[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam"
>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Actually, I get more insight into
> > > > the the artificial nature of the
> > > > small s self by comparing the changes
> > > > of my life with the sense of unchanging
> > > > continuity at the root of my experience.
> > > > Despite big swings in beliefs, affections,
> > > > aspirations and values, there's still
> > > > this sense of a self, of the consciousness
> > > > that's aware of all those changes, that
> > > > seems to be continuous. I figure that's
> > > > the large s Self. But it's still a Self,
> > > > which is supposed to be non-personal, so
> > > > what do I know.
> > >
> > > I recall an advanced lecture that portrayed
> > > a sequence in experience of the Self from
> > > personal to non/impersonal.
> > >
> > > I can't remember any of the details, just
> > > the concept: *ultimately* the Self is
> > > experienced as impersonal, but it goes
> > > through stages to get to that point. That
> > > it may seem personal at an earlier stage
> > > doesn't mean it's not the Self, in other
> > > words.
> > >
> > > Oh, now a bit of it is coming back to me.
> > > The sequence was expressed as "me-ness,"
> > > "I-ness," and finally "is-ness," the Self
> > > experienced as the essence of "me" (my Self),
> > > "I" (I Am Self), and "is" (Being Itself).
> > >
> > > As I recall, this was *not* a sequence of
> > > little-s self to big-S Self; all three were
> > > said to be big-S Self.
> > >
> > > Maybe somebody else remembers it more clearly?
> >
> > My recollection is that isness gaves way to Being.
>
> Could be. At any rate, I just remembered it's I-ness,
> Am-ness, and Is-ness. No "me-ness"!
FWIW, these might be the Sanskrit equivalents:
ahaMkAra [I-making?]m. conception of one's individuality ,
self-consciousness ChUp. &c. ; the making of self , thinking of self ,
egotism MBh. &c. ; pride , haughtiness R. &c. ; (in Sa1n3khya phil.)
the third of the eight producers or sources of creation , viz. the
conceit or conception of individuality , individualization ;
(%{ahaMkAra}) %{-val} mfn. selfish , proud L.
asmitA [(I)am-ness] f. egoism Yogas. Comm. on S3is3. iv , 55 , &c.
astitA [(it)is-ness]f. existence , reality Comm. on Ba1d. Sarvad.
> You may well be right that Being follows Is-ness.
>
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > > wrote: > > > > > Actually, I get more insight into > > > the the artificial nature of the > > > small s self by comparing the changes > > > of my life with the sense of unchanging > > > continuity at the root of my experience. > > > Despite big swings in beliefs, affections, > > > aspirations and values, there's still > > > this sense of a self, of the consciousness > > > that's aware of all those changes, that > > > seems to be continuous. I figure that's > > > the large s Self. But it's still a Self, > > > which is supposed to be non-personal, so > > > what do I know. > > > > I recall an advanced lecture that portrayed > > a sequence in experience of the Self from > > personal to non/impersonal. > > > > I can't remember any of the details, just > > the concept: *ultimately* the Self is > > experienced as impersonal, but it goes > > through stages to get to that point. That > > it may seem personal at an earlier stage > > doesn't mean it's not the Self, in other > > words. > > > > Oh, now a bit of it is coming back to me. > > The sequence was expressed as "me-ness," > > "I-ness," and finally "is-ness," the Self > > experienced as the essence of "me" (my Self), > > "I" (I Am Self), and "is" (Being Itself). > > > > As I recall, this was *not* a sequence of > > little-s self to big-S Self; all three were > > said to be big-S Self. > > > > Maybe somebody else remembers it more clearly? > > My recollection is that isness gaves way to Being. Could be. At any rate, I just remembered it's I-ness, Am-ness, and Is-ness. No "me-ness"! You may well be right that Being follows Is-ness.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > wrote: > > > Actually, I get more insight into > > the the artificial nature of the > > small s self by comparing the changes > > of my life with the sense of unchanging > > continuity at the root of my experience. > > Despite big swings in beliefs, affections, > > aspirations and values, there's still > > this sense of a self, of the consciousness > > that's aware of all those changes, that > > seems to be continuous. I figure that's > > the large s Self. But it's still a Self, > > which is supposed to be non-personal, so > > what do I know. > > I recall an advanced lecture that portrayed > a sequence in experience of the Self from > personal to non/impersonal. > > I can't remember any of the details, just > the concept: *ultimately* the Self is > experienced as impersonal, but it goes > through stages to get to that point. That > it may seem personal at an earlier stage > doesn't mean it's not the Self, in other > words. > > Oh, now a bit of it is coming back to me. > The sequence was expressed as "me-ness," > "I-ness," and finally "is-ness," the Self > experienced as the essence of "me" (my Self), > "I" (I Am Self), and "is" (Being Itself). > > As I recall, this was *not* a sequence of > little-s self to big-S Self; all three were > said to be big-S Self. > > Maybe somebody else remembers it more clearly? > My recollection is that isness gaves way to Being.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, I get more insight into > the the artificial nature of the > small s self by comparing the changes > of my life with the sense of unchanging > continuity at the root of my experience. > Despite big swings in beliefs, affections, > aspirations and values, there's still > this sense of a self, of the consciousness > that's aware of all those changes, that > seems to be continuous. I figure that's > the large s Self. But it's still a Self, > which is supposed to be non-personal, so > what do I know. I recall an advanced lecture that portrayed a sequence in experience of the Self from personal to non/impersonal. I can't remember any of the details, just the concept: *ultimately* the Self is experienced as impersonal, but it goes through stages to get to that point. That it may seem personal at an earlier stage doesn't mean it's not the Self, in other words. Oh, now a bit of it is coming back to me. The sequence was expressed as "me-ness," "I-ness," and finally "is-ness," the Self experienced as the essence of "me" (my Self), "I" (I Am Self), and "is" (Being Itself). As I recall, this was *not* a sequence of little-s self to big-S Self; all three were said to be big-S Self. Maybe somebody else remembers it more clearly?
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
> --- Alex Stanley wrote: > > --- drpetersutphen wrote: > > > > --- hugheshugo wrote: > > > > > --- drpetersutphen wrote: > > > > > > > > --- hugheshugo wrote: > > > > > > > > > I have the experience of my consciousness > > > reaching to infinity and existing as seperate > > > > > from me but being seperate from and also the > > > > > engine for creation at the same time, and it's > > > > > rather nice I have to say. > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharishi to hugheshugo:" Find out who's > > > > having this experience." > > > > > > I'm pretty sure it's me. > > > > Ramana M. "And who is this me?" > > One of the Waking Down teachers tried > this approach with me, and all > she did was piss me off. My perception > was that the internal landscape > was John Alexander Stanleyness all the > way down, and no one could talk > me out of it. Of course, after my > Waking Down brand Second Birth > Awakening, the true internal landscape > was realized, and I groked what > she had been trying to do. I've been doing the atma vicharya meditation that Peter Sutphen has described here on occasion in hopes of grokking some epiphany about the self, but I can't tell if anything profound is happening, or I'm kidding myself. I mean, it's pleasant and everything, but my experience lacks the "interesting" (Peter's word) quality that it was suggested I may have. Actually, I get more insight into the the artificial nature of the small s self by comparing the changes of my life with the sense of unchanging continuity at the root of my experience. Despite big swings in beliefs, affections, aspirations and values, there's still this sense of a self, of the consciousness that's aware of all those changes, that seems to be continuous. I figure that's the large s Self. But it's still a Self, which is supposed to be non-personal, so what do I know. Funny I've never heard Gangaji discourse on a non-personal self, a la Suzanne Segal.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Tom T: Yes DNA is essentially a vibratory bundle of knowledge. Tom Rick archer writes: So would it be correct to say that you're not seeing the DNA itself, but tuning in to the fundamental knowledge it represents? In that case, I could see what you mean about the DNA of creation. You're not using the term "DNA" literally, since most of creation doesn't have any, but as a metaphor for subtle expressions of knowledge. Is that correct? TomT: Well I see it as the DNA and as knowledge both but it appears to be the knowledge that is known to be that which from DNA springs. In other words it is the seed knowledge that forms the DNA in the physical plane. Seems fairly clear to me but that is the way it went down for me. Your Mileage may vary.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- hugheshugo wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I have the experience of my consciousness > > reaching > > > > to infinity and > > > > existing as seperate from me but being seperate > > from > > > > and also the > > > > engine for creation at the same time, and it's > > > > rather nice I have to > > > > say. > > > > > > Ramana Maharishi to hugheshugo:" Find out who's > > having > > > this experience." > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure it's me. > > > Ramana M. "And who is this me?" One of the Waking Down teachers tried this approach with me, and all she did was piss me off. My perception was that the internal landscape was John Alexander Stanleyness all the way down, and no one could talk me out of it. Of course, after my Waking Down brand Second Birth Awakening, the true internal landscape was realized, and I groked what she had been trying to do.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > --- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I have the experience of my consciousness > reaching > > > to infinity and > > > existing as seperate from me but being seperate > from > > > and also the > > > engine for creation at the same time, and it's > > > rather nice I have to > > > say. > > > > Ramana Maharishi to hugheshugo:" Find out who's > having > > this experience." > > > > I'm pretty sure it's me. Ramana M. "And who is this me?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go > > with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. > > http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!' > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have the experience of my consciousness reaching > > to infinity and > > existing as seperate from me but being seperate from > > and also the > > engine for creation at the same time, and it's > > rather nice I have to > > say. > > Ramana Maharishi to hugheshugo:" Find out who's having > this experience." > I'm pretty sure it's me. > > > > No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go > with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail >
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 8:54 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice Sparaig writes snipped: I think he was using "DNA" as a metaphor. In a sense, the Vedas could be seen as the DNA of the universe, and I think that MMY uses that analogy at times: the entire blueprint of nature contained in the ultimate compact form that unfolds itself into all of manifest creation. Tom T: Yes DNA is essentially a vibratory bundle of knowledge. Tom So would it be correct to say that you're not seeing the DNA itself, but tuning in to the fundamental knowledge it represents? In that case, I could see what you mean about the DNA of creation. You're not using the term "DNA" literally, since most of creation doesn't have any, but as a metaphor for subtle expressions of knowledge. Is that correct?
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Sparaig writes snipped: I think he was using "DNA" as a metaphor. In a sense, the Vedas could be seen as the DNA of the universe, and I think that MMY uses that analogy at times: the entire blueprint of nature contained in the ultimate compact form that unfolds itself into all of manifest creation. Tom T: Yes DNA is essentially a vibratory bundle of knowledge. Tom
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Since it comes when listening to or chanting Mahamrityunja or Sahasranaama I don't think thats whats going on. Its like the external vision shutting down, colour vision first. Ultimately the eyes are open and really you don't see anything, unless you decide to. The "color" grey is associated with Rahu and Ketu in Jyotish as well. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69" wrote: > > > > I was wondering if someone might mention this. I have > > seen it many, many times. With eyes open everything > > can dissolve into a grey field. Also happened notably > > when I was invited to a Shiva temple on Shivaratri - > > when I was pouring milk onto the murthi. > > I have no idea what your experience was, but > in other traditions, seeing or experiencing > the color grey (gray?) is associated with > having tapped into the astral field, not with > any higher state of consciousness. Gray or > the experience of "grayness" is one of the > defining characteristics of the lower astral. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them > there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I > can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As > are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of > sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom Isn't this where you say, "show me the money". Can we not see some outward manifestation of a sidhi, even a lesser one. Can you understand what is being a saying in a different language? Can you see things at a distance? Regarding the last question, I did once. But it came unexpeditly and then it left. But I can't say I can access it in my DNA. But maybe I'm just asking too much of a waking state question. lurk >
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Patrick Gillam wrote: > >> --- Bhairitu wrote: > >> > >> But when all is said and done it is > >> just simple sound physics played out > >> at a subtler level of the mind and > >> nervous system. > >> > > > > Bhairitu, if I may ask, what results are you > > getting from your TM-Sidhis practice? > I no longer practice the TM-Sidhis but I did get some fairly good > results from some of them. The siddhis I am practicing now are tantric. > Huh. Could swear that you and others have claimed that TM and the TM-SIdhis are tantric practices
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > >> I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra > >> siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the > >> latter, > >> shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly > >> awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and > >> experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, underlying > >> oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. > >> > >> Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the ishta-devata > >> put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore > >> remains an expression of natural law). > > But when all is said and done it is just simple sound physics > > played out > > at a subtler level of the mind and nervous system. > > > Well, I agree and I disagree. Yeah, there is a type of siddhi that > relies on sound (mantra) and that mantra effects the subtle body > which projects change in the outer. But there are other types and > styles of siddhi. For example you can produce siddhi through the use > of demons or various spirits or various sacrifices (yagyas), etc. > > It is interesting, in this same vein, Paul Mason recently posted an > article on the Tm-Freedom blog discussing two types of siddhi: one > sought by cultivating siddhi (e.g. samyama formulae) and that from > devotion to ones ishta-devata. SBS recommended the later and not the > former. Siddhi via the ishta is a by-product of union/love/samadhi > (although as we both know you can also use karma/action mantras to > direct the mantra-siddhi) and is supportive of evolution. Samyama > taps the dalas via a non-culminating route, which does not lead to > union/bindu. Although it does produce a rather addictive kind of > bliss and illusory experiences. > Of course it does...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
peterklutz wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Vaj wrote: >> >>> On Feb 12, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Bhairitu wrote: >>> >>> > I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra > siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the > > latter, > > shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly > awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and > experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, > > underlying > > oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. > > Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the > > ishta-devata > > put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore > remains an expression of natural law). > But when all is said and done it is just simple sound physics > played out > at a subtler level of the mind and nervous system. >>> Well, I agree and I disagree. Yeah, there is a type of siddhi that >>> relies on sound (mantra) and that mantra effects the subtle body >>> > which > >>> projects change in the outer. But there are other types and styles of >>> siddhi. For example you can produce siddhi through the use of demons >>> or various spirits or various sacrifices (yagyas), etc. >>> >>> >> I don't perform those types of siddhis. Our siddhis are mantra based >> (so far). We can say though they are in English the TM-Sidhis are >> > "sort > >> of" a mantra. >> >>> It is interesting, in this same vein, Paul Mason recently posted an >>> article on the Tm-Freedom blog discussing two types of siddhi: one >>> sought by cultivating siddhi (e.g. samyama formulae) and that from >>> devotion to ones ishta-devata. SBS recommended the later and not the >>> former. Siddhi via the ishta is a by-product of union/love/samadhi >>> (although as we both know you can also use karma/action mantras to >>> direct the mantra-siddhi) and is supportive of evolution. Samyama >>> > taps > >>> the dalas via a non-culminating route, which does not lead to >>> union/bindu. Although it does produce a rather addictive kind of >>> > bliss > >>> and illusory experiences. >>> >> The tantric mantras are much more used as tools for healing and >> solutions people may need for problems. >> >> > > Cool, where do I get some? > http://realtantrasolutions.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vaj wrote: > > > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > > > >>> I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra > >>> siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the latter, > >>> shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly > >>> awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and > >>> experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, underlying > >>> oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. > >>> > >>> Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the ishta-devata > >>> put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore > >>> remains an expression of natural law). > >> But when all is said and done it is just simple sound physics played out > >> at a subtler level of the mind and nervous system. > > > > > > Well, I agree and I disagree. Yeah, there is a type of siddhi that > > relies on sound (mantra) and that mantra effects the subtle body which > > projects change in the outer. But there are other types and styles of > > siddhi. For example you can produce siddhi through the use of demons > > or various spirits or various sacrifices (yagyas), etc. > > > I don't perform those types of siddhis. Our siddhis are mantra based > (so far). We can say though they are in English the TM-Sidhis are "sort > of" a mantra. > > It is interesting, in this same vein, Paul Mason recently posted an > > article on the Tm-Freedom blog discussing two types of siddhi: one > > sought by cultivating siddhi (e.g. samyama formulae) and that from > > devotion to ones ishta-devata. SBS recommended the later and not the > > former. Siddhi via the ishta is a by-product of union/love/samadhi > > (although as we both know you can also use karma/action mantras to > > direct the mantra-siddhi) and is supportive of evolution. Samyama taps > > the dalas via a non-culminating route, which does not lead to > > union/bindu. Although it does produce a rather addictive kind of bliss > > and illusory experiences. > The tantric mantras are much more used as tools for healing and > solutions people may need for problems. > Cool, where do I get some?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
On Feb 12, 2007, at 6:18 PM, Bhairitu wrote: The tantric mantras are much more used as tools for healing and solutions people may need for problems. I agree completely and for my own practice that's all I use action mantras for: physical or emotional healing, subjugation or pacification.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Patrick Gillam wrote: >> --- Bhairitu wrote: >> >> But when all is said and done it is >> just simple sound physics played out >> at a subtler level of the mind and >> nervous system. >> > > Bhairitu, if I may ask, what results are you > getting from your TM-Sidhis practice? I no longer practice the TM-Sidhis but I did get some fairly good results from some of them. The siddhis I am practicing now are tantric.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Vaj wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > >>> I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra >>> siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the latter, >>> shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly >>> awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and >>> experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, underlying >>> oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. >>> >>> Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the ishta-devata >>> put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore >>> remains an expression of natural law). >> But when all is said and done it is just simple sound physics played out >> at a subtler level of the mind and nervous system. > > > Well, I agree and I disagree. Yeah, there is a type of siddhi that > relies on sound (mantra) and that mantra effects the subtle body which > projects change in the outer. But there are other types and styles of > siddhi. For example you can produce siddhi through the use of demons > or various spirits or various sacrifices (yagyas), etc. > I don't perform those types of siddhis. Our siddhis are mantra based (so far). We can say though they are in English the TM-Sidhis are "sort of" a mantra. > It is interesting, in this same vein, Paul Mason recently posted an > article on the Tm-Freedom blog discussing two types of siddhi: one > sought by cultivating siddhi (e.g. samyama formulae) and that from > devotion to ones ishta-devata. SBS recommended the later and not the > former. Siddhi via the ishta is a by-product of union/love/samadhi > (although as we both know you can also use karma/action mantras to > direct the mantra-siddhi) and is supportive of evolution. Samyama taps > the dalas via a non-culminating route, which does not lead to > union/bindu. Although it does produce a rather addictive kind of bliss > and illusory experiences. The tantric mantras are much more used as tools for healing and solutions people may need for problems.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
> --- Bhairitu wrote: > > But when all is said and done it is > just simple sound physics played out > at a subtler level of the mind and > nervous system. Bhairitu, if I may ask, what results are you getting from your TM-Sidhis practice?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
On Feb 12, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Bhairitu wrote: I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the latter, shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, underlying oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the ishta-devata put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore remains an expression of natural law). But when all is said and done it is just simple sound physics played out at a subtler level of the mind and nervous system. Well, I agree and I disagree. Yeah, there is a type of siddhi that relies on sound (mantra) and that mantra effects the subtle body which projects change in the outer. But there are other types and styles of siddhi. For example you can produce siddhi through the use of demons or various spirits or various sacrifices (yagyas), etc. It is interesting, in this same vein, Paul Mason recently posted an article on the Tm-Freedom blog discussing two types of siddhi: one sought by cultivating siddhi (e.g. samyama formulae) and that from devotion to ones ishta-devata. SBS recommended the later and not the former. Siddhi via the ishta is a by-product of union/love/samadhi (although as we both know you can also use karma/action mantras to direct the mantra-siddhi) and is supportive of evolution. Samyama taps the dalas via a non-culminating route, which does not lead to union/bindu. Although it does produce a rather addictive kind of bliss and illusory experiences.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of sparaig > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 1:41 PM > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , Vaj wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 12:31 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote: > > > > > For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them > > > there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I > > > can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As > > > are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of > > > sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom > > > > > > I hope you use tissues. > > > > You know, I don't really believe that Tom's perception is "valid," though of > course I might be > wrong, but I didn't bother to challenge it because, of course, I > couldn't--it is HIS experience, > afterall. OTOH, you felt a need to attack it by making some silly little > joke. > > > > My question is - DNA is a chemical structure found only in biological > systems. How can "all of creation" have DNA? And if you are seeing the DNA > are you literally seeing the double-helix structure, as you would under an > electron microscope? If necessary, could you identify its components? More > on DNA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA > I think he was using "DNA" as a metaphor. In a sense, the Vedas could be seen as the DNA of the universe, and I think that MMY uses that analogy at times: the entire bluepritn of nature contained in the ultimate compact form that unfolds itself into all of manifest creation.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of sparaig Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 1:41 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> , Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 12:31 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote: > > > For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them > > there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I > > can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As > > are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of > > sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom > > > I hope you use tissues. > You know, I don't really believe that Tom's perception is "valid," though of course I might be wrong, but I didn't bother to challenge it because, of course, I couldn't--it is HIS experience, afterall. OTOH, you felt a need to attack it by making some silly little joke. My question is - DNA is a chemical structure found only in biological systems. How can "all of creation" have DNA? And if you are seeing the DNA are you literally seeing the double-helix structure, as you would under an electron microscope? If necessary, could you identify its components? More on DNA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Vaj wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Bhairitu wrote: > >> Of course as you konw Vaj siddhis as well as mantras work on the >> principles of the physics of sound or known as the science nada yoga. I >> suppose at a very low level they "might" effect the DNA. It is just sad >> that in these discussions there is an ignorance of this important yogic >> science. To me it is very clear: the mantras resonate with my nervous >> system and then modify it until it sustains that experience and thus you >> have mantra siddhi. It is the same law of physics that makes a glass >> vibrate when it is at a resonant frequency. However the glass does not >> have the flexibility to adapt to the vibration and if too intense >> shatters. > > I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra > siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the latter, > shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly > awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and > experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, underlying > oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. > > Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the ishta-devata > put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore > remains an expression of natural law). But when all is said and done it is just simple sound physics played out at a subtler level of the mind and nervous system.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
On Feb 12, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Of course as you konw Vaj siddhis as well as mantras work on the principles of the physics of sound or known as the science nada yoga. I suppose at a very low level they "might" effect the DNA. It is just sad that in these discussions there is an ignorance of this important yogic science. To me it is very clear: the mantras resonate with my nervous system and then modify it until it sustains that experience and thus you have mantra siddhi. It is the same law of physics that makes a glass vibrate when it is at a resonant frequency. However the glass does not have the flexibility to adapt to the vibration and if too intense shatters. I draw a distinction between the coincidental spontaneity of mantra siddhi and consciously sought after siddhi. In the case of the latter, shakti is aroused up a path other than the sushumna and directly awakens certain dalas, the petals of the sahasara, giving bliss and experiences at first but it does not have access to bindu, underlying oneness, through this pathway. It's a dead end. Mantra-siddhi coincidentally awakened is the will of the ishta-devata put into action which remains untainted by ego or "I" (and therefore remains an expression of natural law).
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 12:31 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote: > > > For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them > > there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I > > can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As > > are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of > > sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom > > > I hope you use tissues. > You know, I don't really believe that Tom's perception is "valid," though of course I might be wrong, but I didn't bother to challenge it because, of course, I couldn't--it is HIS experience, afterall. OTOH, you felt a need to attack it by making some silly little joke. Why is that?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
Vaj wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2007, at 12:31 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote: > >> For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them >> there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I >> can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As >> are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of >> sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom > > > I hope you use tissues. Of course as you konw Vaj siddhis as well as mantras work on the principles of the physics of sound or known as the science nada yoga. I suppose at a very low level they "might" effect the DNA. It is just sad that in these discussions there is an ignorance of this important yogic science. To me it is very clear: the mantras resonate with my nervous system and then modify it until it sustains that experience and thus you have mantra siddhi. It is the same law of physics that makes a glass vibrate when it is at a resonant frequency. However the glass does not have the flexibility to adapt to the vibration and if too intense shatters.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
On Feb 12, 2007, at 12:31 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote: For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom I hope you use tissues.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them > there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I > can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As > are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of > sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom > Nice description of integration Tom! Thanks for the sign post.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was wondering if someone might mention this. I have seen it many, > many times. With eyes open everything can dissolve into a grey field. > Also happened notably when I was invited to a Shiva temple on > Shivaratri -when I was pouring milk onto the murthi. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > > wrote: > > > > > > One reason I ask is because the question below > > > relates to another question about the connection > > > between pure consciousness and the relative world. > > > The MMY line is that creation arises out of > > > consciousness. I was wondering what sorts > > > of experiences people are having that validate > > > that hypothesis. > > > > > This was an experience I had at the local TM center in 1992-ish in > > Maryland. After doing 20 minutes of TM, I opened my eyes and saw > > several items in the room, including the TM teacher, as vibrating > > bundles of grey shiny metallic atoms forming the shape of those > > objects. As my consciousness continued to ripen into my senses > > turned fully outwards, a covering of texture and color sprang out of > > my eyes and rendered everything as we conventionally see them. I've > > mentioned this before, though it seems to fit well Maharishi's line > > that creation arises out of consciousness. > > > It was not that everything dissolved into a grey field- rather that the objects in front of me had the same conventional shapes they always do, only instead of the hair, the skin, the wooden tabletop having color and texture appropriate to what they typically have, they appeared to be made up of tightly clustered, vibrating, shiny dark grey atoms or BBs.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
For me the Sidhis are now known to be part of my DNA. I have seen them there vibrating. I also know my DNA to be the DNA of all creation. I can no longer do them or find them as they are now me, who I am. As are all of the mantras/advanced techniques. My meditation consists of sitting in silence savoring the vibratory quality of my DNA. Tom
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
> --- Vaj wrote: > > On Feb 11, 2007, Gillam wrote: > > > The MMY line is that creation arises out of > > consciousness. I was wondering what sorts > > of experiences people are having that validate > > that hypothesis. > > If that's the experience you're told you should have, then people > will eventually begin reporting those experiences. You'd think, but I can't say as I have had some concrete experience of creation arising out of consciousness, beyond having a desire fulfilled spontaneously. And as noted earlier, my sidhis practice is nowheresville.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have the experience of my consciousness reaching > to infinity and > existing as seperate from me but being seperate from > and also the > engine for creation at the same time, and it's > rather nice I have to > say. Ramana Maharishi to hugheshugo:" Find out who's having this experience." No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One reason I ask is because the question below > relates to another question about the connection > between pure consciousness and the relative world. > The MMY line is that creation arises out of > consciousness. I was wondering what sorts > of experiences people are having that validate > that hypothesis. > I have the experience of my consciousness reaching to infinity and existing as seperate from me but being seperate from and also the engine for creation at the same time, and it's rather nice I have to say. But does it validate the unified field theory of consciousness? Who knows, it's impossible to be sure as it's totally subjective and therefore impossible to test for. I've always thought that similarity between certain mental states and some (by no means all) interpretations of quantum physics is an analogy because it seems too great a leap to make for what is a completely personal experience. Add the fact that it's impossible to prove, raises far more questions than it answers and can be explained more simply puts the UF theory in the realm of very bad science. But does that mean it's not true? Not at all, it just means that, to accept it, we would have to completely change our view of reality, losing most of what we now consider recieved knowledge and all on the say-so of a couple of mystics like me! Anyhoo, I don't think explanations matter as we don't change reality by wishing it was something else. Just enjoy it that's what I say, whatever it turns out to be.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey, for the people here practicing the TM-Sidhi > > > > program, what are you getting from your practice > > > > these days? When I do it I mostly space out. > > > > > > > > In the early days of my practice I got some flavors, > > > > and they seemed to "firm up" the experience of > > > > pure consciousness. But these days it's just > > > > flatness and daydreams. I'm sure I could use a > > > > tune-up, but I'd have to attend a course for that, > > > > and a course is not in the cards. > > > > > > > > Just wondering. > > > > > > > > > > I just did the whole show first time for quite a long while. > > > At the end of "Flying" I changed to a Sanskrit version of > > > the suutra. To my surprise, "it" became rather hard, if ya > > > know what I mean... ;) > > > Probably been "uurdhva-retas" for a bit too long, or stuff! > > > > > > > I never understand this need to experiment with these things. > Perhaps I'm just too boring > > for my own good. > > > > I guess in my case it's the typical(?) Asperger's curiosity > about details of things... :) > Otherwise it's hard for me to understand why I e.g. enjoy, sort > of, reading Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar, huh! > For an "ordinary" person that might seem almost, > well, necrophiliac, LOL! > A random sample from Whitney: 430. a. The stem /ahan/ n. /day/ is in the later language used only in the strong and weakest [inflectional - card] cases, the middle (with the nom. sing., which usually follows their analogy) coming from /áhar/ or /áhas/: namely, /áhar/ nom.-acc. sing. /áhobhyâm/, /áhobhis/, etc. (PB. has /aharbhis/); but áhnâ etc. /áhni/ or /áhani (or áhan),
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
On Feb 12, 2007, at 4:10 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I was wondering if someone might mention this. I have seen it many, many times. With eyes open everything can dissolve into a grey field. Also happened notably when I was invited to a Shiva temple on Shivaratri - when I was pouring milk onto the murthi. I have no idea what your experience was, but in other traditions, seeing or experiencing the color grey (gray?) is associated with having tapped into the astral field, not with any higher state of consciousness. Gray or the experience of "grayness" is one of the defining characteristics of the lower astral. It can also mean a preponderance of karma from one of the sub-human realms--and a sign to purify that karma. It's definitely a gate you'd want to close off in this lifetime.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > > wrote: > > > > > > Hey, for the people here practicing the TM-Sidhi > > > program, what are you getting from your practice > > > these days? When I do it I mostly space out. > > > > > > In the early days of my practice I got some flavors, > > > and they seemed to "firm up" the experience of > > > pure consciousness. But these days it's just > > > flatness and daydreams. I'm sure I could use a > > > tune-up, but I'd have to attend a course for that, > > > and a course is not in the cards. > > > > > > Just wondering. > > > > > > > I just did the whole show first time for quite a long while. > > At the end of "Flying" I changed to a Sanskrit version of > > the suutra. To my surprise, "it" became rather hard, if ya > > know what I mean... ;) > > Probably been "uurdhva-retas" for a bit too long, or stuff! > > > > I never understand this need to experiment with these things. Perhaps I'm just too boring > for my own good. > I guess in my case it's the typical(?) Asperger's curiosity about details of things... :) Otherwise it's hard for me to understand why I e.g. enjoy, sort of, reading Whitney's Sanskrit Grammar, huh! For an "ordinary" person that might seem almost, well, necrophiliac, LOL!
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > wrote: > > > > Hey, for the people here practicing the TM-Sidhi > > program, what are you getting from your practice > > these days? When I do it I mostly space out. > > > > In the early days of my practice I got some flavors, > > and they seemed to "firm up" the experience of > > pure consciousness. But these days it's just > > flatness and daydreams. I'm sure I could use a > > tune-up, but I'd have to attend a course for that, > > and a course is not in the cards. > > > > Just wondering. > > > > I just did the whole show first time for quite a long while. > At the end of "Flying" I changed to a Sanskrit version of > the suutra. To my surprise, "it" became rather hard, if ya > know what I mean... ;) > Probably been "uurdhva-retas" for a bit too long, or stuff! > I never understand this need to experiment with these things. Perhaps I'm just too boring for my own good.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shukra69" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was wondering if someone might mention this. I have > seen it many, many times. With eyes open everything > can dissolve into a grey field. Also happened notably > when I was invited to a Shiva temple on Shivaratri - > when I was pouring milk onto the murthi. I have no idea what your experience was, but in other traditions, seeing or experiencing the color grey (gray?) is associated with having tapped into the astral field, not with any higher state of consciousness. Gray or the experience of "grayness" is one of the defining characteristics of the lower astral.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey, for the people here practicing the TM-Sidhi > program, what are you getting from your practice > these days? When I do it I mostly space out. > > In the early days of my practice I got some flavors, > and they seemed to "firm up" the experience of > pure consciousness. But these days it's just > flatness and daydreams. I'm sure I could use a > tune-up, but I'd have to attend a course for that, > and a course is not in the cards. > > Just wondering. > I just did the whole show first time for quite a long while. At the end of "Flying" I changed to a Sanskrit version of the suutra. To my surprise, "it" became rather hard, if ya know what I mean... ;) Probably been "uurdhva-retas" for a bit too long, or stuff!
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
I was wondering if someone might mention this. I have seen it many, many times. With eyes open everything can dissolve into a grey field. Also happened notably when I was invited to a Shiva temple on Shivaratri -when I was pouring milk onto the murthi. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" > wrote: > > > > One reason I ask is because the question below > > relates to another question about the connection > > between pure consciousness and the relative world. > > The MMY line is that creation arises out of > > consciousness. I was wondering what sorts > > of experiences people are having that validate > > that hypothesis. > > > This was an experience I had at the local TM center in 1992-ish in > Maryland. After doing 20 minutes of TM, I opened my eyes and saw > several items in the room, including the TM teacher, as vibrating > bundles of grey shiny metallic atoms forming the shape of those > objects. As my consciousness continued to ripen into my senses > turned fully outwards, a covering of texture and color sprang out of > my eyes and rendered everything as we conventionally see them. I've > mentioned this before, though it seems to fit well Maharishi's line > that creation arises out of consciousness. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One reason I ask is because the question below > relates to another question about the connection > between pure consciousness and the relative world. > The MMY line is that creation arises out of > consciousness. I was wondering what sorts > of experiences people are having that validate > that hypothesis. > This was an experience I had at the local TM center in 1992-ish in Maryland. After doing 20 minutes of TM, I opened my eyes and saw several items in the room, including the TM teacher, as vibrating bundles of grey shiny metallic atoms forming the shape of those objects. As my consciousness continued to ripen into my senses turned fully outwards, a covering of texture and color sprang out of my eyes and rendered everything as we conventionally see them. I've mentioned this before, though it seems to fit well Maharishi's line that creation arises out of consciousness.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
On Feb 11, 2007, at 9:14 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: One reason I ask is because the question below relates to another question about the connection between pure consciousness and the relative world. The MMY line is that creation arises out of consciousness. I was wondering what sorts of experiences people are having that validate that hypothesis. If that's the experience you're told you should have, then people will eventually begin reporting those experiences.
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
One reason I ask is because the question below relates to another question about the connection between pure consciousness and the relative world. The MMY line is that creation arises out of consciousness. I was wondering what sorts of experiences people are having that validate that hypothesis. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" wrote: > > > > Hey, for the people here practicing the TM-Sidhi > > program, what are you getting from your practice > > these days? When I do it I mostly space out. > > > > In the early days of my practice I got some flavors, > > and they seemed to "firm up" the experience of > > pure consciousness. But these days it's just > > flatness and daydreams. I'm sure I could use a > > tune-up, but I'd have to attend a course for that, > > and a course is not in the cards. > > > > Just wondering. > > > > Eh, I get motviation for doing more exercise, I guess... >
[FairfieldLife] Re: TM-Sidhis practice
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey, for the people here practicing the TM-Sidhi > program, what are you getting from your practice > these days? When I do it I mostly space out. > > In the early days of my practice I got some flavors, > and they seemed to "firm up" the experience of > pure consciousness. But these days it's just > flatness and daydreams. I'm sure I could use a > tune-up, but I'd have to attend a course for that, > and a course is not in the cards. > > Just wondering. > Eh, I get motviation for doing more exercise, I guess...
