I don't doubt or not-doubt. I don't see how one can discuss or "experience" such things without a physical brain of some kind, however.
"PHysical" in the sense of having differentiated parts, no matter what the parts are made up of. L. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" <yifuxero@...> wrote: > > consciousness beyond the brain - precisely; dead people with subtle bodies. > Likewise, Buddhas existing in varous Buddhalands beyond the physical. You > doubt the existence of life after physical brain existence? How curious. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > On May 9, 2012, at 4:23 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > > > Falsehood? > > > > > > There are two ways you can appreciate "consciousness is primary, matter > > > is secondary": > > > > > > !) allegedly, someone in Unity Consciousness perceives this directly as a > > > result of how their brain operates. > > > > > > I have no personal experience with that for more than a second or so > > > (once just after meditating, I opened my eyes and couldn't see any thing. > > > Just the usual silent me-ness that I associate with having my eyes closed > > > just after meditating. Then I realized that I SHOULD be seeing something > > > because my eyes were open and I realized that I had been seeing "things" > > > all along, just not processing the input. I assume that Unity is sorta > > > like that but you remain a functional human). > > > > You see, for me, that would be an utterly worthless experience, as I'd > > immediately want to know that which this unity consciousness (or "pure" > > consciousness for that matter) arises from. Irregardless of what > > conventional or non-conventional experience you have, that cannot change > > the fact that consciousness does not exist, as far as we know, outside of a > > brain and nervous system, etc. > > > > And one can even have a sense of being beyond the body from that brain, but > > that most certainly would not mean that some consciousness exists as > > something "beyond the brain". It could just mean you have a deluded > > construct that you believe is this "mysterious object" (pure > > consciousness). > > > > > > > > 2) you can arrive at an intellectual understanding that everything MUST > > > be consciousness. > > > > > > John Hagelin's simple realization that any and all interactions of > > > things, whether people or electrons or even more elementary particles, > > > can be described using the rishi-devata-chhandas concept. Once you grasp > > > this point, then it is obvious that everything is conscious. > > > Consciousness is primary, matter is secondary, because the > > > rishi-devata-chhandas description applies to every single possible level > > > of existence, period, whereas material things change. All existence is > > > consciousness because that is what consciousness is: existence. > > > > You see, this is a perfect example how Mahesh used the na�vet� of his > > students to create delusional thinking in them. Thanks for demonstrating > > Lawson. When you actually learn mantra in an authentic tradition, you'd > > know exactly what rishi, devata and chhandas meant, and prayoga, mudra, > > yantra etc. > > > > It's always a major clue that something might be wrong with your guru when > > he tells you `not to read other texts or it might confuse you.' Just sayin'. > > >
