[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
The greatest and weirdest paradox for me is in dealing with the idea that everything is Pure Consciousness or Brahman. In that case, we can't say, it's my ignorance that's keeping me from realizing this since this too is Brahman, the ignorance, the process of moving out of it, getting into ignorance in the first place...all Brahman. Now if we start to obssess on this, we go crazy in the infinite regress of I AM Brahman. In order to get there, we have to reach the end of infinite regress and just BE. At that point, there is no explanation, no paradox and no suffering, since suffering is in trying to figure it out in the first place. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > wrote: > > > > > > A lot of good points have been made about ways of handling > suffering > > > eg Marek's concerning putting the attention away from suffering, > on > > > attention itself - hence manage to transcend suffering; or by > > > embracing suffering/demons eg Rory or Jim. I can see the wisdom > in > > > all this. Am also impressed with some of the reported > experiences. > > > > > > Raging against the clouds will not make the sun shine back any > > > sooner. In the end we seem to have to do the rope trick in > reverse - > > > pretend the snake is just a rope. > > > > Or pretend that the rope is really a snarling snake. > > > > > > > Become more immune to it at any > > > rate. For instance raging anger needs to subside into > indifference or > > > equanimity, in order for us to transcend duality. > > > > Go deep into the tunnel of anger and sadness and the light at the > end > > of it is not indifference. > > > > > > > > > This is where a > > > leap of faith is required, at least before enlightenment - that > this > > > is not just wishful thinking, that goodness can and will > overcome > > > evil in the end. > > > > The premise in all of this is that suffering is the natural state, > the > > core of it all. > > > > Maybe evil has only temporarily overtaken goodness -- the core. > > > > > However my focus was on the dynamics of Unity giving RISE to > creation > > > as discussed in recent webcast conferences - the rope/snake > comment > > > by MMY, the risposte by Hagelin concerning different > perspectives of > > > his Unity equations. And the inherent "covering" of ignorance > and > > > forgetfulness MMY noted between silence and dynamism. > > > > > > So on the one hand we have the view of creation arising from the > > > precise, sequential unfoldment of the Laws of Nature reputedly > > > working "without problems" - excuse me, what about suffering, > was my > > > question. Where is the unifiedfield chart connecting physics > with > > > moral philosophy, karma etc? And what evidence is there in > nature of > > > moral values anyway? > > > > Maybe you / we see suffering everywhere because we are in a > localized > > "hell" and the vaster realm of things is more towards heaven -- the > > happiness/suffering ration approaching larger numbers > > > Suffering as I see it comes about when we don't deal effectively > with the challenge before us. If that challenge was a strong karma > from the past that has us literally on a railroad track as a > quadraplegic and a train coming at us at 80 miles an hour, well, > adios muchacho, nothing to be done in that case. However, in less > extreme situations, it is a matter of developing hard won skills, > perspective, Being, so that either our surroundings arrange > themselves so that we are not confronted by the most difficult set > of circumstances from which to extricate ourselves, or, if faced > with a challenging situation or period of life, we know enough and > have enough tools at our disposal to find a way out, without either > making the situation worse, or causing greater and/or additional > problems for ourselves later on. > > The point being that suffering will naturally happen to us as part > of our life Dharma, if we do not yet have the tools, capacity or > skills to avoid it. It is a natural result of the way the world is > set up for us to grow and learn at the maximum rate. It is literally > how we learn to keep our balance and learn to walk as children. If > we didn't topple over and bang our heads, we'd never learn to walk. > > New morning was talking about drugs earlier as a way to temporarily > alleviate suffering, with the caveat that if we were to use them as > a constant solution, we'd end up like Elvis or Rush Limbaugh (I'm > paraphrasing here...). So learning to not suffer is just that, a > learning process. Not a solution in a bottle, or a mantra by itself, > or just thinking different thoughts, but an entirely new, integrated > approach, where we transform ourselves in order to in effect live in > a differe
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "claudiouk" wrote:". . . amazing how the mere act of > observation can alter outcomes in quantum experiments." > > Hmmm, I'm thinking that "observation" as defined in today's physics is > actually not such. It's not witnessing that changes the observed, > it's the throwing of objects at the observed that skew measurements of > it. That's interfering physically -- not merely absorbing quanta > radiating off the object. This is an interesting point -- for me, observing is not passive absorption, but actually *does* entail an active emanation from within to enliven the object(s) perceived. I hadn't considered the quantum analogies to this before; many thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
I wasn't clear. What I was getting it is, you were speculating that the laws of nature weren't all that intelligent, given all the suffering in the world; and I was suggesting that since those same laws of nature gave us *our* intelligence, we couldn't really be any more intelligent than the laws, such that we could look at them and think maybe they weren't that smart. We'd have to be smarter than the laws, in other words, or at least have some other standard of intelligence to compare the laws to. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Appear intelligent *compared to what*? " - just the fact that nature > is lawful, orderly and consistent and thereby discoverable and > predictable; but also that the "constants" in nature are so fienely > tuned that even the tiniest numerical deviation and matter and energy > would not develop or exist even. These qualities of the laws of > nature point either to an underlying intelligence, as Hagelin argues, > or to their chance emergence in the right ratios, in this particular > universe (compared to the case in trillions of other parallel > universes, where the ratios etc in the constants are "wrong" and no > evolution of matter happens). > > "what provided us with what intelligence we have in the first place" > Yes as we are part of nature - but still it is surprising the > correspondence between our "models" and "nature", that our > mathematics for instance, can be so incredibly accurate. Also amazing > how the mere act of observation can alter outcomes in quantum > experiments. > > Regarding the question of "coverings" and "ignorance", it is all > rather intriguing nevertheless, metaphorically. Children like peek- a- > boo games, psychological development involves discovering self, > others and the boundaries inbetween; science is about "uncovering" > laws of nature, we like mysteries, magic etc.. even mystical > experience is about "revelation" etc. But existentially, especially > concerning all the suffering in the universe, it's infuriating! > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > > wrote: > > > > > On the other hand this veil of ignorance & forgetting > > > implicated in the unified field itself (therefore preceding > > > karma and personal sin) might give rise to Laws of Nature > > > that themselves only APPEAR intelligent. > > > > Appear intelligent *compared to what*? By what standard? > > > > Human intelligence? Because one occasionally feels one > > could have pissed a smarter set of Laws of Nature, a > > universe in which one didn't have to go through all > > this convoluted, counterintuitive stuff to "remember" > > what one has supposedly "forgotten" but "always already > > knew"? > > > > I'm in sympathy with you on that. > > > > But these stupid Laws of Nature that condemn us to sin > > and suffering until we finally figure it out (or not) > > are what provided us with what intelligence we have in > > the first place, aren't they? > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And now, the truth. > > The earth is expanding at the speed of light. It grows 186,000 miles > bigger in all directions every second. The moon expands too, but > because it's smaller, it expands into a smaller biggerness than the > earth grows to in the same amount of time; thus the earth expands > "into" the moon which is pushed outwards by this radiation. The moon > in turn is pressuring the entire universe also, and the universe is > expanding too and thus puts "back pressure" on the moon. The moon > takes the path of least resistance between the earth's expansion and > the "compaction" of our solar system by the universe's pressurings. > This is called orbiting, but there's no gravity holding the moon. > There's no gravity period. There's only the expansion of the earth > that keeps us pinned to the surface -- we're on an exploding ball. > > Now you know. > > Edg > Thanks for the mind-candy! ...:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
Jim's comment (below) is as well said as anything I've heard or read. It would seem that the self never truly experiences or identifies, but rather the ego, being the reflection of That in prakiti does the identifying (and the suffering) as its proxy. The ego (jiva) can be happy or blissful it enlightenment because of its transparency and consequent 'clean' transmission or radiance of the self. The ego is kind of a mirage of the self; not of the same 'substance' (for lack of a better word) as prakriti but an 'effect' that results from a certain arrangement of circumstances -- a certain angle of light in conjunction with a modification that creates the appearance of the thing -- like a prism and sunlight 'creating' a rainbow. [Just some rambling.] (And I agree with Edg or New Morning [as I write this I can't quite rememember who made the comment] who wrote that the discourse today has been sweet.) ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So learning to not suffer is just that, a > learning process. Not a solution in a bottle, or a mantra by itself, > or just thinking different thoughts, but an entirely new, integrated > approach, where we transform ourselves in order to in effect live in > a different world. One just as challenging and comprehensive as that > in which we would suffer, but through our hard won skill, > perspective and capacity, the suffering is no longer present. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
"claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:". . . amazing how the mere act of observation can alter outcomes in quantum experiments." Hmmm, I'm thinking that "observation" as defined in today's physics is actually not such. It's not witnessing that changes the observed, it's the throwing of objects at the observed that skew measurements of it. That's interfering physically -- not merely absorbing quanta radiating off the object. The concept is that when one deals with the finest aspects of physicality, one's tools become like gorilla fingers trying to do needlepoint. Oh, how I'd love for physics to explain action at a distance instead of being merely content to have the math to predict how gravity and electromagnetism work -- somewhat anyway, but they haven't solved the three body problem yet. Newton said, "Hypothesis non fingo," when he considered action at a distance, and today's physicists cop out the same way. No progress. They don't know how the earth can grab the moon. And now, the truth. The earth is expanding at the speed of light. It grows 186,000 miles bigger in all directions every second. The moon expands too, but because it's smaller, it expands into a smaller biggerness than the earth grows to in the same amount of time; thus the earth expands "into" the moon which is pushed outwards by this radiation. The moon in turn is pressuring the entire universe also, and the universe is expanding too and thus puts "back pressure" on the moon. The moon takes the path of least resistance between the earth's expansion and the "compaction" of our solar system by the universe's pressurings. This is called orbiting, but there's no gravity holding the moon. There's no gravity period. There's only the expansion of the earth that keeps us pinned to the surface -- we're on an exploding ball. Now you know. Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
"Appear intelligent *compared to what*? " - just the fact that nature is lawful, orderly and consistent and thereby discoverable and predictable; but also that the "constants" in nature are so fienely tuned that even the tiniest numerical deviation and matter and energy would not develop or exist even. These qualities of the laws of nature point either to an underlying intelligence, as Hagelin argues, or to their chance emergence in the right ratios, in this particular universe (compared to the case in trillions of other parallel universes, where the ratios etc in the constants are "wrong" and no evolution of matter happens). "what provided us with what intelligence we have in the first place" Yes as we are part of nature - but still it is surprising the correspondence between our "models" and "nature", that our mathematics for instance, can be so incredibly accurate. Also amazing how the mere act of observation can alter outcomes in quantum experiments. Regarding the question of "coverings" and "ignorance", it is all rather intriguing nevertheless, metaphorically. Children like peek-a- boo games, psychological development involves discovering self, others and the boundaries inbetween; science is about "uncovering" laws of nature, we like mysteries, magic etc.. even mystical experience is about "revelation" etc. But existentially, especially concerning all the suffering in the universe, it's infuriating! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > wrote: > > > On the other hand this veil of ignorance & forgetting > > implicated in the unified field itself (therefore preceding > > karma and personal sin) might give rise to Laws of Nature > > that themselves only APPEAR intelligent. > > Appear intelligent *compared to what*? By what standard? > > Human intelligence? Because one occasionally feels one > could have pissed a smarter set of Laws of Nature, a > universe in which one didn't have to go through all > this convoluted, counterintuitive stuff to "remember" > what one has supposedly "forgotten" but "always already > knew"? > > I'm in sympathy with you on that. > > But these stupid Laws of Nature that condemn us to sin > and suffering until we finally figure it out (or not) > are what provided us with what intelligence we have in > the first place, aren't they? >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > New morning was talking about drugs earlier as a way to temporarily > alleviate suffering, with the caveat that if we were to use them as > a constant solution, we'd end up like Elvis or Rush Limbaugh (I'm > paraphrasing here...). So learning to not suffer is just that, a > learning process. Not a solution in a bottle, or a mantra by itself, > or just thinking different thoughts, but an entirely new, integrated > approach, where we transform ourselves in order to in effect live in > a different world. One just as challenging and comprehensive as that > in which we would suffer, but through our hard won skill, > perspective and capacity, the suffering is no longer present. Explaininmg my thought a bit better, and it is not inconsistent with what you write here, what I was suggesting is that better neurotransmitter (NT) / receptor (R), and uptake mechanisms, particulalrly for dopamine, seratonin, GABA, noraepi, and the endorphin receptor complex ARE a large part, if not the whole part of happiness. At least relative happiness all the way through the ananda kosha. (how such neurotransmittors relate to polishing the reflector of PC is a broader and interesting issue). I suggested drugs as an example of temporary means of achieving "better", aka happier, such neurotransmittor/receptor states. The larger question is how to culture and create such NT/R states without drugs. Or via via better supplements than are now available -- perhaps hidden AV rayasanas, soma, etc. Even Patanjali said IT could be achieved via drugs. As did Maharishi at Humboldt 70. The caveat is that they are not referring to current drugs. Still bliss in a pill -- time-released I hope, or permanent IV, is possible. Or perhaps full hatha yoga, pranayams etc are such a way to culture such. Or Tai Chi. Or perhaps they culture something else which also brings on the bliss.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity and the Grateful Dead
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thats more of it. > > Perhaps its the sutle realm archetye, platonic form of THE essence of > Grateful Dead Album in my head -- but Jim's description was of that. > (Where is Rango when we need him. Or what was the name of that GD > devotee on ATM or Jim Cooks list) > > Maybe Jim cognized the Divine and it turned out to be the Grateful Dead. Well I'm definitely Living in the Land of the Dead, so who knows? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" wrote: > > > > A lot of good points have been made about ways of handling suffering > > eg Marek's concerning putting the attention away from suffering, on > > attention itself - hence manage to transcend suffering; or by > > embracing suffering/demons eg Rory or Jim. I can see the wisdom in > > all this. Am also impressed with some of the reported experiences. > > > > Raging against the clouds will not make the sun shine back any > > sooner. In the end we seem to have to do the rope trick in reverse - > > pretend the snake is just a rope. > > Or pretend that the rope is really a snarling snake. > > > > Become more immune to it at any > > rate. For instance raging anger needs to subside into indifference or > > equanimity, in order for us to transcend duality. > > Go deep into the tunnel of anger and sadness and the light at the end > of it is not indifference. > > > > > This is where a > > leap of faith is required, at least before enlightenment - that this > > is not just wishful thinking, that goodness can and will overcome > > evil in the end. > > The premise in all of this is that suffering is the natural state, the > core of it all. > > Maybe evil has only temporarily overtaken goodness -- the core. > > > However my focus was on the dynamics of Unity giving RISE to creation > > as discussed in recent webcast conferences - the rope/snake comment > > by MMY, the risposte by Hagelin concerning different perspectives of > > his Unity equations. And the inherent "covering" of ignorance and > > forgetfulness MMY noted between silence and dynamism. > > > > So on the one hand we have the view of creation arising from the > > precise, sequential unfoldment of the Laws of Nature reputedly > > working "without problems" - excuse me, what about suffering, was my > > question. Where is the unifiedfield chart connecting physics with > > moral philosophy, karma etc? And what evidence is there in nature of > > moral values anyway? > > Maybe you / we see suffering everywhere because we are in a localized > "hell" and the vaster realm of things is more towards heaven -- the > happiness/suffering ration approaching larger numbers > Suffering as I see it comes about when we don't deal effectively with the challenge before us. If that challenge was a strong karma from the past that has us literally on a railroad track as a quadraplegic and a train coming at us at 80 miles an hour, well, adios muchacho, nothing to be done in that case. However, in less extreme situations, it is a matter of developing hard won skills, perspective, Being, so that either our surroundings arrange themselves so that we are not confronted by the most difficult set of circumstances from which to extricate ourselves, or, if faced with a challenging situation or period of life, we know enough and have enough tools at our disposal to find a way out, without either making the situation worse, or causing greater and/or additional problems for ourselves later on. The point being that suffering will naturally happen to us as part of our life Dharma, if we do not yet have the tools, capacity or skills to avoid it. It is a natural result of the way the world is set up for us to grow and learn at the maximum rate. It is literally how we learn to keep our balance and learn to walk as children. If we didn't topple over and bang our heads, we'd never learn to walk. New morning was talking about drugs earlier as a way to temporarily alleviate suffering, with the caveat that if we were to use them as a constant solution, we'd end up like Elvis or Rush Limbaugh (I'm paraphrasing here...). So learning to not suffer is just that, a learning process. Not a solution in a bottle, or a mantra by itself, or just thinking different thoughts, but an entirely new, integrated approach, where we transform ourselves in order to in effect live in a different world. One just as challenging and comprehensive as that in which we would suffer, but through our hard won skill, perspective and capacity, the suffering is no longer present.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the other hand this veil of ignorance & forgetting > implicated in the unified field itself (therefore preceding > karma and personal sin) might give rise to Laws of Nature > that themselves only APPEAR intelligent. Appear intelligent *compared to what*? By what standard? Human intelligence? Because one occasionally feels one could have pissed a smarter set of Laws of Nature, a universe in which one didn't have to go through all this convoluted, counterintuitive stuff to "remember" what one has supposedly "forgotten" but "always already knew"? I'm in sympathy with you on that. But these stupid Laws of Nature that condemn us to sin and suffering until we finally figure it out (or not) are what provided us with what intelligence we have in the first place, aren't they?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A lot of good points have been made about ways of handling suffering > eg Marek's concerning putting the attention away from suffering, on > attention itself - hence manage to transcend suffering; or by > embracing suffering/demons eg Rory or Jim. I can see the wisdom in > all this. Am also impressed with some of the reported experiences. > > Raging against the clouds will not make the sun shine back any > sooner. In the end we seem to have to do the rope trick in reverse - > pretend the snake is just a rope. Or pretend that the rope is really a snarling snake. > Become more immune to it at any > rate. For instance raging anger needs to subside into indifference or > equanimity, in order for us to transcend duality. Go deep into the tunnel of anger and sadness and the light at the end of it is not indifference. > This is where a > leap of faith is required, at least before enlightenment - that this > is not just wishful thinking, that goodness can and will overcome > evil in the end. The premise in all of this is that suffering is the natural state, the core of it all. Maybe evil has only temporarily overtaken goodness -- the core. > However my focus was on the dynamics of Unity giving RISE to creation > as discussed in recent webcast conferences - the rope/snake comment > by MMY, the risposte by Hagelin concerning different perspectives of > his Unity equations. And the inherent "covering" of ignorance and > forgetfulness MMY noted between silence and dynamism. > > So on the one hand we have the view of creation arising from the > precise, sequential unfoldment of the Laws of Nature reputedly > working "without problems" - excuse me, what about suffering, was my > question. Where is the unifiedfield chart connecting physics with > moral philosophy, karma etc? And what evidence is there in nature of > moral values anyway? Maybe you / we see suffering everywhere because we are in a localized "hell" and the vaster realm of things is more towards heaven -- the happiness/suffering ration approaching larger numbers
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity and the Grateful Dead
Thats more of it. Perhaps its the sutle realm archetye, platonic form of THE essence of Grateful Dead Album in my head -- but Jim's description was of that. (Where is Rango when we need him. Or what was the name of that GD devotee on ATM or Jim Cooks list) Maybe Jim cognized the Divine and it turned out to be the Grateful Dead. I was thinking a bit more towards the gleeful transcendental side of deadism The name "Grateful Dead" was chosen from a dictionary. Some claim it was a Funk & Wagnalls, others, the Bardo Thodol (Tibetan Book Of the Dead), but according to Phil Lesh, in his biography (pp. 62), "...Jer (Garcia) picked up an old Britannica World Language Dictionary...(and)...In that silvery elf-voice he said to me, 'Hey, man, how about the Grateful Dead?'" The definition there was "A song meant to show a lost soul to the other side." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grateful_Dead#Choosing_a_name (use the zoom function to get the fuller glory ) http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10291295/SP--A/IGID--1047651/The_Grateful_Dead_Collage.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10207003/SP--A/IGID--1292896/Grateful_Dead_40th_Anniversary.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10204319/SP--A/IGID--959216/Grateful_Dead.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10204261/SP--A/IGID--959205/Grateful_Dead.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10204321/SP--A/IGID--959218/Grateful_Dead.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10283771/SP--A/IGID--861387/Stanley_Mouse_Mr_Saturday_Night.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10219495/SP--B/IGID--10219495/The_Closer_or_Da_Morte_Capo_al_Fine).htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10288956/SP--A/IGID--807494/Dead_Family.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2240&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Rainforest-Benefit-Posters_i2036922_.htm http://www.allposters.com/-sp/The-Grateful-Dead-Collage-Posters_i374559_.htm http://media02.liquidblue.com/imagedb/accessories/_Large/87009.jpg http://media02.liquidblue.com/imagedb/accessories/_Large/87019.jpg http://media02.liquidblue.com/imagedb/accessories/_Large/87023.jpg http://www.mousestudios.com/rockart/skulls/5_skulls.htm http://www.mousestudios.com/rockart/skulls/6_skulls.htm http://www.mousestudios.com/rockart/skulls/7_skulls.htm and one for jimi http://www.art.com/asp/sp-asp/_/PD--10119953/SP--A/IGID--945959/Jimi_Hendrix.htm?sOrig=CAT&sOrigID=2247&ui=A8DDEC124A554D95BA9A6D2F71AF3504 -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archetype An archetype is a generic, idealized model of a person, object, or concept from which similar instances are derived, copied, patterned, or emulated. In psychology, an archetype is a model of a person, personality, or behavior. This article is about personality archetypes, as described in literature analysis and the study of the psyche. In the analysis of personality, the term archetype is often broadly used to refer to 1. a stereotypepersonality type observed multiple times, especially an oversimplification of such a type; or 2. an epitomepersonality type exemplified, especially the "greatest" such example. However, in a strict linguistic sense, an archetype is merely a defining example of a personality type. The accepted use of archetype is to refer to a generic version of a personality type. In this sense "mother figure" can be considered an archetype and instances can be found in various female characters with distinct (non-generic) personalities. Archetypes have been present in mythology and literature for hundreds of years. The use of archetypes to analyze personality was advanced by Carl Jung early in the 20th century. The value in using archetypal characters in fiction derives from the fact that a large group of people are able to unconsciously recognize the archetype, and thus the motivations, behind the character's behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonism Platonic realism is a philosophical term usually used to refer to the idea of realism regarding the existence of universals after the Greek philosopher Plato who lived between c. 427c. 347 BC, student of Socrates, and the teacher of Aristotle. Confusingly, this stance is also called Platonic idealism. Plato's own articulation of the realism regarding the existence of universals is expounded in his The Republic and elsewhere, notably in the Phaedo, the Phaedrus, the Meno, and the Parmenides. Universals In Platonic realism, universals do not exist in the way that ordinary physical objects exist, but were originally thought to have a sort of ghostly or heav
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
A lot of good points have been made about ways of handling suffering eg Marek's concerning putting the attention away from suffering, on attention itself - hence manage to transcend suffering; or by embracing suffering/demons eg Rory or Jim. I can see the wisdom in all this. Am also impressed with some of the reported experiences. Raging against the clouds will not make the sun shine back any sooner. In the end we seem to have to do the rope trick in reverse - pretend the snake is just a rope. Become more immune to it at any rate. For instance raging anger needs to subside into indifference or equanimity, in order for us to transcend duality. This is where a leap of faith is required, at least before enlightenment - that this is not just wishful thinking, that goodness can and will overcome evil in the end. However my focus was on the dynamics of Unity giving RISE to creation as discussed in recent webcast conferences - the rope/snake comment by MMY, the risposte by Hagelin concerning different perspectives of his Unity equations. And the inherent "covering" of ignorance and forgetfulness MMY noted between silence and dynamism. So on the one hand we have the view of creation arising from the precise, sequential unfoldment of the Laws of Nature reputedly working "without problems" - excuse me, what about suffering, was my question. Where is the unifiedfield chart connecting physics with moral philosophy, karma etc? And what evidence is there in nature of moral values anyway? On the other hand this veil of ignorance & forgetting implicated in the unified field itself (therefore preceding karma and personal sin) might give rise to Laws of Nature that themselves only APPEAR intelligent. Some physicists believe for instance that there are multiple univereses and in this one the laws just so happen to "work", but the underlying process is still blind chance. Another take on the rope/snake analogy. God = mad, bad or a fool? Well maybe I've been a little too harsh here - sorry God.. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" > wrote: > > YES! This is what I meant when I said there is a place inside > where > > the Purusha deeply hates and fears the Prakriti, and vice versa. > > Coming upon the Purusha's utterly helpless imprisonment within the > > bodymind-world-prakriti stymied me for a moment, as this seemed to > be > > the ultimate demonic Hell. Then I remembered the approach which > has > > generally worked for me in the past: When I meet a demon, I > embrace > > it. Since the demon here seemed to be the whole of physical > creation, > > I embraced it. Wow! Just under that horror of separation/hate was > the > > passionate Understanding of the intimacy of the world as my body, > as > > my LOVE! > > > > *L*L*L* > > > This is a process I go through continually, and I find it the most > instructive to challenge and resolve those feelings of revulsion I > feel the strongest. It is easy for all of us to continue to love > that which we naturally love; babies, flowers, a blue sky, and yet > we are constantly given the opportunity, the sign-post, to be > pointed at those elements of Creation which we detest, simply > because that negative attraction is so strong, that when confronted > by it, we either reinforce our dislike of that, and in turn > reinforce our boundaries, literally, or find a way, a strategy, a > breakthrough on how to incorporate that which we have so disliked > and find that rather than it being the proverbial brick wall, behind > the brick wall, beyond that nasty person, that barking dog, that > sinful President, lies a doorway to infinitely greater and fuller > worlds. Not in a facile, "oh I forgive you" way that has been > mouthed emptily for so long, but rather a genuine acceptance and > full integration of that which challenges us so greatly, to the > point where an honest appraisal of ourselves has to be squarely > modified; we are not the nice person we think we are when faced with > such challenges presented to us on the silver platter of the Divine. > Rather, they bring out the worst in us, and it is then that the > golden opportunity occurs, to love that which we reject and find a > way to a greater self-definition of ourselves, enriching our lives > at the expense of nothing. What else is life, if not this? >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" > wrote: > > > > > and upon the > > > throne sat a being of purest gold, draped in pure gold ermine > > > and velvet, a skull demonic face upon a beautiful skeletal > > > body, deep gold ribs and pelvis, leering as only a face > > > stripped of flesh will, with sockets of deep shadow, yet > > > radiant purest gold. I was slightly afraid and wanted to > > > look elsewhere and yet at the same time, this > > > demonic Being was radiating such love and Bliss, > > > > That was a Grateful Dead Album cover. > > http://tinyurl.com/2jdhy8 > > U mean that? I was thinkin' more along the lines of these: http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/p/PCL007BL.GIF http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/g/GD60S.GIF http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/b/BIGALLAH.GIF http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/p/PHAROAH.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/s/SKELETON.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/o/OMSNUKA.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/p/P3394.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/p/P3395.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/t/TAPER.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/p/P3403.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/p/P3411.JPG http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/t/TERR2.JPG One for the Indiaphiles: http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/o/OCT94COV.GIF Personally, I always liked the design for "Cats Under The Stars": http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/m/M772_S.GIF ...and this one, for "Wake Of The Flood": http://www.eurodead.net/gallery/w/WAKEOTF.JPG
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" wrote: > > > and upon the > > throne sat a being of purest gold, draped in pure gold ermine and > > velvet, a skull demonic face upon a beautiful skeletal body, deep > > gold ribs and pelvis, leering as only a face stripped of flesh will, > > with sockets of deep shadow, yet radiant purest gold. I was slightly > > afraid and wanted to look elsewhere and yet at the same time, this > > demonic Being was radiating such love and Bliss, > > That was a Grateful Dead Album cover. http://tinyurl.com/2jdhy8 U mean that? > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" wrote: > > > and upon the > > throne sat a being of purest gold, draped in pure gold ermine and > > velvet, a skull demonic face upon a beautiful skeletal body, deep > > gold ribs and pelvis, leering as only a face stripped of flesh will, > > with sockets of deep shadow, yet radiant purest gold. I was slightly > > afraid and wanted to look elsewhere and yet at the same time, this > > demonic Being was radiating such love and Bliss, > > That was a Grateful Dead Album cover. > I didn't think of that until just now- you may be right. Whatever it was, it was spectacular, and 100% real! Perhaps Kelly Mouse (wasn't that the artist's nanme??) saw the same vision I did, though I don't recall his skeletons being of solid 24K gold. Perhaps they weren't then, and are now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > YES! This is what I meant when I said there is a place inside where > the Purusha deeply hates and fears the Prakriti, and vice versa. > Coming upon the Purusha's utterly helpless imprisonment within the > bodymind-world-prakriti stymied me for a moment, as this seemed to be > the ultimate demonic Hell. Then I remembered the approach which has > generally worked for me in the past: When I meet a demon, I embrace > it. Since the demon here seemed to be the whole of physical creation, > I embraced it. Wow! Just under that horror of separation/hate was the > passionate Understanding of the intimacy of the world as my body, as > my LOVE! > > *L*L*L* > This is a process I go through continually, and I find it the most instructive to challenge and resolve those feelings of revulsion I feel the strongest. It is easy for all of us to continue to love that which we naturally love; babies, flowers, a blue sky, and yet we are constantly given the opportunity, the sign-post, to be pointed at those elements of Creation which we detest, simply because that negative attraction is so strong, that when confronted by it, we either reinforce our dislike of that, and in turn reinforce our boundaries, literally, or find a way, a strategy, a breakthrough on how to incorporate that which we have so disliked and find that rather than it being the proverbial brick wall, behind the brick wall, beyond that nasty person, that barking dog, that sinful President, lies a doorway to infinitely greater and fuller worlds. Not in a facile, "oh I forgive you" way that has been mouthed emptily for so long, but rather a genuine acceptance and full integration of that which challenges us so greatly, to the point where an honest appraisal of ourselves has to be squarely modified; we are not the nice person we think we are when faced with such challenges presented to us on the silver platter of the Divine. Rather, they bring out the worst in us, and it is then that the golden opportunity occurs, to love that which we reject and find a way to a greater self-definition of ourselves, enriching our lives at the expense of nothing. What else is life, if not this?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > and upon the > throne sat a being of purest gold, draped in pure gold ermine and > velvet, a skull demonic face upon a beautiful skeletal body, deep > gold ribs and pelvis, leering as only a face stripped of flesh will, > with sockets of deep shadow, yet radiant purest gold. I was slightly > afraid and wanted to look elsewhere and yet at the same time, this > demonic Being was radiating such love and Bliss, That was a Grateful Dead Album cover. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > YES! This is what I meant when I said there is a place inside where > the Purusha deeply hates and fears the Prakriti, and vice versa. > Coming upon the Purusha's utterly helpless imprisonment within the > bodymind-world-prakriti stymied me for a moment, as this seemed to be > the ultimate demonic Hell. Then I remembered the approach which has > generally worked for me in the past: When I meet a demon, I embrace > it. Since the demon here seemed to be the whole of physical creation, > I embraced it. Wow! Just under that horror of separation/hate was the > passionate Understanding of the intimacy of the world as my body, as > my LOVE! > > *L*L*L* > I saw something just after my meditation last evening which represents another view of what you have said- Lying down after my twenty minute journey, I saw clearly cast against a resplendent and regal golden crimson backdrop of heavenly light was a stunningly majestic throne of purest gold, radiating pure bliss, and upon the throne sat a being of purest gold, draped in pure gold ermine and velvet, a skull demonic face upon a beautiful skeletal body, deep gold ribs and pelvis, leering as only a face stripped of flesh will, with sockets of deep shadow, yet radiant purest gold. I was slightly afraid and wanted to look elsewhere and yet at the same time, this demonic Being was radiating such love and Bliss, I could not look away, as I just watched fascinated and calm until He faded away from my sight. It was really quite extraordinary!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
That raises the question, in my mind, "if you were living in hell, would you know it?" Or would you rationalize an altrnative more hopeful view? It seems the Cathars recognized / believed that they were in hell -- a suffering life made by and ruled by Satan. Hells, various levels, might be characterized as life where happiness / suffering ratio >1. The higest hell approaching 0. The highest heaven approaching infinity. The prior post characterization is of a life of predomininate suffering. A hell. Marek characerizes life as a heaven aka >1. Many religious traditions within christianity prior to 20th century feel good ones seemed to reject the world and its trappings / traps -- perhaps not too far from a catharian view. How much of happiness / heaven is a reflection of Pure Consciousness (the polishing of the reflector) and how much is simply better dopamine release, reutake inhibition, or tuned up dopamine receptors? "Dopamine is commonly associated with the pleasure system of the brain, providing feelings of enjoyment and reinforcement to motivate a person proactively to perform certain activities. Dopamine is released (particularly in areas such as the nucleus accumbens and striatum) by naturally rewarding experiences such as food, sex,[4][5] use of certain drugs and neutral stimuli that become associated with them. This theory is often discussed in terms of drugs such as cocaine and amphetamines, which seem to directly or indirectly lead to the increase of dopamine in these areas, and in relation to neurobiological theories of chemical addiction, arguing that these dopamine pathways are pathologically altered in addicted persons. However, cocaine and amphetamine influence separate mechanisms of action. Cocaine is a dopamine transporter blocker that competitively inhibits dopamine uptake to increase the lifetime of dopamine and augments an overabundance of dopamine (an increase of up to 150%) within the parameters of the dopamine neurotransmitters. Like cocaine, amphetamines increase the concentration of dopamine in the synaptic gap, but by a different mechanism. Amphetamines are similar in structure to dopamine, and so can enter the terminal button of the presynaptic neuron via its dopamine transporters as well as by diffusing through the neural membrane directly. When entering inside the presynaptic neuron, amphetamines force the dopamine molecules out of their storage vesicles and expel them into the synaptic gap by making the dopamine transporters work in reverse. Dopamine's role in experiencing pleasure has been questioned by several researchers. It has been argued that dopamine is more associated with anticipatory desire and motivation (commonly referred to as "wanting") as opposed to actual consummatory pleasure (commonly referred to as "liking"). Dopamine is not released when unpleasant or aversive stimuli are encountered, and so motivates towards the pleasure of avoiding or removing the unpleasant stimuli." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You're starting to "get" why Catharism so appealed > to the people of the Middle Ages. It was a tough > time, man. We're talking wars, plagues, poverty, > and all of the torments of Hell, unless you were > privileged enough to be born noble. And even then... > > So one of the things that appealed to the medieval > mind about Dualism was that God *wasn't* responsible > for the mess that they saw around them on a daily > basis. The phenomenal world had been created by the > Other Guy, the demiurge, by Satan, by the False > Jehovah. The world didn't just "look" like a gnarly > place because we didn't understand The Unfathomable > Workings Of God. It *was* a gnarly place, designed > by a dude from The Other Place, the *opposite* to > spirit. > > The populace flocked to Catharism in that period > because it gave them a respite from trying to under- > stand The Unfathomable Workings Of God. They got to > blame the world on Someone Else, not God. And it > gave them comfort. And the promise of a better life > in the spirit after they died -- in one incarnation > or another -- gave them hope. And hope is a good thing. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" wrote: > > > > Both of you are looking at the Relative in a rather upbeat way, > > perhaps reflecting transient (for most mortals) blissful moods > > (maybe states or permanent stations in your cases??). For me a mood is a state of consciousness, and vice versa. I find we can generally select whatever mood/state of consciousness we wish (taking into account the various particles of the bodymind which may object, and engaging them into an integrity or synthesis), and on that basis, we find the senses then gather information to support and uphold and perpetuate that particular state or mood. Doesn't > > help the wilderbeast being tormented to death by lions or some > > innocent 16-year old in Pakistan having acid thrown in her face > > because in love with a Hindu or not wearing full Islamic dress. > > Take a snapshot of the WHOLE of Nature and all there is, 99.99 > > of it, is suffering. This appears to be an example of the senses gathering data to support one particular preselected, a-priori mood. There also appears to be a lot of supposition here. Who knows whether the wildebeest is "tormented" by the lions? IIRC people who have been (partially) eaten by tigers and then escaped, reported a feeling of euphoria during the process. All we can really *know* is our own state. I find if I take steps to attend to the root suffering inside, and heal it, my outer world changes correspondingly. Looking to (and at) the outer for anything other than a perfect mirror of the bodymind and perfect unfoldment of my own preselected state/mood, constitutes attachment and suffering. > > Maybe the flaw in Unity > > is an inherent madness - well, who would NOT go mad in total > > isolation? Put anyone in solitary confinement with sensory > > deprivation and they will hallucinate and create nightmares for > > themselves. That's the real story perhaps - a madness without cure. > > It goes on FOREVER because even when it transcends time it ends up > > recreating it all over again. There is no sense in a creation which > > just gives suffering to everyone. Either God is mad, bad or just a > > fool - so much (supposed) intelligence in the geometry and sequence > > of laws of nature but then making a total mess with the experiment. TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're starting to "get" why Catharism so appealed > to the people of the Middle Ages. It was a tough > time, man. We're talking wars, plagues, poverty, > and all of the torments of Hell, unless you were > privileged enough to be born noble. And even then... > > So one of the things that appealed to the medieval > mind about Dualism was that God *wasn't* responsible > for the mess that they saw around them on a daily > basis. The phenomenal world had been created by the > Other Guy, the demiurge, by Satan, by the False > Jehovah. The world didn't just "look" like a gnarly > place because we didn't understand The Unfathomable > Workings Of God. It *was* a gnarly place, designed > by a dude from The Other Place, the *opposite* to > spirit. > > YES! This is what I meant when I said there is a place inside where the Purusha deeply hates and fears the Prakriti, and vice versa. Coming upon the Purusha's utterly helpless imprisonment within the bodymind-world-prakriti stymied me for a moment, as this seemed to be the ultimate demonic Hell. Then I remembered the approach which has generally worked for me in the past: When I meet a demon, I embrace it. Since the demon here seemed to be the whole of physical creation, I embraced it. Wow! Just under that horror of separation/hate was the passionate Understanding of the intimacy of the world as my body, as my LOVE! *L*L*L*
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Comment below: > > ** > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > wrote: > > > > Both of you are looking at the Relative in a rather upbeat way, > > perhaps reflecting transient (for most mortals) blissful moods > > (maybe > > states or permanent stations in your cases??). Doesn't help the > > wilderbeast being tormented to death by lions or some innocent 16- > > year old in Pakistan having acid thrown in her face because in > > love > > with a Hindu or not wearing full Islamic dress. Take a snapshot of > > the WHOLE of Nature and all there is, 99.99 of it, is suffering. > > So > > where is the expansion of happiness in that? Maybe the flaw in > > Unity > > is an inherent madness - well, who would NOT go mad in total > > isolation? Put anyone in solitary confinement with sensory > > deprivation and they will hallucinate and create nightmares for > > themselves. That's the real story perhaps - a madness without > > cure. > > It goes on FOREVER because even when it transcends time it ends up > > recreating it all over again. There is no sense in a creation > > which > > just gives suffering to everyone. Either God is mad, bad or just a > > fool - so much (supposed) intelligence in the geometry and > > sequence > > of laws of nature but then making a total mess with the > > experiment. > > There are states of matter, because of laws of nature, which are > > not > > permissable. For instance H2O, at a given temperature and > > pressure, > > is always water. If Unity truly wanted to expand happiness also in > > every phase of the Relative, all you'd need is some corollary laws > > concerning suffering. Make one step towards goodness, Unity etc=1 > > million times stronger than one step towards badness, anti-Unity. > > Then Unity can safely wander into diversity without resulting in > > suffering for no-one. That is what MMY says is going to happen > > NOW, > > right? So why not have that as an invariable law in the first > > place? > > We would be deprived of many experiences yes - but do you mind > > terribly if you don't taste the experience of being a torturer? or > > a > > victim of torture? What about free will? Where is the free will > > when > > all the probabilities are stacked in favour of you ending up > > suffering, even when you chose bliss? Sorry, but there IS a flaw > > with > > Unity and the supposed "expansion" of happiness via the Relative. > > I've never seen a convincing argument to the contrary... Wish > > there was one though!! > > > **snip to end** > > You're right, there is no convincing argument to negate the apparent > ubiquity of suffering. But as Buddha pointed out (along with many > others, including Maharishi), there is an end to suffering and that > is by removing one's perspective (attention) from the plane of > existence where suffering is always present to another (you could > say higher) plane where no suffering can possibly exist. > > On the plane of the movie story, Jack Nicholson's character in The > Shining is always going to go stark raving, and homicidally, mad > each and every time you watch it. But on another (arguably more > fundamental) plane, that movie is just colored light dancing and > flickering on the screen in whatever theatre, CRT, LCD, or plasma > device you're catching it on. Of course, if your attention is just > on the flickering light then not only do you not get the pants > scared off of you, but you miss all the great parts of the story > and the acting and the cinematography, etc. > > It's not denying that suffering exists, but that it only exists to > the degree you put your attention on it. Well said. One of the best posts here on FFL in quite some time.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Both of you are looking at the Relative in a rather upbeat way, > perhaps reflecting transient (for most mortals) blissful moods > (maybe states or permanent stations in your cases??). Doesn't > help the wilderbeast being tormented to death by lions or some > innocent 16-year old in Pakistan having acid thrown in her face > because in love with a Hindu or not wearing full Islamic dress. > Take a snapshot of the WHOLE of Nature and all there is, 99.99 > of it, is suffering. So where is the expansion of happiness in > that? In the "long shot." One of my favorite Great Quotes Of Spiritual Teachers Through The Ages is by an oddball one, Charlie Chaplin, who said "Life is a tragedy when seen in close-up, but a comedy in long-shot." > Maybe the flaw in Unity > is an inherent madness - well, who would NOT go mad in total > isolation? Put anyone in solitary confinement with sensory > deprivation and they will hallucinate and create nightmares for > themselves. That's the real story perhaps - a madness without cure. > It goes on FOREVER because even when it transcends time it ends up > recreating it all over again. There is no sense in a creation which > just gives suffering to everyone. Either God is mad, bad or just a > fool - so much (supposed) intelligence in the geometry and sequence > of laws of nature but then making a total mess with the experiment. You're starting to "get" why Catharism so appealed to the people of the Middle Ages. It was a tough time, man. We're talking wars, plagues, poverty, and all of the torments of Hell, unless you were privileged enough to be born noble. And even then... So one of the things that appealed to the medieval mind about Dualism was that God *wasn't* responsible for the mess that they saw around them on a daily basis. The phenomenal world had been created by the Other Guy, the demiurge, by Satan, by the False Jehovah. The world didn't just "look" like a gnarly place because we didn't understand The Unfathomable Workings Of God. It *was* a gnarly place, designed by a dude from The Other Place, the *opposite* to spirit. The populace flocked to Catharism in that period because it gave them a respite from trying to under- stand The Unfathomable Workings Of God. They got to blame the world on Someone Else, not God. And it gave them comfort. And the promise of a better life in the spirit after they died -- in one incarnation or another -- gave them hope. And hope is a good thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Both of you are looking at the Relative in a rather upbeat way, > perhaps reflecting transient (for most mortals) blissful moods (maybe > states or permanent stations in your cases??). Doesn't help the > wilderbeast being tormented to death by lions or some innocent 16- > year old in Pakistan having acid thrown in her face because in love > with a Hindu or not wearing full Islamic dress. Take a snapshot of > the WHOLE of Nature and all there is, 99.99 of it, is suffering. So > where is the expansion of happiness in that? Maybe the flaw in Unity > is an inherent madness - well, who would NOT go mad in total > isolation? Put anyone in solitary confinement with sensory > deprivation and they will hallucinate and create nightmares for > themselves. That's the real story perhaps - a madness without cure. > It goes on FOREVER because even when it transcends time it ends up > recreating it all over again. There is no sense in a creation which > just gives suffering to everyone. Either God is mad, bad or just a > fool - so much (supposed) intelligence in the geometry and sequence > of laws of nature but then making a total mess with the experiment. > There are states of matter, because of laws of nature, which are not > permissable. For instance H2O, at a given temperature and pressure, > is always water. If Unity truly wanted to expand happiness also in > every phase of the Relative, all you'd need is some corollary laws > concerning suffering. Make one step towards goodness, Unity etc = 1 > million times stronger than one step towards badness, anti-Unity. > Then Unity can safely wander into diversity without resulting in > suffering for no-one. That is what MMY says is going to happen NOW, > right? So why not have that as an invariable law in the first place? > We would be deprived of many experiences yes - but do you mind > terribly if you don't taste the experience of being a torturer? or a > victim of torture? What about free will? Where is the free will when > all the probabilities are stacked in favour of you ending up > suffering, even when you chose bliss? Sorry, but there IS a flaw with > Unity and the supposed "expansion" of happiness via the Relative. > I've never seen a convincing argument to the contrary... Wish there > was one though!! > **snip to end** You're right, there is no convincing argument to negate the apparent ubiquity of suffering. But as Buddha pointed out (along with many others, including Maharishi), there is an end to suffering and that is by removing one's perspective (attention) from the plane of existence where suffering is always present to another (you could say higher) plane where no suffering can possibly exist. On the plane of the movie story, Jack Nicholson's character in The Shining is always going to go stark raving, and homicidally, mad each and every time you watch it. But on another (arguably more fundamental) plane, that movie is just colored light dancing and flickering on the screen in whatever theatre, CRT, LCD, or plasma device you're catching it on. Of course, if your attention is just on the flickering light then not only do you not get the pants scared off of you, but you miss all the great parts of the story and the acting and the cinematography, etc. It's not denying that suffering exists, but that it only exists to the degree you put your attention on it. Some events in our lives (in our stories) draws attention more or less forcefully to the suffering, and without a doubt, if I was subject to having my head sawed off by a religious fundamentalist who thought that the most appropriate way to address his or her own suffering was by making mine even worse, then I'm positive that it would be an extremely overshadowing experience. But even then, at some point during that process, "who" is having that experience? Who is that guy? Who is dying, me or the body? When the body is defunct and no longer able to draw attention, what happens to the attention? Wasn't the birth of the body the factor that drew the attention in the first place? And if so, then doesn't that raise the issue that Attention (in some latent state) was there as the primary condition? And That really is all that there is and That You Are (already and always). It's really true what "they" all say.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Whole Brain Functioning - flaws of Unity
Both of you are looking at the Relative in a rather upbeat way, perhaps reflecting transient (for most mortals) blissful moods (maybe states or permanent stations in your cases??). Doesn't help the wilderbeast being tormented to death by lions or some innocent 16- year old in Pakistan having acid thrown in her face because in love with a Hindu or not wearing full Islamic dress. Take a snapshot of the WHOLE of Nature and all there is, 99.99 of it, is suffering. So where is the expansion of happiness in that? Maybe the flaw in Unity is an inherent madness - well, who would NOT go mad in total isolation? Put anyone in solitary confinement with sensory deprivation and they will hallucinate and create nightmares for themselves. That's the real story perhaps - a madness without cure. It goes on FOREVER because even when it transcends time it ends up recreating it all over again. There is no sense in a creation which just gives suffering to everyone. Either God is mad, bad or just a fool - so much (supposed) intelligence in the geometry and sequence of laws of nature but then making a total mess with the experiment. There are states of matter, because of laws of nature, which are not permissable. For instance H2O, at a given temperature and pressure, is always water. If Unity truly wanted to expand happiness also in every phase of the Relative, all you'd need is some corollary laws concerning suffering. Make one step towards goodness, Unity etc = 1 million times stronger than one step towards badness, anti-Unity. Then Unity can safely wander into diversity without resulting in suffering for no-one. That is what MMY says is going to happen NOW, right? So why not have that as an invariable law in the first place? We would be deprived of many experiences yes - but do you mind terribly if you don't taste the experience of being a torturer? or a victim of torture? What about free will? Where is the free will when all the probabilities are stacked in favour of you ending up suffering, even when you chose bliss? Sorry, but there IS a flaw with Unity and the supposed "expansion" of happiness via the Relative. I've never seen a convincing argument to the contrary... Wish there was one though!! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "I" sees through both "my" eyes. I sees through all 100 trillion > eyes on this planet. So what's the use of yet another pair of eyes > to see with, unless it's to check out what the binocular perspective > from that moving point in the universe is like. > > Being yet one more hot squidge of granodiorite cooling off in some > crack in the mantle 70 miles below Mt. Shasta is just another way to > experience what Is, too. Or moving into a garden apartment in > Sitges, busking on the sidewalks in DC, walking the trails in > Fairfield, pounding out more code in San Jose, or offering flowers to > the lotus feet of another monkey that looks more like me than I do > myself. > > It's all play. Just wonderful, tragic, frustrating, sad, tedious and > exquisite play. > > Have to say that FFL seems particularly sweet this morning. Thanks > for that. > > ** > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > wrote: > > > > > > "constantly crossing and recrossing the gap of ignorance" might > imply > > > therefore that something is lacking in UNITY? Never saw the sense > of > > > the purpose of life as "expansion of happiness" by going into > > > ignorance.. if the happiness is in the return to Unity, why > wander > > > off in the first place?? > > > > Because happiness is the return to Unity, enriched by the > experience of > > non-Unity. How else can we "expand happiness" except by moving it > into > > where it (apparently) wasn't? How can we learn and grow if not > through > > creation, through stories? Now on the other hand, if you wish to > say > > that in truth we *don't* actually learn or grow, that Isness is all > > there ever Is, you'll get no real argument from me! :-) > > >
