--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchy...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, grate.swan <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > Exactly. So direct experience can be faulty. We may interpret things we see
> > as something they are not. But this is A causes some effect on B sometime
> > in the future. Its even less credible, in a scientific sense, that A caused
> > B than the faith healer. Even a church faith healer has more evidence /
> > signs of A causing B "right now" than the DL effect with a 4 month or so
> > delayed reaction. Just think of how many variables there are between now
> > and four months from now on everybody's lives. 50,000 no 50,000,000 things
> > will happen. And you are going to pick one as the SINGLE causal factor
> > because an ancient text says so?!
> >
> > If you are making a case that some ancient texts says that A causes B, and
> > thus it must be real -- gosh. That's as credible as Maharishi saying yagyas
> > really really work because we have some ancient texts that say they do. And
> > Sat Yuga exists. Or people fly. And on and on. What makes a good
> > shamatha/samadhi text any more credible than that?
> >
>
> The "well known" pacification phenomenon able to soothe a crying baby,
> balance the doshas, convert angry yahoos to Buddhism, disarm Kim Jong-il,
> make Mahmoud Aminajad a friend to Israel and in the last days cause the lion
> to lay down with the lamb, these would be newsworthy events indeed. All we
> have to do is hook everyone up with the Dali Lama for darshan and let him
> pump out a lot of healing shakti. I have experienced "darshan" from such
> saints but how much "pacification" it has or had on my life is darn hard to
> evaluate. I can't imagine I could be part of a "scientific" study measuring
> my "pacification."
>
> Perhaps the amount of good-vibe-saint energy one can "absorb" depends on the
> capacity of the vessel to openness or maybe it's just a crap shoot whether or
> not a saint's whammy can actually benefit you. I'm just saying, just saying,
> "Fill 'er up!" are not the magic words to make "it" happen. When you come
> eyeball to eyeball with a saint, no one and nothing else exists. I can only
> say that it seems to require an openness and surrender of the heart, a
> merging of the Self embodied in the saint and the Self embodied in me.
> Exactly how one goes about "doing" this, I have no idea. I just call it
> grace. I would be more impressed with Vaj's "scientific" claims, if he could
> provide a first hand account of his personal pacification experiences with
> the Dali Lama.
>
The 14th Dalai Lama is a political/religious leader...
I was in his presence, way back in the late '90's...
And didn't see too much in his darshan, but more in the stagecraft and Buddha
parafanalia, and hypnotized followers...
He seemed to have the humility thing down, I must give him credit for that, as
that is one of my main soul lessons, remaining humble in the face of ego...
But, back to the mainstay of this conversation, which is to say, that 'This
follows That' or 'Vice, versa'...
When the whole picture is seen, or heard, or felt, or smelled or tasted, then...
That's a different way of percieving, with the 'Righteous brain'...
The 'Lefty Brain', always trys to make 'Rymth or Reason' to everything...and
trys to show A followed B, follows C, and therefore we should expect this to
happen, so we can charge a certain amount for time served, in the [prison of
the mental].
Therefore, in order to squash bounderies, either in your mind or the miind of
another, one must first be aware of the boundary of the illusion in the first
place...
In other words, if Dalai lama, can feel the illusion of the sepreateness, he
could melt it, he could dissolve it...
Much like The Maharishi did, while he was here, and continues after his
Mahasamadhi, to this day.
And that is to dissolve or transcend the differences that created the illusion
of maya and the bounderies that created war and strife, and of course:
Seperateness...
In Unity there can be no problem...
R.G.
