Thanks for the links Judy, I'll check them out.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > In my experience, the mantra can become so faint that > > > it can be mistaken for "silence," and turning the > > > attention to the mantra can feel as if one is turning > > > the attention to silence rather than to the mantra. > > > > > > This is why I'm so interested in the "revamped" > > > understanding Curtis mentioned in connection with > > > his question about attending to silence rather > > > than the mantra or thoughts. Could well be something > > > entirely different, but I'd love to know for sure. > > > > I have had the experience you are talking about I think. > > The mantra is such a faint murmur that turning to it is > > like turning to silence. It can feel like your self. But > > it lacks qualities that distinguish it from other experiences > > of silence. Think of the difference in the siddhis when you > > drop the sutra and "back on to self" compared to the > > subtle mantra experience. There is a difference. > > Hard to tell for me, because engaging with the mantra > at that level instantly becomes "real" silence. Words > are inadequate, of course, but even "faint murmur" is > too concrete for my experience. What comes to mind is > that the mantra is as if itself the "direction" in > which the attention turns, and what it turns to is the > silence. > > <snip> > > The silence I am talking about has an all consuming > > character, an expansive encompassing of all my mental > > experiences and sense of self. Although I am not ready > > to think of it in trans-personal terms, it feels as if > > it is. > > "All MY mental experience and sense of self" doesn't > really sound TRANSspersonal, but more like the ultimate > personal. Transpersonal would transcend that, I should > think. Maybe that's what's keeping you from thinking of > it as transpersonal? > > > This is one of my current questions, the nature of this > > experience. I know what the scriptures say about it and I > > can see why they make a big deal about it. But I am trying > > to find out where the experience without the shaping from > > the ancient perspective takes me. I want to try to shake > > off my own filters about it and assess its value on its > > own. I get the attraction to it, I am an confirmed addict. > > But I am still trying to get out from the filters I have > > about what it means. > > The ironic thing is that pure consciousness itself > is the ultimate defilterer. > > Have you looked at the work of Robert Forman? He was > at one time a TMer; not sure he still is. But he's > pursued the notion that the pure consciousness event > (as he calls it, because it isn't an experience, > strictly speaking) itself is independent of context > (there are two opposing schools, the contextualists > and the decontextualists, Forman being of the latter > school). > > Here's a short essay by another scholar that gives a > taste of what Forman is after: > > http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Reli/ReliMaho.htm > > There are lots of pages *about* Forman's approach on > the Web, but I couldn't quickly find anything *by* > him. He's written several books and journal articles > (he's the editor of the Journal of Consciousness > Studies), however, if you find his thinking of > interest. > > Here's his latest (1999): > > http://www.amazon.com/Mysticism-Mind-Consciousness-Robert- > Forman/dp/0791441709/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1? > ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215560965&sr=1-1 > > http://tinyurl.com/5fqdbs > > I haven't read it, but I did read his earlier book, > a collection of essays on pure consciousness that he > edited and contributed to: > > http://www.amazon.com/Problem-Pure-Consciousness-Mysticism- > Philosophy/dp/0195109767/ref=sr_1_3? > ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215560965&sr=1-3 > > http://tinyurl.com/5s78qo >
