Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
Just a question on another topic. There was a lawyer who was defending a guy in LA what happened with the situation? I was pretty certain the guy would be convicted but there were some charges that were questionable, what happnened? Louis - Original Message From: Marek Reavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:59:28 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC Acording to MMY-CC! Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > **snip** > > I suspect one can experience *any* emotion, strong or > otherwise, in enlightenment, because the emotion *is* > enlightenment, as is everything else the enlightened > being experiences. The Self need not be "overwhelmed" > to experience any part of what is, essentially, itSelf. > The histories of supposedly-enlightened saints in > almost all spiritual traditions (including Hinduism) > are *full* of stories of them displaying strong > emotions -- of bhakti or compassion or whatever. > > Emotions come and go. That is their nature, and the > nature of having a body. **snip to end** Nicely put. If you read or listen to any of the supposedly- enlightened saints (including Maharishi when he's not trying to promote some program or project) the message consistently is that Enlightenment Is (and never isn't). Ignorance is merely the denial of reality. Nothing changes (when there's awakening) except the realization of what already Is. If you mistakenly believe that you've mislaid your eyeglasses, even while you're wearing them, when you realize where they "are", does your vision suddenly improve? Or do you just relax and appreciate what is present before you. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 17, 2007, at 11:06 AM, authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >>> just noting that for some people there can be a very >>> powerful heart-value to intellectual knowledge >> >> We were talking about dry intellectual knowledge, for one thing. > > But I'm pointing out that "dry" is in the eye > of the beholder. What's "dry" for one person > may be very rich and "juicy" for another. Like for whom, exactly? I would say that having to have the heart-value in our lives is one thing that is fairly universal, and for good reason--it's part and parcel of what makes us human. Millions of years ago, caring for each other was the only thing that kept us from being eaten alive. Basically, it's hard-wired into our brains. Nobody likes to be bored up the wall, Judy. You can chat away all you want, but your own feelings about the TMO (I believe you've said you "loathed" the org, right?) speak for themselves. And most others feel the same way, or else we'd still be there, listening to such scintillating tidbits as, "When the point collapses upon itself... (Yawn) > > For >> another, I imagine that the above is true for very few, seeing as >> how many have fled the TMO citing just that reason, amongst others. > > Could well be. I wasn't suggesting it was common, > just noting that the other ain't universal. > See above.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 17, 2007, at 10:17 AM, authfriend wrote: >> And when that happens, usually the org >> promoting the dry intellectual stuff finds some way to blame the >> person, citing character defects or some other reason. > > For the record, I wasn't "blaming" anybody or anything, Just for the record, I said "the org." > just noting that for some people there can be a very > powerful heart-value to intellectual knowledge We were talking about dry intellectual knowledge, for one thing. For another, I imagine that the above is true for very few, seeing as how many have fled the TMO citing just that reason, amongst others. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 11:37 PM, authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Maharishi's teaching have always been rather dry and academic, even >> more so the last couple of decades. His circular expositions of >> silence, and silence into silence, and silence out of silence, etc., >> etc., just have no juice for me. And they don't effectively speak >> to my experience, either. It mostly seems to be dry >> intellectualization with no ground either in heart or the >> experience along my path. > > FWIW, there can be such profound beauty in > intellectual knowledge that it actually moves > the heart and inspires devotion. That's the party line, of course, and what you're 'supposed' to believe. But, being human, that rarely happens for most people, since the heart value is basically what *makes* us human and people know instinctively when it's lacking--and respond exactly as Marek's friend (and most of the rest of us) did, by going elsewhere where it's more in evidence. And when that happens, usually the org promoting the dry intellectual stuff finds some way to blame the person, citing character defects or some other reason. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 17, 2007, at 7:17 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: As for sparaig's notion that one cannot experience strong, even "overwhelming" emotion in enlightenment, I'd suggest that's Just Another Idea *About* Enlight- enment, formed from the point of view of non-enlight- enment. I suspect one can experience *any* emotion, strong or otherwise, in enlightenment, because the emotion *is* enlightenment, as is everything else the enlightened being experiences. The Self need not be "overwhelmed" to experience any part of what is, essentially, itSelf. The histories of supposedly-enlightened saints in almost all spiritual traditions (including Hinduism) are *full* of stories of them displaying strong emotions -- of bhakti or compassion or whatever. Emotions come and go. That is their nature, and the nature of having a body. Sparaig obviously expects that nature to *change* once one realizes one's enlightenment; I don't. Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water, and occasionally experience strong emotions. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water, and occasionally experience strong emotions. Sparaig's view seems to me a belief that someone who is not comfortable with strong emotions and who finds them "overwhelming" might develop. So many of the ideas that people have *about* enlightenment seem to me to be based on their own fears and aversions, and the hope that the things that inspire those fears and aversions will no longer appear in one's life after one realizes enlightenment. But they will. And we'll still have to deal with them, just as we did before realization. In this case, the issue is not the emotions but who experiences them. A quote I posted last night says it nicely: 51. All-consuming Openness All and everything reverted to openness, its nature is beyond denial or assertion; just as all worlds and life-forms open into space, so emotion and evaluating thought melt into hyperspaciousness. Now here, now gone in a flash—thoughts leave no trace, and opened up wide to seamless gnosis hopes and fears are no longer credible, the stake that tethers the mind in its field is extracted, and Samsara, the city of delusion, is evacuated. Like clouds emerging in the sky and then dissolving therein, all events originate in spaciousness and are finally released into the same space. Upon such intuition, assertion and denial and all emotion, all mental states and functions, return to the empty holistic seed, original hyperspaciousness, and thus the entire mentality of samsaric delusion dissolves into timeless purity. This secret transmission implies living in the undivided openness of intrinsic emptiness.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 10:18 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jan 16, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: **snip** He does mention bhakti, but it's more *transcendental bhakti* and is present in the transitional refinement of GC. In other words it's not 'falling down in the street with your tambourine Hare Krishna bhakti' but an inner, yogic bhakti, Love & God and all that. I also wonder if part of that also has to do with making his system of yoga fit into a more western adapted model, devoid of any overtly "Hindu" elements. **end** There have been passages in my life when I was overcome with what I can only refer to as 'transcendental bhakti' and I found myself on the ground, on my knees in spontaneous prayer, eyes streaming tears of gratitude and in such unbearable sweetness that it was incomprehensible that I could survive it. If that is part of the program I don't know how or why it isn't spoken about more directly. Have you read "Love and God"? After all, it sounds like you already wrote your own version. ;-) Are you mocking him, by chance? My own belief, for what it is worth, is that any form of "overwhelming" emotion is, by definition, a sign of not being fully established in CC, but that doesn't denigrate what he was feeling... On the other hand, YOUR comment certainly "feels" derogatory. Since I know quite well what I meant, we'll chock another one up to the "ear of the beholder." What an idiot.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 6:44 PM, wmurphy77 wrote: Actually it is more simply stated as that between a thimble full of water representing Self Realization (CC according to MMY, sometimes), A picture full of water representing GC (realization of the personal formless 'consciousness' of the personal God IN creation) And Unity or UC, represented by a broken picture of water, realization of the Universal oneness of Brahman as manifest and unmanifest. :-) Just like water is the same regardless of the container, so Brahman is essentially the same regardless of the form it is expressed thru...(my analogy). Here's my favorite recent description of Unity: The Second Theme: Openness The Disclosure of Openness Now that you have sussed absence as the natural way of being I shall show you the nature of openness. The transmission of atiyoga, the apex approach, like space, is without center or boundary; higher than the highest, it is Samantabhadra's vast mind, an immense seamless super-sameness. All inner and outer experience manifest and unmanifest pure mind, unstirring from unstructured reality, ineffable, zero-dimensional, remains open, constantly, without interval. In the moment, all things in the objective field, in the absence of any substantial aspect, are open to infinity, and intrinsic gnosis, wherein past and future are indivisible, likewise is open wide to sky-like infinity; the past closed, the future unbegun, the present is indeterminate pure mind, and signless, rootless, without foundation or substance, it is an untrammeled openness at the boundless center. In essential reality, which lacks all bias and partiality, view, empowerment, mandala and mantra-recitation are absent, and levels, paths, commitment, training and progress are unimaged; all are wide open, unfounded, boundless vastness, everything embraced by pure-mind reality. All experience, however it may appear, is hallowed in its unoriginated nature; 'arising spontaneously, never fixed or crystalized, immaculate in its ontological indeterminacy, it opens infinitely into the reality of natural perfection. Gnosis, the essential reality of total presence, with a 360 degree perspective, free of quantitative bias, unsubstantiated by language or logic, unsigned, neither eternal nor temporal, subject to neither increase nor decrease, without directional movement or pulsation, immaculate in the immensity of immanent hyper-sameness, it is seamless openness unconfined by space and time. The gnostic dynamic lacks any intrusive hope or fear, so nothing can happen to rupture seamless openness; in such autonomous, genuine, unrestricted freedom we can never be caught in a cage of belief All and everything reverted to openness, its nature is beyond denial or assertion; just as all worlds and life-forms open into interior space, so emotion and evaluating thought melt into hyperspaciousness. Now here, now gone, thoughts leave no trace, and opened wide to seamless gnosis hopes and fears are no longer credible, the stake that tethers the mind in its field is extracted, and Samsara, the city of delusion, is evacuated. Whosoever recognizes the events appearing in the external field and the internal mental emanation, all that play of energy, all alike, as utterly empty openness, to him is disclosed everything as this key—this crucial openness. Assimilation to Openness The endless facets of reality are now assimilated to the brilliant emptiness of intrinsic gnosis which is the pristine awareness of openness; the perceiver unloosed, the field of perception dissolved, with nothing to hold on to, yet with full awareness, this is the contemplation of consummate undistracted mindfulness: open like the sky, neither meditation nor nonmeditation, it is the super-matrix of Samantabhadra's contemplation. In the vast gnostic super-matrix of brilliant emptiness, no matter what evanescent particularity shows itself the direct sensory perception of gnosis illuminates its reality and the image unconfined, cognition is pure pleasure; the six sensory fields relaxed in the pristine-awareness matrix, clear light, unobstructed, without outside or inside, in artless super-relaxation—spontaneity! With the carefree mind of an idler, neither tight nor slack, we rest easy; here gnosis is infinitely open, like a crystal-clear sky, and we linger gratefully in spaciousness without anticipation. With spacious intuition of the brilliant emptiness of reality, unconfined gnosis is a seamless infinite openness, and free of belief all ideation dissolving, all things converge in the matrix of the gnostic dynamic. The blissful ground and a happy mind blended, inside and outside is the one taste of pure mind: this is the vision of reality as the consummate way of being. At the moment of engaging with a sensory object, the mind is opened to infinite, blissful vision, and free of belief, as its luminous expression, its natural clarity, it is assimilated to super seamless openness. The Bind of Openness I
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: **snip** He does mention bhakti, but it's more *transcendental bhakti* and is present in the transitional refinement of GC. In other words it's not 'falling down in the street with your tambourine Hare Krishna bhakti' but an inner, yogic bhakti, Love & God and all that. I also wonder if part of that also has to do with making his system of yoga fit into a more western adapted model, devoid of any overtly "Hindu" elements. **end** There have been passages in my life when I was overcome with what I can only refer to as 'transcendental bhakti' and I found myself on the ground, on my knees in spontaneous prayer, eyes streaming tears of gratitude and in such unbearable sweetness that it was incomprehensible that I could survive it. If that is part of the program I don't know how or why it isn't spoken about more directly. Have you read "Love and God"? After all, it sounds like you already wrote your own version. ;-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 5:50 PM, wmurphy77 wrote: Indeed they are.: the commentaries of the Badarayana sutras. I traced this years ago after I heard the first mention. OK, let's just assume for simplicity sake Guru Dev was in UC and MMY just calls everything Cosmic Consciousness, Thanks! :-) Non sequitur. There's no mention nor any implication in my above statement that is connected to your response. Turiyatita or jivan- mukti are the traditional words for "CC". It's well-known in what style of literature these are used. Written accounts only mention him as a jivan-mukti, but the truth is, there is more to life than the written word. We really, at this late date don't have any clue about a man not even one of us has ever met. But also worrying about something so long gone is pathetic. Learn what there is to learn and move on. But just to stir the pot he was known for a couple of siddhis: spontaneously lighting ritual fires and materialization of objects. The clincher is the last one. Can you guess what state of consciousness one would have to be in to materialize sacred objects? (hint: it ain't CC :-)).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 5:26 PM, sparaig wrote: The seven states of consciousness are identified, according to the MUM style guide, as: http://resources.mum.edu/manuals/styleguide.pdf Turiya Chetanå (Transcendental Consciousness) Turiyåtit Chetanå (Cosmic Consciousness) Bhagavad Chetanå (God Consciousness) Bråhmi Chetanå (Unity Consciousness) Seems to me that these terms should be traceable to one or more sanskrit sources. Turiya, for instance, is found in one of the Upanishads. Indeed they are.: the commentaries of the Badarayana sutras. I traced this years ago after I heard the first mention.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 3:47 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: And that seems to be in contradistinction to what Guru Dev taught and lived. If you go to Paul Mason's website on Guru Dev you learn that Guru Dev taught primarily (at least to the masses) in terms of God and the heart. You can listen to Guru Dev sing bhajans and the biographies all point out that he continued to practice devotionals throughout his life. Anyone ever have any experience with Maharishi doing any devotional exercises (besides puja to Guru Dev)? I agree completely and this is a crucial point: M divvies out mantra via formula and SBS gave mantra based on love. There's some interesting discussion of this in Beacon Light. There must've been some watershed moment where a decision was made to move away from out and out initiation into an ishta-devata. And that one thing (IMMO) made all the difference in the world.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 3:47 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: But partly because of that, what's always struck me as peculiar is that Maharishi's programs and organizations are so devoid of bhakti. With the exception of him teaching us the guru puja to Guru Dev (now somewhat morphed -- at least in emphasis -- to the Holy Tradition), Maharishi's teaching have always been rather dry and academic, even more so the last couple of decades. His circular expositions of silence, and silence into silence, and silence out of silence, etc., etc., just have no juice for me. And they don't effectively speak to my experience, either. It mostly seems to be dry intellectualization with no ground either in heart or the experience along my path. Not to mention all the scientific and pseudo-scientific discussions. He does mention bhakti, but it's more *transcendental bhakti* and is present in the transitional refinement of GC. In other words it's not 'falling down in the street with your tambourine Hare Krishna bhakti' but an inner, yogic bhakti, Love & God and all that. I also wonder if part of that also has to do with making his system of yoga fit into a more western adapted model, devoid of any overtly "Hindu" elements.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Hey, was Guru Dev in CC or GC or UC???? Acording to MMY-CC!
On Jan 16, 2007, at 3:47 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: Maharishi's articulation of states of enlightenment definitely seems to have evolved over time; at first he spoke only of Cosmic Consciousness (which was offered as the big E -- the be all and end all of human evolution), and only later spoke of God Consciousness, then Unity, and later Brahman Consciousness. Whether that progression followed his own interior evolution or the arc in the evolution of the teaching (or both) would be impossible to ever tease out since Maharishi (almost?) never speaks in terms of his own experience. I was told by a reliable movement source and had also heard from another source (and IIRC one TMO published instance) that Mahesh had developed the idea from reading the Shankara's bhasya of the Badarayana sutras and then reading the comments from yoga-darshana and those from the Bhagavatas. He read quite a few others as well. This completely fits with the resultant system of 7 states (technically six states with one transitional stage) Mahesh devised and appears to be a unique innovation using these source texts. It is unclear whether he received oral instruction on this from SBS, but it's certainly possible he did since SBS was master of the relative aspect of Vedanta in addition to being a siddha himself. Although M does present the View from the POV of Advaita Vedanta, he is at variance with the Advaitin treatment in his inclusion of the Bhagavatin POV into the progression from witnessing to UC. It is documented but I forget where I saw it that M. did do a detailed study of Badarayana. So I believe someone very familiar with M's life and work could find this written reference of this and even isolate the period of time where he did this examination. But I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the source of the "seven states of consciousness" of MMY as I've studied the same comments on my own along with numerous others.
