[FairfieldLife] Re: Out there, In here [was; another question for MZ,..]
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "danfriedman2002" wrote: > > Rory, > > You got it. But you´re way ahead of me. > * * Ha! I appreciate the thought, Dan, but IMO that's not really possible, as it seems fundamentally there's only one of Us, and the state of our "me" depends on "you" as much as on "anyone else" -- and if "you" see "aheadness" in "me", it's "your" "aheadness" anyhow! As mentioned, it seems these maya-mirrors can get very tricky :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: another question for MZ, and maybe William of Occam
R: * * Why not simply have the chopper drop the tarot cards? Two birds and all that. Bob Price wrote: > Finally some real ideas. I hope we're not going to have any prior art issues > with you when the money starts rollin in. > MZ and I have discussed this and we were thinking a little more Mesopotamia > adventures, a real deck of cards with pictures of the saints, say; Maharishi > as the ace of spades, Amma the Queen of hearts and of course Krishnamurti as > the joker. Might even throw WE in as a deuce of something. Anyway, early days. > * * Maybe we're overthinking it, Bob. Let's just make the cards the good old Vedic demons -- Death can be Yama, the Empress Saraswati, the Magician Maya, and so on -- and then as the cards flutter down from the chopper, our protagonist on the ground can try to beat them off and exclaim half in anger and half in fright, "Why, you're nothing but a pack of cards!" and wake up.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Watch the Egyptian Riots Live
> "RoryGoff" wrote: * * * No. I just have no interest in rehashing my "story" at the moment. If you really care, you can read some of it (up to about 1990) here: http://rorygoff.com/open/rory-goff-a-spiritual-autobiography/ >blusc0ut wrote: > > Thanks Rory, nice and inspiring account. (You biography and experiences, > lined up as a series of initiations, reminds me very much of a friend I had, > who finally founded his own movement called 'Vortex Healing' > http://www.vortexhealing.com/connections.html) * * * My pleasure, and thank you for the link. Thank you too for the "Unity" video, of which I saw and enjoyed more than half before being pulled elsewhere Yes, I can certainly see why my site reminded you of your friend -- his appears to have been a very similar unfoldment! > Also nice to see you finally in action > http://rorygoff.com/open/store/1101-trailer/ I guess, towards the end, with > some more gray, thats about you now, right? > * * * Last year, I believe; right. I am thinking about filming some particle-work sessions soon, as they might be helpful to more people than are being reached currently.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Watch the Egyptian Riots Live
Hey Jim! Many thanks, fun dialogue! My * * * responses below... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" wrote: > > Hi Rory! responses below: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" wrote: > > > > Right, Jim! > > > > This is indeed a forum focusing on topics of interest to seekers and > > finders of truth and liberation. It's not primarily about movies or food or > > politics, though those indeed are fair game, as is everything else. > > **Yes of course. > > Since this is primarily a forum about truth and liberation, I will *probably* > continue to focus on sharing those aspects of truth and liberation I find > most interesting at the moment. Sometimes that may look like lecturing; if so > and that causes you pain, may I suggest that you integrate (become aware of) > your inner lecturer; or if you don't like my thoughts, please feel free not > to read them. > > **What are you talking about? * * * This post was primarily intended for those of Us who might feel they have a problem with one of Us being angry, boring, pedantic, nauseating, a liar, ignorant, suffering, etc. etc., and would like to change that "other's" behavior so that *they* will feel more comfortable -- the classic stance of the suffering addict in Us :-) > It looks to me as if we're *all* constantly jabbering away at our own > reflections -- I find that incredibly humorous, personally, but it doesn't > stop me from doing it! > > **Absolutely! One of my favorite and most challenging activities! > > > > Sadness, boredom, anger, shame, guilt, and even ignorance itself are all in > > the perceiver, the one who feels the sadness, boredom, anger, and so on. > > They are not the "fault" of the world or anyone "out there" -- they just > > ARE, and they always will be; they are eternal parts of Us. I find > > personally that they are not a problem if we do not resist them, but simply > > allow them to BE wherever > > they wish to BE within our body. > > **Duality along with Dharma lovingly co-exists with Unity. Duality within > Unity, relaxing into a greater Unity that encompasses both - perhaps that is > Brahman? I don't know what you would call it. * * * I don't know what to call it either, except Us :-) > **Duality and Unity, as a subset of a greater whole, each vying for the > greatest love and attention from us, simultaneously. Always inclusive vs. > exclusive. Like a fractal, continually dividing itself into an ever > expanding, unified wholeness. > * * * Yes! > **Even the fiercest emotions are experienced in that light, and are > absolutely loved. I think we are saying the same thing - lol. > * * * YES! Absolutely! :-D > > As Blu pointed out, sometimes that may pop us out of the arena of suffering > > into a more spacious one, so we see the larger context -- but sometimes it > > may pop us deeper into the arena, so that we find the "suffering" is > > actually made up of particles of bliss, or love, or light. Either way, > > deeper into Purusha/Shiva or Prakrit/Shakti, we have broken the deadlock of > > bondage or identification which was causing the suffering. > > **"deeper into Purusha/Shiva or Prakrit/Shakti" - what is the relationship to > Vishnu here, please? * * * What is the relationship to Vishnu? Beats me. I was simply using a Spirit-Matter (or -Body) duality, with the I AM as Soul in the middle of the two. We could say that these are the three metagunas, with Shiva being Spirit or infinite expansion into Ecstasy, and Vishnu/Indra being Matter or infinite contraction into Love, and Brahma being the I AM or the consciousness-balance of Light, but it's just a model. Each end wraps into and embraces the other, if we go far enough into infinity in any direction. None of it is really Us, anyway, as we are simply the Great Mystery, it's only a perpective rendering of our body-of-manifestation from one point of view :-) > Thanks :-) > > * * * My pleasure! :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dharana (concentration) beautifully explained!
* * * Beautiful, many thanks! I love those first few lines: "When I get to the bottom > I go back to the top of the slide > Where I stop and turn > and I go for a ride > Till I get to the bottom and I see you again" -- That really evokes our "progress" around and through the black-hole/white-hole torus of awareness :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, blusc0ut wrote: > > > > Thanks Rory for sharing your 'map'. That jigsaw nature of the puzzle, also > called, The Rise and Fall of the wave in the ocean', reminds me of these > poetic verses of our favorate sing-songwriter: > > > When I get to the bottom > I go back to the top of the slide > Where I stop and turn > and I go for a ride > Till I get to the bottom and I see you again > Yeah, yeah, yeah > Do you don't you want me to love you > I'm coming down fast but I'm miles above you > Tell me tell me come on tell me the answer > and you may be a lover but you ain't no dancer > > I will you won't you want me to make you > I'm coming down fast but don't let me break you > Tell me tell me tell me the answer > You may be a lover but you ain't no dancer > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4WoTOX8Lt4 > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" wrote: > > > * * * Experientially, though, it is quite correct; that is, it describes > > > a legitimate aspect of Awakening, in which one feels gut-deep as if one > > > has lost one's old I-point; the separate wave has utterly dissolved into > > > the ocean. When one looks inside immediately after Awakening, there is > > > Nothing there. No center, no self, no private I-ness. Eventually one > > > rummages around and produces the remnants of an I and puts it on, like an > > > old wrinkled shirt, so we can continue the drama, but never again "are" > > > we that I, not in any conventional sense of the word, anyhow. And that I > > > is now or soon appreciated as a charming collapse of the Whole, > > > containing the Whole together with all of its particles or "other" I's. > > > > > Here is how I interpret this "No-self" experience: The so-called states of > > TC, CC, GC, and UC describe an ever-closer approach between Purusha and > > Prakriti, or the Absolute and the Relative, or Father Spirit and Mother > > Matter. Kundalini, both from below and from above, acts as a kind of > > more-or-less constant conductor or tunneler to effect their approach and > > eventual marriage. > > > > Using a "Cosmic Body" as a map of their progress, we can posit that > > Transcendental Consciousness (TC) activates the Crown Chakra (Shiva; > > Purusha) and the Foot Chakra (Shakti; Prakriti); Cosmic Consciousness (CC) > > moves down into the Brow (Witness) and up into the Base (Organs of action; > > Physical plane) to effect a witnessing of activity; God-Consciousness (GC) > > moves down into the Throat (Space; bliss) and up into the Sex (Senses; > > Astral-emotional) to structure blissful senses and subtle-body experiences; > > and Unity Consciousness (UC) moves down into the Heart (Buddhic intuition; > > finest feeling) and up into the Navel (Manas or animal mind) to move beyond > > the senses into an intuitive grasp of One-ness. > > > > What has intermediated between these poles of Absolute and Relative, both > > binding them in a relationship and yet keeping them apart, is the I AM, the > > Soul or the Mind, the separate Ego. As these poles approach each other, the > > intermediary Soul "shrinks" until it occupies only our Sacred Heart or > > Solar Plexus point. At this moment, the Soul becomes Self-aware; we merge > > with our golden Soul as our own Solar Angel, and find ourselves at the > > paradise-center of the universe, in a place of utter love and at-homeness, > > beyond spacetime -- what could be called the culmination of UC, or the > > beginnings of Brahman. > > > > But the marriage is not yet complete, and soon after this Soul-merge, our > > Father-Spirit and Mother-Matter actually meet and overlap across our > > Solar-Plexus or Sacred Heart, and this eclipses our Soul or separate Self, > > which is no longer required as an intermediary between Spirit and Matter. > > The result could variously be called Nirvana -- the blowing out of the > > candle -- or Awakening into the direct Understanding of the the emptiful > > paradox of Brahman, or the Crucifixion of our Inner Christ, depending upon > > our framework. > > > > Beyond this point, there are a number of additional stages as Father-Spirit > > and Mother-Matter overlap more and more, expanding from the Solar Plexus > > both upward and downward to reactivate all the chakras again, only now in > > terms of Us, of Wholeness. We might call these various stages Krishna-I and > > -II (the fip-sides of UC and GC) and Shiva-I and -II (the flip-sides of CC > > and TC). > > > > But this is only a map, not the mult
[FairfieldLife] Re: Dharana (concentration) beautifully explained!
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" wrote: > > > In that state, what exactly do you anticipate remains of any > > > individuality after the physical body dies? "RoryGoff" wrote: > > * * * I don't really anticipate. In what state is that? I don't identify > > with any of these states of consciousness; they are "jigsaw pieces" inside > > Us, different ways to slice up our simple consciousness: like conic > > sections. We are not any particular conic section -- not the point (sleep), > > or the line (dream), or the X (waking), or the circle (TC), or the ellipse > > (CC), or the parabola (GC), or the hyperbola (UC); we are the cone itself, > > containing all of them, yet "beyond" any of them, as they are all one > > dimension smaller than we are; as slices of Us they are dualistic > > descriptors of a nondual Presence. > > * * * Just to continue this analogy to the uttermost, BC or the disappearance of the separate self would involve "backing up" our attention from the double-cone enough to realize it is actually the central spindle of a torus; then we would see that the various conic sections are actually all surrounded by (in the case of the Sleeping point, the TC circle, and the CC ellipse) the same circle, or actually flow into (in the case of the Dreaming line, the Waking X, the GC parabola, and the UC hyperbola) that same surrounding curvature. In other words, the container of Awareness now knows itself or remembers itself to be always the same, regardless of any spacetime state of consciousness it contains. So now we could go back into and investigate those "same" states of consciousness from the context of Wholeness and discover entirely new properties in them. > > From one point of view, the physical body dies and we find ourselves > > inhabiting a subtle or astral body; that too dies and we find ourselves in > > a mental vehicle or dense soul; this too dies and we find ourselves in a > > causal vehicle, and so on, stripping away vehicle after vehicle: buddhic, > > atmic/andanda, avyakta, Purusha... and yet we may experience all of these > > deaths while still in this body! Death is not what it may seem, nor is > > life; these are another "artificial" duality, making sense only as a paired > > concept in the context of spacetime. > > > > Our most cherished individuality is universal, is eternal and outside of > > spacetime and beyond any container, gross or subtle. Any of our countless > > gross or subtle vehicles may come and go as they have always done; in that > > sense they too are eternal, as they are *always* changing -- but the only > > "thing" which is unchanging and eternal is the only "thing" which we > > already are, and have always been. > > "do.rflex" wrote: > > Thanks. > * * * My pleasure; thank you for asking. The key here is our solving the apparent opposition in the ideas of individual *vs.* universal, or Self *vs.* not-Self. These are actually a "false" dichotomy, true in spacetime only, but from our point of view actually two sides of the same non-dual coin.
