--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > on 8/21/06 4:08 PM, new.morning at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > >> <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com> > >> > , "jyouells2000" jyouells@ 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. > > > 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. > > > >> > 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. > > > 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. > >
Exactly the map is different than the territory. The barest of information, enough to quide and inspire. How else can the non-dual descriptions be reconciled with what MMY says. He left much out by necessity, and for other reasons, and many still accept the map as the territory. Many don't anymore. JohnY 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/
