[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > pile of pig-dung? Which way is the wind blowing in Fairfield? > > Yes, FF has restored whole new olfactory chords and harmonic arpeggios > of redolent appreciation that my nose had quite forgotten. :-) you got me- I can't compete with such a plethoric infinitude of syllabic machinations! Aaargh- I'm forced to 'emoticon': =^) 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > pile of pig-dung? Which way is the wind blowing in Fairfield? Yes, FF has restored whole new olfactory chords and harmonic arpeggios of redolent appreciation that my nose had quite forgotten. :-) 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
Both of these descriptions, which seem to be based on personal experiences, are very inspiring and reassuring. There is certainly an element there of non-attachment to the ego-point and a genuine sensitivity to other point-selves, whether or not the transcendental Knower in these examples can actually view the world as if from inside other person's nervous system, but that was just a theoretical interest. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---Also, in rising to GC the inner knower begins to feel expanding > love, or whatever you want to call it; but a feeling of flow from > infinity inside to any point outside. This relates to omniscience in > that the flow of this inner field of awareness, spontaneously, knows > or is drawn to the particular point of interest. > Really in any situation of lack; it is lack of love, lack of > passion, and now, when pure consiousness is established, and all ego > based fear dissolved, there's nothing left to do, but "watch" the > absolute "move"... > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > -Before enlightenment, the world we perceive is "of, by and for > the > > ego. Everything is seen and translated in terms of this point, > this > > sense of me(the ego). > > After enlightenment is acheived one steps out of identifying with > > this point, this sense of me(the ego). > > One is no longer indentified with a point, this tiny sense of me > > (the ego), but becomes identified with the origin of any point in > > pure awareness, the Absolute. > > One can become aware of any point,any side of any issue; no longer > > guided by a single perspective(ego based), totally limiting view... > > So, the next step is allowing the pure consciousness to "flow > within > > itself to the point, then to the next point, all point guided now, > > not by ego, but by pure intelligence. Any "problem" is seen as > just > > energy, which needs balance and recieves balance spontaneously, > from > > point to point. > > In other words, an enlightened person, detatched perceives from > the > > state of being, and in that silence, brings forth the opposite > > energy to perfectly balance, thereby always, percieving the Unity, > > in diversity; as being established in pure consiousness, silence, > > always provides the Unifying factor, always... > > > > 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > I had to read this many times to understand it: > > > > the first time, I understood it intuitively, perhaps the *sound* > and construction of it was balanced. > > > > the second time I tried to interpret it in terms of some imagined > > nebulous 'higher state of consciousness'/hidden meaning, and it > made no sense to me. > > > > the third time, I read it as a simple person, potentially in > > need: 'we keep to ourselves unless we have a need to interact with > > someone else. When we interact with someone else to fulfill our > > need, we will experience them just to the degree that we must, in > > order to fulfill our need.' > > > > the fourth time, I read what was written in terms of unobstructed > > flow of pure consciousness, eliminating the imaginary boundaries > > between the Ocean and the waves, between I and them. > > > > I conclude by enjoying the simplicity of it all, wondering why I > > have once again used a bulldozer to remove a toothpick, and > delight > > in the absurdity of it all! > > > > Thank you! > > LOL Thanks, Jim. I was wondering why that point-self gobbledygook > came out the way it did. You really made a very nice cake out of my > pile of pig-dung! Always nice to be appreciated from every angle! > Yours always, :-) :-) :-D pile of pig-dung? Which way is the wind blowing in Fairfield? 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had to read this many times to understand it: > > the first time, I understood it intuitively, perhaps the *sound* and construction of it was balanced. > > the second time I tried to interpret it in terms of some imagined > nebulous 'higher state of consciousness'/hidden meaning, and it made no sense to me. > > the third time, I read it as a simple person, potentially in > need: 'we keep to ourselves unless we have a need to interact with > someone else. When we interact with someone else to fulfill our > need, we will experience them just to the degree that we must, in > order to fulfill our need.' > > the fourth time, I read what was written in terms of unobstructed > flow of pure consciousness, eliminating the imaginary boundaries > between the Ocean and the waves, between I and them. > > I conclude by enjoying the simplicity of it all, wondering why I > have once again used a bulldozer to remove a toothpick, and delight > in the absurdity of it all! > > Thank you! LOL Thanks, Jim. I was wondering why that point-self gobbledygook came out the way it did. You really made a very nice cake out of my pile of pig-dung! Always nice to be appreciated from every angle! Yours always, :-) :-) :-D 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/
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Yes Infinity (= Wholeness = Unmanifest/Absolute = Self) is > > omnipresent at every Point (= manifest, relative = self). So why is > > the consciosness/Knower remain linked to the habitual point self if > > it is free to be ANY point-self ? > > It is all point-selves of oneself, and one can (to whatever degree) > emerge from the "Ocean" to experience any specific "wave" one attends > to. However, generally it would seem that habit keeps one focussed > more or less in the original bodymind if there is no particular > need/desire at any given moment to experience/heal other point- selves > or aspects of oneself. I had to read this many times to understand it: the first time, I understood it intuitively, perhaps the *sound* and construction of it was balanced. the second time I tried to interpret it in terms of some imagined nebulous 'higher state of consciousness'/hidden meaning, and it made no sense to me. the third time, I read it as a simple person, potentially in need: 'we keep to ourselves unless we have a need to interact with someone else. When we interact with someone else to fulfill our need, we will experience them just to the degree that we must, in order to fulfill our need.' the fourth time, I read what was written in terms of unobstructed flow of pure consciousness, eliminating the imaginary boundaries between the Ocean and the waves, between I and them. I conclude by enjoying the simplicity of it all, wondering why I have once again used a bulldozer to remove a toothpick, and delight in the absurdity of it all! Thank you! 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/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
Sounds like the sperm flow chart to me. - Original Message - From: Peter Sutphen To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 9:35 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative) No one's been doing their asanas regularly! Very nicepost. The flow of consciousness as overwhelming loveto a point in the relative. The "stitching" of therelative into the Absolute.--- Robert Gimbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> ---Also, in rising to GC the inner knower begins to> feel expanding > love, or whatever you want to call it; but a feeling> of flow from > infinity inside to any point outside. This relates> to omniscience in > that the flow of this inner field of awareness,> spontaneously, knows > or is drawn to the particular point of interest. > Really in any situation of lack; it is lack of love,> lack of > passion, and now, when pure consiousness is> established, and all ego > based fear dissolved, there's nothing left to do,> but "watch" the > absolute "move"...> > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel"> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:> > -Before enlightenment, the world we perceive is> "of, by and for > the > > ego. Everything is seen and translated in terms of> this point, > this > > sense of me(the ego). > > After enlightenment is acheived one steps out of> identifying with > > this point, this sense of me(the ego). > > One is no longer indentified with a point, this> tiny sense of me> > (the ego), but becomes identified with the origin> of any point in > > pure awareness, the Absolute.> > One can become aware of any point,any side of any> issue; no longer > > guided by a single perspective(ego based), totally> limiting view...> > So, the next step is allowing the pure> consciousness to "flow > within > > itself to the point, then to the next point, all> point guided now, > > not by ego, but by pure intelligence. Any> "problem" is seen as > just > > energy, which needs balance and recieves balance> spontaneously, > from > > point to point. > > In other words, an enlightened person, detatched> perceives from > the > > state of being, and in that silence, brings forth> the opposite > > energy to perfectly balance, thereby always,> percieving the Unity, > > in diversity; as being established in pure> consiousness, silence, > > always provides the Unifying factor, always...> > > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk"> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote:> > > Many thanks for all the responses, not sure how> to address them > > all.. > > > They helped me think more about the question and> hopefully some > > > resolution is taking place somewhere in my> brain> > > > > > 58385... Irmeli Mattsson> > > > > > > "I cannot understand how this kind of> theoretical, > intellectual > > > speculation can help a person to evolve... If> you have a rigid > > > preconceived idea, you are less open for the> > > unexpected, which a new stage will be. "> > > > > > MMY often emphasized the importance of> understanding along with > > > direct experience, for one's evolution. I agree> that "imitating" > a > > > state of consciousness from some cultural> transmission is > > pointless, > > > but theoretical discussions can hopefully reduce> confusion and > be > > > inspiring and motivating. I imagine that direct> experience would > > > override and automatically stretch any limiting > preconceptions.> > > > > > > "Every thought and every experience regardless> of how .. > > > transcendental it feels, when perceived in and> through a > physical > > > body and nervous system, is always in the> relative. We can only > > talk > > > about the absolute, we cannot experience it."> > > > > > In MMY's schema, this is the "point to infinity"> bit, only > you're > > > saying that any and all experience is relative.> But the Knower > is > > > Absolute so from the "infinity to point"> perspective why are we > > stuck > > > with the relative experience associated with> THIS point body and > > not > > > others, given that the Knower inhabits other> bodies > > simultaneously. > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
No one's been doing their asanas regularly! Very nice post. The flow of consciousness as overwhelming love to a point in the relative. The "stitching" of the relative into the Absolute. --- Robert Gimbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---Also, in rising to GC the inner knower begins to > feel expanding > love, or whatever you want to call it; but a feeling > of flow from > infinity inside to any point outside. This relates > to omniscience in > that the flow of this inner field of awareness, > spontaneously, knows > or is drawn to the particular point of interest. > Really in any situation of lack; it is lack of love, > lack of > passion, and now, when pure consiousness is > established, and all ego > based fear dissolved, there's nothing left to do, > but "watch" the > absolute "move"... > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > -Before enlightenment, the world we perceive is > "of, by and for > the > > ego. Everything is seen and translated in terms of > this point, > this > > sense of me(the ego). > > After enlightenment is acheived one steps out of > identifying with > > this point, this sense of me(the ego). > > One is no longer indentified with a point, this > tiny sense of me > > (the ego), but becomes identified with the origin > of any point in > > pure awareness, the Absolute. > > One can become aware of any point,any side of any > issue; no longer > > guided by a single perspective(ego based), totally > limiting view... > > So, the next step is allowing the pure > consciousness to "flow > within > > itself to the point, then to the next point, all > point guided now, > > not by ego, but by pure intelligence. Any > "problem" is seen as > just > > energy, which needs balance and recieves balance > spontaneously, > from > > point to point. > > In other words, an enlightened person, detatched > perceives from > the > > state of being, and in that silence, brings forth > the opposite > > energy to perfectly balance, thereby always, > percieving the Unity, > > in diversity; as being established in pure > consiousness, silence, > > always provides the Unifying factor, always... > > > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Many thanks for all the responses, not sure how > to address them > > all.. > > > They helped me think more about the question and > hopefully some > > > resolution is taking place somewhere in my > brain > > > > > > 58385... Irmeli Mattsson > > > > > > > "I cannot understand how this kind of > theoretical, > intellectual > > > speculation can help a person to evolve... If > you have a rigid > > > preconceived idea, you are less open for the > > > unexpected, which a new stage will be. " > > > > > > MMY often emphasized the importance of > understanding along with > > > direct experience, for one's evolution. I agree > that "imitating" > a > > > state of consciousness from some cultural > transmission is > > pointless, > > > but theoretical discussions can hopefully reduce > confusion and > be > > > inspiring and motivating. I imagine that direct > experience would > > > override and automatically stretch any limiting > preconceptions. > > > > > > > "Every thought and every experience regardless > of how .. > > > transcendental it feels, when perceived in and > through a > physical > > > body and nervous system, is always in the > relative. We can only > > talk > > > about the absolute, we cannot experience it." > > > > > > In MMY's schema, this is the "point to infinity" > bit, only > you're > > > saying that any and all experience is relative. > But the Knower > is > > > Absolute so from the "infinity to point" > perspective why are we > > stuck > > > with the relative experience associated with > THIS point body and > > not > > > others, given that the Knower inhabits other > bodies > > simultaneously. > > > > > > 58396 ... Rory Goff > > > > > > >"Brahman" or Wholeness resides AS fully in the > "manifest, > > > relative" point as in the "unmanifest, absolute" > Ocean. No > > > difference. A natural progression from this > would seem to be the > > > realization that one's Wholeness is potentially > as free to be ANY > > > point-self as to be one's habitual point-self:" > > > > > > Yes Infinity (= Wholeness = Unmanifest/Absolute > = Self) is > > > omnipresent at every Point (= manifest, relative > = self). So why > > is > > > the consciosness/Knower remain linked to the > habitual point self > > if > > > it is free to be ANY point-self ? > > > > > > 58405... jim_flanegin > > > > > > > "The Self is distinctly free from any sense of > personal > > > identification.It is perceived by the original > 'point' body, but > > is > > > not actually connected to it.It is odd > because it feels like > > me, > > > but try as I might I can't locate the attachment > point, through > > > thought or
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
---Also, in rising to GC the inner knower begins to feel expanding love, or whatever you want to call it; but a feeling of flow from infinity inside to any point outside. This relates to omniscience in that the flow of this inner field of awareness, spontaneously, knows or is drawn to the particular point of interest. Really in any situation of lack; it is lack of love, lack of passion, and now, when pure consiousness is established, and all ego based fear dissolved, there's nothing left to do, but "watch" the absolute "move"... In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -Before enlightenment, the world we perceive is "of, by and for the > ego. Everything is seen and translated in terms of this point, this > sense of me(the ego). > After enlightenment is acheived one steps out of identifying with > this point, this sense of me(the ego). > One is no longer indentified with a point, this tiny sense of me > (the ego), but becomes identified with the origin of any point in > pure awareness, the Absolute. > One can become aware of any point,any side of any issue; no longer > guided by a single perspective(ego based), totally limiting view... > So, the next step is allowing the pure consciousness to "flow within > itself to the point, then to the next point, all point guided now, > not by ego, but by pure intelligence. Any "problem" is seen as just > energy, which needs balance and recieves balance spontaneously, from > point to point. > In other words, an enlightened person, detatched perceives from the > state of being, and in that silence, brings forth the opposite > energy to perfectly balance, thereby always, percieving the Unity, > in diversity; as being established in pure consiousness, silence, > always provides the Unifying factor, always... > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Many thanks for all the responses, not sure how to address them > all.. > > They helped me think more about the question and hopefully some > > resolution is taking place somewhere in my brain > > > > 58385... Irmeli Mattsson > > > > > "I cannot understand how this kind of theoretical, intellectual > > speculation can help a person to evolve... If you have a rigid > > preconceived idea, you are less open for the > > unexpected, which a new stage will be. " > > > > MMY often emphasized the importance of understanding along with > > direct experience, for one's evolution. I agree that "imitating" a > > state of consciousness from some cultural transmission is > pointless, > > but theoretical discussions can hopefully reduce confusion and be > > inspiring and motivating. I imagine that direct experience would > > override and automatically stretch any limiting preconceptions. > > > > > "Every thought and every experience regardless of how .. > > transcendental it feels, when perceived in and through a physical > > body and nervous system, is always in the relative. We can only > talk > > about the absolute, we cannot experience it." > > > > In MMY's schema, this is the "point to infinity" bit, only you're > > saying that any and all experience is relative. But the Knower is > > Absolute so from the "infinity to point" perspective why are we > stuck > > with the relative experience associated with THIS point body and > not > > others, given that the Knower inhabits other bodies > simultaneously. > > > > 58396 ... Rory Goff > > > > >"Brahman" or Wholeness resides AS fully in the "manifest, > > relative" point as in the "unmanifest, absolute" Ocean. No > > difference. A natural progression from this would seem to be the > > realization that one's Wholeness is potentially as free to be ANY > > point-self as to be one's habitual point-self:" > > > > Yes Infinity (= Wholeness = Unmanifest/Absolute = Self) is > > omnipresent at every Point (= manifest, relative = self). So why > is > > the consciosness/Knower remain linked to the habitual point self > if > > it is free to be ANY point-self ? > > > > 58405... jim_flanegin > > > > > "The Self is distinctly free from any sense of personal > > identification.It is perceived by the original 'point' body, but > is > > not actually connected to it.It is odd because it feels like > me, > > but try as I might I can't locate the attachment point, through > > thought or the senses." > > > > Yes identification dissolves when going from point to infinity. > > > > > "Though I am unsure about the next step- how the perception of > the > > Self begins to extend to everything else 'out there'. > Conceptually, > > yes, but experientially, not yet constant." > > > > This infinity to pointS is the tricky bit. I myself can't speak > from > > experience, but am interested in it conceptually (as part of some > > understanding of the possibilities of higher states of > > consciousness). Not sure for instance how it r
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
-Before enlightenment, the world we perceive is "of, by and for the ego. Everything is seen and translated in terms of this point, this sense of me(the ego). After enlightenment is acheived one steps out of identifying with this point, this sense of me(the ego). One is no longer indentified with a point, this tiny sense of me (the ego), but becomes identified with the origin of any point in pure awareness, the Absolute. One can become aware of any point,any side of any issue; no longer guided by a single perspective(ego based), totally limiting view... So, the next step is allowing the pure consciousness to "flow within itself to the point, then to the next point, all point guided now, not by ego, but by pure intelligence. Any "problem" is seen as just energy, which needs balance and recieves balance spontaneously, from point to point. In other words, an enlightened person, detatched perceives from the state of being, and in that silence, brings forth the opposite energy to perfectly balance, thereby always, percieving the Unity, in diversity; as being established in pure consiousness, silence, always provides the Unifying factor, always... -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Many thanks for all the responses, not sure how to address them all.. > They helped me think more about the question and hopefully some > resolution is taking place somewhere in my brain > > 58385... Irmeli Mattsson > > > "I cannot understand how this kind of theoretical, intellectual > speculation can help a person to evolve... If you have a rigid > preconceived idea, you are less open for the > unexpected, which a new stage will be. " > > MMY often emphasized the importance of understanding along with > direct experience, for one's evolution. I agree that "imitating" a > state of consciousness from some cultural transmission is pointless, > but theoretical discussions can hopefully reduce confusion and be > inspiring and motivating. I imagine that direct experience would > override and automatically stretch any limiting preconceptions. > > > "Every thought and every experience regardless of how .. > transcendental it feels, when perceived in and through a physical > body and nervous system, is always in the relative. We can only talk > about the absolute, we cannot experience it." > > In MMY's schema, this is the "point to infinity" bit, only you're > saying that any and all experience is relative. But the Knower is > Absolute so from the "infinity to point" perspective why are we stuck > with the relative experience associated with THIS point body and not > others, given that the Knower inhabits other bodies simultaneously. > > 58396 ... Rory Goff > > >"Brahman" or Wholeness resides AS fully in the "manifest, > relative" point as in the "unmanifest, absolute" Ocean. No > difference. A natural progression from this would seem to be the > realization that one's Wholeness is potentially as free to be ANY > point-self as to be one's habitual point-self:" > > Yes Infinity (= Wholeness = Unmanifest/Absolute = Self) is > omnipresent at every Point (= manifest, relative = self). So why is > the consciosness/Knower remain linked to the habitual point self if > it is free to be ANY point-self ? > > 58405... jim_flanegin > > > "The Self is distinctly free from any sense of personal > identification.It is perceived by the original 'point' body, but is > not actually connected to it.It is odd because it feels like me, > but try as I might I can't locate the attachment point, through > thought or the senses." > > Yes identification dissolves when going from point to infinity. > > > "Though I am unsure about the next step- how the perception of the > Self begins to extend to everything else 'out there'. Conceptually, > yes, but experientially, not yet constant." > > This infinity to pointS is the tricky bit. I myself can't speak from > experience, but am interested in it conceptually (as part of some > understanding of the possibilities of higher states of > consciousness). Not sure for instance how it relates to "Unity". > > 58408 ... Llundrub > > > "This is the problem, identifying with the body as if it's a point. > The body is infinite. The self is absolute, not infinite. A point of > identification is the absolute identifying with some snapshot of the > infinite. There are no points. There are merely snapshots." > > I like MMY's spacial schema "point to infinity" = "relative to > Absolute". You seem to prefer a temporal model based on snapshots. > Both space and time are involved in the relative. And yes a point is > equivalent to a snapshot of the infinite. > > > "All beings are linked, even in the snapshot." > > That is true even from our unenlightened consciousness. But we > experience ourselves as separate points/snapshots - even, it seems, > in the Absolute to Relative/Infinity to Point sit
[FairfieldLife] Re: infinity to PointS (was the relative)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes Infinity (= Wholeness = Unmanifest/Absolute = Self) is > omnipresent at every Point (= manifest, relative = self). So why is > the consciosness/Knower remain linked to the habitual point self if > it is free to be ANY point-self ? It is all point-selves of oneself, and one can (to whatever degree) emerge from the "Ocean" to experience any specific "wave" one attends to. However, generally it would seem that habit keeps one focussed more or less in the original bodymind if there is no particular need/desire at any given moment to experience/heal other point-selves or aspects of oneself. 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/
