Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
Richard J. Williams wrote: >>> So, most mantra meditation is TM and has been TM for >>> centuries. >>> >>> > Bhairitu wrote: > >> The other way around: TM is just a form "yogic meditation" >> which has been taught for centuries. >> >> > So, TM is yogic meditation that has been taught for centuries. NO. TM is A FORM of yogic meditation that has been taught for centuries. The active word is FORM!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
Richard J. Williams wrote: > Bhairitu wrote: > >> Most mantra meditation does not vary from TM much >> at all because TM meditation was borrowed from the >> way mantra meditation has been taught for centuries >> (but with different mantras for you nitpickers). >> >> > So, most mantra meditation is TM and has been TM for > centuries. The other way around: TM is just a form "yogic meditation" which has been taught for centuries.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
At a subtler level as with any mantra meditation you're not going to be able to tell what exactly the pronunciation is. You'll always start with the mantra clearly and a good teacher will make sure you have the correct understanding of the pronunciation (it's too slap dash in TM). Just like TM it can turn into a "faint idea or feeling " more than a clear pronunciation. Most mantra meditation does not vary from TM much at all because TM meditation was borrowed from the way mantra meditation has been taught for centuries (but with different mantras for you nitpickers). Of course we can "nitpick" about concentration as there are some schools that emphasize that but not mine. In fact what some gurus may call "concentration" is the same process as TM of just bringing the mind back to the mantra when you realize you're off it rather than forcing the mind on it. biosoundbill wrote: > Hi Bhairitu, > > Does it matter if the pronounciation of a longer mantra changes as > it becomes more refined ,just as ones TM Mantra changes when > meditating effortlessly. > > Namaste, > > Billy > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> biosoundbill wrote: >> >>> Bhairitu, >>> >>> I meant to ask you as you meditate with a longer mantra >>> effortlessly,are you able to let go completely as in TM where >>> > the > >>> bija can become very faint,unclear, and barely recognizable.Are >>> > you > >>> able to allow a longer mantra to become very faint,unclear, and >>> barely recognizable also? >>> >>> >From my preception it seems that a longer mantra would,unlike >>> > TM, > >>> require a degree of concentration! >>> >>> Namaste, >>> >>> Billy >>> >> Yes the longer mantra will refine to a very faint idea. After a >> > while > >> the mantra will also just go on it's own so no concentration >> > required. > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 22, 2007, at 5:46 PM, bob_brigante wrote: > What, exactly, is a bija mantra anyway? > > > > Do bija mantras always have to be recieved in one-on-one > > initiation from a genuine tantric guru? Are bija mantras > > effective if you find them in a book? > > > > Why all the secrecy about bija mantras? > > > *** The thing about bija mantras (which are certainly not secret, being listed in several Vedic texts) needing their proper use to be taught by a teacher is because they are powerful. The ancient text Srimad Devi Bhagavatam (this is different from the Srimad Bhagavatam) says, after listing the bija mantras used in TM, that results will not be good for those who try to learn TM on their own (I can't cite the page, it's been too long since I read the SDB): http://tinyurl.com/e4q48 This is on the Spiritual Texts online archive for free now: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/db/index.htm
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
Vaj wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2007, at 11:24 PM, BillyG. wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Oct 21, 2007, at 9:43 PM, BillyG. wrote: >> > >> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: >> > > > >> > > > In the Hindu yogic tradition I practiced in, the "gap" or >> > > > transcendent in TM speak is only just the beginning...and it's not >> > > > truly transcendental consciousness, it's merely a thought-free >> > > state. >> > > > It is however an important sign that practice is ready to go to >> > > > another level, one where the transcendent is nurtured and the >> "gap" >> > > > becomes much longer. From what I've seen in TM research, the >> longest >> > > > recorded by their "research" in just a couple of minutes. But >> for a >> > > > yogin going deeply we're talking something that goes for several >> > > > hours or much longer, at will. So a long or short mantra MAY >> make a >> > > > little difference, one or two minutes compared to three or >> four, but >> > > > in the big picture it's insignificant IME. >> > > >> > > Right on Vaj, I agree! Also, I haven't heard even one credible >> > > account of kundalini rising in/from the TM group, probably because >> > > most aren't advanced enough,not that it wouldn't happen some day but >> > > "functioning from the home of all the laws of nature", GMAB!! >> > >> > >> > Sorry to burst your bubble, but I know numerous people who've >> > awakened at the prana-kundalini level. >> >> That and a buck wouldn't get you a cup of coffee at starbucks, so >> let's see, that means YOU haven't RIGHT! Where's the beef, Amigo! > > > Some people will have carried an awakening from a previous life, so > it's impossible to tell those who were previously awakened or if they > awakened from their practice in this life without investigating. But > usually if you ask closely, the person can tell you events throughout > childhood that indicated they carried their awakening from a prior > existence. This is so true. In fact I was even more mystified by people who after 20-30 years of practicing meditation claimed they had yet to experience transcending since so many I knew had experienced it with the first TM instruction and even other techniques before that.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 22, 2007, at 10:34 AM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For me, no effort or will whatsoever is involved. > The whole thing is automatic, completely > spontaneous. *Samyama* involves effort, but not > dhyan. TM is Samyama! Effortless Dharana (poorly translated as concentration), leading to Dhyana (sublime spontaneous contemplation on the Divine), and finally Samadhi (actual merging into oneness with the object of contemplation, pure consciousness or the Divine). So what happens down the road Judy (advanced techniques), when the mantra is instructed to be thought at a certain 'chakra' location? Is that using effort? The Horror!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 22, 2007, at 10:10 AM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Some people will have carried an awakening from a previous life, so > it's impossible to tell those who were previously awakened or if they > awakened from their practice in this life without investigating. But > usually if you ask closely, the person can tell you events throughout > childhood that indicated they carried their awakening from a prior > existence. Let's just put it this way Vaj, most likely many have had glimpses or partial awakening temporarily in just about any discipline, but actual conscious transcending thru all 6 chakras and finally to Sahasrara would make them Christs. It's also not unusual for people to have imbalanced awakenings, esp. people working indiscriminately with sexual practices. This is also somewhat common among TMSP practitioners. It is important to have guidance in such a path. Whether returning shakti to bindu would make them "Christs" I can't say--never met the guy. There are very few who have mastered kundalini that far living today, IMO, and based on the paltry experiences I've heard reported and the fact that MMY doesn't even talk about kundalini (anymore) leads me to believe this is an experience that is far off for the average Yoga practitioner today, (in whatever discipline). Are there a few precocious individuals here and there? sure, maybe MMY's nephew. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 21, 2007, at 11:24 PM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Oct 21, 2007, at 9:43 PM, BillyG. wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > In the Hindu yogic tradition I practiced in, the "gap" or > > > transcendent in TM speak is only just the beginning...and it's not > > > truly transcendental consciousness, it's merely a thought-free > > state. > > > It is however an important sign that practice is ready to go to > > > another level, one where the transcendent is nurtured and the "gap" > > > becomes much longer. From what I've seen in TM research, the longest > > > recorded by their "research" in just a couple of minutes. But for a > > > yogin going deeply we're talking something that goes for several > > > hours or much longer, at will. So a long or short mantra MAY make a > > > little difference, one or two minutes compared to three or four, but > > > in the big picture it's insignificant IME. > > > > Right on Vaj, I agree! Also, I haven't heard even one credible > > account of kundalini rising in/from the TM group, probably because > > most aren't advanced enough,not that it wouldn't happen some day but > > "functioning from the home of all the laws of nature", GMAB!! > > > Sorry to burst your bubble, but I know numerous people who've > awakened at the prana-kundalini level. That and a buck wouldn't get you a cup of coffee at starbucks, so let's see, that means YOU haven't RIGHT! Where's the beef, Amigo! Some people will have carried an awakening from a previous life, so it's impossible to tell those who were previously awakened or if they awakened from their practice in this life without investigating. But usually if you ask closely, the person can tell you events throughout childhood that indicated they carried their awakening from a prior existence.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Angela Mailander wrote: > Is there any evidence of this? Folks have measured the length of sojourn in > TC? Wouldn't that also depend on the individual, on length of practice and > predisposition, to name just a few of the possible variables? a > > Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: About > $4000. :) > And you stay in the transcendent longer. > > Angela Mailander wrote: > > So then, what's the difference? the transcendence is the transcendent, > right? If it had a sign in it that said, "I'm a better transcendent than the > one you get with iddy-biddy mantras" then that wouldn't be the transcendent, > would it? a > > > > Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > biosoundbill wrote: > > > Bhairitu, > > > > > > I meant to ask you as you meditate with a longer mantra > > > effortlessly,are you able to let go completely as in TM where the > > > bija can become very faint,unclear, and barely recognizable.Are you > > > able to allow a longer mantra to become very faint,unclear, and > > > barely recognizable also? > > > > > > >From my preception it seems that a longer mantra would,unlike TM, > > > require a degree of concentration! > > > > > > Namaste, > > > > > > Billy > > Yes the longer mantra will refine to a very faint idea. After a while > > the mantra will also just go on it's own so no concentration required. > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 21, 2007, at 10:03 PM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > In the Hindu yogic tradition I practiced in, the "gap" or > > transcendent in TM speak is only just the beginning...and it's not > > truly transcendental consciousness, it's merely a thought-free > > state. It is however an important sign that practice is ready to > > go to another level, one where the transcendent is nurtured and > > the "gap" becomes much longer. From what I've seen in TM research, > > the longest recorded by their "research" in just a couple of > > minutes. > > More like 20-something minutes, actually. > > Oh, and it's real research. There's no need for > scare quotes. > > But for a > > yogin going deeply we're talking something that goes for several > > hours or much longer, at will. > > Of course, if will is involved, Of course will IS involved, it's called an "effortless *effort*" Judy! Complete passivity in NOT TM!! "...innocently come back to the mantra" still involves attention, and drawing back the attention using the will effortlessly, without that personal effort there could be no Dharana or "concentration" or Samyama. Very good point and attention to subtle detail. What yogis call "the disease of effort" is not at all about "strain" or eye-brow knitting concentration, but merely attention on any object...or even merely the intent to sit, to return to your object when you lose it (even if based on smrti/mindfulness), etc. That's all "disease of effort", a natural part of any dualistic meditation method. Alambanas = effort.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 21, 2007, at 9:43 PM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In the Hindu yogic tradition I practiced in, the "gap" or > transcendent in TM speak is only just the beginning...and it's not > truly transcendental consciousness, it's merely a thought-free state. > It is however an important sign that practice is ready to go to > another level, one where the transcendent is nurtured and the "gap" > becomes much longer. From what I've seen in TM research, the longest > recorded by their "research" in just a couple of minutes. But for a > yogin going deeply we're talking something that goes for several > hours or much longer, at will. So a long or short mantra MAY make a > little difference, one or two minutes compared to three or four, but > in the big picture it's insignificant IME. Right on Vaj, I agree! Also, I haven't heard even one credible account of kundalini rising in/from the TM group, probably because most aren't advanced enough,not that it wouldn't happen some day but "functioning from the home of all the laws of nature", GMAB!! Sorry to burst your bubble, but I know numerous people who've awakened at the prana-kundalini level.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 21, 2007, at 9:41 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In the Hindu yogic tradition I practiced in, the "gap" or > transcendent in TM speak is only just the beginning...and it's not > truly transcendental consciousness, it's merely a thought-free > state. It is however an important sign that practice is ready to > go to another level, one where the transcendent is nurtured and > the "gap" becomes much longer. From what I've seen in TM research, > the longest recorded by their "research" in just a couple of > minutes. More like 20-something minutes, actually. Oh, and it's real research. There's no need for scare quotes. But for a > yogin going deeply we're talking something that goes for several > hours or much longer, at will. Of course, if will is involved, it isn't transcendental-consciousness-by-itself; it includes some element of waking consciousness. What TM researchers have been measuring is not this mixed state, but TC-by-itself, where the will cannot be exercised, by definition. You're misrepresenting what I said. The person wills to enter into samadhi for what ever amount of time before not during their session. Many TMers remain in the mixed state-- spontaneously, not by an effort of will--for most of the meditation period; it's sometimes referred to as "witnessing" one's meditation. Plus which, the principle of TM is cycling effortlessly back and forth between mantra, TC- by-itself, and thoughts, the point being to allow release of stress. Or so you've been lead to believe. Stress release is said to be what "kicks" one out of TC-by- itself. If one were to resist this "kick" by an effort of will in an attempt to repress thought, that would defeat the whole purpose. In any case, these are obviously very different approaches to meditation. Actually not, just better results IME.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
In the Hindu yogic tradition I practiced in, the "gap" or transcendent in TM speak is only just the beginning...and it's not truly transcendental consciousness, it's merely a thought-free state. It is however an important sign that practice is ready to go to another level, one where the transcendent is nurtured and the "gap" becomes much longer. From what I've seen in TM research, the longest recorded by their "research" in just a couple of minutes. But for a yogin going deeply we're talking something that goes for several hours or much longer, at will. So a long or short mantra MAY make a little difference, one or two minutes compared to three or four, but in the big picture it's insignificant IME. On Oct 21, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: Is there any evidence of this? Folks have measured the length of sojourn in TC? Wouldn't that also depend on the individual, on length of practice and predisposition, to name just a few of the possible variables? a
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
Is there any evidence of this? Folks have measured the length of sojourn in TC? Wouldn't that also depend on the individual, on length of practice and predisposition, to name just a few of the possible variables? a Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: About $4000. :) And you stay in the transcendent longer. Angela Mailander wrote: > So then, what's the difference? the transcendence is the transcendent, > right? If it had a sign in it that said, "I'm a better transcendent than > the one you get with iddy-biddy mantras" then that wouldn't be the > transcendent, would it? a > > Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > biosoundbill wrote: > > Bhairitu, > > > > I meant to ask you as you meditate with a longer mantra > > effortlessly,are you able to let go completely as in TM where the > > bija can become very faint,unclear, and barely recognizable.Are you > > able to allow a longer mantra to become very faint,unclear, and > > barely recognizable also? > > > > >From my preception it seems that a longer mantra would,unlike TM, > > require a degree of concentration! > > > > Namaste, > > > > Billy > Yes the longer mantra will refine to a very faint idea. After a while > the mantra will also just go on it's own so no concentration required. > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
About $4000. :) And you stay in the transcendent longer. Angela Mailander wrote: > So then, what's the difference? the transcendence is the transcendent, right? > If it had a sign in it that said, "I'm a better transcendent than the one > you get with iddy-biddy mantras" then that wouldn't be the transcendent, > would it? a > > Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > biosoundbill wrote: > > Bhairitu, > > > > I meant to ask you as you meditate with a longer mantra > > effortlessly,are you able to let go completely as in TM where the > > bija can become very faint,unclear, and barely recognizable.Are you > > able to allow a longer mantra to become very faint,unclear, and > > barely recognizable also? > > > > >From my preception it seems that a longer mantra would,unlike TM, > > require a degree of concentration! > > > > Namaste, > > > > Billy > Yes the longer mantra will refine to a very faint idea. After a while > the mantra will also just go on it's own so no concentration required. > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
So then, what's the difference? the transcendence is the transcendent, right? If it had a sign in it that said, "I'm a better transcendent than the one you get with iddy-biddy mantras" then that wouldn't be the transcendent, would it? a Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: biosoundbill wrote: > Bhairitu, > > I meant to ask you as you meditate with a longer mantra > effortlessly,are you able to let go completely as in TM where the > bija can become very faint,unclear, and barely recognizable.Are you > able to allow a longer mantra to become very faint,unclear, and > barely recognizable also? > > >From my preception it seems that a longer mantra would,unlike TM, > require a degree of concentration! > > Namaste, > > Billy Yes the longer mantra will refine to a very faint idea. After a while the mantra will also just go on it's own so no concentration required. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
biosoundbill wrote: > Bhairitu, > > I meant to ask you as you meditate with a longer mantra > effortlessly,are you able to let go completely as in TM where the > bija can become very faint,unclear, and barely recognizable.Are you > able to allow a longer mantra to become very faint,unclear, and > barely recognizable also? > > >From my preception it seems that a longer mantra would,unlike TM, > require a degree of concentration! > > Namaste, > > Billy Yes the longer mantra will refine to a very faint idea. After a while the mantra will also just go on it's own so no concentration required.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 20, 2007, at 7:26 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "biosoundbill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Richard, In the text below you appear to be admitting that bija mantras are used in TM! Why the sudden change of mind,are you a little confused? Billy...Richard lives under a bridge. Yep, that's it, Judy--anyone who doesn't know that "bija mantras" are used in TM is a clueless nitwit who lives under a bridge. Has it ever occurred to you that you and the others concerned with all of this spiritual nit-picking are obsessive/compulsive bores? Not that there's anything wrong with that! (snicker) Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
Richard J. Williams wrote: > Bhairitu wrote: > >> Don't feed the troll. Don't take mantra knowledge >> from a troll. Enough said. >> >> > Fuck you, Mr. Bharat2 - when you unsubscribe to ComCast > get back to us. Is it alright with you, Sir, if I dialog > with Bill, for just 1 minute, without you butting in > with your surly personal attacks? > > Now we know who is the real troll around here. > > >> You would have to be both deaf and blind to not >> know bij mantras growing up in India. :) >> >> > So, what then, is the big secret, and why are you > attempting to make us believe that you've got some > secret knowledge of magic words and phareses. Growing > up in India anyone would know that you are a pretender, > and that all you are really doing is waving your hands > around over a fire and snaping your fingers. And, > for what purpose? > > NEW YORK - Comcast Corp. actively interferes with > attempts by some of its high-speed Internet subscribers > to share files online, a move that runs counter to the > tradition of treating all types of Net traffic equally. > > Full story: > > 'Comcast blocks some Internet traffic' > By Peter Svensen > http://tinyurl.com/2aa3tr Where did I say *you* were a troll? But if the shoe fits then wear it. :) Note my email address. It is the *other* NWO company AT&T. So far they aren't blocking what rare P2P files I download *which* are BTW totally legal. They are often ISO files for Linux, some video and music files distributed by the authors that way. That's why Comcast is very lame doing this because there *are* companies including film studios using P2P as a low cost way to distribute even DRM'd stuff. You can use DixX's DRM this way as once downloaded DivX's software will download with your authorization code a small section of the file that makes it playable. That's why they can even publish the DRM code but it is of no use for a hacker. Too bad Microsoft, Apple and other MPAA companies engineers aren't that bright. :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
kaladevi93 wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> A longer mantra cultures the mind at deeper levels. The short bij >> mantra bobs up and down. It is not like a rock but more like a >> basketball being dribbled. But the longer mantra keeps you at a deep >> level for longer periods of time. Unfortunately on the airplane trip >> home after TTC where MMY gave out the advanced techniques about 2/3's of >> those who got advanced techniques couldn't remember what they were >> given. I had two versions in my mind: the correct one and one shorter >> but didn't know which was right. I went on for years switching between >> one and the other with different results. I didn't care much for that >> uncertainty and even wrote two mantra check letters to MMY but never got >> anything back. >> >> > > Rather than making an absolute statement that would clearly appeal to TMers, > wouldn't it > be fairer to say 'in some simple forms of meditation using mental repetition > of mantra a > longer mantra can culture the mind at deeper levels. A short bija mantra can > sometimes > bob up and down.' Otherwise you are ignoring the fact that some yogis will > use a bija and > trace it's component parts to beyond the mind and to the deepest absorptions > (something > never witnessed in TM meditators). Likewise other lay people may just use a > long mantra > in a more discursive fashion (consider 'Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is > with thee. > Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. > Holy Mary, > Mother of God..etc.' as an English example or Om Mani Padme Hum > superstitiously > repeated by thousands of TIbetans). > > Your statement is not absolutely true, only conditionally true. It still conveys the concept. I'm not going to waste a lot of time exactly crafting my statements. Who has time for that?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
Don't feed the troll. Don't take mantra knowledge from a troll. Enough said. You would have to be both deaf and blind to not know bij mantras growing up in India. :) biosoundbill wrote: > Richard, > > Most of the TM mantras are listed in the Varada Tantra. > > I believe MMY played around with them a little to dilute their > power, like making Kriing into ki-ring, Shriing into shir-ing, > Hriing into Hi-ring, shyam into she-am, etc > He really went to town on Saraswati aing,ainga,aim,and aima > (Pronounced i-ing, i-ing-ah, i-im, and i-eem-ah respectively) – was > he short on mantras, or what? > > Again as I said before, Southern pronunciation is slightly > different, they pronounce the `ii' in a bija as the `ee' in the word > feet etc,they also tend to use only the anusvara `M' ending,where > the lips are closed pushing the sound up the nasal passages. It > sounds more like the `mb' ending in the word Numb! > > In the North the `ii' is pronounced more like the `i' in the words > ring, bring, fling, etc > Some Northerners use the anusvara `M' ending, but more use the > allegedly more powerful `ng' ending known as anunAsika,-personally I > think the anusvara `M' ending is more powerful and grounding in the > long term. > > The late Harish Johari tended to pronounce the bijas with `ng' > endings combined with the `ee' sound as against the `i' sound giving > shreeng, hreeng, kreeng, etc > > Bottom line no matter what way the bijas are pronounced they are all > Tantric. > > Namaste, > > Billy > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Bhairitu wrote: >> >>> The short bij mantra bobs up and down. >>> >>> >> There seems to be some confusion here. Marshy doesn't >> give out 'bija' mantras, only the names of the devatas, >> the deified heroes of the Hindu tradition, along with >> various words and phrases from Sanskrit. Marshy isn't >> a tantric yogi in the Nath tradition, therefore he >> would not be knowing any actual bija mantras. The tantric >> bija mantras are enumerated in the Buddhist Tantras. >> There are no bija mantras in the Rig Veda, in the >> Upahishads, or in the Puranas. There are no canonical >> collections of bija mantras in Hinduism. The Buddhist >> bija mantras all originated with the Nath Siddhas when >> India was a Buddhist country. >> >> > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
On Oct 18, 2007, at 2:56 PM, biosoundbill wrote: It's not Shri, but Shreem which is the way they pronounce the Bija shrIM in the South of India. It's Shring or sometimes Shrim(thats 'sh'and rim as in the rim of a wheel)in the North of India. U, oh, here we go again..."Muh HAR shee" anyone?? :) Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
BillyG. wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "biosoundbill" >> > wrote: > >>> I think that the advanced techniques in TM where additional >>> syllables are added to the mantra are not as powerful as the basic >>> TM technique. >>> >>> The reason I say this is because in the basic TM technique one is >>> meditating twice daily with the purest, most intense form of a >>> mantra. >>> >>> >> I would disagree. The full dharani, the "chain" of mantra and it's >> > bija is the most profound > >> expression of mantra. One is the seed and one is the "tree". It is >> > only then that we can > >> differentiate and experience the different levels of the mantra >> > (vyapini, unmana, samana, etc.) > >> consciously and under will. Failing that we never completely >> > transcend the mind but instead > >> simply arrive at what appears like a thought-free state. But vrittis >> > are still present at this > >> rudimentary state. This thought-free state can be quite addictive >> > and people tend to get > >> stuck there because of this. It's also important that the initate >> > has the dhyana-vidhi of the > >> devata as that potentializes the ability to actualize the >> > mantra-shakti and communicate with > >> that energy as all-pervasive outside of meditation. >> > > Well, yes and no, that may be intellectually true but *experientially* > unless the meditator is advanced it can have a slowing down of > transcending per my experience! C. Lutes used to explain it like the > difference between a leaf falling from a tree (advanced) and a rock > falling to the bottom of a lake (simple mantra), again depending on > your level of advancement. > > I also noticed a difference in my meditation right after the third > technique-I went back to the original plus one which worked best for > me! I also feel very comfortable with the devatas associated with the > mantras. TM, IMO is not a diksha Initiation but a common power/sound > vibration Initiation, the power is the sound itself and it serves > merely as a vehicle.. A longer mantra cultures the mind at deeper levels. The short bij mantra bobs up and down. It is not like a rock but more like a basketball being dribbled. But the longer mantra keeps you at a deep level for longer periods of time. Unfortunately on the airplane trip home after TTC where MMY gave out the advanced techniques about 2/3's of those who got advanced techniques couldn't remember what they were given. I had two versions in my mind: the correct one and one shorter but didn't know which was right. I went on for years switching between one and the other with different results. I didn't care much for that uncertainty and even wrote two mantra check letters to MMY but never got anything back.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: I think that the basic TM technique is more powerful than the advanced techn
kaladevi93 wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "biosoundbill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Namaskaram Kala Devi, >> >> I'll use a non TM mantra as an example! >> >> Let's say the bija is `Shreem' for the basic TM technique. >> >> Let's say `Om Shreem Namaha' for an advanced technique. >> >> Finally let's say `Om Shreem Maha Lakshmiyei Swaha' for a more >> advanced technique. >> >> From your experience, am I correct in saying that `Om Shreem Maha >> Lakshmiyei Swaha' would be the most powerful of all 3 meditation >> mantras? >> > > > Not necessarily, as mantras depend on the disposition of the student, most > especially the > students mind. There are some techniques utilizing merely a bija mantra which > truly go > beyond the mind (but there are specific techniques in addition to the mantra > in order to do > so). > > Now if, for example, the Lakshmi mantra IS appropriate for a certain student > and they > know the appropriate techniques to use that mantra fully, it could render > full results. But > merely giving out mantras for mental repetition, comparitively there could be > little or no > difference. However if paying wads of money made one think they had something > more > special or important, the change in attitude could affect the students > experience of that > mantra, as silly as that sounds, because the resolve and intent has changed. > > In addition to the mental use of mantra there are hosts of other techniques > which can be > applied in addition to or with the mantra. Often as the experience of > subtlety of mantra > refines, techniques will refine to take the mind deeper, beyond where the > mantra > *appears* to end and to allow the meditator to go much further, deeper and > longer > (sounds like porn! :-) ). > > Adhikara mantras, mantras which are chosen based on the student, are always > favorable > to mantras merely given by puja. With an indiscrimantly given mantra, there > is always the > potential for something to go wrong. > > Kala Devi My guru has had to undo the damage that people got from just picking up some mantra from a book. Indiscriminately given mantras can make someone insane. Playing around with mantras without the proper training can be like playing with fire. Even then most gurus stick with what they've learned through tradition.
