Replying to New Morning's excellent questions (below) on this thread:
It appears that all these people we hold up as enlightened masters wear the
shine off their halos the more we get to know them. I say the reason is our
concept of enlightenment. If all that means to us is that the person becomes
aware of their universal nature (CC) or even it means he becomes aware of his
oneness with all existence (BC), little has been done to change and perfect the
ego, or individual consciousness, which many people on FFL are claiming doesn't
exist. Of course if you think it doesn't exist, you'll do nothing to align it
with divine mind, cosmic intention. You'll think that just knowing your
universal aspect is the quintessential height of evolution.
In reality, that's only part of the journey. The remaining part is for
individual consciousness to master the limitations of this dimension, imbibing
and expressing universal consciousness in every aspect of one's individual
being. This cannot happen if you've gone and annihilated your individual
consciousness. To me, true enlightenment is cognizing your universal nature and
perfecting your individual nature at the same time -- which means retaining
your ego, identifying with it, and purifying/ filling it with the universal
light of your own universal Brahman nature.
If that became part of people's definition of enlightenment -- which it
isn't, for most participants in Eastern spiritual systems -- then the human
personality would outgrow its flaws and earthbound limitations. We'd all become
masters in the truest, fullest sense. Not walking zombies, and not
shakti-zappers who have to screw their disciples.
"new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Personally, I question whether or not he is enlightened especially
> when he started damning democracy and suggesting Bush was Hitler, that
> doesn't strike me as coming from someone who is enlightened!
Your posts raises some interesting themes -- a discussion bobbing up
and down here through the years. Since you have some degree of
opinion or experience on the matter, I ask you and anyone the
following -- not in a challenging way but an exploratory way to see
the diversity of views and direct experiences for the following.
In your framework (or direct experience) what does come from someone
who is enlightened?
Are people with certain characteristics unable to get enlightened?
What are these bad characteristics?
Could Tony Soprano be, or become, enlightened (in this life)?
If not, how effective is TM (or name you favorite sadhana, practice or
path), if they can't enlighten everyone?
Would Tony Soprano's behavior change if he were enlightened?
Particularly if yes, then does everyone's behavior become better in
enlightenment? All aspects of behavior, or just some? Which aspects?
---------------------------------
Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
