Mahendra Trivedi (and Ken Wilber)

[Balder]

Has anyone heard of Mahendra Travedi before, or read this essay by Wilber? 

 

Here's a link to Trivedi's website, from which this is an excerpt:

 

Mahendra Kumar Trivedi was born with an exceptional ability to change living and non-living matter with Energy Transmissions or "blessings" (focused intentional consciousness, called The Trivedi Effect™). Through collaborations with researchers in six countries from numerous scientific fields, Trivedi has amassed a broad set of data substantiating this ability in a scientifically demonstrable and measurable manner. The results of these collaborations are beyond anything predicted by the science and technology of today:

• Agriculture - grow crops with no use of chemical fertilizers or pesticides while providing
  • Increased nutritional value (300% increase in bio-photons)
  • Increased yields (up to 500%)
  • Increased immunity (up to 300%)
    
    
• Genetics
  • Change the DNA in plants (up to 69%) and in microbes (up to 79%)
  • Change the genus and species in harmful bacteria
    
    
• Microbiology
  • Reduce viral loads for HIV, Hepatitis B and C and Cytomegalovirus (up to 99.81%)
  • Reduce antibiotic sensitivity of harmful bacteria (significantly)
  • Convert cancer cells into non-cancerous cells
    
    
• Material science
  • Alter mass and size of atom, energy within and between the atoms
  • Alter specific heat, boiling and melting points
  • Interchange mass and energy (more than 400%)
    
    

It is the goal of Trivedi Foundation to create additional rigorous scientific collaborations to further corroborate, reproduce and follow up on the many remarkable results of the Trivedi Effect™ on seeds, plants, soils, bacteria, fungi, viruses, metals, ceramics and polymers. Through continued collaboration with the international scientific community, we will broaden our base of understanding of the previously demonstrated effects and create groundbreaking new paradigms of the nature of human consciousness and its relationship to the material universe.

Trivedi Foundation also seeks to further the research previously done on Trivedi's distinct physiology and it's relationship to his unique abilities.

[rltruthseeker]

1. a lack of independent studies in peer reviewed literature; 2. a lack of controls in the studies; and 3. a lack of proper statistical support and replication.

I agree with these points, and while I don't really care about Trivendi particularily, I think that paranormal research would also agree with these points.

I have referred to these as "leap of logic." One is, "because something cannot be explained by current scientific theory, therefore..."

These "leaps of logic" can also be applied to skeptics, "because something cannot be explained by current scientific theory, therefore..." it doesn't exist, or it isn't "real."

One aspect of modern mainstream (rigorous) science is that it attempts to negate the influence of such bias. Such bias most often comes from personal and subjective components.
Science is about a neutral, open-ended examination. Starting from the principles of transcendent metaphysics and religious beliefs and then attempting to prove them is not a neutral approach.

I agree with the confirmation bias. I don't think scientists should do that. To do so might lead to inaccurate scientific or cosmological theories...like the "Mount Meru" being the center of the universe, or the biblical narrative of Genesis interpreted literally or factually. Or weapons of destruction in the Gita. :)

I agree that scientists don't have the luxury of a type of theoretical speculation that is afforded to philosophers and spiritual seekers. Science does have to remain neutral with regard to facts and data. The mind/matter problem though, was put in by Descartes who separated the subjective and "objective" domains...leading to "the hard problem" in neuroscience of how objective properties of the brain create subjective qualities of the mind.

However, if everything IS energy...and "subtle" energies are just finer aspects of "gross" matter, then they are not two different energies. All energies are just different vibrating ("ability to do work") qualities of "matter." Mass/matter is not just a mathematical equivalent of energy....mass IS energy, or E=MC2. If there is just energy, and mind exhibits the properties of energy and wavelike properties of energy...then it is theorticaly possible that "mind" can influence matter...such as in psychokinetics or telekinesis. If mind has an interaction with the quantum world...then obviously it can effect "matter."

"The paper demonstrated that the property of inertia possed by all objects was simply resistence to being accelerated through the zero point field. In their paper they showed that inertia is what is termed a Lorentz force- a force that slows particles moving through a magnetic field. In this instance, the magnetic field is a compontent of the Zero Point field, reacting with the charged subatomic particles. The larger the object, the more particles it contains and the more it is held stationary by the field.

What this is basically saying is that the corporeal stuff we call matter and which all physicists since Newton had attributed an innate mass was an illusion. All that was happening was that this background sea of energy was opposing acceration by gripping on the subatomic particles whenever you pushed upon an object. Mass in their eyes, was a "bookkeeping device, a "temporary place holder' for a more general quantum vacuum effect...As they would write later, mass was not equivalent to energy; mass was energy. Or, even more fundamentally, there is no mass. There is only charge." Lynn McTaggart The Field.

But science is not concerned with personal meaning. Scientists are not generally concerned with Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. That’s another quadrant of human being. Science belongs to the third person quadrant.

I absolutely agree with this too. Spirituality is mainly concerned with first person perspectives and the left hand subjective domains. A "spiritual science" would mainly be concerned with the left hand domain, while scientists would explore the objective domain. A spiritual seeker can use scientific facts to base their "faith" on, but can't tie down their faith to any one scientific model...because scientific discoveries are always changing. Spirituality ultimately has to travel alongside science, being informed by it, all the while not being tied down by it. Spirituality, some would say, is concerned with a person's ultimate meaning...but has to take in both the subjective and objective dimensions of life. Each quandrant, is not "separate" from one another, only distinct, and can affect each other domain.

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - Albert Einstein

[Christophe]

I totally think it possible that Mister Trivedi has access to a new kind of subtle energy whith which he is able to heal the lame, the blind and the ignorant (sic). Whether this is going to be confirmed by a team of independent scientists remains to be seen. And btw, such a process can take years and years of peer-reviewing, denying, re-producing, angry arguing in science magazines and so on. I'd say fifteen years from now is an optimistic guess for the first reliable results to be found. YES this IS boring, this is modern science, and there's a good reason why it is like that. That way, it's absolutely impossible to fall prey to the subjectivist "Oh I wish everybody in the world would share my belief about angels and spirits" Boomeritis Meme. Tja! The Post-Metaphysical World is sad and boring. Too bad.

There is an easy test to decide whether you are a Boomer or not: If you check the Science News every day to see if the confirming Trivedi results have arrived yet, then yes, you are a boomer. Go buy a Ken Wilber book to learn to know more about you and your kind.

ahahahahahah

O yes, on another note, I liked the way Mister Trivedi was described in the Blogosphere by some of the attendees of the Seattle Show (or was it Boulder). Some of them Bloggers complained that they couldn't read his aura as he seemed to have none, and when he was blessing people at the end, he didn't seem very happy or likeable at all, but rather grumpy and casually. LOL Mister Trivedi is gaining sympathy points on my part. This is also an indicator that he's not another Hippie Impostor, but that his is a causal energy that could actually be measured in one way or another. Okay enough.

cheers,

[Kim Rushing]

I went to his lecture and had a group "blessing"; Felt something for sure. I slept so deeply and soundly that night
and woke up early without feeling tired. This was amazing to me, as I have been having trouble for YEARS with
waking up tired after sufficient sleep time. I felt much more calm, relaxed and GROUNDED.
So, despite my misgivings about spending what I thought was a lot of the individual blessing the next day, I decided to go ahead and receive the individual transmission/blessing.

WOW. Am I glad I did. I really feel I got my "money's worth" and more.
I feel so much better now. I opened my heart and mind completely in his presence and I
could feel a connection with him. I still am "me" with my various problems; yet I feel so much more
calmness, and a distance from the machinations of the "monkey mind".

Try to catch one of his lectures, (He's going to be in San Diego soon) or look at the website interviews of Mr. Trivedi and follow up according to what you think/feel/hear. Or, just jump in and try it. He offers remote healing work too.

He's highly evolved for sure. And yet, in some ways just seems like a "regular guy". Would love to hear what other people experienced w/ him.

[Kim Rushing]

great point, that spirituality and it's development is from within the individual.
But I do appreciate gurus/healers that can help guide me back to whatever it is
one wants to call it--oneness, god, white light, unity, etc. etc.

and Trivedi helped me feel and stay in that space -- profoundly--and I feel gratitude for that assistance.


"...but the point is....Spirituality doesn't depend on "powers" or "siddhas" ...spirituality depends on expanding our own consciousness, and our own worldview, and our own center of compassion...but we can also make discernments...as well as bringing a recognition that there exists something worthwhile in our own lives to pursue and appreciate.

[Seth]

Kela, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it Wilber who coined the term postmetaphysics? I do say that as a true question. But anyway away from that I would say most people in this thread are critical of Mr. Trivedi, and I don't think it's healthy to sit in a place where everyone is touting the same horn. I think in general there is an intrinsic intent to learn for many who reside in this forum so when you as a person have something of depth to offer I'm sure it's appreciated. I laugh though because I had a similar reaction after reading what, valli, had written (no offense to the author). And no doubt there is a variety of people here. I would also take note that the reins of this particular Ning site have been held loose as it has never been determined if it was going to be the IPS forum's true home.

Edward Jung said:

whatever.
so much for "post metaphysics." this place has become a haven for new-age klingons, wishing to spout their beloved philosophy, thanks to the addenda, "integral," which attracts wilberries, and their ilk, like mosquitos to CO2.

it's gotta be one way or the other. and it's become the other.

still, luv ya brucey.

~hannibal lector
over and out.

[rltruthseeker]

Yes, Seth, Wilber did coin the word post-metaphysics, in his book Integral Spirituality.

kela said: so much for "post metaphysics." this place has become a haven for new-age klingons, wishing to spout their beloved philosophy, thanks to the addenda, "integral," which attracts wilberries, and their ilk, like mosquitos to CO2.

That's a pretty honest answer Kela, so let me just give my own honest answer. Sorry, "Edward", I thought you were one of those "discursive" skeptics, as opposed to those "dismissive" skeptics.I would just like to say that I was a member of IPS and followed the forum since it's day's on Gaia, ever since Star was on, although I didn't talk alot on it then.

I'm sorry, I didn't know that this was Integral Political Spirituality, a place where people just bitch about politics all day. (If people are going to talk about politics, they should at least put forth new models, or have genuine insights, or pro-actions, instead of just bitching about politics, which their blame simultaneously promotes their own interpretation of victimhood and makes them victims.)

If Integral Postmetaphysical Spirituality is to grow as a forum, it will have to discover it's own Identity, or where it wants to go. If it doesn't want to be associated with Integral, it should drop the word Integral. If it doesn't want to be associated with Spirituality, or the sacred, then it should drop the word Spirituality. And yes, there are those who resort to immature put downs, as if it was really an arguement. I'd also like to know who you are calling New Age (hopefully Gadfly). I'm sure you can be pretty thoughtful when your not arguing with Gadfly. And you have quite a bit of knowledge of Shankara....although, I wonder how much of that is filtered through disbelief.

And even though I'm still skeptical of Trivendi (read my first post), I'm still open-minded enough to discuss possibilities of non-local energy. Unfortunately, the term "Post-metaphysical" has become another post-modern word that is dismissive of non-local energy or spiritual realities.

I will also like to say that I will not be joining the next move...somehow I don't care for the general mood of this place. I'm more interested in actually walking the territory, and in my own development.

I too respect what Bruce was trying to do here.

rl.

[Balder]

Yes, Seth, Wilber did coin the word post-metaphysics, in his book Integral Spirituality.

Actually, no, Wilber did not coin the word; it has already been used by Heidegger, Habermas, and a number of postmodernists and feminists. What Wilber did in Integral Spirituality was attempt to articulate a way that spirituality might find a way forward that would meet the requirements of a postmetaphysical understanding.

But, thank you, RL, for your comments about what I was trying to do here. Seth is right that I haven't been very directive or much of a moderator on this site, since I've felt in limbo since arriving, not knowing whether or not this place was ever going to be more than a temporary camp-out on the way to a permanent home.

[Seth]

Thanks for clearing up the origins of post-metaphysics, Bruce.

I think it's safe to say that even though the conception of post-metaphysics did not come from Ken Wilber, this forum was mostly a result of his book Integral Spirituality and its subject matter of post-metaphysics. But also as, Bruce, has stated before it's not limited to those contexts alone or his version of "integral" alone, which leads to my point that integral is not synonymous with Ken Wilber.

I think what is valued for most about this forum is having, Bruce, at the helm. For that reason I would hate to see it go or even naturally dissolve, so maybe it is time for the premise and title to change. Is there not a bit of a feeling that it's all been said before? Maybe by widening the range it will breathe new life and create the room for new insights to develop towards the current aim. I also don't feel there is a clear cut understanding of what post-metaphysics is among the members here. Maybe a good idea for a new thread in the new home. That would at the very least give a good start out reference for anyone engaging with the group.

Anyway, I am totally off topic here. :/

[Seth]

I'm still trying to figure out how my internet search on upper back and neck pain led to a small interview from Deepak Chopra with Mahendra Trivedi, but anyway it did so I figured I would link it to this thread.

I guess Deepak Chopra started a youtube channel back in January of this year, and he has a small two part interview with Mahendra Trivede on it. It doesn't really get into great depth on anything, but it does seem to deny any conscious lower left influence toward who and what he is. He also gives off the impression that he was born a natural spiritual/reality seeker. I would consider myself the same way, but I honestly can't relate to the particular level of detachment he describes.

Mahendra Kumar Trivedi - Pt 1
Mahendra Kumar Trivedi - Pt 2

[rltruthseeker]

Sorry, I meant Post-metaphysical spirituality. Prior to that I don't think anyone coined that phrase (although I could be wrong). I too think that a description might be good in your new home of just what a post-metaphysical understanding entails...and what it doesn't leave out. Best of luck in your new home.

Namaste, and sincerely,

rl.

S€ŦĦ said:

Thanks for clearing up the origins of post-metaphysics, Bruce.

I think it's safe to say that even though the conception of post-metaphysics did not come from Ken Wilber, this forum was mostly a result of his book Integral Spirituality and its subject matter of post-metaphysics. But also as, Bruce, has stated before it's not limited to those contexts alone or his version of "integral" alone, which leads to my point that integral is not synonymous with Ken Wilber.

I think what is valued for most about this forum is having, Bruce, at the helm. For that reason I would hate to see it go or even naturally dissolve, so maybe it is time for the premise and title to change. Is there not a bit of a feeling that it's all been said before? Maybe by widening the range it will breathe new life and create the room for new insights to develop towards the current aim. I also don't feel there is a clear cut understanding of what post-metaphysics is among the members here. Maybe a good idea for a new thread in the new home. That would at the very least give a good start out reference for anyone engaging with the group.

Anyway, I am totally off topic here. :/

[Seth]

Kela, I think this place is an alternative to Wilber and the general consensus among those involved in the "new spirituality". Not that I'm totally sure what you mean by new spirituality, but I think I'm catching your drift. Unsubstantiated metaphysics? But I've never taken this as a place of rejecting the former. I personally like a lot of the subject matter and talk that can happen in both circles, but too often they can become so saturated in their own muck that it can be a little nauseating. This place offers a nice balance. Sometimes it can be a little too heady and at other times it can be a little too fluff, I don't think either one is winning out on the other. Overall I think most of the members here are pretty well rounded in their own right.

You called, rl, Andrew. Maybe that's his real name I don't know, but I almost did the same thing a day or two ago.

[andrew]

your da man kela! ya just gotz to learn to stop eating them!