> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com>Language is tricky. I think people like Peter, Jim F., Tom T. and others understand your point perfectly well, but statements about subjective experience become very cumbersome without the use of the subjective personal pronoun. And when that pronoun is used, or when they express a thought or opinion about some other topic as an individual (which is the only element in the equation that can have thoughts or opinions), it appears to me that you often try to nail them for being phonies.
> , "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com>
>> , Rick Archer <groups@> wrote:
>> The powers that be (and some
>> people on
>>> this list) get very nervous when someone claims to have reached
> the goal.
>
> I must have missed a lot of posts? Who gets nervous when someone
> claims to have reached the goal? I laugh a bit that "someone" has
> strived and strived and reached a "goal". Someonemay have achieved
> something. But that is not THAT. No "individual" gets enlightened and
> there is no goal that the idividual ever reaches. Artifiacts of
> language aside, this type of "ME"-focussed "my enlightenmnet" language
> appears to so predominatlye in some posts -- so it is notewrothy at
> times, if not amusing.
In some cases it may not, but in many cases it very well may be exactly what he was talking about, but sound different when a person tries to describe it in their own terms. Maharishi could only offer a road map, and a road map, like words, is a far cry from the territory it represents. Start driving around that territory and you might be surprised how differently it appears from the concept the map gave you. There is also the issue that there are many stages of awakening, and people may mistake the stage they are experiencing for a more advanced one whose description seems to fit what they are experiencing.
> The major point I have seen raised over the years, and i have raised
> it myself, is that the "enlightenment" some proclaim, while probably a
> good and glorious thing, per the attributes cited, has little to do
> with what MMY has laid out as what he means by the term enlightenment.
Most of the people I know who say they are awake also have numerous sidhi experiences and clear ritam. They may not be flying, but neither is Maharishi. Has he ever proven he is enlightened by demonstrating sidhis? He laid down the ground rules, but did he ever play by them?
> John was insightful: "As I'm sure you have gathered, Maharishi isn't
> impressed with flash, or imagination. But with solid experience of the
> Sidhis .. ". MMY has always said, when I have heard him directly in
> the 70's when this all came out, and on some tapes since that with
> enlightenment dawns strong sidhis abilities. John appears to confirm
> that is still the case after all these years. Clear Ritam was also a
> blossoming attribute of enlightenment that he refered to in the 70s.
>I question this assumption. Perhaps your criteria for what would constitute fulfillment of those 27 attributes do not correlate with actual experiences of their attainment. Again, the map is a far cry from the territory it represents. Yet I know people in Fairfield who not only experience everything in terms of Pure Consciousness 24/7, but have stable celestial perception, certainly fulfilling MMY’s criteria.
> I have no problem, I can't recall any major problems posted, with
> people talking about "experiences". Great awakenings are wonderful.
> Who would possibly be "nervous' over reports of such? What is at times
> noteworthy, sometimes questionable, is when, on a primarily TMO-rooted
> list, that such awakenings are labeled with the same labels as MMY
> uses -- but without the corresponding clear sidhis, ritam, and other
> "attributes" that per his use of the term, manifest with
> enlightenment. I listed 27 or so a while back.
>Some are quite outspoken. Some have been given a hard time by the Movement for being outspoken. Some prefer to remain quiet because they would like to be able to walk into a local restaurant without people approaching them to request private satsangs.
> I don't understand the shyness and meekness of the original post /
> letter. "These individuals generally do not wish to publicize their
> experiences. ... I wonder whether Maharishi would like to hear
> publicly of these experiences or not. It seems to me he would, given
> that significant numbers of people are actually realizing all that his
> programs are intended to bring about... Perhaps, for reasons I do not
> understand, it is better for the awakened in our community to remain
> silent and their experiences to remain largely unknown. ...If you feel
> Maharishi would consider it a good thing, I could urge one or more of
> them to relate their experiences at the mike."
>
> What are these walking Buddhas, Brahman Conscious, totally liberated
> universal souls afraid of?
>Apparently they are in the domes.Some are; some aren’t.
Perhaps it’s a symptom of genuine humility? They don’t feel inclined to make such a proclamation publicly, and the guy who wrote the letter would like to see them do so and is trying to draw them out. There is definitely a major faction in this community who conceive of enlightenment as being something so extraordinary that they accuse anyone proclaiming it of egomania, as you appear to be doing in the following paragraph.
>And MMY
> has called for experiences -- of sidhis and statilized states. And
> many of the "normal folk" are responding with great experiences of
> both, apparently, with great adoring feedback from MMY. Why would
> these special silent ones feel shy about stepping up to the mic and
> discussing their experiences?
>You see? You’re ridiculing them. They’re not afraid of Maharishi. They are human beings, whatever their state of consciousness, and don’t want to become objects of ridicule. They have no compelling need to publicize their experience.
> Perhaps their experiences are so much more Brahamanic and the sidhis
> are SO much beyond the "normal-folks" experiences, that MMY will say
> -- "no, THAT Brahman is TOO GRAND -- Out with you out of DOMES NOW!.
> Now lets get back to hear of "normal Brahamn".
>
> Should tha unlikely scenario occur: MMY is mad that people are having
> good experiences (what a bizzare premise) and these special walking
> buddhas -- Brahman Incarnates -- what do they have to fear of being
> banned from the domes. "I am the Domes" ...
>I wasn’t there. Those guys were on my TTC. I gave intro lectures with Sean in Denver. Saw him a couple of years later and he was pretty strange. Larry always was. This example provides one more reason why people today may be reluctant to make public pronouncements: they don’t want to be associated with nutcases who did so in the past, and a year later became heroin addicts or whatever. __._,_.___
> What MMY may have concerns about, similar to some posters here -- is
> that some are lableling their experiences as something MMY feels they
> are not. In the TMO, and most guru systems, the teacher proclaims the
> label, not the student. The student simply elucidates experiences --
> and answers questions regarding them. As makes sense. Thus when
> stepping up to the mic, MMY may label the experience other than the
> person feels is the case. i have seen it over and over.
>
> And some mic'er's proclaims are quite bold, and MMY's indifference is
> quite striking and amusing at times. Was anyone there when Sean
> Bynton, Larry Lyon and their merry band came and proclaimed Unity,
> thank MMY profusely for their enlightenemtn, and MMY was having
> nothing of the facade?
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
__,_._,___
