  
> It's not appropriate to continuously putsch bizarrely countervening  
> ideals. It very strange to other legit scientists...cultish at best...
> 
> > Why do you have such an axe to grind?
> 
> I don't have any axe and I have nothing to grind RD. I'm really just a  
> science fan, when it comes to the realties of everyday AND meditative  
> (or contemplative) life I just take them as they are. I don't confuse  
> Vedic science fiction and science fact--and I have honest reasons for  
> that.
> 
> 
> > If you think you're going to save the world from "dangerous" TM and  
> > "evil" Maharishi by posting on FFLife, you're just pissing in a tiny  
> > pot of little consequence. Boring, boring, boring.
> 
> Well thanks for that.
> 
> >
> > > >
> > > > "Meditation in the Tibetan Buddhism tradition has been generally
> > > > described as: "Reasoned deconstruction of the reality of objects
> > > > experienced in meditation, as well as concentrative practices to
> > > > create moods such as pure compassion, loving kindness; or no self.
> > > > This involves focused attention, and control of the mind. It
> > > > involves concentration.
> > >
> > > Wow, what a horrible description of the literally hundreds--- 
> > probably
> > > thousands--of meditation techniques in Tibetan Buddhism alone. If  
> > this
> > > is his description, it certainly, clearly shows the guy doesn't  
> > have a
> > > clue what he's talking about.
> > >
> >
> > If you know the first thing about resea

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

Hi RD:

On Aug 22, 2009, at 8:50 PM, raunchydog wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:28 PM, raunchydog wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> > >
> > > > Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in  
other

> > > > meditation practices?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Travis isn't talking about "just" alpha which anyone can  
demonstrate
> > doing biofeedback, listening to music, daydreaming etc. He's  
talking

> > specifically about alpha coherence in the frontal lobes of the
> > brain, which no one has found in other forms of meditation or in
> > people just relaxing. He's comparing three types of meditation
> > techniques and TM is the only one that produces "frontal alpha
> > coherence." Since relaxation and other forms of meditation can't
> > reproduce it, it must be unique to TM. The fact that we don't know
> > what it "means" doesn't negate its uniqueness, maybe it just means
> > "something good is happening."
>
> Sorry, not buying it. It's no wonder Travis is viewed at with
> suspicion as this is total BS.
>

I'm not asking you to buy anything. Just answer the question. Why do  
researchers


Whoa. Let's stop you right there. Not "researchers", but "TM zealot  
researchers", claiming independent views but espousing "zig heil" TM  
movement sputum.


All I'm getting is 'should I angle my sputum-bucket closer to the  
Unified Field of TM or the patient? Oh, I'm sorry...the patient?



find "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and not in people simply  
relaxing or in other meditation techniques? No answer implies you  
either don't know the difference between alpha brainwaves in  
relaxation and "frontal alpha coherence" in TM or you are afraid to  
admit you're the one pedaling BS and not Travis.


No, not at all, I'm familiar with brain measurements and neuroscience,  
so this type of begging argument just doesn't effect me like it does  
the 'willing believers'. I learned a long time ago not to trust these  
folks, and it's sad to say: I see the same patterns even after MMY  
croaked.




If you ever had to own up to the fact that TM produces EEG  
brainwaves not achievable in other techniques, your raison d'être  
would crumble and we would see a lot less of you, your Buddhist  
mumbojumbo and continuous attempts to discredit TM. For what?


Well that's an interesting statement. I'm sad to say, I do not believe  
it is a supportable argument my dear. One needs to be able to  
objectively and scientifically observe phenomenon for which we credit  
so-called "research". The observations and syllogisms seem almost  
childish to me: to render some thing available, now, to "me". Childish.


Just to own up here: Zen students were able to quickly master the  
"alpha" challenge and we know what the concomitants are of "alpha".  
It's not appropriate to continuously putsch bizarrely countervening  
ideals. It very strange to other legit scientists...cultish at best...



Why do you have such an axe to grind?


I don't have any axe and I have nothing to grind RD. I'm really just a  
science fan, when it comes to the realties of everyday AND meditative  
(or contemplative) life I just take them as they are. I don't confuse  
Vedic science fiction and science fact--and I have honest reasons for  
that.



If you think you're going to save the world from "dangerous" TM and  
"evil" Maharishi by posting on FFLife, you're just pissing in a tiny  
pot of little consequence. Boring, boring, boring.


Well thanks for that.



> >
> > "Meditation in the Tibetan Buddhism tradition has been generally
> > described as: "Reasoned deconstruction of the reality of objects
> > experienced in meditation, as well as concentrative practices to
> > create moods such as pure compassion, loving kindness; or no self.
> > This involves focused attention, and control of the mind. It
> > involves concentration.
>
> Wow, what a horrible description of the literally hundreds--- 
probably
> thousands--of meditation techniques in Tibetan Buddhism alone. If  
this
> is his description, it certainly, clearly shows the guy doesn't  
have a

> clue what he's talking about.
>

If you know the first thing about research you should know that you  
minimize your variables. Obviously, Travis couldn't pick a thousand  
different techniques for his study, so he picked one. If there are a  
thousand techniques in Buddhism, it stands to reason that a least  
one of them is practiced as Travis describes.


Well that would presume you consider Travis to be objective. I don't-- 
by any shot consider Travis nowhere near objective. He was bought and  
sold ages ago my child.


Wake the fuck up.

By the way, I have yet to hear you pick one Buddhist meditation  
technique and define it as precisely as Travis did.


Travis did not define any Buddhist technique precisely at all. What  
Travis did was pick a TB sta

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:28 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> > >
> > > > Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other
> > > > meditation practices?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Travis isn't talking about "just" alpha which anyone can demonstrate  
> > doing biofeedback, listening to music, daydreaming etc. He's talking  
> > specifically about alpha coherence in the frontal lobes of the  
> > brain, which no one has found in other forms of meditation or in  
> > people just relaxing. He's comparing three types of meditation  
> > techniques and TM is the only one that produces "frontal alpha  
> > coherence." Since relaxation and other forms of meditation can't  
> > reproduce it, it must be unique to TM. The fact that we don't know  
> > what it "means" doesn't negate its uniqueness, maybe it just means  
> > "something good is happening."
> 
> Sorry, not buying it. It's no wonder Travis is viewed at with  
> suspicion as this is total BS.
> 

I'm not asking you to buy anything. Just answer the question. Why do 
researchers find "frontal alpha coherence" in TM'ers and not in people simply 
relaxing or in other meditation techniques? No answer implies you either don't 
know the difference between alpha brainwaves in relaxation and "frontal alpha 
coherence" in TM or you are afraid to admit you're the one pedaling BS and not 
Travis. 

If you ever had to own up to the fact that TM produces EEG brainwaves not 
achievable in other techniques, your raison d'être would crumble and we would 
see a lot less of you, your Buddhist mumbojumbo and continuous attempts to 
discredit TM. For what? Why do you have such an axe to grind? If you think 
you're going to save the world from "dangerous" TM and "evil" Maharishi by 
posting on FFLife, you're just pissing in a tiny pot of little consequence. 
Boring, boring, boring.

> >
> > "Meditation in the Tibetan Buddhism tradition has been generally  
> > described as: "Reasoned deconstruction of the reality of objects  
> > experienced in meditation, as well as concentrative practices to  
> > create moods such as pure compassion, loving kindness; or no self.  
> > This involves focused attention, and control of the mind. It  
> > involves concentration.
> 
> Wow, what a horrible description of the literally hundreds---probably  
> thousands--of meditation techniques in Tibetan Buddhism alone. If this  
> is his description, it certainly, clearly shows the guy doesn't have a  
> clue what he's talking about.
> 

If you know the first thing about research you should know that you minimize 
your variables. Obviously, Travis couldn't pick a thousand different techniques 
for his study, so he picked one.  If there are a thousand techniques in 
Buddhism, it stands to reason that a least one of them is practiced as Travis 
describes. By the way, I have yet to hear you pick one Buddhist meditation 
technique and define it as precisely as Travis did. You're always kind of fuzzy 
on describing a Buddhist technique so how could anyone listening to you figure 
out how to structure a research model to compare TM with other techniques? Now 
there's the ticket. Describe for us one, just one, Buddhist meditation 
technique that sets clear parameters for a research model comparing it to TM 
and Mindfulness. 

Things to consider: How many minutes? How many years of practice? 
Reasoned deconstruction of the reality of objects experienced in meditation? 
Concentrative practices to create moods such as pure compassion, loving 
kindness or no self? What would you add to the mix? What's missing?

> >
> > Mindfulness Meditation is described by Paul Grossman as: Systematic  
> > procedure to develop enhanced awareness of moment-to-moment  
> > experiences. Mindfulness includes two meditation practices:
> > - with eyes closed: attention on breath.
> > - with eyes open: dispassionate observation of body, senses and  
> > environment. This meditation involves intention or directing of  
> > attention to physiological rhythms, inner thoughts, sensations or  
> > outer objects.
> >
> > Transcendental Meditation technique is a process of effortless  
> > transcending...
> >
> > As a working hypothesis, let's accept that TM is effortless, and  
> > then generate testable hypotheses. One of these testable hypotheses,  
> > is: If TM is effortless, then people should quickly master the  
> > practice of transcending.
> 
> If we know about the metaphysics of meditation, we know that  
> meditation with objects can never be truly effortless--a fine  
> distinction, but a crucial one. So we should avoid saying things we  
> know to be false, as if repeating the lie over and over, someone will  
> believe it. Perhaps this is why MMY went to such lengths to point that  
> TM involved a small amount of effort at Estes Park...
> 

Well, 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Bhairitu]

Vaj wrote:
>>
>> Cleaning house the other day I came across my copy of "The Physical and
>> Psychological Effects of Meditation " the 1988 book by Michael Murphy
>> and Steven Donovan published by Esalen Institute. I'm going to have to
>> thumb through some of those studies again. ;-)
>
> Probably mostly out of date.
>
> Check out the meditation research section of The Cambridge Handbook of 
> Consciousness if you want a state of the art view.

I'm aware of the current research but thought it would be interesting to 
see what was published back then.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 22, 2009, at 5:59 PM, Bhairitu wrote:


Vaj wrote:
>
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
>
>> Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other
>> meditation practices?
>
>
> It isn't considered important because it's low integration and  
common.

> Usually meditation will only briefly stay in alpha until it goes to
> deeper levels of absorption.
>
> As one of the primary experts on EEG Barbara Brown said about alpha
> "Concluding anything about alpha is perilous." All it means in the
> case of TM you are listening to a faint sound, a mantra, you're  
nicely

> relaxed or both. But you can poise yourself as is listening to ANY
> faint noise and alpha will shoot up. Big whoop. Many things can get
> you into the alpha state, but in deep meditation alpha is passed by.
>
>> > interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma
>> > coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition  
yogis who
>> > could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence,  
which

>> > oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,
>> > continues even when these yogis are not meditating.
>> >
>> > "And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.
>> >
>>
>> Well, that's the way Vaj says it is.
>>
>> "What strikes me as uncool is feeling that a cool thing  
attributable

>> to TM must somehow be "countered" because it isn't attributable to
>> Buddhism."
>
> If that's what's happening, that would be uncool. But that's not
> what's happening. What's happening is meditation researchers who are
> reputable have gained considerable wisdom in different ways of  
looking

> at the brain, and EEG is one we know a lot about already. When the
> leading researchers on the planet say TM's claims are exaggerated  
and
> premature (among other things), it would bade well to find out  
"why".

>
> Since I had heard rumors of the exaggeration by old staff who had
> worked with Maharishi in the original disappointing findings way  
back
> in the 80's, the researchers were basically told "go with the  
alpha".
> They had no choice. They did what Maharishi insisted was  
significant.
> Forcing researchers to report a finding as significant that they  
felt
> (and knew) was insignificant is always bound to catch up with you.  
And

> IMO that's exactly what has happened.
>
> Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!

Cleaning house the other day I came across my copy of "The Physical  
and

Psychological Effects of Meditation " the 1988 book by Michael Murphy
and Steven Donovan published by Esalen Institute. I'm going to have to
thumb through some of those studies again. ;-)


Probably mostly out of date.

Check out the meditation research section of The Cambridge Handbook of  
Consciousness if you want a state of the art view.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Bhairitu]

Vaj wrote:
>
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
>
>> Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other 
>> meditation practices?
>
>
> It isn't considered important because it's low integration and common. 
> Usually meditation will only briefly stay in alpha until it goes to 
> deeper levels of absorption.
>
> As one of the primary experts on EEG Barbara Brown said about alpha 
> "Concluding anything about alpha is perilous." All it means in the 
> case of TM you are listening to a faint sound, a mantra, you're nicely 
> relaxed or both. But you can poise yourself as is listening to ANY 
> faint noise and alpha will shoot up. Big whoop. Many things can get 
> you into the alpha state, but in deep meditation alpha is passed by.
>
>> > interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma
>> > coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition yogis who
>> > could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence, which
>> > oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,
>> > continues even when these yogis are not meditating.
>> >
>> > "And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.
>> >
>>
>> Well, that's the way Vaj says it is.
>>
>> "What strikes me as uncool is feeling that a cool thing attributable 
>> to TM must somehow be "countered" because it isn't attributable to 
>> Buddhism."
>
> If that's what's happening, that would be uncool. But that's not 
> what's happening. What's happening is meditation researchers who are 
> reputable have gained considerable wisdom in different ways of looking 
> at the brain, and EEG is one we know a lot about already. When the 
> leading researchers on the planet say TM's claims are exaggerated and 
> premature (among other things), it would bade well to find out "why".
>
> Since I had heard rumors of the exaggeration by old staff who had 
> worked with Maharishi in the original disappointing findings way back 
> in the 80's, the researchers were basically told "go with the alpha". 
> They had no choice. They did what Maharishi insisted was significant. 
> Forcing researchers to report a finding as significant that they felt 
> (and knew) was insignificant is always bound to catch up with you. And 
> IMO that's exactly what has happened.
>
> Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!

Cleaning house the other day I came across my copy of "The Physical and 
Psychological Effects of Meditation " the 1988 book by Michael Murphy 
and Steven Donovan published by Esalen Institute.  I'm going to have to 
thumb through some of those studies again.  ;-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:28 PM, raunchydog wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
>
> > Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other
> > meditation practices?
>
>

Travis isn't talking about "just" alpha which anyone can demonstrate  
doing biofeedback, listening to music, daydreaming etc. He's talking  
specifically about alpha coherence in the frontal lobes of the  
brain, which no one has found in other forms of meditation or in  
people just relaxing. He's comparing three types of meditation  
techniques and TM is the only one that produces "frontal alpha  
coherence." Since relaxation and other forms of meditation can't  
reproduce it, it must be unique to TM. The fact that we don't know  
what it "means" doesn't negate its uniqueness, maybe it just means  
"something good is happening."


Sorry, not buying it. It's no wonder Travis is viewed at with  
suspicion as this is total BS.





"Meditation in the Tibetan Buddhism tradition has been generally  
described as: "Reasoned deconstruction of the reality of objects  
experienced in meditation, as well as concentrative practices to  
create moods such as pure compassion, loving kindness; or no self.  
This involves focused attention, and control of the mind. It  
involves concentration.


Wow, what a horrible description of the literally hundreds---probably  
thousands--of meditation techniques in Tibetan Buddhism alone. If this  
is his description, it certainly, clearly shows the guy doesn't have a  
clue what he's talking about.




Mindfulness Meditation is described by Paul Grossman as: Systematic  
procedure to develop enhanced awareness of moment-to-moment  
experiences. Mindfulness includes two meditation practices:

- with eyes closed: attention on breath.
- with eyes open: dispassionate observation of body, senses and  
environment. This meditation involves intention or directing of  
attention to physiological rhythms, inner thoughts, sensations or  
outer objects.


Transcendental Meditation technique is a process of effortless  
transcending...


As a working hypothesis, let's accept that TM is effortless, and  
then generate testable hypotheses. One of these testable hypotheses,  
is: If TM is effortless, then people should quickly master the  
practice of transcending.


If we know about the metaphysics of meditation, we know that  
meditation with objects can never be truly effortless--a fine  
distinction, but a crucial one. So we should avoid saying things we  
know to be false, as if repeating the lie over and over, someone will  
believe it. Perhaps this is why MMY went to such lengths to point that  
TM involved a small amount of effort at Estes Park...




Research supports this hypothesis. In the next slide, we see EEG  
during TM in students of the same age, but with very different  
levels of time practicing the Transcendental Meditation technique.  
The one on the left just learned the TM technique, as a new student  
at Maharishi University of Management. The one on the right has been  
meditating since he was 10 years old."


http://www.fredtravis.com/talk.html


I'm familiar with the spiel. It's kinda disappointing now that that  
MMY is gone, they don't at least TRY to be more honest.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:04 PM, nablusoss1008 wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!

Pity then that you didn't "wake up" but joined, or perhaps you've  
been there all along, Buddhism; perhaps the most stagnated and  
formalized of all the major and dry religions on earth.



Actually, the first thing I did was go to the Shankaracharya and  
someone from Guru Dev's direct line for further teachings. I was far  
from disappointed!


Nice try though. ;-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:
> 
> > Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other  
> > meditation practices?
> 
> 

Travis isn't talking about "just" alpha which anyone can demonstrate doing 
biofeedback, listening to music, daydreaming etc. He's talking specifically 
about alpha coherence in the frontal lobes of the brain, which no one has found 
in other forms of meditation or in people just relaxing. He's comparing three 
types of meditation techniques and TM is the only one that produces "frontal 
alpha coherence."  Since relaxation and other forms of meditation can't 
reproduce it, it must be unique to TM. The fact that we don't know what it 
"means" doesn't negate its uniqueness, maybe it just means "something good is 
happening."

"Meditation in the Tibetan Buddhism tradition has been generally described as: 
"Reasoned deconstruction of the reality of objects experienced in meditation, 
as well as concentrative practices to create moods such as pure compassion, 
loving kindness; or no self. This involves focused attention, and control of 
the mind. It involves concentration.

Mindfulness Meditation is described by Paul Grossman as: Systematic procedure 
to develop enhanced awareness of moment-to-moment experiences. Mindfulness 
includes two meditation practices:
- with eyes closed: attention on breath.
- with eyes open: dispassionate observation of body, senses and environment. 
This meditation involves intention or directing of attention to physiological 
rhythms, inner thoughts, sensations or outer objects.

Transcendental Meditation technique is a process of effortless transcending... 

As a working hypothesis, let's accept that TM is effortless, and then generate 
testable hypotheses. One of these testable hypotheses, is: If TM is effortless, 
then people should quickly master the practice of transcending.

Research supports this hypothesis. In the next slide, we see EEG during TM in 
students of the same age, but with very different levels of time practicing the 
Transcendental Meditation technique. The one on the left just learned the TM 
technique, as a new student at Maharishi University of Management. The one on 
the right has been meditating since he was 10 years old."

http://www.fredtravis.com/talk.html

> It isn't considered important because it's low integration and common.  
> Usually meditation will only briefly stay in alpha until it goes to  
> deeper levels of absorption.
> 
> As one of the primary experts on EEG Barbara Brown said about alpha  
> "Concluding anything about alpha is perilous." All it means in the  
> case of TM you are listening to a faint sound, a mantra, you're nicely  
> relaxed or both. But you can poise yourself as is listening to ANY  
> faint noise and alpha will shoot up. Big whoop. Many things can get  
> you into the alpha state, but in deep meditation alpha is passed by.
> 
> > > interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma
> > > coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition yogis  
> > who
> > > could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence,  
> > which
> > > oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,
> > > continues even when these yogis are not meditating.
> > >
> > > "And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.
> > >
> >
> > Well, that's the way Vaj says it is.
> >
> > "What strikes me as uncool is feeling that a cool thing attributable  
> > to TM must somehow be "countered" because it isn't attributable to  
> > Buddhism."
> 
> If that's what's happening, that would be uncool. But that's not  
> what's happening. What's happening is meditation researchers who are  
> reputable have gained considerable wisdom in different ways of looking  
> at the brain, and EEG is one we know a lot about already. When the  
> leading researchers on the planet say TM's claims are exaggerated and  
> premature (among other things), it would bade well to find out "why".
> 
> Since I had heard rumors of the exaggeration by old staff who had  
> worked with Maharishi in the original disappointing findings way back  
> in the 80's, the researchers were basically told "go with the alpha".  
> They had no choice. They did what Maharishi insisted was significant.  
> Forcing researchers to report a finding as significant that they felt  
> (and knew) was insignificant is always bound to catch up with you. And  
> IMO that's exactly what has happened.
> 
> Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!

Pity then that you didn't "wake up" but joined, or perhaps you've been there 
all along, Buddhism; perhaps the most stagnated and formalized of all the major 
and dry religions on earth.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 21, 2009, at 11:11 PM, WillyTex wrote:


Vaj wrote:
> Ah yes, James Austin. Good stuff!
>
Ah yes, James Austin, the same James Austin
that cites Herbert Benson, who as everyone
knows, first published the results of TM
with Keith Wallace. According to Austin,
scientists have mapped the relaxation
response in TM meditation. Makes one wonder
if all that stuff you said about TM was
true.



You love your strawmen too Willy, don't you?

I've always known and accepted that TM invokes the relaxation  
response. In fact I just recently sat with HHDL and Herbert Benson at  
Harvard and heard him say what 8 common meditations can elicit the  
relaxation response. TM is one of many.


Of course that would not include people who are unstressing most  
likely. ;-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:39 PM, raunchydog wrote:

Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other  
meditation practices?



It isn't considered important because it's low integration and common.  
Usually meditation will only briefly stay in alpha until it goes to  
deeper levels of absorption.


As one of the primary experts on EEG Barbara Brown said about alpha  
"Concluding anything about alpha is perilous." All it means in the  
case of TM you are listening to a faint sound, a mantra, you're nicely  
relaxed or both. But you can poise yourself as is listening to ANY  
faint noise and alpha will shoot up. Big whoop. Many things can get  
you into the alpha state, but in deep meditation alpha is passed by.



> interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma
> coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition yogis  
who
> could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence,  
which

> oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,
> continues even when these yogis are not meditating.
>
> "And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.
>

Well, that's the way Vaj says it is.

"What strikes me as uncool is feeling that a cool thing attributable  
to TM must somehow be "countered" because it isn't attributable to  
Buddhism."


If that's what's happening, that would be uncool. But that's not  
what's happening. What's happening is meditation researchers who are  
reputable have gained considerable wisdom in different ways of looking  
at the brain, and EEG is one we know a lot about already. When the  
leading researchers on the planet say TM's claims are exaggerated and  
premature (among other things), it would bade well to find out "why".


Since I had heard rumors of the exaggeration by old staff who had  
worked with Maharishi in the original disappointing findings way back  
in the 80's, the researchers were basically told "go with the alpha".  
They had no choice. They did what Maharishi insisted was significant.  
Forcing researchers to report a finding as significant that they felt  
(and knew) was insignificant is always bound to catch up with you. And  
IMO that's exactly what has happened.


Boy, was I disappointed when I first heard that. Wake up call!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > What strikes me as uncool is feeling
> > > that a cool thing attributable to Buddhism must somehow
> > > be "countered" because it isn't attributable to TM.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > What strikes 'me' as uncool is your assumption that my post had anything at 
> > all to do either with Buddhism OR TM. It's simply ANOTHER look at what 
> > makes people happy.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What Makes Us Happy?
> > > > 
> > > > "The job isn't conforming, it isn't 
> > > > keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
> > > > and working and loving. And loving is 
> > > > probably the most important. 
> > > > 
> > > > Happiness is love. Full stop."
> > > > 
> 
> I guess I agree. And the *object* of love can be
> practically anything...
>


Yes. I would say that it's easy to love this or that. That's how easy love is. 
And that love, the substance of that love is the substance of God. 

Love happens in the heart, and one finds God in one's heart.


-God is Love

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth 
is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is 
love. 
1 John 7-8


"Having become a devotee of God one can never remain unhappy. This is our 
experience."

~ Swami Brahmananda Saraswati [Guru Dev]

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[WillyTex]

Vaj wrote:
> Ah yes, James Austin. Good stuff!
>
Ah yes, James Austin, the same James Austin
that cites Herbert Benson, who as everyone 
knows, first published the results of TM 
with Keith Wallace. According to Austin,
scientists have mapped the relaxation 
response in TM meditation. Makes one wonder
if all that stuff you said about TM was 
true.

8. Lazar, S, Bush, G, Gollub, R, et al. 
"Functional brain mapping of the relaxation 
response and meditation." NeuroReport 2000; 
11: (7): 1581-1585.

http://www.dana.org/news/cerebrum/detail.aspx?id=2896

"Meditation is a conscious mental process 
that induces a set of integrated physiologic 
changes termed the relaxation response..." 

'Functional brain mapping of the relaxation 
response and meditation'

Lazar SW, Bush G, Gollub RL, Fricchione GL, 
Khalsa G, Benson H.
PubMed, 10841380, May 2000
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10841380

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:49 AM, raunchydog wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> > >
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> > >
> > > "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that
> > > results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > >
> > > Paul Ekman,
> > > University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> > >
> > > Buddhists 'really are happier'
> > >
> > > Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are
> > > happier and calmer than other people.
> > >
> > > Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their
> > > brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more  
> > active.
> >
> > If, as TM critics say, we don't know what TM EEG brain coherence  
> > means and therefore we cannot say it correlates with better  
> > behavior, how can we say that we know what "activity in the left  
> > prefrontal lobes" means in Buddhist meditation and correlates with  
> > better behavior? If Buddhists "light up" only the left half of  
> > their brain and feel happy, wouldn't it follow that TMer's  
> > "lighting up" both halves of their brain would feel doubly happy?
> 
> 
> They're not referring to EEG measurements, but PET and fMRI findings  
> of the brain, in real time when they're referring to things "lighting  
> up". We do know the areas of the brain associated with certain  
> positive emotions and qualities. For some reason perfusion or blood  
> supply to these regions of the brain increases, creating neuroplastic  
> changes to these areas, the cortex actually thickens. Since these are  
> lasting changes, it's actually as if these qualities are 'dyed" into  
> their brains. Thus in depression patients, it's now known that they  
> can even stop meditating and the alleviation of depression will  
> continue, they become "resilient" since they've physically altered  
> their brain for the better.
> 
> Regarding TM EEG "alpha coherence", that's probably the biggest  
> sleight of hand job ever pulled. Alpha coherence in the range seen in  
> advanced TM meditators, is actually within the normal range of  
> healthy humans who don't meditate. In fact alpha coherence is so  
> common in humans, it's not really anything special at all. The most  

Then how come, "Frontal alpha coherence is not reported in other meditation 
practices?" http://www.fredtravis.com/talk.html

> interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma  
> coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition yogis who  
> could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence, which  
> oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,  
> continues even when these yogis are not meditating.
> 
> "And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.
>

Well, that's the way Vaj says it is. 

"What strikes me as uncool is feeling that a cool thing attributable to TM must 
somehow be "countered" because it isn't attributable to Buddhism."

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[cardemaister]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> What strikes me as uncool is feeling
> > that a cool thing attributable to Buddhism must somehow
> > be "countered" because it isn't attributable to TM.
> > 
> 
> 
> What strikes 'me' as uncool is your assumption that my post had anything at 
> all to do either with Buddhism OR TM. It's simply ANOTHER look at what makes 
> people happy.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > >
> > > What Makes Us Happy?
> > > 
> > > "The job isn't conforming, it isn't 
> > > keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
> > > and working and loving. And loving is 
> > > probably the most important. 
> > > 
> > > Happiness is love. Full stop."
> > > 

I guess I agree. And the *object* of love can be
practically anything... 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > What strikes me as uncool is feeling
> > that a cool thing attributable to Buddhism must somehow
> > be "countered" because it isn't attributable to TM.
=> 
> 
> What strikes 'me' as uncool is your assumption that my 
> post had anything at all to do either with Buddhism OR 
> TM. It's simply ANOTHER look at what makes people happy.

And I did not refer to or comment on your post
at all. I merely chose it at random as a spring-
board from which to reply to this thread.

In other words, your post did not even enter my
consciousness when making mine. 


> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> > >
> > > What Makes Us Happy?
> > > 
> > > "The job isn't conforming, it isn't 
> > > keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
> > > and working and loving. And loving is 
> > > probably the most important. 
> > > 
> > > Happiness is love. Full stop."
> > > 
> > > 
> > > For 72 years, researchers at Harvard have been examining this question, 
> > > following 268 men who entered college in the late 1930s through war, 
> > > career, marriage and divorce, parenthood and grandparenthood, and old 
> > > age. Here, for the first time, a journalist gains access to the archive 
> > > of one of the most comprehensive longitudinal studies in history. Its 
> > > contents, as much literature as science, offer profound insight into the 
> > > human condition.
> > > 
> > > Atlantic article: 
> > > http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200906/happiness
> > > 
> > > 
> > > =  = The (Scientific) Pursuit of Happiness
> > > 
> > > The Harvard Study of Adult Development, begun in 1937, has been following 
> > > the lives of 268 men, from college to death, to learn what makes for a 
> > > good life.
> > > 
> > > Dr. George Vaillant, a professor at Harvard Medical School, has been the 
> > > director of the study for 42 years. In this excellent short video from 
> > > The Atlantic, he discusses lessons he learned about fame, ambition, and 
> > > happiness along the way. In the end, his expansive empirical studies 
> > > confirmed what John Lennon told us a few decades ago:
> > > 
> > > "The job isn't conforming, it isn't keeping up with the Jones'. It is 
> > > playing and working and loving. And loving is probably the most 
> > > important. Happiness is love. Full stop."
> > > 
> > > Watch video: 
> > > http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1460906593?bctid=22804415001
> > > 
> > > http://snipurl.com/qnq2l   [link_brightcove_com] 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> > > > 
> > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> > > > 
> > > > "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that  
> > > > results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > > > 
> > > > Paul Ekman,
> > > > University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> > > > 
> > > > Buddhists 'really are happier'
> > > > 
> > > > Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are  
> > > > happier and calmer than other people.
> > > > 
> > > > Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their  
> > > > brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.
> > > > 
> > > > The findings come as another study suggests that Buddhist meditation  
> > > > can help to calm people.
> > > > 
> > > > Researchers at University of California San Francisco Medical Centre  
> > > > have found the practise can tame the amygdala, an area of the brain  
> > > > which is the hub of fear memory.
> > > > 
> > > > They found that experienced Buddhists, who meditate regularly, were  
> > > > less likely to be shocked, flustered, surprised or as angry compared  
> > > > to other people.
> > > > 
> > > > Paul Ekman, who carried out the study, said: "The most reasonable  
> > > > hypothesis is that there is something about conscientious Buddhist  
> > > > practice that results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > > > 
> > > > Brain activity
> > > > 
> > > > In a separate study, scientists at the University of Wisconsin at  
> > > > Madison used new scanning techniques to examine brain activity in a  
> > > > group of Buddhists.
> > > > 
> > > > Their tests revealed activity in the left prefrontal lobes of  
> > > > experienced Buddhist practitioners.
> > > > 
> > > > This area is linked to positive emotions, self-control and temperament.
> > > > 
> > > > Their tests showed this area of the Buddhists' brains are constantly  
> > > > lit up and not just when they are meditating.
> > > > 
> > > > This, the scientists said, suggests they are more likely to  
> > > > experience positive emotions and be in good mood.
> > > > 
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > Paul Ekman (born February 15, 1934) is a psychologist who has been a  
> > > > pioneer in the study of emotions and their relation 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[do.rflex]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  wrote:

[snip]

What strikes me as uncool is feeling
> that a cool thing attributable to Buddhism must somehow
> be "countered" because it isn't attributable to TM.
> 


What strikes 'me' as uncool is your assumption that my post had anything at all 
to do either with Buddhism OR TM. It's simply ANOTHER look at what makes people 
happy.



> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
> >
> > What Makes Us Happy?
> > 
> > "The job isn't conforming, it isn't 
> > keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
> > and working and loving. And loving is 
> > probably the most important. 
> > 
> > Happiness is love. Full stop."
> > 
> > 
> > For 72 years, researchers at Harvard have been examining this question, 
> > following 268 men who entered college in the late 1930s through war, 
> > career, marriage and divorce, parenthood and grandparenthood, and old age. 
> > Here, for the first time, a journalist gains access to the archive of one 
> > of the most comprehensive longitudinal studies in history. Its contents, as 
> > much literature as science, offer profound insight into the human condition.
> > 
> > Atlantic article: 
> > http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200906/happiness
> > 
> > 
> > =  = The (Scientific) Pursuit of Happiness
> > 
> > The Harvard Study of Adult Development, begun in 1937, has been following 
> > the lives of 268 men, from college to death, to learn what makes for a good 
> > life.
> > 
> > Dr. George Vaillant, a professor at Harvard Medical School, has been the 
> > director of the study for 42 years. In this excellent short video from The 
> > Atlantic, he discusses lessons he learned about fame, ambition, and 
> > happiness along the way. In the end, his expansive empirical studies 
> > confirmed what John Lennon told us a few decades ago:
> > 
> > "The job isn't conforming, it isn't keeping up with the Jones'. It is 
> > playing and working and loving. And loving is probably the most important. 
> > Happiness is love. Full stop."
> > 
> > Watch video: 
> > http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1460906593?bctid=22804415001
> > 
> > http://snipurl.com/qnq2l   [link_brightcove_com] 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> > > 
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> > > 
> > > "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that  
> > > results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > > 
> > > Paul Ekman,
> > > University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> > > 
> > > Buddhists 'really are happier'
> > > 
> > > Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are  
> > > happier and calmer than other people.
> > > 
> > > Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their  
> > > brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.
> > > 
> > > The findings come as another study suggests that Buddhist meditation  
> > > can help to calm people.
> > > 
> > > Researchers at University of California San Francisco Medical Centre  
> > > have found the practise can tame the amygdala, an area of the brain  
> > > which is the hub of fear memory.
> > > 
> > > They found that experienced Buddhists, who meditate regularly, were  
> > > less likely to be shocked, flustered, surprised or as angry compared  
> > > to other people.
> > > 
> > > Paul Ekman, who carried out the study, said: "The most reasonable  
> > > hypothesis is that there is something about conscientious Buddhist  
> > > practice that results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > > 
> > > Brain activity
> > > 
> > > In a separate study, scientists at the University of Wisconsin at  
> > > Madison used new scanning techniques to examine brain activity in a  
> > > group of Buddhists.
> > > 
> > > Their tests revealed activity in the left prefrontal lobes of  
> > > experienced Buddhist practitioners.
> > > 
> > > This area is linked to positive emotions, self-control and temperament.
> > > 
> > > Their tests showed this area of the Buddhists' brains are constantly  
> > > lit up and not just when they are meditating.
> > > 
> > > This, the scientists said, suggests they are more likely to  
> > > experience positive emotions and be in good mood.
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Paul Ekman (born February 15, 1934) is a psychologist who has been a  
> > > pioneer in the study of emotions and their relation to facial  
> > > expressions. He is considered one of the 100 most eminent  
> > > psychologists of the twentieth century.[1] The background of Ekman's  
> > > research analyzes the development of human traits and states over  
> > > time (Keltner, 2007). The character Cal Lightman of the television  
> > > series Lie to Me is loosely based on him and his work.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

Ah yes, James Austin. Good stuff!

On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:33 AM, shinkai_birx wrote:



Tricycle: the Buddhist Review (Fall 2009 issue) presents an  
informative article beginning on page 58 entitled "This Is Your  
Brain On Zen".

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[TurquoiseB]

Thanks to all of you so far who have tried to keep the
spirit of Vaj's original post alive instead of crapping
on it. It's fascinating to me, especially in the context
of my current vacation in the Pyrenees, to see how a life 
spent in the pursuit of Buddhist (or spiritual) goals can 
affect how you turn out, and how you think.

Over this trip I've experienced numerous technical diffi-
culties. My expensive digital camera went all Impressionist
on my ass, and started taking photos that look as if they
were painted by Manet or Van Gogh. Then the "E" key fell
off my computer. Then its screen died. And yesterday I got
a flat tire.

One of the friends who is here with me on vacation, some-
one who is very sweet but has never been exposed to medi-
tation and spirituality, said to me, "Wow. You've sure
been having bad luck on this trip."

The phrase "bad luck" shocked me. 

I had not heard -- or used -- the phrase in so long that
it literally took me a few minutes to figure out what my
friend meant by it. 

And then *that* shocked me.

I had never -- even for a moment -- considered the minor
tech failures on this trip as "bad luck," or even anything
"bad." They were just shit that happened.

I tried to explain this to my friend and she didn't get it.
Things that happened to her were instantly sorted into 
"good" and "bad." A sequence of "bad" things for her becomes
a string of "bad luck." 

I just don't think like that. Shit happens. Whether it's 
good shit or bad shit never occurs to me. It's just shit
that needs to be handled. BFD.

If I can attribute that to Buddhism and the practice of
mindfulness, cool. If I were to attribute it to TM, it 
would still be cool. What strikes me as uncool is feeling
that a cool thing attributable to Buddhism must somehow
be "countered" because it isn't attributable to TM.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex"  wrote:
>
> What Makes Us Happy?
> 
> "The job isn't conforming, it isn't 
> keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
> and working and loving. And loving is 
> probably the most important. 
> 
> Happiness is love. Full stop."
> 
> 
> For 72 years, researchers at Harvard have been examining this question, 
> following 268 men who entered college in the late 1930s through war, career, 
> marriage and divorce, parenthood and grandparenthood, and old age. Here, for 
> the first time, a journalist gains access to the archive of one of the most 
> comprehensive longitudinal studies in history. Its contents, as much 
> literature as science, offer profound insight into the human condition.
> 
> Atlantic article: 
> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200906/happiness
> 
> 
> =  = The (Scientific) Pursuit of Happiness
> 
> The Harvard Study of Adult Development, begun in 1937, has been following the 
> lives of 268 men, from college to death, to learn what makes for a good life.
> 
> Dr. George Vaillant, a professor at Harvard Medical School, has been the 
> director of the study for 42 years. In this excellent short video from The 
> Atlantic, he discusses lessons he learned about fame, ambition, and happiness 
> along the way. In the end, his expansive empirical studies confirmed what 
> John Lennon told us a few decades ago:
> 
> "The job isn't conforming, it isn't keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
> and working and loving. And loving is probably the most important. Happiness 
> is love. Full stop."
> 
> Watch video: 
> http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1460906593?bctid=22804415001
> 
> http://snipurl.com/qnq2l   [link_brightcove_com] 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> > 
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> > 
> > "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that  
> > results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > 
> > Paul Ekman,
> > University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> > 
> > Buddhists 'really are happier'
> > 
> > Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are  
> > happier and calmer than other people.
> > 
> > Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their  
> > brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.
> > 
> > The findings come as another study suggests that Buddhist meditation  
> > can help to calm people.
> > 
> > Researchers at University of California San Francisco Medical Centre  
> > have found the practise can tame the amygdala, an area of the brain  
> > which is the hub of fear memory.
> > 
> > They found that experienced Buddhists, who meditate regularly, were  
> > less likely to be shocked, flustered, surprised or as angry compared  
> > to other people.
> > 
> > Paul Ekman, who carried out the study, said: "The most reasonable  
> > hypothesis is that there is something about conscientious Buddhist  
> > practice that results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > 
> > Brain activity
> > 
> > In a separate study, scientists at the

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[do.rflex]

What Makes Us Happy?


"The job isn't conforming, it isn't 
keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
and working and loving. And loving is 
probably the most important. 

Happiness is love. Full stop."


For 72 years, researchers at Harvard have been examining this question, 
following 268 men who entered college in the late 1930s through war, career, 
marriage and divorce, parenthood and grandparenthood, and old age. Here, for 
the first time, a journalist gains access to the archive of one of the most 
comprehensive longitudinal studies in history. Its contents, as much literature 
as science, offer profound insight into the human condition.

Atlantic article: 
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200906/happiness


=  = The (Scientific) Pursuit of Happiness

The Harvard Study of Adult Development, begun in 1937, has been following the 
lives of 268 men, from college to death, to learn what makes for a good life.

Dr. George Vaillant, a professor at Harvard Medical School, has been the 
director of the study for 42 years. In this excellent short video from The 
Atlantic, he discusses lessons he learned about fame, ambition, and happiness 
along the way. In the end, his expansive empirical studies confirmed what John 
Lennon told us a few decades ago:

"The job isn't conforming, it isn't keeping up with the Jones'. It is playing 
and working and loving. And loving is probably the most important. Happiness is 
love. Full stop."

Watch video: 
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1460906593?bctid=22804415001

http://snipurl.com/qnq2l   [link_brightcove_com] 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> 
> "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that  
> results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> 
> Paul Ekman,
> University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> 
> Buddhists 'really are happier'
> 
> Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are  
> happier and calmer than other people.
> 
> Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their  
> brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.
> 
> The findings come as another study suggests that Buddhist meditation  
> can help to calm people.
> 
> Researchers at University of California San Francisco Medical Centre  
> have found the practise can tame the amygdala, an area of the brain  
> which is the hub of fear memory.
> 
> They found that experienced Buddhists, who meditate regularly, were  
> less likely to be shocked, flustered, surprised or as angry compared  
> to other people.
> 
> Paul Ekman, who carried out the study, said: "The most reasonable  
> hypothesis is that there is something about conscientious Buddhist  
> practice that results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> 
> Brain activity
> 
> In a separate study, scientists at the University of Wisconsin at  
> Madison used new scanning techniques to examine brain activity in a  
> group of Buddhists.
> 
> Their tests revealed activity in the left prefrontal lobes of  
> experienced Buddhist practitioners.
> 
> This area is linked to positive emotions, self-control and temperament.
> 
> Their tests showed this area of the Buddhists' brains are constantly  
> lit up and not just when they are meditating.
> 
> This, the scientists said, suggests they are more likely to  
> experience positive emotions and be in good mood.
> 
> ---
> 
> Paul Ekman (born February 15, 1934) is a psychologist who has been a  
> pioneer in the study of emotions and their relation to facial  
> expressions. He is considered one of the 100 most eminent  
> psychologists of the twentieth century.[1] The background of Ekman's  
> research analyzes the development of human traits and states over  
> time (Keltner, 2007). The character Cal Lightman of the television  
> series Lie to Me is loosely based on him and his work.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[shinkai_birx]

Tricycle: the Buddhist Review (Fall 2009 issue) presents an informative article 
beginning on page 58 entitled "This Is Your Brain On Zen".


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:49 AM, raunchydog wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> > >
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> > >
> > > "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that
> > > results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> > >
> > > Paul Ekman,
> > > University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> > >
> > > Buddhists 'really are happier'
> > >
> > > Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are
> > > happier and calmer than other people.
> > >
> > > Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their
> > > brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more  
> > active.
> >
> > If, as TM critics say, we don't know what TM EEG brain coherence  
> > means and therefore we cannot say it correlates with better  
> > behavior, how can we say that we know what "activity in the left  
> > prefrontal lobes" means in Buddhist meditation and correlates with  
> > better behavior? If Buddhists "light up" only the left half of  
> > their brain and feel happy, wouldn't it follow that TMer's  
> > "lighting up" both halves of their brain would feel doubly happy?
> 
> 
> They're not referring to EEG measurements, but PET and fMRI findings  
> of the brain, in real time when they're referring to things "lighting  
> up". We do know the areas of the brain associated with certain  
> positive emotions and qualities. For some reason perfusion or blood  
> supply to these regions of the brain increases, creating neuroplastic  
> changes to these areas, the cortex actually thickens. Since these are  
> lasting changes, it's actually as if these qualities are 'dyed" into  
> their brains. Thus in depression patients, it's now known that they  
> can even stop meditating and the alleviation of depression will  
> continue, they become "resilient" since they've physically altered  
> their brain for the better.
> 
> Regarding TM EEG "alpha coherence", that's probably the biggest  
> sleight of hand job ever pulled. Alpha coherence in the range seen in  
> advanced TM meditators, is actually within the normal range of  
> healthy humans who don't meditate. In fact alpha coherence is so  
> common in humans, it's not really anything special at all. The most  
> interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma  
> coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition yogis who  
> could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence, which  
> oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,  
> continues even when these yogis are not meditating.
> 
> "And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[Vaj]

On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:49 AM, raunchydog wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
>
> "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that
> results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
>
> Paul Ekman,
> University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
>
> Buddhists 'really are happier'
>
> Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are
> happier and calmer than other people.
>
> Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their
> brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more  
active.


If, as TM critics say, we don't know what TM EEG brain coherence  
means and therefore we cannot say it correlates with better  
behavior, how can we say that we know what "activity in the left  
prefrontal lobes" means in Buddhist meditation and correlates with  
better behavior? If Buddhists "light up" only the left half of  
their brain and feel happy, wouldn't it follow that TMer's  
"lighting up" both halves of their brain would feel doubly happy?



They're not referring to EEG measurements, but PET and fMRI findings  
of the brain, in real time when they're referring to things "lighting  
up". We do know the areas of the brain associated with certain  
positive emotions and qualities. For some reason perfusion or blood  
supply to these regions of the brain increases, creating neuroplastic  
changes to these areas, the cortex actually thickens. Since these are  
lasting changes, it's actually as if these qualities are 'dyed" into  
their brains. Thus in depression patients, it's now known that they  
can even stop meditating and the alleviation of depression will  
continue, they become "resilient" since they've physically altered  
their brain for the better.


Regarding TM EEG "alpha coherence", that's probably the biggest  
sleight of hand job ever pulled. Alpha coherence in the range seen in  
advanced TM meditators, is actually within the normal range of  
healthy humans who don't meditate. In fact alpha coherence is so  
common in humans, it's not really anything special at all. The most  
interesting findings seem to be coming from high-amplitude gamma  
coherence which was originally found in Patanjali tradition yogis who  
could go into samadhi at will. In Buddhists that EEG coherence, which  
oddly connects the part of the brain associated with integration,  
continues even when these yogis are not meditating.


"And that's the way it is", as Walter Cronkite used to say.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Buddhists 'really are happier'

[raunchydog]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> Dying the cloth of inner happiness.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm
> 
> "There is something about conscientious Buddhist practice that  
> results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> 
> Paul Ekman,
> University of California San Francisco Medical Centre
> 
> Buddhists 'really are happier'
> 
> Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are  
> happier and calmer than other people.
> 
> Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their  
> brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.

If, as TM critics say, we don't know what TM EEG brain coherence means and 
therefore we cannot say it correlates with better behavior, how can we say that 
we know what "activity in the left prefrontal lobes" means in Buddhist 
meditation and correlates with better behavior? If Buddhists "light up" only 
the left half of their brain and feel happy, wouldn't it follow that TMer's 
"lighting up" both halves of their brain would feel doubly happy? 

> 
> The findings come as another study suggests that Buddhist meditation  
> can help to calm people.
> 
> Researchers at University of California San Francisco Medical Centre  
> have found the practise can tame the amygdala, an area of the brain  
> which is the hub of fear memory.
> 
> They found that experienced Buddhists, who meditate regularly, were  
> less likely to be shocked, flustered, surprised or as angry compared  
> to other people.
> 
> Paul Ekman, who carried out the study, said: "The most reasonable  
> hypothesis is that there is something about conscientious Buddhist  
> practice that results in the kind of happiness we all seek."
> 
> Brain activity
> 
> In a separate study, scientists at the University of Wisconsin at  
> Madison used new scanning techniques to examine brain activity in a  
> group of Buddhists.
> 
> Their tests revealed activity in the left prefrontal lobes of  
> experienced Buddhist practitioners.
> 
> This area is linked to positive emotions, self-control and temperament.
> 
> Their tests showed this area of the Buddhists' brains are constantly  
> lit up and not just when they are meditating.
> 
> This, the scientists said, suggests they are more likely to  
> experience positive emotions and be in good mood.
> 
> ---
> 
> Paul Ekman (born February 15, 1934) is a psychologist who has been a  
> pioneer in the study of emotions and their relation to facial  
> expressions. He is considered one of the 100 most eminent  
> psychologists of the twentieth century.[1] The background of Ekman's  
> research analyzes the development of human traits and states over  
> time (Keltner, 2007). The character Cal Lightman of the television  
> series Lie to Me is loosely based on him and his work.
>