[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Vaj wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that? It would depend how you define enlightenment. Certainly beyond Stream Enterer, the Path of Seeing most likely. And the definition of those are? A Stream Enterer would be roughly equivalent to Brahman Consciousness where one is permanently awake and one has obliterated all the afflictive emotion, one still has some subtle obscurations remaining. It the entry level bodhisattva. You can always tell a true Stream Enterer by the costume they are issued by the gods when they achieve that state. For example, here is a photo of the noted female Tibetan saint Yeshe Flyrod wearing her Stream Enterer costume as she helps fish move to their next incarnation: http://singlebarbed.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/aa_poster1.jpg Sorry, I meant to say Path of No More Learning--it's many realizations beyond a stream enterer. Vaj, I hate to tell you, but that sounds like '1984 Double Speak', To me... Could you inform me sir, how are why would one still be here, on the path of 'No More Learning'... What kind of foolish giberish are you peddling here, sir? Just to provide some balance, not all who respect the man assume he's enlightened. I've met him and like his clockwork-precise mind and his laugh and above all his ability to personify the compassion that underlies the path he represents, but I have never made any assumptions about either his enlightenment or lack thereof. He's just an admirable guy to me, one who walks his talk. In my experience, that last quality is so rare among famous spiritual teachers that it's more than enough...who cares whether they're enlight- ened if they can do that, and so few others can? Of course, he doesn't look as good in his waders as Yeshe does, but that's to be expected...
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
I think Curtis could put your commie list to blues music and it would be a side splitter. You, me and Grate could be chanting do-wap in the background. The Four Busketeers! Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, satvadude108 no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: Vaj is a Commie. Sal Now *that* clears things up a bit. I wonder of what shade stripe of Commie? A bit leftist leaning Commie? Just a kinda pink Commie? Want the world to be a better place Commie? Generic fellow traveler Commie? Read Lenin and wore a Che t-shirt as an undergrad Commie? Card carrying Commie? Red diaper baby Commie? Valium in the jet contrails but don't take my BluRay player or ever deign to mess with my ego because I'm a true 'ARTIST' and can prove it by never being able to string 3 grammatically correct sentences in a row together but don't tell *ME* about line-breaks cuz I have a powerful guru mantra dog shit stepin' in drivin' my Suburu don't like dog owners hip to the Seattle scene cuz I played with Hendrix and I'm a Jazz musician but make unwatchable unlistenable animated music vids about downtown girls people move away from me when I sit down at Starbuck's Commie? Ahhh, shades.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: I would be more impressed with Vaj's scientific claims, if he could provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with the Dali Lama. I'd be more impressed with TMers if they learned how to spell the Dalai Lama's name. :-) Remedial education for TMers: Dali Lama -- a surrealistic painter from Catalunya, known for his flamboyant mustache. Dali Llama -- a South American cud-chewing animal related to camels but smaller and lacking a hump. Dolly Lama -- an American country-and-western singer known for her big humps. Dalai Lama -- a well-known spiritual teacher. All four are Buddhists, so it's still OK to dump on them so you feel better about being a TMer and thus following the highest path. Doing so indicates how spiritually advanced you are. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: Dalai Lama -- a well-known spiritual teacher. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: I would be more impressed with Vaj's scientific claims, if he could provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with the Dali Lama. I'd be more impressed with TMers if they learned how to spell the Dalai Lama's name. :-) Remedial education for TMers: Dali Lama -- a surrealistic painter from Catalunya, known for his flamboyant mustache. Dali Llama -- a South American cud-chewing animal related to camels but smaller and lacking a hump. Dolly Lama -- an American country-and-western singer known for her big humps. Dalai Lama -- a well-known spiritual teacher. All four are Buddhists, so it's still OK to dump on them so you feel better about being a TMer and thus following the highest path. Doing so indicates how spiritually advanced you are. :-) Look whose dumping from his high horse now. If Vaj wants to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (red pen spelling correction noted) he could at least back it up. I'm not even asking for a study, just one little personal experience. Vaj is very quick to criticize TM research but has not yet supported his claims for pacification whatever the hell that even means. I don't doubt the DL's spiritual greatness or his ability to be a conduit for people to experience unity consciousness. I just doubt that such a subjective experience as pacification or unity consciousness is quantifiable other than the telling of an anecdote. I am interested to hear from Vaj and not you unless you have met the Dalai Lama and have a truthful story to tell about an experience of pacification and what that means to you. P.S. Deli Lama: A sandwich.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: The interesting story of world-renowned psychologist, Paul Ekman, and the resolution of a lifetime of anger. A related project had its roots in a surprisingly powerful private exchange Paul Ekman had with the Dalai Lama during a tea break on Wednesday. Well, ahiMsaa-pratiSThaayaaM tat-saMnidhau vaira-tyaagaH??
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: I am interested to hear from Vaj and not you unless you have met the Dalai Lama and have a truthful story to tell about an experience of pacification and what that means to you. Well, I saw the Dalai Lama once in Paris, and after meeting with him I walked outside and there were protesters there who had been paid to protest by the Chinese embassy in Paris. ( Really! Made the news in the Paris papers when they found out that that each of the protesters had been paid more than the police who had been called in to watch them. ) I kicked the shit out of all of them. Things were much more peaceful then. So I guess that pacification works because I wasn't the least bit angry as I wailed on their asses. ( Not really. We pacified Buddhists live by a variant of Orson Welles' old credo: We shall kick no ass before its time. It wasn't their time. ) P.S. Deli Lama: A sandwich. A...very good, Grasshopper. Now, to see whether you have learned enough to leave the monastery, does the sandwich contain meat or not?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: I would be more impressed with Vaj's scientific claims, if he could provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with the Dali Lama. I'd be more impressed with TMers if they learned how to spell the Dalai Lama's name. :-) Remedial education for TMers: Dali Lama -- a surrealistic painter from Catalunya, known for his flamboyant mustache. Dali Llama -- a South American cud-chewing animal related to camels but smaller and lacking a hump. Dolly Lama -- an American country-and-western singer known for her big humps. Dalai Lama -- a well-known spiritual teacher. All four are Buddhists, so it's still OK to dump on them so you feel better about being a TMer and thus following the highest path. Doing so indicates how spiritually advanced you are. :-) Look whose dumping from his high horse now. If Vaj wants to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (red pen spelling correction noted) he could at least back it up. I'm not even asking for a study, just one little personal experience. Vaj is very quick to criticize TM research but has not yet supported his claims for pacification whatever the hell that even means. I don't doubt the DL's spiritual greatness or his ability to be a conduit for people to experience unity consciousness. I just doubt that such a subjective experience as pacification or unity consciousness is quantifiable other than the telling of an anecdote. I am interested to hear from Vaj and not you unless you have met the Dalai Lama and have a truthful story to tell about an experience of pacification and what that means to you. P.S. Deli Lama: A sandwich. Well, maybe Vaj., never met the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet... To me, it seems like this so-called 'Pacification' vibe, is one of non-violence... If you look up non-violence in the dictionary, you should see the Daliai there, as well as Martin Luther King and Gandhi... They were and are symbols of non-violence... So, perhaps this guy, who shook hands with the Dalai, got the contrast between his fathers violent vibe, and that of non-violence... Perhaps this guy, was born into a family with a father like that, and suppose he met the Dalai, so he could get the lesson of the contrast between anger and violence and peacefulness and non-violence. You really can't compare the Vibes of the Tribes: The Yogis and The Buddhists... One is interested in ~(zap)~ Experience of the Divine; And the other is more interested in Rituals, Bells...and proving that they are Bestest Buddhist this side of 2nd St... So, there ya go. R.G.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 9, 2009, at 10:53 PM, grate.swan wrote: But just, what if, A doesn't cause B and its just an illusion? Then, despite the direct experience, its still an illusion. I had a filipino faith healer pull ugly bloody things from my body. I directly experienced it. Do you think it was real? Yeah, he was pulling bloody things from the palm of his hand, away from your body. I believe that was real. Real chicken liver probably. :-) Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence / signs of A causing B right now than the DL effect with a 4 month or so delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor because an ancient text says so?! If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that? It's about having the appropriate instrument for investigation. If you want to look at the stars, it's fine if you have a nice telescope, but it's not that helpful if you're trying to observe the stars from the back of a moving motorcycle. The mind needs to be similarly stable. In order for the telescope be clear, it needs to be built in a clean room. Similarly the mind as an instrument needs to be prepared by the prerequisites of samadhi. Further, if you're going to see clearly, the lenses need to be clean; similarly, attention should be vivid, not lax. Etc.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 3:06 AM, raunchydog wrote: Look whose dumping from his high horse now. If Vaj wants to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (red pen spelling correction noted) he could at least back it up. I'm not even asking for a study, just one little personal experience. Vaj is very quick to criticize TM research but has not yet supported his claims for pacification whatever the hell that even means. I don't doubt the DL's spiritual greatness or his ability to be a conduit for people to experience unity consciousness. I just doubt that such a subjective experience as pacification or unity consciousness is quantifiable other than the telling of an anecdote. I am interested to hear from Vaj and not you unless you have met the Dalai Lama and have a truthful story to tell about an experience of pacification and what that means to you. What made you think that the post was meant to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers? That's a pretty bizarre claim. Not all of us are interested in talking about ourselves endlessly, even though we've had similar experiences. Since you come across as such an angry person, maybe it would better for you to experience it yourself firsthand? Then you could talk about I, Me and Mine all you like!
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: I would be more impressed with Vaj's scientific claims, if he could provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with the Dali Lama. I'd be more impressed with TMers if they learned how to spell the Dalai Lama's name. :-) To ensure a fairly decent pronunciation it might be best spelt something like 'duh-lie' (the second syllable rhymes with 'why'). Well, actually I don't know how Tibetans pronounce Da Name... ;D
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 9, 2009, at 10:53 PM, grate.swan wrote: But just, what if, A doesn't cause B and its just an illusion? Then, despite the direct experience, its still an illusion. I had a filipino faith healer pull ugly bloody things from my body. I directly experienced it. Do you think it was real? Yeah, he was pulling bloody things from the palm of his hand, away from your body. I believe that was real. Real chicken liver probably. :-) Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence / signs of A causing B right now than the DL effect with a 4 month or so delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor because an ancient text says so?! If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that? It's about having the appropriate instrument for investigation. If you want to look at the stars, it's fine if you have a nice telescope, but it's not that helpful if you're trying to observe the stars from the back of a moving motorcycle. The mind needs to be similarly stable. In order for the telescope be clear, it needs to be built in a clean room. Similarly the mind as an instrument needs to be prepared by the prerequisites of samadhi. Further, if you're going to see clearly, the lenses need to be clean; similarly, attention should be vivid, not lax. Etc. A stable telescope that needs a little Windex so you can see the stars clearly and vividly is a great metaphor for samadhi. It sounds exactly like my TM-Sidhi program on a good day. So is this your answer to GrateSwan, that there is not an appropriate instrument for investigation? In post #218205 http://tinyurl.com/pzncrn GrateSwan asked you to back up your claims for pacification and so far you have offered ancient texts and an analogy. If that is the best proof you can offer for the Dalai Lama's ability to create the pacification effect you have no room to criticize the Maharishi Effect, which if you look at it more closely, and split a few hairs about it, we talking very much about the same thing. The only thing you have not yet offered as proof of pacification is the telling of your personal experience from having been with the Dalai Lama. I've told a few gushy stories of my experiences with Maharishi so if you want to gush over the Dalai Lama, I'd love to hear it. Pacify me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 3:06 AM, raunchydog wrote: Look whose dumping from his high horse now. If Vaj wants to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (red pen spelling correction noted) he could at least back it up. I'm not even asking for a study, just one little personal experience. snip What made you think that the post was meant to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers? That's a pretty bizarre claim. True, Vaj has been explicit that he's making *unscientific* claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (post #218203): Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. Not all of us are interested in talking about ourselves endlessly, even though we've had similar experiences. Translation: Vaj hasn't had an experience of pacification from the Dalai Lama.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On May 9, 2009, at 10:53 PM, grate.swan wrote: But just, what if, A doesn't cause B and its just an illusion? Then, despite the direct experience, its still an illusion. I had a filipino faith healer pull ugly bloody things from my body. I directly experienced it. Do you think it was real? Yeah, he was pulling bloody things from the palm of his hand, away from your body. I believe that was real. Real chicken liver probably. :-) Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence / signs of A causing B right now than the DL effect with a 4 month or so delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor because an ancient text says so?! If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that? It's about having the appropriate instrument for investigation. If you want to look at the stars, it's fine if you have a nice telescope, but it's not that helpful if you're trying to observe the stars from the back of a moving motorcycle. The mind needs to be similarly stable. In order for the telescope be clear, it needs to be built in a clean room. Similarly the mind as an instrument needs to be prepared by the prerequisites of samadhi. Further, if you're going to see clearly, the lenses need to be clean; similarly, attention should be vivid, not lax. Etc. A stable telescope that needs a little Windex so you can see the stars clearly and vividly is a great metaphor for samadhi. It sounds exactly like my TM-Sidhi program on a good day. So is this your answer to GrateSwan, that there is not an appropriate instrument for investigation? In post #218205 http://tinyurl.com/pzncrn GrateSwan asked you to back up your claims for pacification and so far you have offered ancient texts and an analogy. If that is the best proof you can offer for the Dalai Lama's ability to create the pacification effect you have no room to criticize the Maharishi Effect, which if you look at it more closely, and split a few hairs about it, we talking very much about the same thing. The only thing you have not yet offered as proof of pacification is the telling of your personal experience from having been with the Dalai Lama. I've told a few gushy stories of my experiences with Maharishi so if you want to gush over the Dalai Lama, I'd love to hear it. Pacify me. I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
If Vaj was within two feet of the Dalai Lama and had been balmisized, how is that different if Vaj reported that he'd once been at the back of a lecture hall filled with folks hearing the Dalai Lama's sermon and had been balmisized by that? Are we saying that the closer to the fire the greater the heat, or, do we believe the balmisizing has nothing to do with physical distance? IOW, Vaj doesn't ever have to have had a real meeting with the Dalai Lama for balmisizing to have happened. All that's really required is that Vaj be properly prepared spiritually for the experience. The closer one physically gets to the Dalai Lama, the more easily the brain can be filled with a constant triggering, e.g., OMG, I'm here with the Dalai Lama, or The Dalai Lama just touched me. etc., but a mind such as the one Vaj presents daily to us could easily be as involved and intensely focused on a spectrum of expectations from merely contemplating the Dalai Lama since Vaj's involvement with Buddhism is so deep. Two women try to pick up a car, but only the mother of the trapped child lifts it, like that. Whether or not there's something really given to Vaj from the Dalai Lama, I can easily see a very real life change happening to Vaj from simply the placebo effect combined with a spiritual intent that is daily and frequently entertained by Vaj. It's as understandable as the results of faith healers or bone shakers or voodoo rites -- real things can happen no matter if the presumed dynamics are actually operative. I had some chicken meat taken from my body and nothing came of it. Why? I was paying my $125 just to see up close how the magic act was conducted. I wasn't there in a mind prepared to change. And, verily I got what I was paying for -- I got a tee shirt that said, I went to a psychic surgeon, and all I got was salmonella. I envy those who can get real results by any method. Any of Grate Swan's list of possibilities would do me. Hook or crook, what does it matter? Blessed are those who believe and have not seen -- it's a powerful tool if one can, you know, work it, and make believing things a daily regimen. What would Jesus do? -- another example? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 3:06 AM, raunchydog wrote: Look whose dumping from his high horse now. If Vaj wants to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (red pen spelling correction noted) he could at least back it up. I'm not even asking for a study, just one little personal experience. snip What made you think that the post was meant to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers? That's a pretty bizarre claim. True, Vaj has been explicit that he's making *unscientific* claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (post #218203): Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. Not all of us are interested in talking about ourselves endlessly, even though we've had similar experiences. Translation: Vaj hasn't had an experience of pacification from the Dalai Lama.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
http://tinyurl.com/qwy7bj The link above goes to a New York Times article that deals with the placebo effect from a very mundane angle: the use of various creams that are sold over the counter for various bodily aches. Edg PSthe below wasn't formatted by hand by me -- sorry, I forgot, but know that I am attempting to make my posts readable to those who get them via email. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_re...@... wrote: If Vaj was within two feet of the Dalai Lama and had been balmisized, how is that different if Vaj reported that he'd once been at the back of a lecture hall filled with folks hearing the Dalai Lama's sermon and had been balmisized by that? Are we saying that the closer to the fire the greater the heat, or, do we believe the balmisizing has nothing to do with physical distance? IOW, Vaj doesn't ever have to have had a real meeting with the Dalai Lama for balmisizing to have happened. All that's really required is that Vaj be properly prepared spiritually for the experience. The closer one physically gets to the Dalai Lama, the more easily the brain can be filled with a constant triggering, e.g., OMG, I'm here with the Dalai Lama, or The Dalai Lama just touched me. etc., but a mind such as the one Vaj presents daily to us could easily be as involved and intensely focused on a spectrum of expectations from merely contemplating the Dalai Lama since Vaj's involvement with Buddhism is so deep. Two women try to pick up a car, but only the mother of the trapped child lifts it, like that. Whether or not there's something really given to Vaj from the Dalai Lama, I can easily see a very real life change happening to Vaj from simply the placebo effect combined with a spiritual intent that is daily and frequently entertained by Vaj. It's as understandable as the results of faith healers or bone shakers or voodoo rites -- real things can happen no matter if the presumed dynamics are actually operative. I had some chicken meat taken from my body and nothing came of it. Why? I was paying my $125 just to see up close how the magic act was conducted. I wasn't there in a mind prepared to change. And, verily I got what I was paying for -- I got a tee shirt that said, I went to a psychic surgeon, and all I got was salmonella. I envy those who can get real results by any method. Any of Grate Swan's list of possibilities would do me. Hook or crook, what does it matter? Blessed are those who believe and have not seen -- it's a powerful tool if one can, you know, work it, and make believing things a daily regimen. What would Jesus do? -- another example? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 3:06 AM, raunchydog wrote: Look whose dumping from his high horse now. If Vaj wants to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (red pen spelling correction noted) he could at least back it up. I'm not even asking for a study, just one little personal experience. snip What made you think that the post was meant to make scientific claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers? That's a pretty bizarre claim. True, Vaj has been explicit that he's making *unscientific* claims for the Dalai Lama's spiritual whammy powers (post #218203): Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. Not all of us are interested in talking about ourselves endlessly, even though we've had similar experiences. Translation: Vaj hasn't had an experience of pacification from the Dalai Lama.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? From my own experiences, a teacher's spiritual transmission isn't necessarily universally received. I think a person has to have some degree of attunement with the teacher for that subtle connection to be made. In my own experience with Waking Down, I didn't connect with Saniel Bonder the way I did with Pascal Salesses. And, I have none of the woo-woo experiences that some people have when getting a hug from Ammachi.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@... wrote: From my own experiences, a teacher's spiritual transmission isn't necessarily universally received. If it even exists. There are perfectly viable theories that explain the *perception* of having received a transmission without there ever having been one. Mood-making is one. :-) The placebo effect, especially when jumpstarted with having paid a lot of money to be in the proximity of the person giving the transmission is another. However, the theory that I like the best is called recognition. Each of us contains ALL of the attributes of any spiritual teacher we could ever meet. The only real difference between us and them is that they might be aware of or utilizing or accessing more of those attributes, and in us they are latent, unaccessed. So when you are in the presence of a spiritual teacher who resonates with you (or even thinking about them from afar), the part of you that is latent but ready to wake up and become active sees its *counterpart* in the spiritual teacher. The phrase for this phenomenon is Recognition is liberation. If you think about it, it explains the experience of the person Vaj has been talking about. His latent attributes of ahimsa and compassion were ready to be awakened. Put him in the presence of a teacher whose life has been a veritable showcase of ahimsa and compassion, and those parts of him *recognize* themselves in the Dalai Lama, and awaken in him. No transmission necessary. But both the *effect* and the subjective *perception* are that one has taken place. I think a person has to have some degree of attunement with the teacher for that subtle connection to be made. In my own experience with Waking Down, I didn't connect with Saniel Bonder the way I did with Pascal Salesses. And, I have none of the woo-woo experiences that some people have when getting a hug from Ammachi. One of the reasons I like the recognition theory is that it explains experiences such as Alex is talking about above. I have had similar experiences. I've been very close to teachers whom some here think were hot shit, aura-wise or darshan-wise or transmission-wise, and nada. On the other hand, I've been around other teachers with whom I felt an instantaneous rapport, and afterwards felt very much as if something in me had been awakened as a result of meeting them. The recognition theory explains this in that not every teacher one meets is aware of or accessing the attribute or quality that is ready to wake up at the time you meet them. But some are. So you tend to get something from being in presence of those who are accessing the attribute or quality you are ready for and thus receptive to, and feel something from them, both while you're with them and afterwards. With other teachers, this does not happen, but very possibly because they aren't aware of or accessing a latent attribute or quality that is currently within your reach. So you feel little. Either that or it's all mood-making and the placebo theory. I am content with any of the three theories. None is any better to me, because the bottom line is that sometimes seeing a spiritual teacher works to awaken something in you. HOW this happens doesn't matter at all to me, only THAT it happens. And if it happens only as a result of moodmaking or the placebo effect, that's just fine with me. And the recognition theory is just fine with me. I'm just not as big a fan of the darshan-transmission theory as some, because for me that's an extension of the Beam me up Scotty theory of liberation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: From my own experiences, a teacher's spiritual transmission isn't necessarily universally received. If it even exists. There are perfectly viable theories that explain the *perception* of having received a transmission without there ever having been one. Mood-making is one. :-) The placebo effect, especially when jumpstarted with having paid a lot of money to be in the proximity of the person giving the transmission is another. However, the theory that I like the best is called recognition. I use the term transmission because it is common spiritual vernacular. I've been in total agreement with your recognition theory of darshan since I first read it back in 2005: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/55423
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_re...@... wrote: The recognition theory explains this in that not every teacher one meets is aware of or accessing the attribute or quality that is ready to wake up at the time you meet them. But some are. So you tend to get something from being in presence of those who are accessing the attribute or quality you are ready for and thus receptive to, and feel something from them, both while you're with them and afterwards. With other teachers, this does not happen, but very possibly because they aren't aware of or accessing a latent attribute or quality that is currently within your reach. So you feel little. Either that or it's all mood-making and the placebo theory. I am content with any of the three theories. None is any better to me, because the bottom line is that sometimes seeing a spiritual teacher works to awaken something in you. HOW this happens doesn't matter at all to me, only THAT it happens. And if it happens only as a result of moodmaking or the placebo effect, that's just fine with me. And the recognition theory is just fine with me. I'm just not as big a fan of the darshan-transmission theory as some, because for me that's an extension of the Beam me up Scotty theory of liberation. So, either mood-making placebo or your recognition theory is O.K. as long as it works to awaken an undefined something in you but you are not a fan of darshan-transmission. Why split hairs over semantics when you have not defined exactly how these terms differ, and therefore have no basis for comparison or criticism? P.S. Dash of saffron! she cracked wryly Triple-decker drama! Just hold your beef with Veggie Feast! Sandwich Deli Lama
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 8:46 AM, raunchydog wrote: It's about having the appropriate instrument for investigation. If you want to look at the stars, it's fine if you have a nice telescope, but it's not that helpful if you're trying to observe the stars from the back of a moving motorcycle. The mind needs to be similarly stable. In order for the telescope be clear, it needs to be built in a clean room. Similarly the mind as an instrument needs to be prepared by the prerequisites of samadhi. Further, if you're going to see clearly, the lenses need to be clean; similarly, attention should be vivid, not lax. Etc. A stable telescope that needs a little Windex so you can see the stars clearly and vividly is a great metaphor for samadhi. It sounds exactly like my TM-Sidhi program on a good day. So is this your answer to GrateSwan, that there is not an appropriate instrument for investigation? No, you missed the point. You need to have a reliable internal instrument in order to decide clearly. In post #218205 http://tinyurl.com/pzncrn GrateSwan asked you to back up your claims for pacification and so far you have offered ancient texts and an analogy. If that is the best proof you can offer for the Dalai Lama's ability to create the pacification effect you have no room to criticize the Maharishi Effect, which if you look at it more closely, and split a few hairs about it, we talking very much about the same thing. Actually (as I've postulated here before) IME TM and the TMSP do not lead to pacification, so no, it is not a valid comparison. Actually Grate falsely assumed I was referring to some landmark scientific study, when I was not referring to any such study. It was just another one of Grate's setting up strawman fallacies: pretend there should have been a landmark study, then whine where is one. If you want external evidence, I'd recommend the book it was quoted from as it's all on the science of overcoming destructive emotions. The only thing you have not yet offered as proof of pacification is the telling of your personal experience from having been with the Dalai Lama. I've told a few gushy stories of my experiences with Maharishi so if you want to gush over the Dalai Lama, I'd love to hear it. Pacify me. As I've said, the post was not intended to provide proof of pacification, but if you're interested in science on the topic, I'd recommend the works of Goleman and Ekman, esp. the book the quote came from since it's chocked full of citations.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? From my own experiences, a teacher's spiritual transmission isn't necessarily universally received. I think a person has to have some degree of attunement with the teacher for that subtle connection to be made. In my own experience with Waking Down, I didn't connect with Saniel Bonder the way I did with Pascal Salesses. And, I have none of the woo-woo experiences that some people have when getting a hug from Ammachi. I initially experienced nada from Ammachi, until I had the recognition that she was at the level of shakti. Instantly on that recognition, there was an acknowledgment from her, which was interesting that the recognition seemed reciprocal.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 10:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: If you think about it, it explains the experience of the person Vaj has been talking about. His latent attributes of ahimsa and compassion were ready to be awakened. Put him in the presence of a teacher whose life has been a veritable showcase of ahimsa and compassion, and those parts of him *recognize* themselves in the Dalai Lama, and awaken in him. No transmission necessary. But both the *effect* and the subjective *perception* are that one has taken place. While I can appreciate the use of the word transmission, it does seem the mechanics are more one of recognition, although perhaps recognition-by-sympathetic-vibration, but without vibration or energetic mediation necessarily. The reason I used the words Enlightened-Mind, was because experientially the non-conventional experience of absolute bodhichitta (Enlightened-Mind) is pacifying, to the extent that whole complexes of negativity just go. I've never had any feeling that the transmission of Enlightened-Mind was anything like shaktipat or some energy transmission because none of the teachers that I've experienced emitted the shakti-darshan type of vibe I'm familiar with from so many Hindu teachers. And this seems to be something others look for. But unfortunately I think what's going on isn't necessarily energetic. In fact often it's only when one moves oneself, shifts oneself in some way that unknowingly the recognition dawns. That's also why in many cases a sense of shock or surprise can facilitate such recognition.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 8:46 AM, raunchydog wrote: It's about having the appropriate instrument for investigation. If you want to look at the stars, it's fine if you have a nice telescope, but it's not that helpful if you're trying to observe the stars from the back of a moving motorcycle. The mind needs to be similarly stable. In order for the telescope be clear, it needs to be built in a clean room. Similarly the mind as an instrument needs to be prepared by the prerequisites of samadhi. Further, if you're going to see clearly, the lenses need to be clean; similarly, attention should be vivid, not lax. Etc. A stable telescope that needs a little Windex so you can see the stars clearly and vividly is a great metaphor for samadhi. It sounds exactly like my TM-Sidhi program on a good day. So is this your answer to GrateSwan, that there is not an appropriate instrument for investigation? No, you missed the point. You need to have a reliable internal instrument in order to decide clearly. In post #218205 http://tinyurl.com/pzncrn GrateSwan asked you to back up your claims for pacification and so far you have offered ancient texts and an analogy. If that is the best proof you can offer for the Dalai Lama's ability to create the pacification effect you have no room to criticize the Maharishi Effect, which if you look at it more closely, and split a few hairs about it, we talking very much about the same thing. Actually (as I've postulated here before) IME TM and the TMSP do not lead to pacification, so no, it is not a valid comparison. Actually Grate falsely assumed I was referring to some landmark scientific study, when I was not referring to any such study. It was just another one of Grate's setting up strawman fallacies: pretend there should have been a landmark study, then whine where is one. Well you view things from your light and interpret things in ways that are meaningful to you. While you may see strawmen, only a rope was there (from my side). The rope, being what I read, that this phenomenon had been replicated many times. Yes? If so, if replicated pre-science, then if something this powerful has been replicated many times in the past, why would not the scientific community jump on this and research the bejesus out of it? It would put any number of ambitious scientists and/or grad students on the map. A landmark study in the history of science. Mental/spiritual transmission of great power. What could be a grander finding than that. So I was surprised that, apparently, the scientists are not busting down the door to do such research. I assume because they got to step one -- preliminary screening -- and dropped it then as not worthy of more effort and inquiry. Now some could claim grand conspiracy theories -- that the Big Corporations don't want these secrets revealed. That they killed it. Wont' fund it. Ha! Good one. A preliminary study, to establish that this phenomenon is worthy of more extensive studies, would be well within 1000's of research center budgets. But apparently its not worthy. Other things are far more plausible, far more replicable, far more lined up to establish that A causes B. But i was giving you the benefit of the doubt. If this balm is such a great thing, and so replicable, it surely must have scientific research I thought. Actually, part of me was skeptical, but being compassionate, having felt the DL's goodness, I benevolently gave you the benefit of the doubt. I see now that was not warranted. That this is another, undocumented, fluffy new-age claim worthy of the dustbin. If you want external evidence, I'd recommend the book it was quoted from as it's all on the science of overcoming destructive emotions. The only thing you have not yet offered as proof of pacification is the telling of your personal experience from having been with the Dalai Lama. I've told a few gushy stories of my experiences with Maharishi so if you want to gush over the Dalai Lama, I'd love to hear it. Pacify me. As I've said, the post was not intended to provide proof of pacification, but if you're interested in science on the topic, I'd recommend the works of Goleman and Ekman, esp. the book the quote came from since it's chocked full of citations.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 8:22 AM, grate.swan wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? It doesn't work on Commies. Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? Vaj is a Commie. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: In fact often it's only when one moves oneself, shifts oneself in some way that unknowingly the recognition dawns. That's also why in many cases a sense of shock or surprise can facilitate such recognition. I think the mechanics Maharishi presented about the picture of SBS in puja is similar. He said, candidly, we are not invoking SBS, he is not of form, only formlessness exists. But seeing a picture of one who walked and talked in fully integrated state, form and formless, that picture then is a tool to help see those qualities in ourselves. (Wrods may be different, but that is my takeaway) Surely that's not limited to SBS. Put your awareness on any saint, and the thing happens. Put your attention on Jesus, Buddha, or Krishna, and the thing happens. Interestingly, Formless, with a slight overlay of Form -- the particular qualities more expressed by that person. Darschan from live people, in form, Mother Meera, Ammachi, SriSri, and all, do not require physical presence. Being with them may help establish confidence in you that something happens. But the darschan dis not limited to physical proximity. Its totally wireless. Take it anywhere. Even a flower can give you darschan. The infinity and depth of structure of nature is within the flower as it is within you. Simply synch up to that, and the beauty of the flower becomes lively within you. (I just noticed flow is the foundation of flower. The essence of th flow, its inherent infinity and depth of the structure of nature, flows to you from the flower, when you put receptive, synching attention on it. ) But I have not scientific studies on this -- simply because what A causes in B is not a clear tangible thing to measure -- in contrast to highly measurable things like no outburst of anger in one year, after a history or weekly outbursts for 10 years. However, some change in function might be measurable as your whole insides light up from such darschan.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 8:22 AM, grate.swan wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? It doesn't work on Commies. Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? Vaj is a Commie. Sal Ah, sometimes the obvious is right in front of you and you miss it. Doh! Thank you Sal.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: Deli Lama: A sandwich. A...very good, Grasshopper. Now, to see whether you have learned enough to leave the monastery, does the sandwich contain meat or not? Dash of saffron! she cracked wryly Triple-decker drama! Just hold your beef with Veggie Feast! Sandwich Deli Lama I figured you wouldn't know. Most Tibetans are not strict vegetarians, and neither is the Dalai Lama. Think of where their country is and its altitude. If they ate only veggies, there would be nothing to eat nine months of the year. When you can crack a book to learn some- thing about spiritual traditions other than TM, Grasshopper, *then* you will be ready to leave the monastery. Until then, I suggest you stay hidden away in the ashram...you're not ready for the larger world. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: I initially experienced nada from Ammachi, until I had the recognition that she was at the level of shakti. Instantly on that recognition, there was an acknowledgment from her, which was interesting that the recognition seemed reciprocal. This all seems a little vague. Not sure what she was at the level of shakti means. It sounds like you are saying that this recognition from you ocurred at a distance, and her acknkoweledgement ocurred at a distance. So, this was a rather subtle type communication. I buy into this kind of thing, but was wondering if I have it straight.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
and the DL is a putz. a nice enough guy, but sort of the nerd of spiritual teachers-- talks in very obtuse language, not terribly effective, and has managed to make a name for himself only because outsiders have taken over his medieval oligarchy, while he was unable to do anything about it. sort of the principle that there is no such thing as bad publicity... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 8:22 AM, grate.swan wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? It doesn't work on Commies. Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? Vaj is a Commie. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 12:15 PM, grate.swan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: In fact often it's only when one moves oneself, shifts oneself in some way that unknowingly the recognition dawns. That's also why in many cases a sense of shock or surprise can facilitate such recognition. I think the mechanics Maharishi presented about the picture of SBS in puja is similar. He said, candidly, we are not invoking SBS, he is not of form, only formlessness exists. But seeing a picture of one who walked and talked in fully integrated state, form and formless, that picture then is a tool to help see those qualities in ourselves. (Wrods may be different, but that is my takeaway) Surely that's not limited to SBS. Put your awareness on any saint, and the thing happens. Put your attention on Jesus, Buddha, or Krishna, and the thing happens. Interestingly, Formless, with a slight overlay of Form -- the particular qualities more expressed by that person. Darschan from live people, in form, Mother Meera, Ammachi, SriSri, and all, do not require physical presence. Being with them may help establish confidence in you that something happens. But the darschan dis not limited to physical proximity. Its totally wireless. Take it anywhere. Even a flower can give you darschan. The infinity and depth of structure of nature is within the flower as it is within you. Simply synch up to that, and the beauty of the flower becomes lively within you. (I just noticed flow is the foundation of flower. The essence of th flow, its inherent infinity and depth of the structure of nature, flows to you from the flower, when you put receptive, synching attention on it. ) But I have not scientific studies on this -- simply because what A causes in B is not a clear tangible thing to measure -- in contrast to highly measurable things like no outburst of anger in one year, after a history or weekly outbursts for 10 years. However, some change in function might be measurable as your whole insides light up from such darschan. I wouldn't confuse shakti darshan effects, like you're describing, with the transmitted recognition of enlightened mind which can lead to pacification (Skt.: prashanti). These are different phenomenon.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 12:15 PM, grate.swan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: In fact often it's only when one moves oneself, shifts oneself in some way that unknowingly the recognition dawns. That's also why in many cases a sense of shock or surprise can facilitate such recognition. I think the mechanics Maharishi presented about the picture of SBS in puja is similar. He said, candidly, we are not invoking SBS, he is not of form, only formlessness exists. But seeing a picture of one who walked and talked in fully integrated state, form and formless, that picture then is a tool to help see those qualities in ourselves. (Wrods may be different, but that is my takeaway) Surely that's not limited to SBS. Put your awareness on any saint, and the thing happens. Put your attention on Jesus, Buddha, or Krishna, and the thing happens. Interestingly, Formless, with a slight overlay of Form -- the particular qualities more expressed by that person. Darschan from live people, in form, Mother Meera, Ammachi, SriSri, and all, do not require physical presence. Being with them may help establish confidence in you that something happens. But the darschan dis not limited to physical proximity. Its totally wireless. Take it anywhere. Even a flower can give you darschan. The infinity and depth of structure of nature is within the flower as it is within you. Simply synch up to that, and the beauty of the flower becomes lively within you. (I just noticed flow is the foundation of flower. The essence of th flow, its inherent infinity and depth of the structure of nature, flows to you from the flower, when you put receptive, synching attention on it. ) But I have not scientific studies on this -- simply because what A causes in B is not a clear tangible thing to measure -- in contrast to highly measurable things like no outburst of anger in one year, after a history or weekly outbursts for 10 years. However, some change in function might be measurable as your whole insides light up from such darschan. I wouldn't confuse shakti darshan effects, like you're describing, with the transmitted recognition of enlightened mind which can lead to pacification (Skt.: prashanti). These are different phenomenon. Perhaps you did not follow. How can the Formless create a shakti effect? The effect which i describe from my own experience is within oneself. My experience is that it is structural, not energetic. Or more accurately, destructural. As in kicking out the jams. Well, no that sounds energetic-- but the point is boundaries disappear -- silently. Boundaries become destructured. Formlessness dominates.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: In fact often it's only when one moves oneself, shifts oneself in some way that unknowingly the recognition dawns. That's also why in many cases a sense of shock or surprise can facilitate such recognition. I think the mechanics Maharishi presented about the picture of SBS in puja is similar. He said, candidly, we are not invoking SBS, he is not of form, only formlessness exists. But seeing a picture of one who walked and talked in fully integrated state, form and formless, that picture then is a tool to help see those qualities in ourselves. (Wrods may be different, but that is my takeaway) Surely that's not limited to SBS. Put your awareness on any saint, and the thing happens. Put your attention on Jesus, Buddha, or Krishna, and the thing happens. Interestingly, Formless, with a slight overlay of Form -- the particular qualities more expressed by that person. Darschan from live people, in form, Mother Meera, Ammachi, SriSri, and all, do not require physical presence. Being with them may help establish confidence in you that something happens. But the darschan dis not limited to physical proximity. Its totally wireless. Take it anywhere. Even a flower can give you darschan. The infinity and depth of structure of nature is within the flower as it is within you. Simply synch up to that, and the beauty of the flower becomes lively within you. (I just noticed flow is the foundation of flower. The essence of th flow, its inherent infinity and depth of the structure of nature, flows to you from the flower, when you put receptive, synching attention on it. ) But I have not scientific studies on this -- simply because what A causes in B is not a clear tangible thing to measure -- in contrast to highly measurable things like no outburst of anger in one year, after a history or weekly outbursts for 10 years. However, some change in function might be measurable as your whole insides light up from such darschan. Excellent post. I experienced darshan from a Dolphin. No kidding. I met a big rubbery mammal living in the blue waters of Bermuda whose captors trained him to swim with humans. His name was Sirius. I think Sirius was just humoring his trainers because it was he, not they who had something valuable to teach. In the presence of his Being, Sirius embodied such joyous living and love that I couldn't help but drink it in. I smiled for days and even now I smile just thinking about Him. Beautiful. http://tinyurl.com/ok9gbg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7PPx7LtGc4
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 11:55 AM, grate.swan wrote: Actually (as I've postulated here before) IME TM and the TMSP do not lead to pacification, so no, it is not a valid comparison. Actually Grate falsely assumed I was referring to some landmark scientific study, when I was not referring to any such study. It was just another one of Grate's setting up strawman fallacies: pretend there should have been a landmark study, then whine where is one. Well you view things from your light and interpret things in ways that are meaningful to you. While you may see strawmen, only a rope was there (from my side). Well, actually your initial comment-- So what journals has this been published in? Being replicated so many times by reputable scientists, it must have created quite the stir in the scientific community. To be honest, I missed this landmark event in science. What are the cites so that I can educate myself. --raises a question that has no basis in my post. You assume there was a landmark study. The rope, being what I read, that this phenomenon had been replicated many times. Yes? If so, if replicated pre-science, then if something this powerful has been replicated many times in the past, why would not the scientific community jump on this and research the bejesus out of it? It would put any number of ambitious scientists and/or grad students on the map. A landmark study in the history of science. Mental/spiritual transmission of great power. What could be a grander finding than that. They are. But FYI I don't keep a ongoing list of all meditation research by my side wherever I go. IMO the specific question of pacification is better discerned in either the stages of transcendence/ calm-abiding, for which it has a notable subjective experience OR the experience of enlightened-mind where it occurs spontaneously due to sympathetic recognition modulated (it would seem) through attention/ intention. So I was surprised that, apparently, the scientists are not busting down the door to do such research. I assume because they got to step one -- preliminary screening -- and dropped it then as not worthy of more effort and inquiry. The book the quote comes from is all about the beginning of this scientific inquiry. There are already a number of correlations like the immune system which seems to get stronger in people who are pacifying negative emotions (e.g. mindfulness meditators have twice the antibodies to flu, post-vaccine, that non-meditators). Now some could claim grand conspiracy theories -- that the Big Corporations don't want these secrets revealed. That they killed it. Wont' fund it. Ha! Good one. A preliminary study, to establish that this phenomenon is worthy of more extensive studies, would be well within 1000's of research center budgets. But apparently its not worthy. Other things are far more plausible, far more replicable, far more lined up to establish that A causes B. But i was giving you the benefit of the doubt. If this balm is such a great thing, and so replicable, it surely must have scientific research I thought. Actually, part of me was skeptical, but being compassionate, having felt the DL's goodness, I benevolently gave you the benefit of the doubt. I see now that was not warranted. That this is another, undocumented, fluffy new-age claim worthy of the dustbin. Another strawman. Like I said, read Ekman and Goleman if this kinda thing grabs you, but subjective experience is IMO a much finer and more valuable indicator. I think you'd be surprised what's already out there. Ekman's facial coding system which he applied to various yogis and controls is an interesting example. Another interesting area is examining the refractory period after a negative emotion and it's amelioration via meditative expertise.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 12:45 PM, grate.swan wrote: I wouldn't confuse shakti darshan effects, like you're describing, with the transmitted recognition of enlightened mind which can lead to pacification (Skt.: prashanti). These are different phenomenon. Perhaps you did not follow. How can the Formless create a shakti effect? It moves. The effect which i describe from my own experience is within oneself. My experience is that it is structural, not energetic. Or more accurately, destructural. As in kicking out the jams. Well, no that sounds energetic-- but the point is boundaries disappear -- silently. Boundaries become destructured. Formlessness dominates.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 8:22 AM, grate.swan wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? It doesn't work on Commies. Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? Vaj is a Commie. Sal Now *that* clears things up a bit. I wonder of what shade stripe of Commie? A bit leftist leaning Commie? Just a kinda pink Commie? Want the world to be a better place Commie? Generic fellow traveler Commie? Read Lenin and wore a Che t-shirt as an undergrad Commie? Card carrying Commie? Red diaper baby Commie? Valium in the jet contrails but don't take my BluRay player or ever deign to mess with my ego because I'm a true 'ARTIST' and can prove it by never being able to string 3 grammatically correct sentences in a row together but don't tell *ME* about line-breaks cuz I have a powerful guru mantra dog shit stepin' in drivin' my Suburu don't like dog owners hip to the Seattle scene cuz I played with Hendrix and I'm a Jazz musician but make unwatchable unlistenable animated music vids about downtown girls people move away from me when I sit down at Starbuck's Commie? Ahhh, shades.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 10, 2009, at 1:21 PM, satvadude108 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 8:22 AM, grate.swan wrote: I like the DL (did I spell it right?). He is a sweet gentle man, and appears to have good insights. And a sense of humor. However, if he has the power of pacification, why does he not use it on the Chinese leaders -- who upon pacification will grant and celebrate autonomy, if not freedom, to/for Tibet? It doesn't work on Commies. Why does he go for small fish like Ekland. Why doesn't he at least pacify Vaj via transmission and root out his anger? Vaj is a Commie. Sal Now *that* clears things up a bit. Yes, I knew it would. Don't thank me, it was nothing. I wonder of what shade stripe of Commie? A bit leftist leaning Commie? Just a kinda pink Commie? Want the world to be a better place Commie? Generic fellow traveler Commie? Read Lenin and wore a Che t-shirt as an undergrad Commie? Card carrying Commie? Red diaper baby Commie? Valium in the jet contrails but don't take my BluRay player or ever deign to mess with my ego because I'm a true 'ARTIST' and can prove it by never being able to string 3 grammatically correct sentences in a row together but don't tell *ME* about line-breaks cuz I have a powerful guru mantra dog shit stepin' in drivin' my Suburu don't like dog owners hip to the Seattle scene cuz I played with Hendrix and I'm a Jazz musician but make unwatchable unlistenable animated music vids about downtown girls people move away from me when I sit down at Starbuck's Commie? Ahhh, shades.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Vaj wrote: The interesting story of world-renowned psychologist, Paul Ekman, and the resolution of a lifetime of anger. A related project had its roots in a surprisingly powerful private exchange Paul Ekman had with the Dalai Lama during a tea break on Wednesday. As his daughter Eve asked the Dalai Lama a personal question about relationships, His Holiness alternately held, and affectionately rubbed, each of their hands. That small encounter, Paul later recounted, was what some people would call a mystical, transforming experience. I was inexplicably suffused with physical warmth during those five to ten minutes--a wonderful kind of warmth throughout my body and face. It was palpable. I felt a kind of goodness I'd never felt before in my life, all the time I sat there. This was a unique moment for Paul, a feeling of being embraced with generosity, concern, and compassion. And that moment came on top of the Dalai Lama having said during the discussion what a good father Paul was. Somehow that combination touched the very roots of Paul's motivation in life. A year or so later, Paul related that experience--and changes he had felt since--to a particularly traumatic incident in his life. My father was a violent man. When I was eighteen I told him I had decided to study psychology, not medicine, like he had--he was a pediatrician. And he said he would give me no support. I asked him if he wanted me to feel toward him as he did toward his own father, who had also refused support for his education. He knocked me to the floor, and when I got up I told him that was the last time he was going to hit me, for I was bigger and I would hit him back. I left home, not to see him again for a decade. Since that time, Paul added, About once a week for the last fifty years I've had an anger attack that I regretted. But things changed on the day in Dharamsala when Paul had that private encounter with His Holiness. After that, I didn't even have an angry impulse for the next four months, and no full episode of erupting in anger for the whole last year. I'm someone who has struggled his whole life with flare-ups of anger, but even now, almost a year later, they're very rare. I believe that physical contact with that kind of goodness can have a transformative effect. from Destructive Emotions, How Can We Overcome Them? : A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Narrated by Daniel Goleman. Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that? I'm not sure who would assume that he is enlightened? He has never claimed to be enlightened... He doesn't appear to be enlightened... The only thing he claim is being the 14th reincarnation of someone who he has been doing this for at least 14 lifetimes... R.g.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Vaj wrote: The interesting story of world-renowned psychologist, Paul Ekman, and the resolution of a lifetime of anger. A related project had its roots in a surprisingly powerful private exchange Paul Ekman had with the Dalai Lama during a tea break on Wednesday. As his daughter Eve asked the Dalai Lama a personal question about relationships, His Holiness alternately held, and affectionately rubbed, each of their hands. That small encounter, Paul later recounted, was what some people would call a mystical, transforming experience. I was inexplicably suffused with physical warmth during those five to ten minutes--a wonderful kind of warmth throughout my body and face. It was palpable. I felt a kind of goodness I'd never felt before in my life, all the time I sat there. This was a unique moment for Paul, a feeling of being embraced with generosity, concern, and compassion. And that moment came on top of the Dalai Lama having said during the discussion what a good father Paul was. Somehow that combination touched the very roots of Paul's motivation in life. A year or so later, Paul related that experience--and changes he had felt since--to a particularly traumatic incident in his life. My father was a violent man. When I was eighteen I told him I had decided to study psychology, not medicine, like he had--he was a pediatrician. And he said he would give me no support. I asked him if he wanted me to feel toward him as he did toward his own father, who had also refused support for his education. He knocked me to the floor, and when I got up I told him that was the last time he was going to hit me, for I was bigger and I would hit him back. I left home, not to see him again for a decade. Since that time, Paul added, About once a week for the last fifty years I've had an anger attack that I regretted. But things changed on the day in Dharamsala when Paul had that private encounter with His Holiness. After that, I didn't even have an angry impulse for the next four months, and no full episode of erupting in anger for the whole last year. I'm someone who has struggled his whole life with flare-ups of anger, but even now, almost a year later, they're very rare. I believe that physical contact with that kind of goodness can have a transformative effect. from Destructive Emotions, How Can We Overcome Them? : A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Narrated by Daniel Goleman. Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that? I'm not sure who would assume that he is enlightened? He has never claimed to be enlightened... He doesn't appear to be enlightened... The only thing he claim is being the 14th reincarnation of someone who he has been doing this for at least 14 lifetimes... R.g. But we are ALL the reincarnation of the person who has been doing the same thing 14 lifetimes. (Do we get spiffy robes, and cool hats?) We keep repeating grade school because we flunked out of the basic curriculum. (you know, like Compassion 101, even Compassion for Dummies). Oh well, see you out in the sand box.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Vaj wrote: The interesting story of world-renowned psychologist, Paul Ekman, and the resolution of a lifetime of anger. A related project had its roots in a surprisingly powerful private exchange Paul Ekman had with the Dalai Lama during a tea break on Wednesday. As his daughter Eve asked the Dalai Lama a personal question about relationships, His Holiness alternately held, and affectionately rubbed, each of their hands. That small encounter, Paul later recounted, was what some people would call a mystical, transforming experience. I was inexplicably suffused with physical warmth during those five to ten minutes--a wonderful kind of warmth throughout my body and face. It was palpable. I felt a kind of goodness I'd never felt before in my life, all the time I sat there. This was a unique moment for Paul, a feeling of being embraced with generosity, concern, and compassion. And that moment came on top of the Dalai Lama having said during the discussion what a good father Paul was. Somehow that combination touched the very roots of Paul's motivation in life. A year or so later, Paul related that experience--and changes he had felt since--to a particularly traumatic incident in his life. My father was a violent man. When I was eighteen I told him I had decided to study psychology, not medicine, like he had--he was a pediatrician. And he said he would give me no support. I asked him if he wanted me to feel toward him as he did toward his own father, who had also refused support for his education. He knocked me to the floor, and when I got up I told him that was the last time he was going to hit me, for I was bigger and I would hit him back. I left home, not to see him again for a decade. Since that time, Paul added, About once a week for the last fifty years I've had an anger attack that I regretted. But things changed on the day in Dharamsala when Paul had that private encounter with His Holiness. After that, I didn't even have an angry impulse for the next four months, and no full episode of erupting in anger for the whole last year. I'm someone who has struggled his whole life with flare-ups of anger, but even now, almost a year later, they're very rare. I believe that physical contact with that kind of goodness can have a transformative effect. from Destructive Emotions, How Can We Overcome Them? : A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Narrated by Daniel Goleman. Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that? I'm not sure who would assume that he is enlightened? He has never claimed to be enlightened... He doesn't appear to be enlightened... The only thing he claim is being the 14th reincarnation of someone who he has been doing this for at least 14 lifetimes... R.g. But we are ALL the reincarnation of the person who has been doing the same thing 14 lifetimes. (Do we get spiffy robes, and cool hats?) We keep repeating grade school because we flunked out of the basic curriculum. (you know, like Compassion 101, even Compassion for Dummies). Oh well, see you out in the sand box. That's true...we're all doing this reincarnation thing, until we get it right... I'm not sure how many times I've been here doing my time, but hopefully I'm making some progress towards my enlightenment... Until then we play in the sand...just be careful not to sit in that spot that's wet, because I think someone had a leak in their diaper. R.G. R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that? It would depend how you define enlightenment. Certainly beyond Stream Enterer, the Path of Seeing most likely. According to that definition, then Ronald Reagan would be considered enlightened! Spending up to 14 lifetimes, in different movies, refining his acting abilities... To one day, appear on the stage of life...playing his 'part', Exactly to the letter... Following the script, the facial gestures, the hand movements, the calm yet determined voice... Mr. Mao: Tear down this Wall... Can't We All Just Get Along ~Rodney King(an enlighened being). R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Vaj wrote: On May 10, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that? It would depend how you define enlightenment. Certainly beyond Stream Enterer, the Path of Seeing most likely. And the definition of those are? A Stream Enterer would be roughly equivalent to Brahman Consciousness where one is permanently awake and one has obliterated all the afflictive emotion, one still has some subtle obscurations remaining. It the entry level bodhisattva. Sorry, I meant to say Path of No More Learning--it's many realizations beyond a stream enterer. Vaj, I hate to tell you, but that sounds like '1984 Double Speak', To me... Could you inform me sir, how are why would one still be here, on the path of 'No More Learning'... What kind of foolish giberish are you peddling here, sir? R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
everyone just assumes it. the DL is the Baskin Robbins flavor of the month funny looking eastern guy. westerners, like Vaj, are very naive when it comes to enlightenment. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Vaj wrote: The interesting story of world-renowned psychologist, Paul Ekman, and the resolution of a lifetime of anger. A related project had its roots in a surprisingly powerful private exchange Paul Ekman had with the Dalai Lama during a tea break on Wednesday. As his daughter Eve asked the Dalai Lama a personal question about relationships, His Holiness alternately held, and affectionately rubbed, each of their hands. That small encounter, Paul later recounted, was what some people would call a mystical, transforming experience. I was inexplicably suffused with physical warmth during those five to ten minutes--a wonderful kind of warmth throughout my body and face. It was palpable. I felt a kind of goodness I'd never felt before in my life, all the time I sat there. This was a unique moment for Paul, a feeling of being embraced with generosity, concern, and compassion. And that moment came on top of the Dalai Lama having said during the discussion what a good father Paul was. Somehow that combination touched the very roots of Paul's motivation in life. A year or so later, Paul related that experience--and changes he had felt since--to a particularly traumatic incident in his life. My father was a violent man. When I was eighteen I told him I had decided to study psychology, not medicine, like he had--he was a pediatrician. And he said he would give me no support. I asked him if he wanted me to feel toward him as he did toward his own father, who had also refused support for his education. He knocked me to the floor, and when I got up I told him that was the last time he was going to hit me, for I was bigger and I would hit him back. I left home, not to see him again for a decade. Since that time, Paul added, About once a week for the last fifty years I've had an anger attack that I regretted. But things changed on the day in Dharamsala when Paul had that private encounter with His Holiness. After that, I didn't even have an angry impulse for the next four months, and no full episode of erupting in anger for the whole last year. I'm someone who has struggled his whole life with flare-ups of anger, but even now, almost a year later, they're very rare. I believe that physical contact with that kind of goodness can have a transformative effect. from Destructive Emotions, How Can We Overcome Them? : A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Narrated by Daniel Goleman. Is the Dalai Lama enlightened? Or do people just assume that?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
I believe that physical contact with that kind of goodness can have a transformative effect. from Destructive Emotions, How Can We Overcome Them? : A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Narrated by Daniel Goleman. :: Beautiful, thanks so much for sharing this.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
Its a nice story. But why does A necessarily cause B? Maybe cessation of anger came with age and would have happened any way. Maybe some clutch of saturn or mars was diminished for a while, maybe secretly did a yagya for him, maybe its a placebo effect, maybe his diet changed and he began to get some increase of some needed neurotransmitter, maybe an elf cast a spell, maybe it was his karma to suffer anger for 50 years of so then it was over, maybe he simply acted in ways that did not create anger, maybe he has anger triggers that did not occur during that period, maybe jesus did it, maybe someone prayed for him, maybe its because the team x won, maybe his testosterone levels have decreased significantly, maybe he has a brain tumor, maybe the devil gave up on him, maybe he drove and Prius and the electomagnetic waves changed his aura, maybe he wore rudraksa, maybe he got a reflexology foot massage and wore those funny red sandals with knobs, maybe some one slipped him some acid and he worked it out without knowing it, maybe God had mercy on him ... The story is no different, as far as I can see, that peoples lives changed with mystical thing, or new age thing, or fitness routine, or what ever. That's the point of science to try to isolate hat cause what -- and what is noise. If Ekman is a scientist then he must take his claims with some quite large grain of salt. Else he appears to be a quack. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: The interesting story of world-renowned psychologist, Paul Ekman, and the resolution of a lifetime of anger. A related project had its roots in a surprisingly powerful private exchange Paul Ekman had with the Dalai Lama during a tea break on Wednesday. As his daughter Eve asked the Dalai Lama a personal question about relationships, His Holiness alternately held, and affectionately rubbed, each of their hands. That small encounter, Paul later recounted, was what some people would call a mystical, transforming experience. I was inexplicably suffused with physical warmth during those five to ten minutes--a wonderful kind of warmth throughout my body and face. It was palpable. I felt a kind of goodness I'd never felt before in my life, all the time I sat there. This was a unique moment for Paul, a feeling of being embraced with generosity, concern, and compassion. And that moment came on top of the Dalai Lama having said during the discussion what a good father Paul was. Somehow that combination touched the very roots of Paul's motivation in life. A year or so later, Paul related that experience--and changes he had felt since--to a particularly traumatic incident in his life. My father was a violent man. When I was eighteen I told him I had decided to study psychology, not medicine, like he had--he was a pediatrician. And he said he would give me no support. I asked him if he wanted me to feel toward him as he did toward his own father, who had also refused support for his education. He knocked me to the floor, and when I got up I told him that was the last time he was going to hit me, for I was bigger and I would hit him back. I left home, not to see him again for a decade. Since that time, Paul added, About once a week for the last fifty years I've had an anger attack that I regretted. But things changed on the day in Dharamsala when Paul had that private encounter with His Holiness. After that, I didn't even have an angry impulse for the next four months, and no full episode of erupting in anger for the whole last year. I'm someone who has struggled his whole life with flare-ups of anger, but even now, almost a year later, they're very rare. I believe that physical contact with that kind of goodness can have a transformative effect. from Destructive Emotions, How Can We Overcome Them? : A Scientific Dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Narrated by Daniel Goleman.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 9, 2009, at 7:54 PM, grate.swan wrote: Its a nice story. But why does A necessarily cause B? It's called pacification, and it's something that's known to happen. It's nothing surprisingly new. It has some known characteristics and signs. So that's how we know. Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. But like anything, it's helpful to have have such an experience firsthand. In this case it's interesting (and helpful for others) that it's one of the great geniuses of emotional intelligence it happened to.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 9, 2009, at 7:54 PM, grate.swan wrote: Its a nice story. But why does A necessarily cause B? It's called pacification, and it's something that's known to happen. It's nothing surprisingly new. It has some known characteristics and signs. So that's how we know. Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. So what journals has this been published in? Being replicated so many times by reputable scientists, it must have created quite the stir in the scientific community. To be honest, I missed this landmark event in science. What are the cites so that I can educate myself. But like anything, it's helpful to have have such an experience firsthand. Same as yagyas and jyotish I suppose. But just, what if, A doesn't cause B and its just an illusion? Then, despite the direct experience, its still an illusion. I had a filipino faith healer pull ugly bloody things from my body. I directly experienced it. Do you think it was real? In this case it's interesting (and helpful for others) that it's one of the great geniuses of emotional intelligence it happened to.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
On May 9, 2009, at 10:22 PM, grate.swan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 9, 2009, at 7:54 PM, grate.swan wrote: Its a nice story. But why does A necessarily cause B? It's called pacification, and it's something that's known to happen. It's nothing surprisingly new. It has some known characteristics and signs. So that's how we know. Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. So what journals has this been published in? Being replicated so many times by reputable scientists, it must have created quite the stir in the scientific community. To be honest, I missed this landmark event in science. What are the cites so that I can educate myself. Well a good shamatha/samadhi text would be a start. The one in the file section's a good start for TM-style meditators. But I think in order to have an appreciation that past yogis could be capable of a subjective science, I suspect you'd have to have your own inner appreciation that such scientific subjectivity would even be possible, esp. given that we live in world filled with materialistic and objectivist scientism where subjectivity as a science would be considered a taboo. Barring that inner appreciation in understanding, you'd have to rely on faith. :-) But subjective science from the past aside, I'd recommend looking into Paul Ekman's work if you're interested in objectivist scientific verification, as his experience lead him to found a project to investigate these phenomenon. But like anything, it's helpful to have have such an experience firsthand. Same as yagyas and jyotish I suppose. In my own experience, I don't see any similarity. Both deal with remedial measures, something very, very different from internal pacification. But just, what if, A doesn't cause B and its just an illusion? Then, despite the direct experience, its still an illusion. I had a filipino faith healer pull ugly bloody things from my body. I directly experienced it. Do you think it was real? Yeah, he was pulling bloody things from the palm of his hand, away from your body. I believe that was real. Real chicken liver probably. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 9, 2009, at 10:22 PM, grate.swan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On May 9, 2009, at 7:54 PM, grate.swan wrote: Its a nice story. But why does A necessarily cause B? It's called pacification, and it's something that's known to happen. It's nothing surprisingly new. It has some known characteristics and signs. So that's how we know. Before there was scientific replication, it was known and replicated many, many times. So what journals has this been published in? Being replicated so many times by reputable scientists, it must have created quite the stir in the scientific community. To be honest, I missed this landmark event in science. What are the cites so that I can educate myself. Well a good shamatha/samadhi text would be a start. The one in the file section's a good start for TM-style meditators. But I think in order to have an appreciation that past yogis could be capable of a subjective science, I suspect you'd have to have your own inner appreciation that such scientific subjectivity would even be possible, esp. given that we live in world filled with materialistic and objectivist scientism where subjectivity as a science would be considered a taboo. Barring that inner appreciation in understanding, you'd have to rely on faith. :-) But subjective science from the past aside, I'd recommend looking into Paul Ekman's work if you're interested in objectivist scientific verification, as his experience lead him to found a project to investigate these phenomenon. But like anything, it's helpful to have have such an experience firsthand. Same as yagyas and jyotish I suppose. In my own experience, I don't see any similarity. Both deal with remedial measures, something very, very different from internal pacification. But just, what if, A doesn't cause B and its just an illusion? Then, despite the direct experience, its still an illusion. I had a filipino faith healer pull ugly bloody things from my body. I directly experienced it. Do you think it was real? Yeah, he was pulling bloody things from the palm of his hand, away from your body. I believe that was real. Real chicken liver probably. :-) Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence / signs of A causing B right now than the DL effect with a 4 month or so delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor because an ancient text says so?! If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_re...@... wrote: Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence / signs of A causing B right now than the DL effect with a 4 month or so delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor because an ancient text says so?! If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that? The well known pacification phenomenon able to soothe a crying baby, balance the doshas, convert angry yahoos to Buddhism, disarm Kim Jong-il, make Mahmoud Aminajad a friend to Israel and in the last days cause the lion to lay down with the lamb, these would be newsworthy events indeed. All we have to do is hook everyone up with the Dali Lama for darshan and let him pump out a lot of healing shakti. I have experienced darshan from such saints but how much pacification it has or had on my life is darn hard to evaluate. I can't imagine I could be part of a scientific study measuring my pacification. Perhaps the amount of good-vibe-saint energy one can absorb depends on the capacity of the vessel to openness or maybe it's just a crap shoot whether or not a saint's whammy can actually benefit you. I'm just saying, just saying, Fill 'er up! are not the magic words to make it happen. When you come eyeball to eyeball with a saint, no one and nothing else exists. I can only say that it seems to require an openness and surrender of the heart, a merging of the Self embodied in the saint and the Self embodied in me. Exactly how one goes about doing this, I have no idea. I just call it grace. I would be more impressed with Vaj's scientific claims, if he could provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with the Dali Lama.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Balm of Enlightened-Mind
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchy...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan no_reply@ wrote: Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence / signs of A causing B right now than the DL effect with a 4 month or so delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor because an ancient text says so?! If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that? The well known pacification phenomenon able to soothe a crying baby, balance the doshas, convert angry yahoos to Buddhism, disarm Kim Jong-il, make Mahmoud Aminajad a friend to Israel and in the last days cause the lion to lay down with the lamb, these would be newsworthy events indeed. All we have to do is hook everyone up with the Dali Lama for darshan and let him pump out a lot of healing shakti. I have experienced darshan from such saints but how much pacification it has or had on my life is darn hard to evaluate. I can't imagine I could be part of a scientific study measuring my pacification. Perhaps the amount of good-vibe-saint energy one can absorb depends on the capacity of the vessel to openness or maybe it's just a crap shoot whether or not a saint's whammy can actually benefit you. I'm just saying, just saying, Fill 'er up! are not the magic words to make it happen. When you come eyeball to eyeball with a saint, no one and nothing else exists. I can only say that it seems to require an openness and surrender of the heart, a merging of the Self embodied in the saint and the Self embodied in me. Exactly how one goes about doing this, I have no idea. I just call it grace. I would be more impressed with Vaj's scientific claims, if he could provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with the Dali Lama. The 14th Dalai Lama is a political/religious leader... I was in his presence, way back in the late '90's... And didn't see too much in his darshan, but more in the stagecraft and Buddha parafanalia, and hypnotized followers... He seemed to have the humility thing down, I must give him credit for that, as that is one of my main soul lessons, remaining humble in the face of ego... But, back to the mainstay of this conversation, which is to say, that 'This follows That' or 'Vice, versa'... When the whole picture is seen, or heard, or felt, or smelled or tasted, then... That's a different way of percieving, with the 'Righteous brain'... The 'Lefty Brain', always trys to make 'Rymth or Reason' to everything...and trys to show A followed B, follows C, and therefore we should expect this to happen, so we can charge a certain amount for time served, in the [prison of the mental]. Therefore, in order to squash bounderies, either in your mind or the miind of another, one must first be aware of the boundary of the illusion in the first place... In other words, if Dalai lama, can feel the illusion of the sepreateness, he could melt it, he could dissolve it... Much like The Maharishi did, while he was here, and continues after his Mahasamadhi, to this day. And that is to dissolve or transcend the differences that created the illusion of maya and the bounderies that created war and strife, and of course: Seperateness... In Unity there can be no problem... R.G.
