On 05/15/2012 09:35 AM, Duveyoung wrote: > Bhairitu, > > You're one of the smart ones here.
I don't know about that especially as I get older. :-D > > Thanks for the concept "getting caught up in intellectual concepts." > > I don't know how to check myself for suchlike....except to post herein and > let others take a whack at my conclusions and see if my certainties are > thereby eroded. > > Have you got a better technique to offer me for such recalibration? Probably but you'd need to do some traveling. Might be quite a trek on a trikke. :-D > > What does a yogi know if he/she says he/she knows silence? He doesn't (unless he has the Vulcan Mind Meld Siddhi) but he might notice the glow in the fact or light emanating from the crown chakra. It would just be an indicator that "something good is happening" though. :-D > > Here's my answer to that question. (I'll risk constructing a Gordian Knot for > you to slice in half:) > > "Silence," as an experience, is not an experience of silence itself, but > rather, it is, well, a something, an experience, a processing, a doingness of > a nervous system that is mis-labeled "silence." > > The lack of input from the senses, the lack of any memories being recalled, > the lack of an emotional undercurrent -- these are not examples of silence, > they're "zeros in the nervous system, place holders." An empty cup "actively > waiting to be filled" is a non-silent cup. It buzzes with readiness. That > would be the sound OM. Beingness is busy-ness. > > The nervous system must be doing something (creating > mental-cup-ready-to-be-filled) to create the possibility of > "knowing/knower/known." > > Sounds like a whole lotta non-silence to me. Is your elbow silent? No, > right? It's always sending you reports about itself, but you ignore them. > That's not an experience of "elbow silence," right? > > Then there's the "silence" of deep sleep when waking-consciousness itself is > "gone." Yet we are assured by the ancients that "someone is still home" even > when all the lights are turned out. And science proves this: a person in a > coma can be seen to light up parts of their brain when someone in the room > discusses, say, "playing tennis," and the brain's areas for motor functions > then get active. > > Who's "in" there listening? > > Answer -- No one. The ego is shut down, the waking state is shut down, > awareness of the body is absent, no volitional dynamics are observed, REM is > absent as are other indicators of dreaming. > > Who's listening? > > When the corpus coliseum is severed, the person becomes two persons, each > with a separate POV, each one having a separate sentience. > > Where is the awareness of those two parts subtly conjoined? Answer: > they're not. > > One doesn't speak to the other. They act as if they are two separate souls. > Only the concept, "The Absolute" can explain this. Jesus spoke of rocks > crying out -- I like to think he was signifying The Absolute's > omnipresence....not that rocks have nervous systems. > > When a tree falls in the forest THERE'S ALWAYS "SOMEONE" AROUND -- that is: > The Absolute. It hears the tree fall just as the comatose patient hears the > discussion about tennis and the rocks "hear" that the disciples didn't preach > on the Sabbath. > > Only The Absolute can "be the identity" for a "broken down or shut down > nervous system," or "the mind of a rock," and in doing so (note the word > "doing") awareness (as an attribute of existence) becomes real -- as in "when > consciousness becomes conscious." > > Silence is transcendence. Beyond materiality. Beyond manifestation. Prior > to consciousness becoming active. Before God first spoke. > > In the Ved we read about these priests who tried to bring back this person > from the dead. They invoked every rite and got no results. They prayed: > "May this soul of this body return from heaven or hell or any of the other > lokas." Nothing. Finally they prayed: "May the soul of this body come back > from wherever it's at." And bingo the guy lived. Where was he "residing?" > > All these arguments leave me with only The Absolute. "Pure being" doesn't > cut it for me. Yogis, saints and even Brahma didn't know, couldn't know, > will never know, silence. > > Edg The "silence" I am talking about permeates everything. It is NOT a sound but "inner peace" that will grow. It is the screen on which the shadow play of the relative is shown. There have been some members here who have mentioned experiencing it. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu<noozguru@...> wrote: >> What do you think the "silence" is that so many yogi have spoken of? >> The silence that permeates activity or over which activity is >> projected. The silence that is still and absolute. Be careful about >> getting caught up in intellectual concepts. They will delude you. >> >> Either that or meditation is just another way of getting high. :-D >> >> On 05/14/2012 03:20 PM, Duveyoung wrote: >>> Bhairitu >>> >>> So, are you saying The Absolute can be "experienced" by an enlightened >>> person? Seems to me it cannot be, but instead the body/mind system >>> constructs a "nearest equivalent" as a metaphor. >>> >>> Edg >>> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu >>>> These things are better experienced than explained. ;-) >>>> >>> > >
