--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <groups@> wrote: > > > > > > on 8/21/06 3:11 PM, sparaig at sparaig@ wrote: > > > > > > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > >> <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> > > > >> > , "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> My prediction is that anyone who gets on the "enlightened" > > list will > > > >>> >> be banned from future courses. MMY's organization is not > > built for > > > >>> >> people who claim to have reached the goal. The "only one > > beard in the > > > >>> >> room" rule still applies. Am I wrong? > > > >>> >> > > > >> > > > > >> > That's why Fred Travis has been able to publish physiological > > studies on > > > >> > people who reported > > > >> > witnessing 24/7 for years on end: they're afraid to step > forward... > > > > > > > Fred was very condescending and dismissive of an Awake friend > > > of mine whose brain waves didn¹t happen to match Fred¹s > > > expectations. > > > > Where did TMO folks get the idea that being awake/enlightened is a > > measurable, dualistic phenomenon? > > Well, its a 30 year old theme in the TMO -- at least as far as > states, dual and non-dual, having measurable correlates. TMO > folks got it from MMY -- and his active encouragement of various > researchers of that theme. And TMO'ers got it from many advanced > lectures, res course tapes, etc. And SCI. Where did you "miss" > the theme being there?
I never had any interest in ideas about enlightenment, so the TMO's dogmas never took. Similarly, I could never sink my teeth into Saniel Bonder's writings, either. > It does raise a good set of questions: i) is refinement of the > nervous system, ii) is a nervous system indeed necessry' for > enlightenment? > > Peter, if i understand his past posts, has said "no" to i). Though > this is clearly contgraty to TMO dogma / theory. His response to ii) > would be intersting. > > Alex, what is your view on the above two questions? Those are interesting questions. The "I AM THATness" is not on the level of mind or intellect; it's a knowing on the level of silent pure awareness, pure Being. That's the fundamental, unchanging truth of all existence. But for the human organism to realize that truth, the attention must be directed to that awareness, and attention is ever changing and subject to all sorts of occluding influences (ego dynamics, mind attached to concepts of enlightenment, etc.) My guess is that attention on awareness is not something that can be measured in a laboratory. But, back to your two questions, refinement of nervous system is probably not a bad idea, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary. After all, there have been great awakened minds in bodies that saw more than their fair share of alcohol abuse, and Nisargadatta fouled his with tobacco. Is the duality of a human nervous system necessary to know oneself as nonduality? Gonna have to plead paradox of Brahman on that one. 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 <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
