--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you know what someone in CC, GC, or UC perceives, or > > > > > > doesn't? > > > > > > > > > > Same way I know what anyone does, by what they express. > > > > > > > > And the language they use to express it. If, for example, > > > > someone claimed to be enlightened and *consistently*, over > > > > a period of years, demonstrated 1) heavy attachment, and > > > > an inability to keep from lashing out angrily at those > > > > who don't believe his or her claims of enlightenment, and > > > > 2) even heavier elitism, and a tendency to consider him/ > > > > herself "more evolved" than others, I might not know what > > > > exactly they were perceiving, but I sure know that I > > > > neither value it nor want it. > > > > > > Funny that there is all of this fighting about a field of pure joy. > > > > A few years back some "spiritual" folks in Boulder > > put together a bunch of seminars that they called > > "Holy Man Jams." What they'd do is invite noted > > spiritual teachers -- many of whom had declared > > themselves to be enlightened -- to appear on the > > same stage, each of them having twenty minutes or > > so to do their thing, no one receiving any "higher > > billing" than anyone else. > > > > The most fascinating thing about this noble exper- > > iment is that literally every session devolved into > > intense and often emotional argument. The first guy > > or gal would speak and then all of the subsequent > > speakers would spend most of their time trying to > > refute or rebut the previous speakers. A fistfight > > actually broke out onstage in one session, which > > had been pre-billed as "everyone in this session > > is enlightened, at least according to them." > > > > I am merely noting as a parallel that if the people > > on this forum who have claimed to be enlightened > > really are enlightened, I don't want it. And I > > don't think I'm alone in this. > > Existence is not and never became "enlightened". It has > always been pure joy.
That's my intuition, too. > Some people express slices and dashes of that joy in some > ways, some in others. Even people who have opened themselves > up to huge joy, will express it and live it differently in > their lives. Its natural that some will be attracted to and > others repulsed by various walking packets of pure joy. > > I think labels is a large constraint in these matters. If one > views Existence as "enlightened" or views themselves as having > become enlightened, or others think "asshole, no way am I going > to be like that so called enlightened asshole" -- it all hinges > on a label "enlightenment". A good insight. My feeling about all of this is fairly simple (although some might call it simple-minded). If the entire *concept* of "enlightened" did not exist, or if I had never heard of it, would I want to hang with this person, or spend time around them? If the answer is No...uh...the answer is No. Whatever label they try to affix to themselves or that others affix to them is not germane to the discussion. If they don't strike me as a hoopy frood who knows where his or her towel is, why would I want to hitchhike a potentially interesting path through the galaxy with them? > Why not simply focus on joy and increasing levels of joy. Indeed. In my life, I have been privileged to know many who did this. Some of them professed to be following a "spiritual path." Others did not. Some vehemently denied having a "spiritual path." What I found interesting was that the people who actually seemed to be walking the talk of "focusing on joy" both found it and radiated it. They were fun to be around, whether they followed any formal "path" or not. Those who professed to be either pursuing joy or living it 24/7, but who not only failed to radiate that joy but tended to radiate its opposite (to me, attachment)? Not so much. It really wouldn't matter *what* label they affixed to themselves or that other people affixed to them, would it? I am attracted to those who seem to be enjoying their lives. I am...uh...less attracted to those who don't. End of story. > If one feels joy from another, and is opened up to more > of that joy himself, then wonderful. If one does not perceive > or experience the joy expressed by some, who cares -- move on. Exactly. Have you ever noticed that many who *do* try to affix the label of "enlightened" to themselves can't seem to move on when someone doubts it, or reacts to its declaration with an unimpressed "Ho hum?" Seems to me that if there is any consistency to the many descriptions of the enlightened state passed down to us by Those Who Claim To Know, non-attachment is one of the traits that appears most often. TO ME, non-attachment would imply a lack of attachment to what other people might think of their declarations of where they were at, state of consciousness-wise. On this forum, I have fond memories of Tom Traynor. He rarely seemed to devolve into attachment. He just said his thing, tended not to get terribly involved in the small shit, and moved on. Finally, he actually moved on. To me, he seemed -- for the most part -- to walk the talk of his purported state of consciousness. The others. Not so much. When dealing with their walk -- contrasted with their talk -- I'm more often tempted to think Narcissistic Personality Disorder than I am Enlightened. As you say above, that may be my limitation, and my inability to groove behind some of their expressions of what they conceive of as joy. But so what? I wouldn't want to hang with them if they had never claimed to be enlight- ened or self realized, and I don't want to hang with them now that they have. Preference and predilection. Never to be undervalued along the spiritual path, in my opinion. > Find joy elsewhere. And everywhere. Because it is everywhere. Isn't it fascinating that some who claim to be enlightened can't seem to see it in some locations or actions, and in some people?
