Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- tomandcindytraynor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > TurquoiseB writes: > > Dr. Pete, I've been wondering about this while > away > > for the weekend. I looked up 'apperception' in > the > > dictionary ( yes, I had to :-), and I find myself > > unsure of the distinction you're making here. Can > > you clarify for me the difference you see between > > 'perception' and 'apperception' and why you feel > one > > is more appropriate here? Thanks. > Peter Sutphen writes: > No problem, Unc. Your comments and arguments are > always well-intentioned. I like apperception better > because perception implies a perceiver and a > perceived. In "my" experience in this realm of pure > consciousness, there is no perceiver. Perception, of > course, occurs, but there is no individual > perceiving. > You can't say, "I am perceiving pure consciousness." > Consciousness is simply awake to itself. The term > apperception seems to capture this better than > perception. > Tom T writes: > From Jean Klein Transmission of the Flame page 65 > first para: > "...We have very often repeated that the seeker is > the sought. An > object is a fraction; it appears in your wholeness, > in your globality. > When you really come to the understanding that the > seeker is the > sought, there is a natural giving-up of all energy > to find something. > It is an instantaneous apperception. I don't say > perception, because > in perception there is a perceiver and something > perceived. An > apperception is an instantaneous perceiving of what > is perceiving. So > it can never be in relation of subject-object, just > as an eye can > never see its own seeing. ...you will find a > glimpse of > non-subject-object relationship. This glimpse is > seen with your whole > intelligence, which is there in the absence of the > person, the > thinker, the doer. Understanding, being the > understanding, is > enlightenment. > Tom T Jean and I just have to stop channeling one another. It's getting very confusing! > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
TurquoiseB writes: > Dr. Pete, I've been wondering about this while away > for the weekend. I looked up 'apperception' in the > dictionary ( yes, I had to :-), and I find myself > unsure of the distinction you're making here. Can > you clarify for me the difference you see between > 'perception' and 'apperception' and why you feel one > is more appropriate here? Thanks. Peter Sutphen writes: No problem, Unc. Your comments and arguments are always well-intentioned. I like apperception better because perception implies a perceiver and a perceived. In "my" experience in this realm of pure consciousness, there is no perceiver. Perception, of course, occurs, but there is no individual perceiving. You can't say, "I am perceiving pure consciousness." Consciousness is simply awake to itself. The term apperception seems to capture this better than perception. Tom T writes: >From Jean Klein Transmission of the Flame page 65 first para: "...We have very often repeated that the seeker is the sought. An object is a fraction; it appears in your wholeness, in your globality. When you really come to the understanding that the seeker is the sought, there is a natural giving-up of all energy to find something. It is an instantaneous apperception. I don't say perception, because in perception there is a perceiver and something perceived. An apperception is an instantaneous perceiving of what is perceiving. So it can never be in relation of subject-object, just as an eye can never see its own seeing. ...you will find a glimpse of non-subject-object relationship. This glimpse is seen with your whole intelligence, which is there in the absence of the person, the thinker, the doer. Understanding, being the understanding, is enlightenment. Tom T 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
To use such phrases in speech while simultaneously cursing proves that speech has risen to the level of Sat Yuga. Or maybe not? I remeber when maybe doing something someone didn't like at the Capital, whereever that may have been, that mere inflection was the key to knowing you had been a bad boy. "Would Maharishi have taken a walk after midnight? Or sucked Jennifer's hairy nipples? OK, then. Perhaps more on the program now, yes. Perfect." - Original Message - From: akasha_108 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 11:55 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening" --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> wrote:> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...> wrote:> > Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such> > florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one,> > bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds,> > brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the> > mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt.> > You have to admit, it'd make for entertaining> flame wars. :-)> > UncOh, boundless as the sky Peter-ji, saint among saints, thou speakethwith infitinte insight and wisdom, even with the trident of shivapiercing your most holy rear orifice and your words from that holyalter, perfumed with an earthy fragrance that connects you to allprogeny of Manu, it is with honor and humility that we witness youhumble yourself before the most humble of men, acting as they do, in amost auspicious and dramatic enactment of folly as if under infinitelayers of maya, your service and humility is an inspiration for usall, taking the bodhisattva vow, you pretend to assume the veil ofingornace and act as deeply foolish as a neanderthal, to show us allthat the divine lives in even the lowest of creatures. To thee, theblazing brahman of neanderthal-loka, we give our vast praise andlaudations. To subscribe, send a message to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/and click 'Join This Group!' 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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such > > florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one, > > bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds, > > brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the > > mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt. > > You have to admit, it'd make for entertaining > flame wars. :-) > > Unc Oh, boundless as the sky Peter-ji, saint among saints, thou speaketh with infitinte insight and wisdom, even with the trident of shiva piercing your most holy rear orifice and your words from that holy alter, perfumed with an earthy fragrance that connects you to all progeny of Manu, it is with honor and humility that we witness you humble yourself before the most humble of men, acting as they do, in a most auspicious and dramatic enactment of folly as if under infinite layers of maya, your service and humility is an inspiration for us all, taking the bodhisattva vow, you pretend to assume the veil of ingornace and act as deeply foolish as a neanderthal, to show us all that the divine lives in even the lowest of creatures. To thee, the blazing brahman of neanderthal-loka, we give our vast praise and laudations. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such > florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one, > bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds, > brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the > mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt. You have to admit, it'd make for entertaining flame wars. :-) Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: snip > > > Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such > florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one, > bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds, > brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the > mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt. Chronicles of Narnia, "A Horse and His Boy", some entertaining chapters where some of the characters do talk like this. lurk > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Sports > Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football > http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > > Sutphen > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > snip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing > > out > > > > the > > > > > > Indian position on > > > > > > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is > > > > something > > > > > > to be remembered > > > > > > in all discussions about both enlightenment > > and > > > > > > their comments about > > > > > > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of > > > > > > expression think about > > > > > > sentences that have appeared in the > > > > announcements > > > > > > for the recert courses. > > > > > > > > > > > > JohnY > > > > > > > > > > This shining crest-jewel of piercing intellect > > has > > > > > thrilled that infinite Brahman with a > > shimmmering > > > > wave > > > > > of amrita. The gods dance when such pearls of > > > > > knowledge effortlessly flow from that finest > > > > feeling > > > > > level of the Atman. Such joy is almost never > > seen > > > > in > > > > > all the infinite cycles of creation. Hail > > Johny! > > > > Hail > > > > > Johny! Hail Johny! Oh rishi, oh sage, oh > > infinite > > > > > fullness! > > > > > > > > > > Hey, not too bad. Do you think I could get a > > job > > > > as a > > > > > copy writer? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's: "Here's Johnny" - but hey that's > > even > > > > over the top for > > > > the movement. :) > > > > > > > > JohnY > > > > (I just read my reply and it did sound pompous, > > oh > > > > well stuff happens) > > > > > > I wasn't spoofing you, Johny. I was spoofing the > > TMO > > > hyperbole! > > > > > > > It took me a long time to understand the difference > > between Indian > > truth-telling and western ideas of truthfullness. > > Even knowing about > > all the sweet truth stuff. When the Indian style of > > truth-telling is > > exagerated, it comes out as a lie. Maybe Indians > > instinctivly read > > between the lines. > > Hey it was a good spoof on me too! > > > > JohnY > > Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such > florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one, > bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds, > brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the > mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt. > Sure if you put it that way, be glad to! JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen [...] > Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such > florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one, > bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds, > brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the > mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt. > > Most cultures had a period like that. Here's part of the dedication of _Study of the Lute_ by Ernst Gottlieb Baron, 1727: "HISTORICAL, THEORETICAL, AND PRACTICAL STUDY OF THE LUTE Prepared with diligence andpublished for the pleasure of all honest amateurs by ERNST GOTTLIEB BARON (Candidate in Law) Nuremberg, Johann Friedrich Rudiger 1727 To his Serene Highness, Lord Ernst August Duke of Saxony, Juliers, Celves and Brerg, also Engern and Westphalia, Landgrave in Thurgingia, Margrave of Hennberg, Duke of the March and Ravensberg, Lord of Ravenstein, etc., etc. My Most Gracious Prince and Lord, resident in Weimar Most serene Highness and Gracious Lord: In presenting these pages to Your Serene Highenss with the most humble gratitude, I hesitate less the more I hope that you may be pleased to look first upon the heart, zeal and intent before offering itself, as otherwise in all your doings you demonstrate greatness, and that you will thus imitate God the Highest, who as appointed the kings and princes as his governors on earth. This sole confidence also allows me the boldness to appear before Your Serene Highness with the present small work and, if it be most graciously allowed, to lay it before your sacred purple robe..." and so on for 3 more pages... 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > Sutphen > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > snip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing > out > > > the > > > > > Indian position on > > > > > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is > > > something > > > > > to be remembered > > > > > in all discussions about both enlightenment > and > > > > > their comments about > > > > > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of > > > > > expression think about > > > > > sentences that have appeared in the > > > announcements > > > > > for the recert courses. > > > > > > > > > > JohnY > > > > > > > > This shining crest-jewel of piercing intellect > has > > > > thrilled that infinite Brahman with a > shimmmering > > > wave > > > > of amrita. The gods dance when such pearls of > > > > knowledge effortlessly flow from that finest > > > feeling > > > > level of the Atman. Such joy is almost never > seen > > > in > > > > all the infinite cycles of creation. Hail > Johny! > > > Hail > > > > Johny! Hail Johny! Oh rishi, oh sage, oh > infinite > > > > fullness! > > > > > > > > Hey, not too bad. Do you think I could get a > job > > > as a > > > > copy writer? > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's: "Here's Johnny" - but hey that's > even > > > over the top for > > > the movement. :) > > > > > > JohnY > > > (I just read my reply and it did sound pompous, > oh > > > well stuff happens) > > > > I wasn't spoofing you, Johny. I was spoofing the > TMO > > hyperbole! > > > > It took me a long time to understand the difference > between Indian > truth-telling and western ideas of truthfullness. > Even knowing about > all the sweet truth stuff. When the Indian style of > truth-telling is > exagerated, it comes out as a lie. Maybe Indians > instinctivly read > between the lines. > Hey it was a good spoof on me too! > > JohnY Imagine if everything we said was proceeded by such florid rhetoric? What a hoot! Oh infinite one, bejeweled with the wisdom of the three worlds, brandishing the trident of boundless Shiva and the mace of Cosmic Vishnu, please pass the salt. > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > snip > > > > > > > > > > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing out > > the > > > > Indian position on > > > > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is > > something > > > > to be remembered > > > > in all discussions about both enlightenment and > > > > their comments about > > > > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of > > > > expression think about > > > > sentences that have appeared in the > > announcements > > > > for the recert courses. > > > > > > > > JohnY > > > > > > This shining crest-jewel of piercing intellect has > > > thrilled that infinite Brahman with a shimmmering > > wave > > > of amrita. The gods dance when such pearls of > > > knowledge effortlessly flow from that finest > > feeling > > > level of the Atman. Such joy is almost never seen > > in > > > all the infinite cycles of creation. Hail Johny! > > Hail > > > Johny! Hail Johny! Oh rishi, oh sage, oh infinite > > > fullness! > > > > > > Hey, not too bad. Do you think I could get a job > > as a > > > copy writer? > > > > > > > > I think it's: "Here's Johnny" - but hey that's even > > over the top for > > the movement. :) > > > > JohnY > > (I just read my reply and it did sound pompous, oh > > well stuff happens) > > I wasn't spoofing you, Johny. I was spoofing the TMO > hyperbole! > It took me a long time to understand the difference between Indian truth-telling and western ideas of truthfullness. Even knowing about all the sweet truth stuff. When the Indian style of truth-telling is exagerated, it comes out as a lie. Maybe Indians instinctivly read between the lines. Hey it was a good spoof on me too! JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > snip > > > > > > > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing out > the > > > Indian position on > > > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is > something > > > to be remembered > > > in all discussions about both enlightenment and > > > their comments about > > > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of > > > expression think about > > > sentences that have appeared in the > announcements > > > for the recert courses. > > > > > > JohnY > > > > This shining crest-jewel of piercing intellect has > > thrilled that infinite Brahman with a shimmmering > wave > > of amrita. The gods dance when such pearls of > > knowledge effortlessly flow from that finest > feeling > > level of the Atman. Such joy is almost never seen > in > > all the infinite cycles of creation. Hail Johny! > Hail > > Johny! Hail Johny! Oh rishi, oh sage, oh infinite > > fullness! > > > > Hey, not too bad. Do you think I could get a job > as a > > copy writer? > > > > > I think it's: "Here's Johnny" - but hey that's even > over the top for > the movement. :) > > JohnY > (I just read my reply and it did sound pompous, oh > well stuff happens) I wasn't spoofing you, Johny. I was spoofing the TMO hyperbole! > > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
On Jun 20, 2005, at 1:56 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > My point was simply that "defining" what one means > by enlightenment is nice to think about, but basically > illusory, because enlightenment cannot be defined in > words. You can talk *around* it, but you can't actually > describe it. Maybe some people have gotten tired of > decades of dogma spouted by people who admit the above, > but then try to define it anyway... The other issue is getting caught in the trap of desiring enlightenment and fearing not getting enlightened...or even wishing/hoping and worrying/being concerned of not revealing the state. Reminds me of the method of learning to swim where on is simply thrown in the water--the 'sink-and-swim method'--as opposed to being instructed and indoctrinated. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dr. Pete, I've been wondering about this while away > > for the weekend. I looked up 'apperception' in the > > dictionary ( yes, I had to :-), and I find myself > > unsure of the distinction you're making here. Can > > you clarify for me the difference you see between > > 'perception' and 'apperception' and why you feel one > > is more appropriate here? Thanks. > > > > Not to argue or anything like that, just to > > understand... > > No problem, Unc. Your comments and arguments are > always well-intentioned. I like apperception better > because perception implies a perceiver and a > perceived. In "my" experience in this realm of pure > consciousness, there is no perceiver. Perception, of > course, occurs, but there is no individual perceiving. > You can't say, "I am perceiving pure consciousness." > Consciousness is simply awake to itself. The term > apperception seems to capture this better than > perception. Ok, that makes sense, but I'm not sure that's the commonly-accepted meaning of the term 'apperception.' Merriam-Webster defines it as: 1 : introspective self-consciousness 2 : mental perception; especially : the process of understanding something perceived in terms of previous experience which to me sounds not quite like what you said. Anyway, interesting distinction... Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; > ignorance > > > disappears. > > > > > > Good. But I'd say that even this is > problematic, > > > because > > > people have different interpretations of what > the > > > word 'ignorance' means. > > > > > > I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't > > > appear; > > > the perception of it not always already having > been > > > present disappears." > > > > I'd replace "perception" with "apperception" and > then > > I'd be happy as a clam! > > Dr. Pete, I've been wondering about this while away > for the weekend. I looked up 'apperception' in the > dictionary ( yes, I had to :-), and I find myself > unsure of the distinction you're making here. Can > you clarify for me the difference you see between > 'perception' and 'apperception' and why you feel one > is more appropriate here? Thanks. > > Not to argue or anything like that, just to > understand... > > Unc No problem, Unc. Your comments and arguments are always well-intentioned. I like apperception better because perception implies a perceiver and a perceived. In "my" experience in this realm of pure consciousness, there is no perceiver. Perception, of course, occurs, but there is no individual perceiving. You can't say, "I am perceiving pure consciousness." Consciousness is simply awake to itself. The term apperception seems to capture this better than perception. > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
> > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance > > dissappears. > > > > Good. But I'd say that even this is problematic, > > because > > people have different interpretations of what the > > word 'ignorance' means. > > > > I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't > > appear; > > the perception of it not always already having been > > present disappears." > > I'd replace "perception" with "apperception" and then > I'd be happy as a clam! Dr. Pete, I've been wondering about this while away for the weekend. I looked up 'apperception' in the dictionary ( yes, I had to :-), and I find myself unsure of the distinction you're making here. Can you clarify for me the difference you see between 'perception' and 'apperception' and why you feel one is more appropriate here? Thanks. Not to argue or anything like that, just to understand... Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > snip > > > > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing out the > > Indian position on > > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is something > > to be remembered > > in all discussions about both enlightenment and > > their comments about > > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of > > expression think about > > sentences that have appeared in the announcements > > for the recert courses. > > > > JohnY > > This shining crest-jewel of piercing intellect has > thrilled that infinite Brahman with a shimmmering wave > of amrita. The gods dance when such pearls of > knowledge effortlessly flow from that finest feeling > level of the Atman. Such joy is almost never seen in > all the infinite cycles of creation. Hail Johny! Hail > Johny! Hail Johny! Oh rishi, oh sage, oh infinite > fullness! > > Hey, not too bad. Do you think I could get a job as a > copy writer? > > I think it's: "Here's Johnny" - but hey that's even over the top for the movement. :) JohnY (I just read my reply and it did sound pompous, oh well stuff happens) 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The point, if it matters, of the larger post was that if people choose > to use the terms enlightenment or awakening, they could improve their > communications by offering up a definition for how they mean it -- or > outline the experience(s) they believe comprise such. Else A & E are > simple empty labels, platitudes, bantered about. My point was simply that "defining" what one means by enlightenment is nice to think about, but basically illusory, because enlightenment cannot be defined in words. You can talk *around* it, but you can't actually describe it. Maybe some people have gotten tired of decades of dogma spouted by people who admit the above, but then try to define it anyway... Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Interesting analogy: "pushing an elephant uphill with > your dick" Makes me go hm. :-) I was tired from a long drive, and searching for a metaphor for some nigh-unto-impossible task that, even when accomplished, wasn't worth it. Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Interesting analogy: "pushing an elephant uphill with > your dick" Makes me go hm. Stirs that vasana from the 5th century bce? :) 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > The discussion is not about enlightnement. Indeed I find it > > pointless to discuss something that no one on the list appears > > to be able to or willing to clearly and conisely define the term > > as they mean it or experience it. > > I suspect that no one on the list has ever pushed > an elephant up a hill using only his dick as a > pushing device, either. No matter how potentially > noble the goal, sometimes it comes down to a matter > of the basic futility of the effort outweighing any > potential benefit. Pushing an elephant up a hill > with your dick is much easier than "defining > enlightenment." And at the end of it at least > you'd have an elephant on a hill to point at and > say, "There." At the end of trying to define > enlightenment, there's no there to say "There" > about. :-) > > Unc Both your anatomical ambitions and intellectual capabilities far exceed mine. The latter because I have yet to grasp what you are trying to say. :) The point, if it matters, of the larger post was that if people choose to use the terms enlightenment or awakening, they could improve their communications by offering up a definition for how they mean it -- or outline the experience(s) they believe comprise such. Else A & E are simple empty labels, platitudes, bantered about. Its just an observation. Personally not believing in the value of such labels, I often switch the channel when such platitudes start bubbling up. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Interesting analogy: "pushing an elephant uphill with your dick" Makes me go hm. --- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > The discussion is not about enlightnement. Indeed > I find it > > pointless to discuss something that no one on the > list appears > > to be able to or willing to clearly and conisely > define the term > > as they mean it or experience it. > > I suspect that no one on the list has ever pushed > an elephant up a hill using only his dick as a > pushing device, either. No matter how potentially > noble the goal, sometimes it comes down to a matter > of the basic futility of the effort outweighing any > potential benefit. Pushing an elephant up a hill > with your dick is much easier than "defining > enlightenment." And at the end of it at least > you'd have an elephant on a hill to point at and > say, "There." At the end of trying to define > enlightenment, there's no there to say "There" > about. :-) > > Unc > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The discussion is not about enlightnement. Indeed I find it > pointless to discuss something that no one on the list appears > to be able to or willing to clearly and conisely define the term > as they mean it or experience it. I suspect that no one on the list has ever pushed an elephant up a hill using only his dick as a pushing device, either. No matter how potentially noble the goal, sometimes it comes down to a matter of the basic futility of the effort outweighing any potential benefit. Pushing an elephant up a hill with your dick is much easier than "defining enlightenment." And at the end of it at least you'd have an elephant on a hill to point at and say, "There." At the end of trying to define enlightenment, there's no there to say "There" about. :-) Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
on 6/19/05 7:31 AM, Ingegerd at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have had some ideas about Enlightenment through the years from the > TMO view. And I am reviewing them all the time. One of the stories > (fantasies) was that when Enlightened, you know everything about > everything and everybody. And MMY as an Enlightened person know > everything about what you are doing. Like God watching you all the > time. I never heard MMY say that. I did hear him say that you could know anything anywhere, but only one thing at a time, and that your would only be inclined to know that which it would be useful for you to know. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
---Claudiouk,this is a good summary of my own POV.IMO a person's enlightenment can't be seperated from how they interpret it .The interpretation to some degree structures the experience. Kevin In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still being one of those "waking state" seekers of "enlightenment" > myself, I would agree that I might be defensively attached to a > particular and no doubt limiting view and understandings of it. > However it does seem that people with "experiences" of enlightenment > in this forum, and more generally outside it, seem themselves > also "attached" to explanations or descriptions that don't correlate > much between eachother. For instance you have MMY followers using > typical TMO lingo, versus Buddhists finding no God or Self in > enlightenment as gainst Christian mystics whose expositions have > another character altogether. Could it be, I wonder sometimes, that > enlightenment is a real phenomenon but idiosyncratic, depending on > brain chemistry on one hand and cultural heritage on the other, and > there is no way of establishing the "superiority" of one claim > against another; also that we are dealing here ultimately with > purely "subjective" experiences and accounts, however lofty, sacred, > universal etc one might experience them as being "ultimate reality". > However unlike drug-induced experiences, "enlightenment" is a natural > human capacity and beneficial. > > , although aware of the and yes at times > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > ---Actually I think your response makes my point > > > since for you my > > > description of my experience of unboundedbess > > > changing"isn't > > > really real,but really clever" while on the other > > > hand I think my > > > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I > > > described.However > > > the way I described this change apparently doesn't > > > make sense to you > > > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of > > > course points out > > > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to > > > describe changes in > > > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one > > > of the reasons why > > > its probably a good idea not to say too much about > > > your expereinces. > > > Kevin > > > > I see people reacting to reports of "spiritual" > > experiences in two ways. The first is healthy. The > > experiences inspire and can challenge the belief > > systems of the listener. Discussion can lead to a much > > deeper understanding of these experiences and the > > nature of evolution of consciousness. An authentic > > growth of understanding and insight has occurred. The > > other response is purely defensive. The experiences > > challenge the listeners belief system but there is so > > much invested in that belief system that they reject > > the experience outright. Unless experience conforms to > > the waking state model of enlightenment they are > > defensively attached to, it is invalid and the person > > is at best delusional and at worst intentionally > > sowing seeds of doubt (i.e., an agent of the "dark > > forces"). These people confuse their emotional > > investment in their belief system with divine > > "intuition". They never question their beliefs: > > they're fanatics. A possibly very dangerous place to > > be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
I have had some ideas about Enlightenment through the years from the TMO view. And I am reviewing them all the time. One of the stories (fantasies) was that when Enlightened, you know everything about everything and everybody. And MMY as an Enlightened person know everything about what you are doing. Like God watching you all the time. As time has passed by, my personal view has become simpler. Like a child accepting what is happening without analysing it too much. I do not expect dramatic changes or exciting experiences. I am satisfied when I experience Bliss floating in Mind and Body. It is like a very thin curtain between me as a person and Infinite Energy. I think that is good, because I have a body that probably could not handle Infinite Energy without that curtain. TM is not enough to get Enligtenment I am quite sure about that, but it is a mean to be more awake. And then I try to add other good advices. to take care of my Body, take care of my Environment and live life as decent as possible. Sometimes I fail of course, but that is a part of life too. God forbid that I start to see at myself as a Perfect Human Being. Ingegerd --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still being one of those "waking state" seekers of "enlightenment" > myself, I would agree that I might be defensively attached to a > particular and no doubt limiting view and understandings of it. > However it does seem that people with "experiences" of enlightenment > in this forum, and more generally outside it, seem themselves > also "attached" to explanations or descriptions that don't correlate > much between eachother. For instance you have MMY followers using > typical TMO lingo, versus Buddhists finding no God or Self in > enlightenment as gainst Christian mystics whose expositions have > another character altogether. Could it be, I wonder sometimes, that > enlightenment is a real phenomenon but idiosyncratic, depending on > brain chemistry on one hand and cultural heritage on the other, and > there is no way of establishing the "superiority" of one claim > against another; also that we are dealing here ultimately with > purely "subjective" experiences and accounts, however lofty, sacred, > universal etc one might experience them as being "ultimate reality". > However unlike drug-induced experiences, "enlightenment" is a natural > human capacity and beneficial. > > , although aware of the and yes at times > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > ---Actually I think your response makes my point > > > since for you my > > > description of my experience of unboundedbess > > > changing"isn't > > > really real,but really clever" while on the other > > > hand I think my > > > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I > > > described.However > > > the way I described this change apparently doesn't > > > make sense to you > > > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of > > > course points out > > > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to > > > describe changes in > > > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one > > > of the reasons why > > > its probably a good idea not to say too much about > > > your expereinces. > > > Kevin > > > > I see people reacting to reports of "spiritual" > > experiences in two ways. The first is healthy. The > > experiences inspire and can challenge the belief > > systems of the listener. Discussion can lead to a much > > deeper understanding of these experiences and the > > nature of evolution of consciousness. An authentic > > growth of understanding and insight has occurred. The > > other response is purely defensive. The experiences > > challenge the listeners belief system but there is so > > much invested in that belief system that they reject > > the experience outright. Unless experience conforms to > > the waking state model of enlightenment they are > > defensively attached to, it is invalid and the person > > is at best delusional and at worst intentionally > > sowing seeds of doubt (i.e., an agent of the "dark > > forces"). These people confuse their emotional > > investment in their belief system with divine > > "intuition". They never question their beliefs: > > they're fanatics. A possibly very dangerous place to > > be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com 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: [EMAI
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Folks might want to look up _The Problem of Pure Consciousness_ edited by Robert C Foreman. Interestingly enough, Skip Alexander was originally going to contribute a chapter on the physiology of pure consciousness, but the publisher told the editor that this was a no- no for one reason or another (something about it not fitting with the rest of the book). http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/- /0195059808/qid=1119182564/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-1687161- 5694326?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 Editorial Reviews Book Description Are mystical experiences formed by the mystic's cultural background and concepts, as "constructivists" maintain, or do mystics sometimes transcend language, belief, and culturally conditioned expectations? Do mystical experiences differ throughout the various religious traditions, as "pluralists" contend, or are they somehow ecumenical? The contributors to this collection scrutinize a common mystical experience, the "pure consciousness event"--the experience of being awake but devoid of intentional content--in order to answer these questions. Through the use of historical Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, and Jewish mystical writings, as well as those of modern mystics, the contributors reveal the inconsistencies and inadequacies of current models, and make significant strides towards developing new models for the understanding of mystical phenomenon, in particular, and of human experience, in general.--This text refers to the Paperback edition. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Still being one of those "waking state" seekers of "enlightenment" > myself, I would agree that I might be defensively attached to a > particular and no doubt limiting view and understandings of it. > However it does seem that people with "experiences" of enlightenment > in this forum, and more generally outside it, seem themselves > also "attached" to explanations or descriptions that don't correlate > much between eachother. For instance you have MMY followers using > typical TMO lingo, versus Buddhists finding no God or Self in > enlightenment as gainst Christian mystics whose expositions have > another character altogether. Could it be, I wonder sometimes, that > enlightenment is a real phenomenon but idiosyncratic, depending on > brain chemistry on one hand and cultural heritage on the other, and > there is no way of establishing the "superiority" of one claim > against another; also that we are dealing here ultimately with > purely "subjective" experiences and accounts, however lofty, sacred, > universal etc one might experience them as being "ultimate reality". > However unlike drug-induced experiences, "enlightenment" is a natural > human capacity and beneficial. > > , although aware of the and yes at times > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > ---Actually I think your response makes my point > > > since for you my > > > description of my experience of unboundedbess > > > changing"isn't > > > really real,but really clever" while on the other > > > hand I think my > > > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I > > > described.However > > > the way I described this change apparently doesn't > > > make sense to you > > > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of > > > course points out > > > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to > > > describe changes in > > > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one > > > of the reasons why > > > its probably a good idea not to say too much about > > > your expereinces. > > > Kevin > > > > I see people reacting to reports of "spiritual" > > experiences in two ways. The first is healthy. The > > experiences inspire and can challenge the belief > > systems of the listener. Discussion can lead to a much > > deeper understanding of these experiences and the > > nature of evolution of consciousness. An authentic > > growth of understanding and insight has occurred. The > > other response is purely defensive. The experiences > > challenge the listeners belief system but there is so > > much invested in that belief system that they reject > > the experience outright. Unless experience conforms to > > the waking state model of enlightenment they are > > defensively attached to, it is invalid and the person > > is at best delusional and at worst intentionally > > sowing seeds of doubt (i.e., an agent of the "dark > > forces"). These people confuse their emotional > > investment in their belief system with divine > > "intuition". They never question their beliefs: > > they're fanatics. A possibly very dangerous place to > > be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Still being one of those "waking state" seekers of "enlightenment" myself, I would agree that I might be defensively attached to a particular and no doubt limiting view and understandings of it. However it does seem that people with "experiences" of enlightenment in this forum, and more generally outside it, seem themselves also "attached" to explanations or descriptions that don't correlate much between eachother. For instance you have MMY followers using typical TMO lingo, versus Buddhists finding no God or Self in enlightenment as gainst Christian mystics whose expositions have another character altogether. Could it be, I wonder sometimes, that enlightenment is a real phenomenon but idiosyncratic, depending on brain chemistry on one hand and cultural heritage on the other, and there is no way of establishing the "superiority" of one claim against another; also that we are dealing here ultimately with purely "subjective" experiences and accounts, however lofty, sacred, universal etc one might experience them as being "ultimate reality". However unlike drug-induced experiences, "enlightenment" is a natural human capacity and beneficial. , although aware of the and yes at times --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ---Actually I think your response makes my point > > since for you my > > description of my experience of unboundedbess > > changing"isn't > > really real,but really clever" while on the other > > hand I think my > > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I > > described.However > > the way I described this change apparently doesn't > > make sense to you > > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of > > course points out > > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to > > describe changes in > > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one > > of the reasons why > > its probably a good idea not to say too much about > > your expereinces. > > Kevin > > I see people reacting to reports of "spiritual" > experiences in two ways. The first is healthy. The > experiences inspire and can challenge the belief > systems of the listener. Discussion can lead to a much > deeper understanding of these experiences and the > nature of evolution of consciousness. An authentic > growth of understanding and insight has occurred. The > other response is purely defensive. The experiences > challenge the listeners belief system but there is so > much invested in that belief system that they reject > the experience outright. Unless experience conforms to > the waking state model of enlightenment they are > defensively attached to, it is invalid and the person > is at best delusional and at worst intentionally > sowing seeds of doubt (i.e., an agent of the "dark > forces"). These people confuse their emotional > investment in their belief system with divine > "intuition". They never question their beliefs: > they're fanatics. A possibly very dangerous place to > be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---Actually I think your response makes my point > since for you my > description of my experience of unboundedbess > changing"isn't > really real,but really clever" while on the other > hand I think my > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I > described.However > the way I described this change apparently doesn't > make sense to you > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of > course points out > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to > describe changes in > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one > of the reasons why > its probably a good idea not to say too much about > your expereinces. > Kevin I see people reacting to reports of "spiritual" experiences in two ways. The first is healthy. The experiences inspire and can challenge the belief systems of the listener. Discussion can lead to a much deeper understanding of these experiences and the nature of evolution of consciousness. An authentic growth of understanding and insight has occurred. The other response is purely defensive. The experiences challenge the listeners belief system but there is so much invested in that belief system that they reject the experience outright. Unless experience conforms to the waking state model of enlightenment they are defensively attached to, it is invalid and the person is at best delusional and at worst intentionally sowing seeds of doubt (i.e., an agent of the "dark forces"). These people confuse their emotional investment in their belief system with divine "intuition". They never question their beliefs: they're fanatics. A possibly very dangerous place to be. > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > Comment below: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > **SNIP** > > > > > > > > > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In > > > other > > > > > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered > these > > > words. > > > > > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > > > > > mothering > > > > > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there > > > were a > > > > > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to > herself in > > > > > > relation to her child. From an outsider's > perspective, "she" > > > was > > > > > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > > > > > > > > > **END** > > > > > > > > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > > > > > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > > > > > No it at all. Just raining. > > > > > > > > Objectifying principle? Projection? The meaning of 'pragya- > parad' - > > > > creating an object where there is no such thing - the mistake > of the > > > > intellect. > > > > > > > > > > The mistakeof the intellect is in seeing a distinction where > there > > > isn't one. Objects have every bit as much reality as > consciousness. > > > > Yes. It (the it in it's raining) depends on ones point of view. We > > were using the other perspective. I am that, thou art that, all this > > is that, that alone is. Progression in point of view. If caught in > the > > objective the other perspective may be more useful. What was the > yoga > > sutra quoted the other day about negative thought? I think it's II 33: vitarka-baadhane pratipakSa-bhaavanam Taimni's translation: When the mind is disturbed by improper thoughts constant pondering over the opposites (is the remedy). FWIW, the next suutra seems to define "vitarka": vitarkaa hiMsaadayaH [...] iti pratipakSa-bhaavanam In Sanskrit, a bahuvriihi compound with the word 'aadi' (= beginning; nominative plural: 'aadayaH') as the last component is used to express the notion 'et cetera'. Thus, 'himsaadayaH' (hiMsaa + aadayaH) means 'violence, etc'. It seems to refer to the /yamas/, a_hiMsaa, satya, a_steya, brahmacarya and aparigraha, and actually the opposites of those: violence (hiMsaa), non-truthfulness, stealing (steya), etc. Entertain the > exact > > opposite. > > What is the opposite of a though 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > Comment below: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > **SNIP** > > > > > > > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In > > other > > > > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these > > words. > > > > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > > > > mothering > > > > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there > > were a > > > > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > > > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" > > was > > > > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > > > > > > > **END** > > > > > > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > > > > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > > > > No it at all. Just raining. > > > > > > Objectifying principle? Projection? The meaning of 'pragya- parad' - > > > creating an object where there is no such thing - the mistake of the > > > intellect. > > > > > > > The mistakeof the intellect is in seeing a distinction where there > > isn't one. Objects have every bit as much reality as consciousness. > > Yes. It (the it in it's raining) depends on ones point of view. We > were using the other perspective. I am that, thou art that, all this > is that, that alone is. Progression in point of view. If caught in the > objective the other perspective may be more useful. What was the yoga > sutra quoted the other day about negative thought? Entertain the exact > opposite. What is the opposite of a thought? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Comment below: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > **SNIP** > > > > > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In > other > > > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these > words. > > > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > > > mothering > > > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there > were a > > > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" > was > > > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > > > > > **END** > > > > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > > > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > > > No it at all. Just raining. > > > > Objectifying principle? Projection? The meaning of 'pragya-parad' - > > creating an object where there is no such thing - the mistake of the > > intellect. > > > > The mistakeof the intellect is in seeing a distinction where there > isn't one. Objects have every bit as much reality as consciousness. Yes. It (the it in it's raining) depends on ones point of view. We were using the other perspective. I am that, thou art that, all this is that, that alone is. Progression in point of view. If caught in the objective the other perspective may be more useful. What was the yoga sutra quoted the other day about negative thought? Entertain the exact opposite. JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > ---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone > > > tries to share their experience they must do so through their > > > interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that > > terms > > > like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and > something > > else > > > to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative > > > system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called > > > unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that > > term > > > 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first > it > > > seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like > the > > > unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin > > > > > > > > > > My intuition is that this isn't really real, but really clever. > > > > Just thought that I'd make that distinction, really. > > > My experience is the same as what Kevin has described here. For some > this may be a baby step, but for me the dawning realization that the > unbounded awareness is other than the mind is indescribable in it's > value. It's a delight to hear anyone say that they are coming to a > similar realization. > It was a joke, based on what someone had said a previous message... 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But its all mud and its all water, so... > > > ...so the teaching or the use of any technique designed to clear up > awareness is just a waste of time? No, but attempts to figure out what is awareness and what isn't via the intellect sure seem to be... > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > --- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Or, put another way, what makes pure awareness become not > > > > > so pure? > > > > > > > > > > Rick Carlstrom > > > > > > It gets "lost" or muddled in the shuffle of perception, thinking, > > > daily life. to use a knee-jerk but experientially valid analogy, > > when > > > mud is added to water, the water is still pure, its just muddied > up. > > > The purity is not apparrent. If the water is filtered, it is > still > > pure. > > > > > > Pure awareness is apparently pure (as opposed to apparently not > > pure) > > > either when the mud stops flowing into the river, or the muddied > > water > > > is filtered. > > > > > > I think both are experientially analogous to what occurs in > > > consciousness (amongst other things). > > > > > > Stopping the mud flows to me refers to resolving / healing the > > > vasanas. When vasanas are lively, the mind is a chatter box of > > > thoughts and inner diolgue -- often concerning the past for > future. > > > When these seeds in the storehouse of impressions (chitta) are > > > resolved, life goes on but the blaring boom box of monkey-mind > > chatter > > > is not there. The water is not churned up and muddied. Awareness > is > > > more apparently pure, not muddled, muddy or whipped up in waves. > > > > > > The filter analogy to me experientially refers to a deepening of > > > Awareness so that even when mud is thrown into the water, > the "lake" > > > is deep enough so that the mud quickly sinks, dissipates. The > water, > > > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its > this > > > quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher > > states. > > > And in some behaviors. > > > > > > More relevant analogies come to mind -- less muddy rivers flow > into > > > the lake (karma is purifed), ... but I will leave it with these > two > > > for now. However, I think there are a multitude of factors that > can > > > come into play to help keep the appearance of the water / > Awareness. > > > (Again, I say "appearance" because the water is always pure, it > just > > > does not appear to alwys be.) Many methods and techniques to > keep > > mud > > > ot, and to filter it when it is there. Thus given the paths and > > > techniques one has practiced, different mechanisms may be at > play in > > > giving rise to the common experience of Pure Awareness. And may > > > explain why descriptions and behaviors vary. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--To elaborate on what Rick said, for me the recogntion that the unbounded is other than the mind has,at times,made it easier not to react to the activity of the mind eg thoughts that are emotionally charged seem to have less an effect on me.It also seems to me that when the unboundedness is particularly"strong" the feeling of"being" the unboundedness becomes more prominent and results in a significant attenuation of the feeling of being "me".However,I think it would also be accurate to say that 'I" is subsumed to some degree into the unbounded.Which is the truth or whether either is true is difficult to say since any attempt to convey an experience in words is bound to fall short.Kevin - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > ---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone > > > tries to share their experience they must do so through their > > > interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that > > terms > > > like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and > something > > else > > > to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative > > > system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called > > > unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that > > term > > > 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first > it > > > seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like > the > > > unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin > > > > > > > > > > My intuition is that this isn't really real, but really clever. > > > > Just thought that I'd make that distinction, really. > > > My experience is the same as what Kevin has described here. For some > this may be a baby step, but for me the dawning realization that the > unbounded awareness is other than the mind is indescribable in it's > value. It's a delight to hear anyone say that they are coming to a > similar realization. > > Rick Carlstrom 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > ---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone > > tries to share their experience they must do so through their > > interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that > terms > > like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and something > else > > to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative > > system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called > > unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that > term > > 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first it > > seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like the > > unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin > > > > > > My intuition is that this isn't really real, but really clever. > > Just thought that I'd make that distinction, really. My experience is the same as what Kevin has described here. For some this may be a baby step, but for me the dawning realization that the unbounded awareness is other than the mind is indescribable in it's value. It's a delight to hear anyone say that they are coming to a similar realization. Rick Carlstrom 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But its all mud and its all water, so... ...so the teaching or the use of any technique designed to clear up awareness is just a waste of time? > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > --- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Or, put another way, what makes pure awareness become not > > > > so pure? > > > > > > > > Rick Carlstrom > > > > It gets "lost" or muddled in the shuffle of perception, thinking, > > daily life. to use a knee-jerk but experientially valid analogy, > when > > mud is added to water, the water is still pure, its just muddied up. > > The purity is not apparrent. If the water is filtered, it is still > pure. > > > > Pure awareness is apparently pure (as opposed to apparently not > pure) > > either when the mud stops flowing into the river, or the muddied > water > > is filtered. > > > > I think both are experientially analogous to what occurs in > > consciousness (amongst other things). > > > > Stopping the mud flows to me refers to resolving / healing the > > vasanas. When vasanas are lively, the mind is a chatter box of > > thoughts and inner diolgue -- often concerning the past for future. > > When these seeds in the storehouse of impressions (chitta) are > > resolved, life goes on but the blaring boom box of monkey-mind > chatter > > is not there. The water is not churned up and muddied. Awareness is > > more apparently pure, not muddled, muddy or whipped up in waves. > > > > The filter analogy to me experientially refers to a deepening of > > Awareness so that even when mud is thrown into the water, the "lake" > > is deep enough so that the mud quickly sinks, dissipates. The water, > > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its this > > quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher > states. > > And in some behaviors. > > > > More relevant analogies come to mind -- less muddy rivers flow into > > the lake (karma is purifed), ... but I will leave it with these two > > for now. However, I think there are a multitude of factors that can > > come into play to help keep the appearance of the water / Awareness. > > (Again, I say "appearance" because the water is always pure, it just > > does not appear to alwys be.) Many methods and techniques to keep > mud > > ot, and to filter it when it is there. Thus given the paths and > > techniques one has practiced, different mechanisms may be at play in > > giving rise to the common experience of Pure Awareness. And may > > explain why descriptions and behaviors vary. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---Actually I think your response makes my point since for you my > description of my experience of unboundedbess changing"isn't > really real,but really clever" while on the other hand I think my > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I described.However > the way I described this change apparently doesn't make sense to you > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of course points out > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to describe changes in > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one of the reasons why > its probably a good idea not to say too much about your expereinces. > Kevin > My response was a passing reference to: > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" > > > a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is > > > still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. > > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > ---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone > > > tries to share their experience they must do so through their > > > interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that > > terms > > > like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and something > > else > > > to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative > > > system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called > > > unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that > > term > > > 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first it > > > seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like the > > > unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin > > > > > > > > > > My intuition is that this isn't really real, but really clever. > > > > Just thought that I'd make that distinction, really. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > > > > > haven't. > > > > > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who > > have had > > > > > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > > > > > > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had > > such > > > > > > episodes? > > > > > > > > > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > > > > > where I pay attention to people who are merely > > > > > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > > > > > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > > > > > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > > > > > > > > > Unc - boy does that ring a bell with me. Reading and hearng direct > > > > accounts is what interests me too. Getting those people to talk > > can be > > > > a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is > > > > still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. > > > > > > > > > > > > JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > [...] > > > > > > > > The water, > > > > > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. > its > > > > this quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called > > higher states. And in some behaviors. > > > > > > > > > > > > Very good point. > > > > > > > But what behaviors show enlightenment? > > > > The discussion is not about enlightnement. Indeed I find it > pointless > > to discuss something that no one on the list appears to be able to > or > > willing to clearly and conisely define the term as they mean it or > > experience it. Other than Peter, who did offer up a nice concise > > personal definition -- but even he appears unwilling or unable to > > answer a simple follow-up question: is this attribute both necessary > > and sufficient? > > > > The above discussion is about an experience that may or may not have > > anything to do with enlightenment but is something I think many have > > experienced. Yet, I noted with interest, many /most enlightenment > > proponents do not include such descriptions in their discourses. > > > > The point was that some behaviors -- such as outburst of anger and > > frustration -- are counter to the experience of a substantial depth > of > > Awareness present along with activity. The analogy used, which to me > > is very experientially real, parallel to the analogy, is that of a > > lake (corresponding to Awareness) -- when it is deep, mud that > enters > > does not muddy the water and the water is still appreciated as clean > > and pure. > > > > Some will argue "Consciusness / Awareness has Nothing to do with > > behaviors such as anger!" I counter that yes that is true when the > > lake is shallow -- building on the analogy -- but there is a > noticible > > lessening of such behavior when the lake becomes deeper. > > Perhaps, but you can't be sure. There may be situations where the > only appropriate response is extreme anger [-appearance] and violent > activity (Jesus and the money-changers in the temple, for instance). Agreed. I am not postulating an absolute or universal rule based on one person's experience (mine). As Irmeli points out, there is a healthy anger that sets boundaries. I am just pointing out my experience that in situations where anger used to bubble up and manifest (and I am a pitta, fiery chart sort of guy, i know about anger), most of the time now it can't get enough heat to turn to fire. The "deep lake" of Awareness thing I was trying to describe. When I see some that talk alot about their enlightenment, and then fairly regularly "over the top" outbursts occur -- not having to do with rightous indignation or setting boundaries -- it makes me wonder if they experience the same "deep lake" effect that I do. From the manifest behavior (and from that truly no one can be sure) it appears they don't have that (lake effect). So it causes me to wonder how "profound" their enlightenment is. If their enlightenment is simply the experience of no "I", and doesn't include things like the lake effect, non-ownership, compassion, it seems sort of like a shallow enlightenment. But then, as I have stated, I think the whole practice adn mind-set of labeling, categorizing and evaluating people and experiences by A & E terms is not productive, even detrimental. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
---Actually I think your response makes my point since for you my description of my experience of unboundedbess changing"isn't really real,but really clever" while on the other hand I think my experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I described.However the way I described this change apparently doesn't make sense to you and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of course points out the difficulty if not the futility of trying to describe changes in the experience of conciousness.I think this is one of the reasons why its probably a good idea not to say too much about your expereinces. Kevin In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > ---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone > > tries to share their experience they must do so through their > > interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that > terms > > like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and something > else > > to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative > > system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called > > unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that > term > > 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first it > > seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like the > > unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin > > > > > > My intuition is that this isn't really real, but really clever. > > Just thought that I'd make that distinction, really. > > > > > > > > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > > > > haven't. > > > > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who > have had > > > > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > > > > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had > such > > > > > episodes? > > > > > > > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > > > > where I pay attention to people who are merely > > > > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > > > > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > > > > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > > > > > > > Unc - boy does that ring a bell with me. Reading and hearng direct > > > accounts is what interests me too. Getting those people to talk > can be > > > a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is > > > still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. > > > > > > > > > JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > [...] > > > > > > The water, > > > > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its > > > this quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called > higher states. And in some behaviors. > > > > > > > > > Very good point. > > > > But what behaviors show enlightenment? > > The discussion is not about enlightnement. Indeed I find it pointless > to discuss something that no one on the list appears to be able to or > willing to clearly and conisely define the term as they mean it or > experience it. Other than Peter, who did offer up a nice concise > personal definition -- but even he appears unwilling or unable to > answer a simple follow-up question: is this attribute both necessary > and sufficient? > > The above discussion is about an experience that may or may not have > anything to do with enlightenment but is something I think many have > experienced. Yet, I noted with interest, many /most enlightenment > proponents do not include such descriptions in their discourses. > > The point was that some behaviors -- such as outburst of anger and > frustration -- are counter to the experience of a substantial depth of > Awareness present along with activity. The analogy used, which to me > is very experientially real, parallel to the analogy, is that of a > lake (corresponding to Awareness) -- when it is deep, mud that enters > does not muddy the water and the water is still appreciated as clean > and pure. > > Some will argue "Consciusness / Awareness has Nothing to do with > behaviors such as anger!" I counter that yes that is true when the > lake is shallow -- building on the analogy -- but there is a noticible > lessening of such behavior when the lake becomes deeper. Perhaps, but you can't be sure. There may be situations where the only appropriate response is extreme anger [-appearance] and violent activity (Jesus and the money-changers in the temple, for instance). 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone > tries to share their experience they must do so through their > interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that terms > like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and something else > to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative > system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called > unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that term > 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first it > seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like the > unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin > > My intuition is that this isn't really real, but really clever. Just thought that I'd make that distinction, really. > > > > In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > > > haven't. > > > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had > > > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such > > > > episodes? > > > > > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > > > where I pay attention to people who are merely > > > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > > > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > > > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > > > > > Unc - boy does that ring a bell with me. Reading and hearng direct > > accounts is what interests me too. Getting those people to talk can be > > a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is > > still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. > > > > > > JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [...] > > > > The water, > > > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its > > this quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher states. And in some behaviors. > > > > > > Very good point. > But what behaviors show enlightenment? The discussion is not about enlightnement. Indeed I find it pointless to discuss something that no one on the list appears to be able to or willing to clearly and conisely define the term as they mean it or experience it. Other than Peter, who did offer up a nice concise personal definition -- but even he appears unwilling or unable to answer a simple follow-up question: is this attribute both necessary and sufficient? The above discussion is about an experience that may or may not have anything to do with enlightenment but is something I think many have experienced. Yet, I noted with interest, many /most enlightenment proponents do not include such descriptions in their discourses. The point was that some behaviors -- such as outburst of anger and frustration -- are counter to the experience of a substantial depth of Awareness present along with activity. The analogy used, which to me is very experientially real, parallel to the analogy, is that of a lake (corresponding to Awareness) -- when it is deep, mud that enters does not muddy the water and the water is still appreciated as clean and pure. Some will argue "Consciusness / Awareness has Nothing to do with behaviors such as anger!" I counter that yes that is true when the lake is shallow -- building on the analogy -- but there is a noticible lessening of such behavior when the lake becomes deeper. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > So which Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath has endorsed YOU as a > > > > > preferred candidate to become his sucessor? > > > > > > > > It's just a meaningless statement, Lawson. It's like > > > > someone saying, "My choice for US President is Nelson > > > > Mandela." Not gonna happen; can't ever happen until > > > > they change the laws for Ahnuld. So it's easy to say. > > > > > > > > > > Why would Swami say it if it wasn't what he thought? > > > > My understanding is tha the TMO was providing substantial funding for > > Shantanada and his Shakaracharayaship. (Correct me if my > > understanding is wrong). And Shantanada knew that your professor > > friend was quite interested and looked favorably upon MMY( didn't he? > > correct my understanding if I am wrong). > > > > Its not uncommon for reicpients to speak highly of their benefactors, > > in heart felt, but sometimes exagerated terms. And its not uncommon to > > load praise on someone whom the audience / listener admires -- it > > gives the listener a thrill. > > > > So perhaps in the spirit of Indian conviviality and expressive > > laudations, Shantanada gave copious praise to his benefactor, knowing > > it would thrill your friend, even if some aspects were a bit > > exaggerated or out of context. > > > > I could imagine Shantanand telling MMY that such and such a very wise > > and grand professor visited him and the man was of such sterling > > character it was of such a credit to MMY that his admirers were so > > wise and grand. > > > > Anyway, I sense some grandness and goodwill, of the superlative Indian > > type, in what Shantananda told your prof friend. Just a hunch. > > Akasha wrote: > >"So perhaps in the spirit of Indian conviviality and expressive > laudations, Shantanada gave copious praise to his benefactor, knowing > it would thrill your friend, even if some aspects were a bit > exaggerated or out of context." > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing out the Indian position on > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is something to be remembered > in all discussions about both enlightenment and their comments about > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of expression think about > sentences that have appeared in the announcements for the recert courses. All very interesting, but as I pointed out, Swami Shantananda was my friend's meditation teacher, so any interest he had in MMY was purely intellectual curiousity. It is possible that Swami Shantananda knew that my friend would be able to support MMY decades later, so he praised his material benefactor as highly as it is possible for the predicted future gain, but that sounds like paranoid nutter ranting to me... (given this forum, why am I not surprised?) 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > > haven't. > > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had > > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such > > > episodes? > > > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > > where I pay attention to people who are merely > > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > > > Unc - boy does that ring a bell with me. Reading and hearng direct > accounts is what interests me too. Getting those people to talk can be > a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is > still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. > > Ah, so there is a need to separate? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Comment below: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > **SNIP** > > > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these words. > > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > > mothering > > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were a > > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > > > **END** > > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > > No it at all. Just raining. > > Objectifying principle? Projection? The meaning of 'pragya-parad' - > creating an object where there is no such thing - the mistake of the > intellect. > The mistakeof the intellect is in seeing a distinction where there isn't one. Objects have every bit as much reality as consciousness. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...] > > The water, > > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its > this > > quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher > states. > > And in some behaviors. > > > Very good point. > > But what behaviors show enlightenment? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
But its all mud and its all water, so... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or, put another way, what makes pure awareness become not > > > so pure? > > > > > > Rick Carlstrom > > It gets "lost" or muddled in the shuffle of perception, thinking, > daily life. to use a knee-jerk but experientially valid analogy, when > mud is added to water, the water is still pure, its just muddied up. > The purity is not apparrent. If the water is filtered, it is still pure. > > Pure awareness is apparently pure (as opposed to apparently not pure) > either when the mud stops flowing into the river, or the muddied water > is filtered. > > I think both are experientially analogous to what occurs in > consciousness (amongst other things). > > Stopping the mud flows to me refers to resolving / healing the > vasanas. When vasanas are lively, the mind is a chatter box of > thoughts and inner diolgue -- often concerning the past for future. > When these seeds in the storehouse of impressions (chitta) are > resolved, life goes on but the blaring boom box of monkey-mind chatter > is not there. The water is not churned up and muddied. Awareness is > more apparently pure, not muddled, muddy or whipped up in waves. > > The filter analogy to me experientially refers to a deepening of > Awareness so that even when mud is thrown into the water, the "lake" > is deep enough so that the mud quickly sinks, dissipates. The water, > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its this > quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher states. > And in some behaviors. > > More relevant analogies come to mind -- less muddy rivers flow into > the lake (karma is purifed), ... but I will leave it with these two > for now. However, I think there are a multitude of factors that can > come into play to help keep the appearance of the water / Awareness. > (Again, I say "appearance" because the water is always pure, it just > does not appear to alwys be.) Many methods and techniques to keep mud > ot, and to filter it when it is there. Thus given the paths and > techniques one has practiced, different mechanisms may be at play in > giving rise to the common experience of Pure Awareness. And may > explain why descriptions and behaviors vary. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- jyouells2000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: snip > > > That's certainly a polite way of pointing out the > Indian position on > truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is something > to be remembered > in all discussions about both enlightenment and > their comments about > spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of > expression think about > sentences that have appeared in the announcements > for the recert courses. > > JohnY This shining crest-jewel of piercing intellect has thrilled that infinite Brahman with a shimmmering wave of amrita. The gods dance when such pearls of knowledge effortlessly flow from that finest feeling level of the Atman. Such joy is almost never seen in all the infinite cycles of creation. Hail Johny! Hail Johny! Hail Johny! Oh rishi, oh sage, oh infinite fullness! Hey, not too bad. Do you think I could get a job as a copy writer? > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
---Part of the problem of sharing expereince is that when someone tries to share their experience they must do so through their interpretative system.Futher complicating this is tha fact that terms like unboundedness may mean one thing to one person and something else to another person(even if they are using the same interpretative system).Infact in my own case the experience which I have called unboundedness has changed over time so that what I meant by that term 10 yrs ago is not the same as what I meant by it now ie at first it seemed to me that the mind was unbounded and now it seems like the unbounded(awareness)is other than the mind.Kevin In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jyouells2000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > > haven't. > > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had > > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such > > > episodes? > > > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > > where I pay attention to people who are merely > > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > > > Unc - boy does that ring a bell with me. Reading and hearng direct > accounts is what interests me too. Getting those people to talk can be > a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is > still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. > > > JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So which Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath has endorsed YOU as a > > > > preferred candidate to become his sucessor? > > > > > > It's just a meaningless statement, Lawson. It's like > > > someone saying, "My choice for US President is Nelson > > > Mandela." Not gonna happen; can't ever happen until > > > they change the laws for Ahnuld. So it's easy to say. > > > > > > > Why would Swami say it if it wasn't what he thought? > > My understanding is tha the TMO was providing substantial funding for > Shantanada and his Shakaracharayaship. (Correct me if my > understanding is wrong). And Shantanada knew that your professor > friend was quite interested and looked favorably upon MMY( didn't he? > correct my understanding if I am wrong). > > Its not uncommon for reicpients to speak highly of their benefactors, > in heart felt, but sometimes exagerated terms. And its not uncommon to > load praise on someone whom the audience / listener admires -- it > gives the listener a thrill. > > So perhaps in the spirit of Indian conviviality and expressive > laudations, Shantanada gave copious praise to his benefactor, knowing > it would thrill your friend, even if some aspects were a bit > exaggerated or out of context. > > I could imagine Shantanand telling MMY that such and such a very wise > and grand professor visited him and the man was of such sterling > character it was of such a credit to MMY that his admirers were so > wise and grand. > > Anyway, I sense some grandness and goodwill, of the superlative Indian > type, in what Shantananda told your prof friend. Just a hunch. Akasha wrote: "So perhaps in the spirit of Indian conviviality and expressive laudations, Shantanada gave copious praise to his benefactor, knowing it would thrill your friend, even if some aspects were a bit exaggerated or out of context." That's certainly a polite way of pointing out the Indian position on truthfulness. This Indian POV on truth is something to be remembered in all discussions about both enlightenment and their comments about spiritual teachers. At it's worst level of expression think about sentences that have appeared in the announcements for the recert courses. JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > haven't. > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such > > episodes? > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > where I pay attention to people who are merely > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > Unc - boy does that ring a bell with me. Reading and hearng direct accounts is what interests me too. Getting those people to talk can be a real task though (OSF). Even among those who write, intuition is still necessary to separate the real from the merely clever. JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance dissappears. > > Good. But I'd say that even this is problematic, because > people have different interpretations of what the word > 'ignorance' means. > > I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't appear; > the perception of it not always already having been > present disappears." > > Unc Much better. How can the eternal have a begining? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Comment below: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > **SNIP** > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these words. > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > mothering > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were a > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > **END** > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > No it at all. Just raining. Objectifying principle? Projection? The meaning of 'pragya-parad' - creating an object where there is no such thing - the mistake of the intellect. JohnY To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or, put another way, what makes pure awareness become not > > > so pure? > > > > > > Rick Carlstrom > > It gets "lost" or muddled in the shuffle of perception, thinking, > daily life. to use a knee-jerk but experientially valid analogy, when > mud is added to water, the water is still pure, its just muddied up. > The purity is not apparrent. If the water is filtered, it is still pure. > > Pure awareness is apparently pure (as opposed to apparently not pure) > either when the mud stops flowing into the river, or the muddied water > is filtered. > > I think both are experientially analogous to what occurs in > consciousness (amongst other things). > > Stopping the mud flows to me refers to resolving / healing the > vasanas. When vasanas are lively, the mind is a chatter box of > thoughts and inner diolgue -- often concerning the past for future. > When these seeds in the storehouse of impressions (chitta) are > resolved, life goes on but the blaring boom box of monkey-mind chatter > is not there. The water is not churned up and muddied. Awareness is > more apparently pure, not muddled, muddy or whipped up in waves. > > The filter analogy to me experientially refers to a deepening of > Awareness so that even when mud is thrown into the water, the "lake" > is deep enough so that the mud quickly sinks, dissipates. The water, > Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its this > quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher states. > And in some behaviors. Very good point. (snipped to end) 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- marekreavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > snip > > > > > > > > Yes, the "one" who began with the objective to > > find > > > > who or what > > > > that "one" was is extinquished in the process. > > That > > > > one(self)is not > > > > found because it was never present. Never > > present > > > > because it was > > > > predicated on a misapprehension of the > > situation. > > > > The "feeling" of > > > > a self is the misapprehension, the mistake of > > > > intellect, the false > > > > identity of pure awareness with limitations. > > The > > > > "feeling" is there > > > > only because pure awareness "IS", not because > > the > > > > ego is. > > > > > > > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; > > ignorance > > > > dissappears. > > > > > > Good stuff! That feeling of "I" is pure awareness > > > projected into mind. Like Deep Throat said, > > "follow > > > the money." But in this case it is "follow the > > 'I'. > > > Self inquiry will disolve that "I" into pure > > > awareness. > > > > > > How is it that once the "I" is dissolved into pure > > awareness, quite > > often after some time the "I" reemerges? > > > > If the self disappears then what is it that falls > > back into the > > illusion? Or, put another way, what makes pure > > awareness become not > > so pure? > > > > Rick Carlstrom > > I don't have a clue. This is a good question for a > guru such as MMY or SSRS. Perhaps it's because the self never really disappeared, rather, there was a vision of distinction between self and pure awareness. Small self still exists as body and memory and that is what pulls pure awareness back into "I". Could there be a difference between enlightenment and liberation? Rick Carlstrom 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
> --- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Or, put another way, what makes pure awareness become not > > so pure? > > > > Rick Carlstrom It gets "lost" or muddled in the shuffle of perception, thinking, daily life. to use a knee-jerk but experientially valid analogy, when mud is added to water, the water is still pure, its just muddied up. The purity is not apparrent. If the water is filtered, it is still pure. Pure awareness is apparently pure (as opposed to apparently not pure) either when the mud stops flowing into the river, or the muddied water is filtered. I think both are experientially analogous to what occurs in consciousness (amongst other things). Stopping the mud flows to me refers to resolving / healing the vasanas. When vasanas are lively, the mind is a chatter box of thoughts and inner diolgue -- often concerning the past for future. When these seeds in the storehouse of impressions (chitta) are resolved, life goes on but the blaring boom box of monkey-mind chatter is not there. The water is not churned up and muddied. Awareness is more apparently pure, not muddled, muddy or whipped up in waves. The filter analogy to me experientially refers to a deepening of Awareness so that even when mud is thrown into the water, the "lake" is deep enough so that the mud quickly sinks, dissipates. The water, Awareness is not noticably affected by the infusion of mud. its this quality that I see lacking in many reports of so called higher states. And in some behaviors. More relevant analogies come to mind -- less muddy rivers flow into the lake (karma is purifed), ... but I will leave it with these two for now. However, I think there are a multitude of factors that can come into play to help keep the appearance of the water / Awareness. (Again, I say "appearance" because the water is always pure, it just does not appear to alwys be.) Many methods and techniques to keep mud ot, and to filter it when it is there. Thus given the paths and techniques one has practiced, different mechanisms may be at play in giving rise to the common experience of Pure Awareness. And may explain why descriptions and behaviors vary. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- marekreavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > snip > > > > > > Yes, the "one" who began with the objective to > find > > > who or what > > > that "one" was is extinquished in the process. > That > > > one(self)is not > > > found because it was never present. Never > present > > > because it was > > > predicated on a misapprehension of the > situation. > > > The "feeling" of > > > a self is the misapprehension, the mistake of > > > intellect, the false > > > identity of pure awareness with limitations. > The > > > "feeling" is there > > > only because pure awareness "IS", not because > the > > > ego is. > > > > > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; > ignorance > > > dissappears. > > > > Good stuff! That feeling of "I" is pure awareness > > projected into mind. Like Deep Throat said, > "follow > > the money." But in this case it is "follow the > 'I'. > > Self inquiry will disolve that "I" into pure > > awareness. > > > How is it that once the "I" is dissolved into pure > awareness, quite > often after some time the "I" reemerges? > > If the self disappears then what is it that falls > back into the > illusion? Or, put another way, what makes pure > awareness become not > so pure? > > Rick Carlstrom I don't have a clue. This is a good question for a guru such as MMY or SSRS. > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (snipped a lot) > Advaita addresses Awareness unfolded to its "core", stripped naked to > encompass All, even objective phenomenon -- including, along the way, > the processes of perception, thinking, deciding acting. Nothing but > Awareness. No duality. > > * And thus my use of the term triplicity to categorize expressions > that include or imply a volitoner, Awareness and the World. In > contrast to a duality view of Awareness and the World. > > ** I have started to use the term non-volitioner (or non- controller), > instead of "non-doer" because there actually is "doing being done" so > using english constructs there must be a doer.IMV, the doing is > passive, and the doer are the "apparatus" -- the mind, intellect, deep > and surface memory, perception, physiology, etc, doing acccording to > their natures / structures /functions -- without need of a controlling > volitioner. This is interesting but it makes me wonder what the "power source" would be for this apparatus to function? Rick Carlstrom 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- marekreavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > snip > > > > Yes, the "one" who began with the objective to find > > who or what > > that "one" was is extinquished in the process. That > > one(self)is not > > found because it was never present. Never present > > because it was > > predicated on a misapprehension of the situation. > > The "feeling" of > > a self is the misapprehension, the mistake of > > intellect, the false > > identity of pure awareness with limitations. The > > "feeling" is there > > only because pure awareness "IS", not because the > > ego is. > > > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance > > dissappears. > > Good stuff! That feeling of "I" is pure awareness > projected into mind. Like Deep Throat said, "follow > the money." But in this case it is "follow the 'I'. > Self inquiry will disolve that "I" into pure > awareness. How is it that once the "I" is dissolved into pure awareness, quite often after some time the "I" reemerges? If the self disappears then what is it that falls back into the illusion? Or, put another way, what makes pure awareness become not so pure? Rick Carlstrom 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --It would be helpful in these discussions for there > > to be > >a common definition for terms being used > > eg"real".When this word is > >it may mean something very different from one > > person to another. > >So for me the statement "the ego is not real" is > > an absurd > >statement thats because of how I define > > "real".For someone using a > >different definition this statement may make > > perfrct sense.Kevin > > The ego is not real from the "perspective" of CC. > However it is real in waking state. Real meaning that > it is experienced or a phenomenological reality. There > is no individuality experienced in CC. There is a very > clear individuality in waking state. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There is a difference between speaking about ego, > > I, Self etc. as if > > > these were real objects that could be pointed to > > meaningfully in an > > > abstract discussion, and speaking about one's > > "sense of self". A sense > > > of self is an experience, not an idea. By all > > appearances, it is a > > > very common experience, and the absence of it is > > not at all a common > > > experience. Does this have anything to do with > > what is "real"? > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's > > raining.'" > > > > -- paraphrase from something posted last > > year on FFL > > > > No it at all. Just raining. > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--As I have said in an earlier post the concept of ego does not only refer to the experience of a personal self/individuality it also refers to the intergrated and unified functioning of a human being.Infact it could be argued that the experience of being a personal self is only a small part of being an individual.This unified functioning is what people are refering to when describing someone as being a certain way eg no one on this forum would fail to tell the difference between Bob B. and Rick A.Individuality is a social and physical reality.The fact that a particular brain no longer produces the experience of individuality(CC) in no way changes the physical reality of that brain or the social reality of the "person" that that brain expresses.Statments suggesting that individuality is a delusion are based on a very restricted definition of what being an individual means.By not being clear about this anyone making statments like individuality is an illusion will invariably not be taken seriously by anyone coming from a western philosophical perspective.(which includes most thinking people in the Western world).Kevin - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --It would be helpful in these discussions for there > > to be > >a common definition for terms being used > > eg"real".When this word is > >it may mean something very different from one > > person to another. > >So for me the statement "the ego is not real" is > > an absurd > >statement thats because of how I define > > "real".For someone using a > >different definition this statement may make > > perfrct sense.Kevin > > The ego is not real from the "perspective" of CC. > However it is real in waking state. Real meaning that > it is experienced or a phenomenological reality. There > is no individuality experienced in CC. There is a very > clear individuality in waking state. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There is a difference between speaking about ego, > > I, Self etc. as if > > > these were real objects that could be pointed to > > meaningfully in an > > > abstract discussion, and speaking about one's > > "sense of self". A sense > > > of self is an experience, not an idea. By all > > appearances, it is a > > > very common experience, and the absence of it is > > not at all a common > > > experience. Does this have anything to do with > > what is "real"? > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's > > raining.'" > > > > -- paraphrase from something posted last > > year on FFL > > > > No it at all. Just raining. > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --It would be helpful in these discussions for there > > to be > >a common definition for terms being used > > eg"real".When this word is > >it may mean something very different from one > > person to another. > >So for me the statement "the ego is not real" is > > an absurd > >statement thats because of how I define > > "real".For someone using a > >different definition this statement may make > > perfrct sense.Kevin > > The ego is not real from the "perspective" of CC. > However it is real in waking state. Real meaning that > it is experienced or a phenomenological reality. There > is no individuality experienced in CC. There is a very > clear individuality in waking state. There's plenty of individuality experienced in CC. In fact, there is more individuality in CC than in the Waking state. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So which Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath has endorsed YOU as a > > > > preferred candidate to become his sucessor? > > > > > > It's just a meaningless statement, Lawson. It's like > > > someone saying, "My choice for US President is Nelson > > > Mandela." Not gonna happen; can't ever happen until > > > they change the laws for Ahnuld. So it's easy to say. > > > > > > > Why would Swami say it if it wasn't what he thought? > > My understanding is tha the TMO was providing substantial funding for > Shantanada and his Shakaracharayaship. (Correct me if my > understanding is wrong). This would have been about 35years or so ago. DOn't think that MMY had much money atthat point. And Shantanada knew that your professor > friend was quite interested and looked favorably upon MMY( didn't he? > correct my understanding if I am wrong). Chodola asked "What about that Maharishi who is with the Beatles? Is he legitimate?" > > Its not uncommon for reicpients to speak highly of their benefactors, > in heart felt, but sometimes exagerated terms. And its not uncommon to > load praise on someone whom the audience / listener admires -- it > gives the listener a thrill. The Shankaracharya initiated Chondola into meditation 35 or so years ago. I doubt if Chandola was a Maharishi supporter at that point. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I > haven't. > > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had > > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such > > episodes? > > Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point > where I pay attention to people who are merely > repeating what they have been told about enlight- > enment. I'm only interested in people's personal > experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. > > Would you trust a restaurant review written by > someone who had never eaten there? Many would. > > Would you trust a restaurant review written by > someone who had never eaten, period, but had only > heard what others have have said about eating? > Many would. > > For those who are interested in fine dining exper- > iences, and comparing them to their own, I kinda > suspect they'd prefer to hear first-hand experiences... > enlightenment as fine-cuisine... What would you do, switch nervous systems if you heard a story you preferred? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said > > > > the above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. > > > > > > It's just One Man's Opinion. The value that people > > > give to that opinion depends pretty much on what > > > they want to read into it. > > > > Anoop Chandola: "What about this Maharishi who is with the Beatles? > > Is he legitimate?" > > > > Swami Shantananda, Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath: "Let me put it to > > you this way, he would have been my first choice to be my sucessor > > but they wouldn't allow it due to the caste laws." > > > > So you're saying that the response didn't say anything relevant > > about MMY's legitimacy? > > Only to those who are concerned about "proving" Maharishi's > "legitimacy." If you believe what he brought to the table > (TM) was valuable in your life, why would you even care? > I was responding originally to those who saidthat MMY never had "legitimacy" within the Shankaracharya tradition. > If you don't, One Man's Opinion is not going to convince > you. You seem to be using this statement as some sort of > a club to bash people into agreeing with your opinion of > the man. Some already do. Some did, and no longer do. > Some never did. Your statement is not going to change > any of these people's minds. > > It seems to me that your intention, nigh unto a need, > is to change people's minds. Nyah, more like trying to quell my own insecurities at this point. > > What does it MATTER what other people believe? All that > matters is what YOU believe, man. I don't see people > actively trying to change your mind here. All they're > doing is stating what they believe themselves. How does > that affect you in any way? > > Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Was this the Shankaracharya that Mahesh "owned"?--there was one that > was basically 'bought and sold'. Just a like a special interest group > buying for legislation, influence, etc. That's all I needed to hear, > esp. given all the other improprieties. You mean the one that was specificed in the will? The one that was acknowledged by the courts as being Gurudev's foremost disciple? The will was challenged by the group that selected Gurudev.They wanted to establish a tradition that THEY would select the new Shankaracharya, period. Note that accounts of the hostility say theprimary reason for the bad blood between the committee and Swami Shatananda was due to his rapid decision to *accept the will*. > > In general the Shankaracharyas are not only realized--and the only ones > who ever claimed M. was enlightened was his followers--they had to have > expertise in the scriptures. Since M. relies heavily on pundits for his > knowledge, in this case 'two strikes and you're out'. The most powerful > of the seats, Sringeri (Shankaras seat), from what I could tell > spending a lot of time with the sanyasis, they considered M. an > aberration and a 'seller of the Veda'. Many felt he was headed to > Patala-loka... Actually, the 5th seat isn't even considered part of the Shankaracharya tradition by many. > > On Jun 17, 2005, at 5:44 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said the > >> above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. > > > > It's just One Man's Opinion. The value that people > > give to that opinion depends pretty much on what > > they want to read into it. > > > > Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Anon wrote: REPLY TO AKASHA: I feel very disappointed that you dismissed this discussion so easily. It is as if you didn't bother reading past my first paragraph and formed an opinion on that basis alone. Akasha: I did read it but no comments came to mind. I can see from the excerpt that you extracted from the broader diolog, that you may believe that I have a strong interest in cross-cultural/religous comparisions of "Enlightenment". I really don't. Read the "Broader Dialog" posted at the end, which gives a fuller context for what the excerpt you extracted. And I disagree with your premise: "I chose to assume that there is one universe within which different people get 'enlightened'. I know semantics can ruin a good discussion, but people and seekers never get enlightened. And as I have indicated in other posts, I don't think about enlightenment, and I don't think it is a particularly useful label. >From a recent post: - I gave up caring about A or E several years ago. Even going so far as to say they don't exist -- in that they are only labels, categorizations, and in some instances judgements. What does exist is Awareness and various comprehensions and insights that can unfold as Awareness unfolds and reveals itself. And Awareness is not the seeker. Seeking is outside the domain of (the unfoldment of) Awareness. Try to lasso the state of Desirelessness with a desire? Its funny at face value. However, I periodically ask the question of "what is that" when people use the A&E terms because I think some deep inquiry on the matter is useful, it has been for me. - At best, it appears that A or E can be used as broad categories, like being "grown-up" or a "college graduate" or "fit". Each connates some level of achievement, though it may be hard sometimes to define what that specifically is. Indeed people who use the term A & E don't appear to care to give it much of a rigorous definition. And the diversity of characteristics across people in the category of "grown-up" or "college graduate" is huge. However, most in these categories readily acknowledge that a lot more unfoldment is possible. Same with those that are A or E, I presume. There are a vast array of spiritual unfoldment methods and techniques used and available. Vaj, for example, gives some insight into this. I am coming around to the LBS voiced view "many paths, many peaks" in contrast to the new-agey, feel good supposition that there are many paths, but they all lead to the same mountain top (where all the saints sing kumbaha and drink hot chocolate around the campfire I suppose). The plethora of various methods refine or address different parts of body, nervous system, subtle bodies, vasanas, chakra / marma / prana, dattus, ayur-vedic balances, devotion, intellectual understanding, compassion, systems, etc. There is huge diversity or "paths". I think it may be apt to follow the practice of moutaineers: they have all climbed many peaks. Not necessarily all the same. But all are at home in the very high mountains. That is their commonality as mountaineers. SSRS told a story of when he was at a Kumba Mela -- (before becoming a teacher), alone, walking and talking among the huge diversity of saints. One was a very stern naked saint (many saints go naked by tradition). And he was scoffing at those with clothes on. "What kind of saints are these, they even wear clothes" His view was, i believe, that no one could possibly be enlightened if they still wore clothes -- an obvious sign of atachment. So, many paths, many peaks, perhaps the commonality being the clean crips air high-altitude air of Awareness -- but its expression can be in many forms. The Broader Dialog === Peter: > CC is "baby" awakening. Cessation of identification of consciousness with mind. End of "I" and "me". Akasha: On a more serious note, do you singularly define CC as "Cessation of identification of consciousness with mind. End of 'I' and 'me'"? Do you feel "No I" is both nexcessary and sufficient to label the experience "CC"? Without relying on dogmatic kneejerks, it does seems there are additional "attributes" along with or beyond the experience of "No I". Though as you know I am no fan or labeling any experience or person with such labels, it seems that if one does enjoy that exercise, they may be jumping the gun a bit to "ring the bell of Eureka" of CC simple when experience "no I". But as people often remind me that I know nothing, I tend to agree. Tom: About as many as there needs to be to allow all to have the unique experience they need to have to wake up. Seems to be pretty straightforward to me that IT is filtered through each unique set of DNA, why wouldn't it have to > be unique for each. See you all next week. Tom T Akasha: That Awareness is expressed in the lifes of all in infinite ways is of little surprise. However, what I was seeking to confirm (or refute if there is no confirm
[FairfieldLife] Re: CC is "Baby Awakening"
"Clam Happy", the one, true characteristic of enlightenment. ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance > > dissappears. > > > > Good. But I'd say that even this is problematic, > > because > > people have different interpretations of what the > > word > > 'ignorance' means. > > > > I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't > > appear; > > the perception of it not always already having been > > present disappears." > > > > Unc > > I'd replace "perception" with "apperception" and then > I'd be happy as a clam! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Discover Yahoo! > Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out! > http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- marekreavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > snip > > > > Yes, the "one" who began with the objective to find > > who or what > > that "one" was is extinquished in the process. That > > one(self)is not > > found because it was never present. Never present > > because it was > > predicated on a misapprehension of the situation. > > The "feeling" of > > a self is the misapprehension, the mistake of > > intellect, the false > > identity of pure awareness with limitations. The > > "feeling" is there > > only because pure awareness "IS", not because the > > ego is. > > > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance > > dissappears. > > Good stuff! That feeling of "I" is pure awareness > projected into mind. And awareness of its (Awareness) purity is lost in the shuffle. >Like Deep Throat said, "follow > the money." But in this case it is "follow the 'I'. > Self inquiry will disolve that "I" into pure > awareness. And as Awareness unfolds more, Awareness can be found projected into the mind, ... and intellect, senses, and beyond ... without the purity being lost in the shuffle. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert > > Gimbel" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -Maybe she meant, that when the ego self is > > transcended, > > > > Who transcends the ego? > > > > > and the Self is realized, > > > > Who realizes the Self? > > > > > than one begins to be more present, in the moment, > > > > > obviously... > > > > Who is this "one" that is more present in the moment > > ? > > Akasha, did you catch the advaita flu from me? :-) Well Peter, I try not to be as obnoxious as you. :) I usually let such phrasing pass, knowing the confines of common english are not conducive to precise writing about Awareness. Somehow the wording of this post grabbed at my attention more than others in its apparent assumption of triplicity* -- that is, an assumption that there is a seeker who transcends his ego and a seeker who realizes his Self and a seeker who is more present. So no offense to the writer, it may just be the constraints of english and such assumptions were not implied. Which raises is a question to Peter, why do you use the term advaita in this context -- other than its trendy? :) Advaita, to my understanding, is total non-duality. The above questions are used to stimulate insight into the fundamental paradox of duality: that there is no "volitioner"**, that a seeker never gains "awakening", etc, and that Awareness is not of the realm of volition and seeking. However, this is still a Samkyan duality. Advaita addresses Awareness unfolded to its "core", stripped naked to encompass All, even objective phenomenon -- including, along the way, the processes of perception, thinking, deciding acting. Nothing but Awareness. No duality. * And thus my use of the term triplicity to categorize expressions that include or imply a volitoner, Awareness and the World. In contrast to a duality view of Awareness and the World. ** I have started to use the term non-volitioner (or non-controller), instead of "non-doer" because there actually is "doing being done" so using english constructs there must be a doer.IMV, the doing is passive, and the doer are the "apparatus" -- the mind, intellect, deep and surface memory, perception, physiology, etc, doing acccording to their natures / structures /functions -- without need of a controlling volitioner. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance > dissappears. > > Good. But I'd say that even this is problematic, > because > people have different interpretations of what the > word > 'ignorance' means. > > I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't > appear; > the perception of it not always already having been > present disappears." > > Unc I'd replace "perception" with "apperception" and then I'd be happy as a clam! > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Discover Yahoo! Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- marekreavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: snip > > Yes, the "one" who began with the objective to find > who or what > that "one" was is extinquished in the process. That > one(self)is not > found because it was never present. Never present > because it was > predicated on a misapprehension of the situation. > The "feeling" of > a self is the misapprehension, the mistake of > intellect, the false > identity of pure awareness with limitations. The > "feeling" is there > only because pure awareness "IS", not because the > ego is. > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance > dissappears. Good stuff! That feeling of "I" is pure awareness projected into mind. Like Deep Throat said, "follow the money." But in this case it is "follow the 'I'. Self inquiry will disolve that "I" into pure awareness. > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --It would be helpful in these discussions for there > to be >a common definition for terms being used > eg"real".When this word is >it may mean something very different from one > person to another. >So for me the statement "the ego is not real" is > an absurd >statement thats because of how I define > "real".For someone using a >different definition this statement may make > perfrct sense.Kevin The ego is not real from the "perspective" of CC. However it is real in waking state. Real meaning that it is experienced or a phenomenological reality. There is no individuality experienced in CC. There is a very clear individuality in waking state. > > > > > > > > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is a difference between speaking about ego, > I, Self etc. as if > > these were real objects that could be pointed to > meaningfully in an > > abstract discussion, and speaking about one's > "sense of self". A sense > > of self is an experience, not an idea. By all > appearances, it is a > > very common experience, and the absence of it is > not at all a common > > experience. Does this have anything to do with > what is "real"? > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's > raining.'" > > > -- paraphrase from something posted last > year on FFL > > > No it at all. Just raining. > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--It would be helpful in these discussions for there to be a common definition for terms being used eg"real".When this word is it may mean something very different from one person to another. So for me the statement "the ego is not real" is an absurd statement thats because of how I define "real".For someone using a different definition this statement may make perfrct sense.Kevin FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is a difference between speaking about ego, I, Self etc. as if > these were real objects that could be pointed to meaningfully in an > abstract discussion, and speaking about one's "sense of self". A sense > of self is an experience, not an idea. By all appearances, it is a > very common experience, and the absence of it is not at all a common > experience. Does this have anything to do with what is "real"? > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > > No it at all. Just raining. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert > Gimbel" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -Maybe she meant, that when the ego self is > transcended, > > Who transcends the ego? > > > and the Self is realized, > > Who realizes the Self? > > > than one begins to be more present, in the moment, > > > obviously... > > Who is this "one" that is more present in the moment > ? Akasha, did you catch the advaita flu from me? :-) > > > > > > > > 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 > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So which Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath has endorsed YOU as a > > > preferred candidate to become his sucessor? > > > > It's just a meaningless statement, Lawson. It's like > > someone saying, "My choice for US President is Nelson > > Mandela." Not gonna happen; can't ever happen until > > they change the laws for Ahnuld. So it's easy to say. > > > > Why would Swami say it if it wasn't what he thought? My understanding is tha the TMO was providing substantial funding for Shantanada and his Shakaracharayaship. (Correct me if my understanding is wrong). And Shantanada knew that your professor friend was quite interested and looked favorably upon MMY( didn't he? correct my understanding if I am wrong). Its not uncommon for reicpients to speak highly of their benefactors, in heart felt, but sometimes exagerated terms. And its not uncommon to load praise on someone whom the audience / listener admires -- it gives the listener a thrill. So perhaps in the spirit of Indian conviviality and expressive laudations, Shantanada gave copious praise to his benefactor, knowing it would thrill your friend, even if some aspects were a bit exaggerated or out of context. I could imagine Shantanand telling MMY that such and such a very wise and grand professor visited him and the man was of such sterling character it was of such a credit to MMY that his admirers were so wise and grand. Anyway, I sense some grandness and goodwill, of the superlative Indian type, in what Shantananda told your prof friend. Just a hunch. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -Maybe she meant, that when the ego self is transcended, Who transcends the ego? > and the Self is realized, Who realizes the Self? > than one begins to be more present, in the moment, > obviously... Who is this "one" that is more present in the moment ? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 15, 2005, at 11:17 PM, sparaig wrote: > > > All that CC is is when there is 24/7 presence of Self. The claim > > that "I" and "me" goes away is either a mis-identification of CC with > > extreme unstressing resulting in pathological derealization, or a > > misinterpretation of what MMY is describing. > > Said the robot Lawson when the remote was pushed. So which Shankaracharya of the NOrth has indicated that he would have liked you to be his sucessor if you were of the proper caste? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I haven't. > If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had > CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. > > My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such > episodes? Speaking only for myself, I'm 'way past the point where I pay attention to people who are merely repeating what they have been told about enlight- enment. I'm only interested in people's personal experiences with it, and comparing them to my own. Would you trust a restaurant review written by someone who had never eaten there? Many would. Would you trust a restaurant review written by someone who had never eaten, period, but had only heard what others have have said about eating? Many would. For those who are interested in fine dining exper- iences, and comparing them to their own, I kinda suspect they'd prefer to hear first-hand experiences... Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...] > > > Is this based on personal experience? > > > > "I" will never tell. > > I take that as a no. And am left with the impression that your view is > based on your interpretation of any number of advanced lecture tapes > you heard and "assimilated" over the years. You can take that as '"I" will never tell.' Either I have had CC episodes and won't admit to them, or I haven't. If I have, then my comments might make sense to others who have had CC episodes. If I haven't, then perhaps they won't. My question to YOU: why do YOU care whether or not I have had such episodes? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
> > > It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said > > > the above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. > > > > It's just One Man's Opinion. The value that people > > give to that opinion depends pretty much on what > > they want to read into it. > > Anoop Chandola: "What about this Maharishi who is with the Beatles? > Is he legitimate?" > > Swami Shantananda, Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath: "Let me put it to > you this way, he would have been my first choice to be my sucessor > but they wouldn't allow it due to the caste laws." > > So you're saying that the response didn't say anything relevant > about MMY's legitimacy? Only to those who are concerned about "proving" Maharishi's "legitimacy." If you believe what he brought to the table (TM) was valuable in your life, why would you even care? If you don't, One Man's Opinion is not going to convince you. You seem to be using this statement as some sort of a club to bash people into agreeing with your opinion of the man. Some already do. Some did, and no longer do. Some never did. Your statement is not going to change any of these people's minds. It seems to me that your intention, nigh unto a need, is to change people's minds. What does it MATTER what other people believe? All that matters is what YOU believe, man. I don't see people actively trying to change your mind here. All they're doing is stating what they believe themselves. How does that affect you in any way? Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
At the bottom: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance dissappears. > > Good. But I'd say that even this is problematic, because > people have different interpretations of what the word > 'ignorance' means. > > I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't appear; > the perception of it not always already having been > present disappears." > > Unc Thanks. Problem-free. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance dissappears. Good. But I'd say that even this is problematic, because people have different interpretations of what the word 'ignorance' means. I'd say something like, "Enlightenment doesn't appear; the perception of it not always already having been present disappears." Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Was this the Shankaracharya that Mahesh "owned"?--there was one that was basically 'bought and sold'. Just a like a special interest group buying for legislation, influence, etc. That's all I needed to hear, esp. given all the other improprieties. In general the Shankaracharyas are not only realized--and the only ones who ever claimed M. was enlightened was his followers--they had to have expertise in the scriptures. Since M. relies heavily on pundits for his knowledge, in this case 'two strikes and you're out'. The most powerful of the seats, Sringeri (Shankaras seat), from what I could tell spending a lot of time with the sanyasis, they considered M. an aberration and a 'seller of the Veda'. Many felt he was headed to Patala-loka... On Jun 17, 2005, at 5:44 PM, TurquoiseB wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said the >> above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. > > It's just One Man's Opinion. The value that people > give to that opinion depends pretty much on what > they want to read into it. > > Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What kind of "feeling" is a "sense of self?" What is its taste, > > touch, scent, sound or image? Do you mean "emotion?" Then what > > emotion is "sense of self?" > > *** > Well, anyone who has this feeling knows it without further > discrimination or discussion. > > Got to go. Perhaps I'll check in again tomorrow. :) It's an interesting useof the word "feeling." Perhaps you meant "most comfortable word to use in this context?" 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Most people, or at least many, use my definition, consciously or unconsciously, I think. It's also similar to the "Working definition" found in various psychology textbooks. Just because a given person doesn't usethat definition, doesn't mean the definition isn't in common use. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > by "definition," that is their self. > > > Truth can't be obtained by definitions. Words are defined according > to a world view that already presupposes a certain truth. That is > why I said (below) that your definition started with an > understanding that "self" exists. Then I said that you have this > understanding because it is your experience. I followed this with an > example of someone whose experience differs from yours, who would > not find the world view that gave rise to your definition to hold > true for her. > > Your follow-up points (below) on use of intellect and on the need > for definitions, don't seem to have anything to do with this. > > > > > > > > *** > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these > words. > > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > mothering > > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were > a > > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > > > Uttering words involves use of "definitions" unless you are > claiming > > that someone who is enlightened has no intellect to help guide the > > chooice of words to utter. > > > > Notice I didn't say that the intellect guided their Self or > something, > > though I suppose that this distinction isn't an issue at some > point... 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm a big believer in intuition, and that intuition > can be "trained." That is, one pays attention to one's > intuitions and tries to figure out the state of attention > or the "feeling" that accompanied the moment of intuitional > "seeing." Then, if the intuition turns out to be correct, > watch for that same state of attention or "feeling" in the > future, and pay more attention to it. > El Camino (the King's Highway) Thanks! 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said the > > above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. > > It's just One Man's Opinion. The value that people > give to that opinion depends pretty much on what > they want to read into it. > Anoop Chandola: "What about this Maharishi who is with the Beatles? Is he legitimate?" Swami Shantananda, Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath: "Let me put it to you this way, he would have been my first choice to be my sucessor but they wouldn't allow it due to the caste laws." So you're saying that the response didn't say anything relevant about MMY's legitimacy? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
Comment below: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you spend any time trying to find that "sense of self" it > proves to > > be maddeningly untraceable. We assume that there is a self, but > if > > you investigate into the matter there doesn't seem to be one > > locatable. The atma vichara (self inquiry) that a number of folks > here > > have recommended (as well as Ramana Maharishi and Nisargadatta, > among > > others) is extraordinarily profound (and addictive). > > *** > One who tries to locate a "self" has started with the unconscious > assumption that "self" is an object that could be located. Or, if it > can't be located, then maybe the correct conclusion is that it > doesn't exist. But a "sense of self" is not an object to be located. > It is a feeling. If the feeling is there, it doesn't need to be > traced. The feeling cannot be denied, even if no referent for the > feeling could ever be found. Similarly, if the feeling is not there, > nothing need be done to prove existence or non-existence of self. > **END** Yes, the "one" who began with the objective to find who or what that "one" was is extinquished in the process. That one(self)is not found because it was never present. Never present because it was predicated on a misapprehension of the situation. The "feeling" of a self is the misapprehension, the mistake of intellect, the false identity of pure awareness with limitations. The "feeling" is there only because pure awareness "IS", not because the ego is. Enlightenment/Awakening doesn't appear; ignorance dissappears. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What kind of "feeling" is a "sense of self?" What is its taste, > touch, scent, sound or image? Do you mean "emotion?" Then what > emotion is "sense of self?" *** Well, anyone who has this feeling knows it without further discrimination or discussion. Got to go. Perhaps I'll check in again tomorrow. :) 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > by "definition," that is their self. Truth can't be obtained by definitions. Words are defined according to a world view that already presupposes a certain truth. That is why I said (below) that your definition started with an understanding that "self" exists. Then I said that you have this understanding because it is your experience. I followed this with an example of someone whose experience differs from yours, who would not find the world view that gave rise to your definition to hold true for her. Your follow-up points (below) on use of intellect and on the need for definitions, don't seem to have anything to do with this. > > > > *** > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these words. > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The mothering > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were a > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > Uttering words involves use of "definitions" unless you are claiming > that someone who is enlightened has no intellect to help guide the > chooice of words to utter. > > Notice I didn't say that the intellect guided their Self or something, > though I suppose that this distinction isn't an issue at some point... 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said the > above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. It's just One Man's Opinion. The value that people give to that opinion depends pretty much on what they want to read into it. Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you spend any time trying to find that "sense of self" it > proves to > > be maddeningly untraceable. We assume that there is a self, but > if > > you investigate into the matter there doesn't seem to be one > > locatable. The atma vichara (self inquiry) that a number of folks > here > > have recommended (as well as Ramana Maharishi and Nisargadatta, > among > > others) is extraordinarily profound (and addictive). > > *** > One who tries to locate a "self" has started with the unconscious > assumption that "self" is an object that could be located. Or, if it > can't be located, then maybe the correct conclusion is that it > doesn't exist. But a "sense of self" is not an object to be located. > It is a feeling. If the feeling is there, it doesn't need to be > traced. The feeling cannot be denied, even if no referent for the > feeling could ever be found. Similarly, if the feeling is not there, > nothing need be done to prove existence or non-existence of self. What kind of "feeling" is a "sense of self?" What is its taste, touch, scent, sound or image? Do you mean "emotion?" Then what emotion is "sense of self?" > > Yes, Ramana, Nisargadatta and others make interesting reading. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "coshlnx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --The BODY is the source of fear, not the ego. This fact (more > importantly and generally), explains why Enlightened Gurus can still > have hang-ups especially in the sex and money departments. The > source of desires in these areas arise from the BODY, not the ego. > Remember: such desires originating from the physical body (and even > subtle bodies), have an origin in millions of years of evolution and > carry a momemtum full of impulses relating to primal instincts; but > translated into a host of new desires blossoming in aspects of the > social arena not present, (say) 50,000 years ago. > Going back in time even further, look at the less highly evolved > primates such as chimps. Observation of their groups show highly > complex social skills involving power struggles, alliances, clashes > of personality, sex games, etc; and in the human context of modern > life, these primal desires and ways of interacting are translated > into even more highly complex and refined patterns of behavior. > So why is there a distinction between "Body" and "ego" unless you want to claim that "ego" doesn't exist for an enlightened person? 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So which Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath has endorsed YOU as a > > > > preferred candidate to become his sucessor? > > > > > > It's just a meaningless statement, Lawson. It's like > > > someone saying, "My choice for US President is Nelson > > > Mandela." Not gonna happen; can't ever happen until > > > they change the laws for Ahnuld. So it's easy to say. > > > > Why would Swami Shantanada say it if it wasn't what he thought? > > True for whom? For him? I have never doubted your > story, or that the man probably felt that way. On > the other hand, it's a meaningless thing to say. > There was never any possibility that Maharishi could > ever be considered for the gig. > > All I'm saying is that, as statements go, it's a lot > like, "If frogs could fly they wouldn't bump their > asses when they hop." It's easy to speculate, but > they can't fly, and they do bump their asses when > they hop. > It's meaningful in that the Shankaracharya of the NOrth said the above when asked about the "genuineness" of MMY. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you spend any time trying to find that "sense of self" it proves to > be maddeningly untraceable. We assume that there is a self, but if > you investigate into the matter there doesn't seem to be one > locatable. The atma vichara (self inquiry) that a number of folks here > have recommended (as well as Ramana Maharishi and Nisargadatta, among > others) is extraordinarily profound (and addictive). *** One who tries to locate a "self" has started with the unconscious assumption that "self" is an object that could be located. Or, if it can't be located, then maybe the correct conclusion is that it doesn't exist. But a "sense of self" is not an object to be located. It is a feeling. If the feeling is there, it doesn't need to be traced. The feeling cannot be denied, even if no referent for the feeling could ever be found. Similarly, if the feeling is not there, nothing need be done to prove existence or non-existence of self. Yes, Ramana, Nisargadatta and others make interesting reading. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--The BODY is the source of fear, not the ego. This fact (more importantly and generally), explains why Enlightened Gurus can still have hang-ups especially in the sex and money departments. The source of desires in these areas arise from the BODY, not the ego. Remember: such desires originating from the physical body (and even subtle bodies), have an origin in millions of years of evolution and carry a momemtum full of impulses relating to primal instincts; but translated into a host of new desires blossoming in aspects of the social arena not present, (say) 50,000 years ago. Going back in time even further, look at the less highly evolved primates such as chimps. Observation of their groups show highly complex social skills involving power struggles, alliances, clashes of personality, sex games, etc; and in the human context of modern life, these primal desires and ways of interacting are translated into even more highly complex and refined patterns of behavior. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -In regard to the last post: there is no fear, because the ego is > the origin of fear, due to it's quality of seperating,...everything.. > whereas the Self, there is unity, no need to fear...anything, as to > fear requires you to feel threatened or seperated from something, or > disconnected, etc, all of the stuff the ego call up to verify > itself... > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > We automatically call our "self" the most permanent set of > things > > > present in our mental landscape. For most, these include > > personality, > > > beliefs, habits, emotions, etc. When somone has 24/7 witnessing, > the > > > most permanent aspect of their existance is that 24/7 > witnessing, so > > > by "definition," that is their self. > > > > *** > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these > words. > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > mothering > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were a > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So which Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath has endorsed YOU as a > > > preferred candidate to become his sucessor? > > > > It's just a meaningless statement, Lawson. It's like > > someone saying, "My choice for US President is Nelson > > Mandela." Not gonna happen; can't ever happen until > > they change the laws for Ahnuld. So it's easy to say. > > Why would Swami Shantanada say it if it wasn't what he thought? True for whom? For him? I have never doubted your story, or that the man probably felt that way. On the other hand, it's a meaningless thing to say. There was never any possibility that Maharishi could ever be considered for the gig. All I'm saying is that, as statements go, it's a lot like, "If frogs could fly they wouldn't bump their asses when they hop." It's easy to speculate, but they can't fly, and they do bump their asses when they hop. Unc 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "marekreavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Comment below: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > **SNIP** > > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these words. > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > mothering > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were a > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. > > **END** > > "The ego(self) is as real as the 'it' in 'It's raining.'" > -- paraphrase from something posted last year on FFL > No it at all. Just raining. But what is "raining?" Definitions continue to be used when speaking. Appropriate words are selected based on their definitions (meaning). 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: CC is "Baby Awakening"
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Gimbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -In regard to the last post: there is no fear, because the ego is > the origin of fear, due to it's quality of seperating,...everything.. > whereas the Self, there is unity, no need to fear...anything, as to > fear requires you to feel threatened or seperated from something, or > disconnected, etc, all of the stuff the ego call up to verify > itself... So someone in CC or higher can't "feel" fear? > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > We automatically call our "self" the most permanent set of > things > > > present in our mental landscape. For most, these include > > personality, > > > beliefs, habits, emotions, etc. When somone has 24/7 witnessing, > the > > > most permanent aspect of their existance is that 24/7 > witnessing, so > > > by "definition," that is their self. > > > > *** > > By what "definition"? This presumes self to begin with. In other > > words, someone experiencing a sense of self has uttered these > words. > > Contrast this with comments from Suzanne Segal such as: The > mothering > > function is happening. It is happening better than if there were a > > mother. But there is no mother. She was referring to herself in > > relation to her child. From an outsider's perspective, "she" was > > obviously present, but she experienced no sense of a self. 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/
