|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
riptiz
United Kingdom
741 Posts |
 Posted - Dec 23 2005 : 2:16:58 PM
|
Dear David,
Well it seems we are in agreement with something.
'But the shaktipat guy CLAIM more. At least a good proportion of them (including Sahaja yoga, whether you consider their method "Shaktipat" or not) say that as long as you have the desire, you will get experience for sure. That's certainly not true.'
I will not repeat what my Guru told me about Sahaja yoga but it was enough to convince me that all their claims are not 100%. I'll leave it at that.As far as having desire to get effect!
I would call it sankalpa not desire(anyway desire is a backward step for us is it not?)and can say without doubt that it works.For instance all my new students are given a chakra overhaul by me to help them on their way.It is based on the bija akshars and is given by intent.However this works(and scientifically I don't have a clue), there is no doubt in my mind, or the ones who have received it, that it works.I cannot say what the specific effect is on as I can only tell you what my intent is when sending.It's all energy just as in healing but given with different intent.I can tell you that those who seem to be suffering ill health or stress seem to experience greater effect.
I cannot speak for guru's who make consistent claims as I witnessed several different expereinces to my own.Some intiates were screaming, a sadhu from the Himalayas was laughing out loud.Several were grunting loudly with deep rapid breath.Others were trancelike writhing on the floor.Another on her knees ,eyes closed, hands praying and crawling on her knees around the room.I do believe that some of the kriyas could be induced by thought but certainly not the shaking I experienced.
'I actually don't doubt that shaktiput works some times. But as the numbers go, I'm not so sure it is a great source of spiritual advancement.'
Well it seems that some claim not only to give diksha to thousands but that with it comes enlightenment instantly.We both know this is a load of rubbish.If moksha was so easily available the world would not be as it is now as we would have passed the required % that the Maharishi claims is needed.
Guruji told me that shaktipat was simply a day of rebirth and is only the lighting of the spark.Now that doesn't seem too outlandish a claim does it?
'
But, is your experience a proof for you that it has great power for everyone? Or even for many?'
Yes it does if received from my sadguru but I cannot speak for other guru's and I as well as you know that some make claims that are untrue.Unfortunately it's difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff.
I was also told that the Maharishi's aides had approached Guruji to give shaktipat in the Maharishis name for a substantial amount of money each time.He refused and if I had been him I would also have felt this was an insult to his Guru's memory.
L&L
Dave
'the mind can see further than the eyes' |
 |
|
|
Alvin Chan
Hong Kong
407 Posts |
Posted - Dec 24 2005 : 05:57:40 AM
|
David, for the bit in blue, I am talking from my own experience, which is very discouraging for me--- that all those I know (including via the internet, written sources, personally, etc) who experience SOMETHING profound and immediate from methods such as "shaktipat" or "sahaja" are NOT scientifically oriented, and most are not even aware of such issues. May be you are the only exception, David. (but did you recieve "shaktipat" with profound experiences??)
That's why I am asking for a scientific study to confirm my guess. Another suggestion, though not nearly as good as a double-blinded study(but much easier): try to invite a prominent scientist to recieve your guru's shaktipat. You will know what I mean than. If Shaktipat has any effect, I think it's 'psychologically' produced.
Does "Shaktipat" work sometimes? Does placebo work sometimes? Do the words of Jesus work sometimes? NOT JUST SOMETIMES!! They usually works (scientifically proved in the placebo case, the I think the same holds for the other two) The effects of our mind on our body cannot be underestimated.
Yes, we agree on one thing--- Shaktipat works, at least sometimes. But how, and to what extent? What are the limitations? Placebo works as well. But not that well when you know it's a placebo because the source of its power vanished. From my understanding (and observations) the same is true for shaktipat (and all religions), that's why you cannot find even a prominent scientist who have profound-enough experience.
Again, only a scientific study can be convincing about this, not any guru, not Guruji.
Frankly speaking, I don't see much helpful ideas coming up by the justification of scientific approaches. (or may be not helpful for me only?) Discussing what can be done, what are the objective signals, etc, seems to me to be a more productive discussion towards the scientific approach, not just its justification. Once some experiments were done, dave, you will see the justification: much better understanding, better comparisons between various "paths", Much better indicators for progress. (and thus for managing practices) If the methods can be shown to be effective scientifically, much more people will be coming to them. No more doubts from guys like me. Are the above side-effects of the scientific approach enough to convince you, dave? I see scientific studies as a must, you can see it as a bonus. |
|
|
|
riptiz
United Kingdom
741 Posts |
Posted - Dec 24 2005 : 07:43:16 AM
|
Dear Alvin,
Unfortunately the scientists who should be researching these things don't understand them even.We are now in the realms of Quantum physics which is parallel to the eastern mystic ways.Not only can anyone of us explain in words our full experiences as a result of meditation but the scientists have the same problem with Quantum Physics. If you read 'The Tao of Physics' it explains the difficulties and also of the parallels between the two.It's quite heavy reading but makes things a bit clearer.First we had Newton, then Einstein and now the Laws of Quantum physics which seem very closely related to the eastern teachings.Unfortunately mankind's methods of communication are not competent enough to allow us to explain it not only to ourselves but also to other people.In just the same way it is difficult to measure the effects in Quantum physics as any method of measuring affects the results.Unfortunately in Lee Sanella's book 'Kundalini experience' he only seems to talk about spontaneous awakening and not shaktipat but it's worth a read.
L&L
Dave
'the mind can see further than the eyes' |
|
|
|
Alvin Chan
Hong Kong
407 Posts |
Posted - Dec 24 2005 : 11:52:09 PM
|
You may be mixing up somethings here. The "uncertainty principle" in quantum mechanics are inherent in its theory. What it tells us is that we cannot, even in principle, measure accurately BOTH the velocity AND the position of a single particle (e.g. electrons) at a certain moment. (and with an accurate formula telling us the limits of such measurments)
But quantum mechanics DO make many predictions (parallel to the "claims" in our discussion) and all experiments confirm them!! The predictive power is one of the main point to distinguish science and pseudo-science.
What's those layman books on quantum physics mean is mainly this: that our "intuition", our "usual" understanding of this world (e.g. the nature of objects, like "every object has an obective reality, including speed and position, which are irrelevant of whether we observe it or not) fails to be compatible with the new findings. May be our language is not enough to express many things, but quantum physics didn't show that. Not yet. It shows the limitations of our everyday perception (especially when they are not pushed to the vigor which science ask for) in stead of our language. In fact, quantum mechanics still employ the same language which physicists find to be the most powerful to describe our world: mathematics. That may not be a language in your sense, but it is a language. The Schoedinger equations (which are Partial Differential Equations, if you care to know) is very precise and rigorous, so are the predictions coming from it.
Although we could not predict accurately the behaviour of one particle, we still have the accurate descriptions of the probability of its behaviour. In the gross level, the results will be very very accurate and precise. And all experiments conducted so far (if I am updated enough!) confirm these accurate preductions of quantum mechanics.
What's important of quantum mechanics is that it explains and predicts some phenominon---and do so accurately. The cultural shock of "the failure of our usual perception" is a by-product of it.
That's why quantum physics is "scientific", although the surprising accuracy (not the other way) of its predictions certainly give us some philosophical shocks: that particles are "ghost-like". But "ghosts" still follow what Schoedinger told them to do!!! |
Edited by - Alvin Chan on Dec 25 2005 07:47:12 AM |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Dec 25 2005 : 4:43:41 PM
|
Frank said:
Yet I believe something like the following is more probable ( again, I am outta my league here ) ...
" When alpha, beta and gamma waves are at this frequency and the patient says he is experiencing XYZ, then the probability of the individual being in Bhagavat Consciousness is highly probable to a 96% confidence level." If that is the science of verification we are talking about on this post, then yes, I believe we will have this ability.
Frank, that is exactly the kind of scientific verification that I am talking about.
And, to specific, real-time brain-imaging systems, such as real-time MRIs (if and when they become sensitive enough) may be among the important measurement tools. They are potentially far richer than the tools that measure alpha/beta and gamma waves. Because they can show the specific part of the brain that is activated.
-D
(more replies to Alvin's message later).
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Dec 25 2005 4:44:35 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Siddhis
