Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A different explanation of stress release

[Vaj]

On May 28, 2007, at 11:50 AM, cardemaister wrote:


> > On May 25, 2007, at 9:23 AM, shempmcgurk wrote:
> >
> > > > This just verifies what I've stated here numerous times,
> > > > that the TM myth of physical stress release from the
> > > > physical nervous system was fallacious. Where stress is
> > > > being released is in the pranic body or vajra body. It is
> > > > the pranic body that evolves.
> > >
> > > I don't understand the inconsistency between MMY's position,
> > > your's, and Muktananda's.
> > >
> > > Whether it's the "pranic body or vajra body" (although I'm not
> > > sure what "vajra body" is), isn't that still on the relative
> > > level? Whether it's actual physical body or subtle, the stress
> > > (or karma) is still stored there and has to be released.
> >
> > Karma is what tradition would state, not "stress".
>
> Actually, "stress" in MMY's lingo refers to samskaras,

The word "saMskaara" is actually almost the "same" as
Sanskrit in, well, Sanskrit -- which is "saMskRta".
That word, "saM-s-kRta", consists of the perfect participle
of the root "kR" (to do, etc), with the prefix "sam"
(together, etc.), and a transition consonant, or perhaps,
as per Whitney, an original consonant that's lost from
most other forms of the root "kR", which would thus have
been originally *skR (in linguistics asterix is used to
indicate hypothetical word forms).
The word "saMskaara" differs from "saMskRta" in that
the second part is a noun, "kaara", from the same root "kR".



If this is indeed what he's referring to, then please quote a source  
showing the equivalency in MMB's own words.


If indeed it is, and I suspect you may be right, the mediator is  
indeed the pranic body and it's karmic eddies not the physical  
nervous system (as oft advertised in TMO tracts).


There may indeed be a physical component in the nervous system, e.g.  
glia with an extremely short time span unmeasurable by current  
medical imaging technology or some short biological half-life fast  
neurotransmitters, but currently there is no tangible evidence to  
definitely arrive at such a conclusion.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: A different explanation of stress release

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of boo_lives
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 6:46 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A different explanation of stress release

 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>

> > Yeah, but, Ms. Magdalene was considered to be a whore, and I'm not 
> > sure that anyone would respect a Rabbi who married a whore.
> > You remember that in that period of history, her fate would have 
> been 
> > death, if Jesus had not intervened. Much like the women of Islam 

The mary magdalene as whore lie was started by pope gregory long ago
without any support from the bible in an effort to denigrate women. 
the catholic church apologized for this false accusation though not
until sometime last century as it served many of their purposes. 
There would not have been any problem with jesus marrying mary
magdalene - in fact a rabbi being an unmarried celebate is what would
have been considered weird at the time. 

Also, the woman whom Jesus saved from death by stoning ("Let him who is
without sin cast the first stone.") was a different woman - an accused
adulterer - not Mary Magdalene.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A different explanation of stress release

[Vaj]

On May 25, 2007, at 6:36 PM, qntmpkt wrote:


---Vaj, I know you're heavily into "tradition" but there's something
called "new knowledge";


And you feel the blossoming of new knowledge isn't part of or hasn't  
happened in a tradition before? There's little "new" under the sun.


Tradition is merely an authentic line of transmission, that's all, a  
river of transmission, it's not static. Don't think it means nothing  
new or unique happens. Something new or unique *always* happens as  
each person, unique in their own ways, awakens.



but ultimately, the idea is to seek the
truth, whether from tradition, authorities, Scriptures, one's own
experience, heresay evidence;...better yet, everything together with
one's own experience at the top of the list. This separates the true
Gnostics from the TB.
I see no reason to separate karma from stress and say it's only
karma. Why not get rid of the bad karma AND the stress, on all
levels. It's not an either/or proposition, unless one's Guru is only
adept at helping you one one level and not another.


I was not objecting to karma in my remarks but the insistence on  
"stress release" and the purification of the physical nervous system.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A different explanation of stress release

[Vaj]

On May 25, 2007, at 10:25 AM, shempmcgurk wrote:


"utterly fallacious and misleading"?

Methinks you doth protest too much. It's just an innoculous way of
saying the same thing to make it palatable to another audience.


Methinks thou art brainwashed.

Sorry, they are not the same thing, despite what your programming may  
tell you.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: A different explanation of stress release

[Vaj]

On May 25, 2007, at 9:23 AM, shempmcgurk wrote:


> This just verifies what I've stated here numerous times, that the
TM
> myth of physical stress release from the physical nervous system
was
> fallacious. Where stress is being released is in the pranic body
or
> vajra body. It is the pranic body that evolves.
>

I don't understand the inconsistency between MMY's position, your's,
and Muktananda's.

Whether it's the "pranic body or vajra body" (although I'm not sure
what "vajra body" is), isn't that still on the relative level?
Whether it's actual physical body or subtle, the stress (or karma) is
still stored there and has to be released.


Karma is what tradition would state, not "stress". Generally one  
would practice a technique to resolve the karmic eddies that still  
exist in the pranic body. Once practicing such a technique, then one  
can follow various signs to see how that's working. MMY's position is  
a marketable one, that's all, otherwise it's utterly fallacious and  
misleading. Muktananda just touches on some basics, but does give an  
idea of what is involved.