Nice post; comments interleaved below:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The sense of "me-ness" or "i-ness" comes from ahamkara, the "i- maker". > Ahamkara is shakti, the kundalini shakti herself. Whatever "masks" she > wears are subtle and profound aspects of this same yogic ego. This would appear to describe the "whipsawing" little snake as she insists upon separation and superiority; she is wrapped around and protecting the egoic-egg or causal-body -- the idea of a separate self. She appears here to be the serpent of space-time, keeping the separate self locked into a 3-D world of division and comparison. There is > something else, shakti's mate, which must grow in relation to the > unfoldment of "her" otherwise you end up attaching to these relative > aspect of "her" (the ego). Many imagine they are enlightened and > describe a vast array of subtle "experiences", celestial messages, OOBE > etc. These are just expansion at the level of the ego. Ego- display. Absolutely; any attachment to "experience" or even to any definition or conception of "enlightenment" is still subtle bondage to something transitory, wherein the Self has not yet completely understood the fundamental and all-inclusive nature of the Self. On the other hand, it would appear that only the enlightened feel comfortable saying "I am enlightened" (as well as "I am in ignorance") or "I am awake" (as well as "I am asleep") or "I am free" (as well as "I am a slave"), for only in enlightenment are all of these things Understood as the same. > It's only when you expand enough to encompass ALL of it in a non- dual > stance that you stop being conditioned by the "stress" that's causing > the shakti-experience to arise in the first places. These things have > to arise from a "cause". You want to go beyond that cause. If you can, > it dissolves immediately. This appears to be a function of the fundamental comprehension that the "Other-I" and this "I" aren't actually separate after all. > The problem with the TM-Sidhi method is that samyama, once attained, > automatically awakens this power-behind-"I-ness". It awakens the > shakti. Thus you tend to get a lot of egomaniacs spouting from the POV of their shakti experiences--their subtle egos. And it would seem that one still attached to the idea of "Other-I" vs. "this-I" will see everything in that Light until the egoic separate-self egg is broken. > In traditional methods samyama is not taught on the formulae of >pada three first. It's taught so as to quickly cultivate >the "witness". If this is not done first you end up very possibly >enslaving yourself to the subtle ego--all the while declaring your >enlightenment from any > nearby footstool. It would appear that regardless of one's "path," so long as one believes there actually IS a "path," the "witness" is still mediated through the idea-of-separate-self and hence subtle ego until it isn't. 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/ <*> 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/
