--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@>
wrote:
> > Him:
> > > No, I don't have time to clarify my position right now but you
> > might
> > > remember that I don't doubt the notion of continuous witnessing
> > (in fact,
> > > I've had very long stretches of it) nor even of "celestial
vision/
> > god
> > > consciousness" (though it is defined and described variously);
> > it's just
> > > that direct experiences has taught me that these experiences
are
> > not very
> > > valuable. I don't call these states enlightenment, thought they
> > DO fit
> > > the Hindu model of what the term (in it's various forms: bodhi,
> > > jivanmukta, brahmavidya, etc.) means.
> >
> > This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC
and
> > UC being transitory states.
>
> Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is
very
> clear on what "UC", videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional
state.
>
You must be misintepreting that. Its a very subtle difference
between Brahman and UC. Each could be mistaken for the other. I'll
trust my experience over a tradition any day.:-)
