Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Thanks for your alternating comments. I read them. Not sure what to say except, Oh Yeah, you live in Scotland, truely a mystical place I wish to check out someday since I have a good amount of Scottish in me. My Grandfather was in Scottish Military horseback and kilts and all. - Original Message - From: off_world_beings To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Kirk" wrote: > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Some things have no definition! --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, grate.swan wrote: > > A corrupt marketing tool and identity crutch used by those who feel > that the natural culmination of life processes is something that can > be packaged, sold and owned.>> This ironically seems like the statement of a corrupted perception. To see life, not as life, but as death, is like seeing the glass half empty instead of half full. OffWorld
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
> Very good ! Excitement = entropy. > > > Unfortunately the citizens of Fairfield, except for a very few bright > individuals, understands the power behind and blessings bestowed upon > their town since the early 70's. > > When MUM and the meditators leave, and they finally will, the town > will be left with hundreds of bewildered spiritual vampires. > > The "chatters" as you described them will be all that town will have > left. An american story of hope and tragedy. -Nablus you have changed during last year.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
I had some meditation experiences. I would see lights of all colors, pretty much the entire time. Other things read like 'day and night' experiences of the Buddhist tantric - fireflys, smoke, crosses, eternal knots, melting, expanding, and typical kundalini signs like feeling on fire for weeks on end and hearing my brain synapses rapid firing during times of especial internal mental conflict, often more at night when trying to sleep than during formal meditation. People ask, what meditation am I talking about since I synthesize all my teachings into one maismic conundrum. I am talking about all the meditation forms I have done starting with Guru Dattreya mantra I got from a traveling yogi in LA when I was fourteen to TM and fifteen years, then also seven advanced techniques, Sidhis, four years at MIU, then falling pretty much freeform from there on until Dzogchen for last five years. Whatever that means, if anything at all. Which for me takes the form of a hymn or two and some japa. And also the recurring thought that all will be alright, to not force issues, to relax, to have a good time. The person holding up traffic behind clears it up for ahead. I have put down TM as totally internally turned techniques now totally space me out beyond the ability to effectly act. So I do the middle thing and sit 'in the gap' and put down some numbers of mantras. No point discussing which ones. But they are related to Saraswati as hot babe Dakini. But it is clear to me during practice due to the clear feelings I get that the mantras I use are 'effective' in the sense that they make me feel a certain way. Inlcuding that too, you pervert. So when I am hearing people talk about not feeling enlightened or whatever I am like hey what are you talking about. If you don't feel enlightened then you most likely aren't since if you are working just from the mind it won't be stable and if just from the POV of sitting meditation sessions then one will never open their eyes during regular life and see the same thing as during meditation. If one is doing open eye practice using imagination as well as sound and so on then it will become more easy to stabilize the light nature. The value of which is the feeling that comes from such stability. The feeling of freshness, clarity, light, and sense of connectivity. Resorting to consort, one has developed within the love fire and it is automatically arisen due to grace of guru and lineage. I remember once on the topic of aloneness and kaivalya someone added that it sounded horrible to be alone, but someone else added that however in that state there is not even aloneness. So no feeling of aloneness. If ones sadhana is not providing feelings of enlightenment then what is it doing exactly? Because we were not doing these religious things merely to waste time were we? No God is keeping track. So sorry. One is doing their practice because it is still of benefit to them obviously. Have you ever been tense like a live wire and put on a song and it strokes your head and unknots your muscles better than your lazy lover. POV of Dzogchen is something like lack of Advaita with a flashlight and a clear crystal globe. No God and so on, though presence throughout all. Over the glass of wine, I ask you to tell me where this God you Advaitists talk about where it exists, now stop thinking and tell me! The only God that ever existed for any and all was the king and queen of their mental limitations disguised as lordly and goodly. Of any other God there has never been such a thing upon this Earth. Liberated beings have come many who felt the presence of being beyond mind as being liberating to know and develop a relationship with. Then having such knowledge one realizes that nobody else can ever again place limitations upon ones potential or mind. It is in your control to submerge and retreat, that is to repent, oh sinner, repent, at the late hour, and transcend and how can anything be really so sinful when one is able to glow like that? I say this like I have because in various systems liberation takes on various forms. It's really cool to finally get rid of God and Gods finally and forever as all they have done is stood between one and ones elf. Now look here. Now see here. Mardi Gras is right around the corner. Have you found a reason to repent yet? No? Sad.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Enlightenment is different in different states of consciousness. Different tantras will evoke the state of conceptless light vision direct with sight, or work perhaps in less elaborated centers with other formless and unformulable mental or energy states. To at the state of sound and vision to mentally elaborate into something meaningful is at once both the start and end of the path itself. The entire path starting with a thought and ending with the same thought, the thought having presented the path. From sound and vision opportunities are constantly occuring to freshen up or liberate frequencies thus if one wills so they may die outwardly and ressurect in spirit, or as in The Devil card 15 of the Tarot Solve et Coagula one may entirely dissolve again their mental state of elaboration and forget all this enlightenment business entirely at their own discretion, especially those of us who aren't actively teaching. Bro, Sis, I have been sitting right next to you in sound and vision. Bro Sis don't spit at me with derision.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:00 PM, boo_lives wrote: > > The experience has to fit in with Maharishi's teachings and not be > > conjecture. I had a number of sentences struck out because, > according to > > Doug B, the experiences could not be verified. > snip > > What nonsense. The only reason I can see to have "experience" > meetings is to have a student recount an experience that has had a > particularly profound or confusing impact on him/her and to have a > qualified teacher respond and bring some clarity or perspective. For > that to happen the experience has to be described in an accurate and > personal manner, there can't be any editing. What does it mean to say > your experience "can't be verified"? And by people like Doug B, who > BTW gave me perhaps the single worst piece of advice I've ever been given? > > One thing I learned in the tmo was that most everyone who's known to > have "great experiences" is to be avoided at all costs, they're > usually toxic, unstable or egomaniacs. > I guess you're not getting what the #1 experience reporting is about. It's part of the all day, all evening show. IA is marketed to potential CPs as the way to gain very profound experiences in consciousness very quickly, say in just a week end. It goes along with the very laughable (IMO) marketing of go to IA, if even for the weekend then go home and prosper. IA has lost a lot of its glitter, but it started off as being ground zero of the development of consciousness. Maharishi was on many of the between the first and second morning round teleconferences. This was a way to get Maharishi's knowledge, his presence, his attention. As you can see by the numbers at http://invincibleamerica.org/tallies.htmlit's dead in the water. They made a big mistake when the cancelled the foreign stipends I guess to raise the NAFTA stipends by $100 USD per a month. I didn't get all that excited when I was last on IA (ended a couple weeks ago) and I didn't notice all that much excitement amongst the people I spoke with compared to last year or the year before.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Jan 28, 2009, at 6:57 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" wrote: --In other words, mind is a secondary witness to Witnessing; a fact even the Neo-Advaitins can't deny. (some mind-entity - illusory or not - is making various claims). What is the value of having those experiences.? That is the question that no one asks, because they have already been presented with (and bought hook, line, and sinker) the dogma that achieving this witnessing state is the highest point of human evolution, something that "should" be achieved. That's why MMY refers to CC as "merely normal" or "glorified ignorance" or the most intense form of the illusion of duality, etc. Wow, if he really said that, all that really shows is his ineptitude as a so-called "yogi", turiyatita being the summum bonum of real yogis and his acquired pseudo-advaitic snobbery. How could anyone take such a person seriously? Whatever sells, huh?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Let's face it, the TMO would be a lot healthier if people had sex (and chicken sandwiches) on a more regular basis. --- On Wed, 1/28/09, raunchydog wrote: > From: raunchydog > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 6:48 PM > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > wrote: > > > > Me, EnlightenDawn and Raunch sit around, smoking > grasshopper weed > and engage in mental tantric practices between the domes. > Oh, by the > way, many years ago I walked between the domes when > everybody was > flying. Oh my God! I almost got electrocuted! The energy > exchange > between the domes was mind blowing. One big yoni, one big > lingam. > Stand back! > > > > Peter, I used to know a guy who said he could > sense,(through his nose > physical nose or his subtle nose, I forget which) the > attraction > between male and female pheromones emanating from the > domes. He must > have been smokin' grasshopper weed or somethin' on > a breezy day and he > got wind of it. > > > --- On Wed, 1/28/09, enlightened_dawn11 > > wrote: > > > > > From: enlightened_dawn11 > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of > enlightenment > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 12:40 PM > > > lol-- i got as far as the grasshopper living > among the weeds > > > and > > > then got lost... > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > > "raunchydog" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > > enlightened_dawn11 > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > agreed-- really well said dr. pete. > enlightenment > > > is real, > > > viable > > > > > and experienced-- just not by > -thinking- > > > > > > > > > > raunchydog, i don't get your > comments at all- > > > care to clarify > > > please? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just jiving Peter. It's an analogy that > obviously > > > failed. It's a > > > > stretch but my point was, the grasshopper > identifies > > > with the > > > weeds in > > > > which he lives so much so that he smokes the > > > "weed" and > > > hallucinates > > > > his existence to be something > "real." Sorry, > > > I can't wrap my brain > > > > around it any further than that. > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > > "raunchydog" > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Excellent, Peter. It's exactly > the map > > > of the territory > > > Maharishi > > > > > has > > > > > > been telling grasshopper, > identifying for > > > years with the weeds > > > he's > > > > > > been smokin'. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Enlightenment is not what you > think > > > because: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can not get enlightened. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A thought is necessarily > bound by time > > > and space and > > > therefore > > > > > has > > > > > > nothing to do with enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can not "model" > > > enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So with those caveats. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In ignorance you are > somebody. A > > > psychological private self > > > that > > > > > > relates to the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then you get 1st stage > enlightenment > > > and you are nobody. > > > > > Actually, > > > > > > no "you" to be or not to > be. > > > Consciousness becomes conscious > > > of its > > > > > > own consciousness and withdraws > identity > > > with any space/time > > &g
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Vaj wrote: > Thanks for taking the time to openly respond to this question. Your > openness *is* appreciated. > On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:12 PM, I am the eternal wrote: > > What's expected is that you'll relate a #1 (Unity or beyond) experience. > In the two domes, these experiences take the form of describing, with lots > of heart, experiences that have to do with loss of self, with experiencing > The Self, with experiences of infinity, bliss in every direction and in > every thing. Each experience in the two domes is quite unique, stated in > the idiom of the experiencer. The sidhi administrators read the experiences > and make <<>> about what to leave in, what to leave out before > the experience is read. > > > So they make editorial suggestions? Why? I'm sorry, but that seems odd. > "Edited experiences, movement approved?" This *doesn't* mean there is a > script (of acceptable or not acceptable)? If the experiences are turned > down, one would have to be *on the (unspoken) script* to get a mention > wouldn't they? > The experience has to fit in with Maharishi's teachings and not be conjecture. I had a number of sentences struck out because, according to Doug B, the experiences could not be verified. > > Perhaps I'm missing something. > Yes. You are. There are improper experiences and proper experiences. The sidhi admin just want to make sure you're reporting a proper experience. > > I have no idea what the THMD/THP feel about the experiences in the domes. > In the domes the reaction to the THMD/THP experiences is "bullshit". Why > does it take all of these special buzz words to describe an experience? Why > further is it necessary to seemingly continue on with one of Maharishi's > last lectures with show and tell or a lab demonstration? > > > Good question. You're closer to the source so I'll have to defer to your > impressions! > My, our impression is that THMD and THP want to impress Maharishi. The people in the domes want to share their experiences with the other people in the domes. > > Bevin and Hagelin give first preference to THMD/THP experiences and if > there are none then experiences in the domes can be read. > > > Oh that's just too funny. It's not easy being king. > > Well, you have to realize that the unwashed huddled masses don't report experiences which fit in that easily with what Bevin and Hagelin want to talk about, which is a rehash of what Maharishi said. So of course THP and THMD experiences count more because you can catch more of Maharishi's more recent teachings in the experiences. God knows no one wants to be caught dead living out /last year's experiences/. There's an old cartoon of the Wizard of Id where an aid runs up to the little king and exclaims "Sire, the peasants are revolting". The little king replies "Yes, they are. But they pay the taxes." That's my take on having been perpetually one of the unwashed huddled masses during my entire career. First the initiators lorded over us. Then the sidhas (governors only). Then it was Vedic Atom, THMD and THP. Now it's all of the above plus the people with the Burger King hats. Thank God we are the salt of the earth.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Thanks for taking the time to openly respond to this question. Your openness is appreciated. On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:12 PM, I am the eternal wrote: Been there, done that, plan to go back and do it again. There is no script given to the IA CPs. There is no script. However TMO people will be TMO people. What's expected is that you'll relate a #1 (Unity or beyond) experience. In the two domes, these experiences take the form of describing, with lots of heart, experiences that have to do with loss of self, with experiencing The Self, with experiences of infinity, bliss in every direction and in every thing. Each experience in the two domes is quite unique, stated in the idiom of the experiencer. The sidhi administrators read the experiences and make <<>> about what to leave in, what to leave out before the experience is read. So they make editorial suggestions? Why? I'm sorry, but that seems odd. "Edited experiences, movement approved?" This doesn't mean there is a script (of acceptable or not acceptable)? If the experiences are turned down, one would have to be on the (unspoken) script to get a mention wouldn't they? Perhaps I'm missing something. The off campus experiences seem to be pages out of the same book. Some THMD will go on and on about experiencing the primal sounds, for example, and throw in as many of Maharishi's words used during his last year of teaching to us, just to let us know that these words have validity. One could be cynical here, but let's just let it be that what you place your attention on will grow and since Maharishi placed out attention there, that area will grow into #1 experiences. I have no idea what the THMD/THP feel about the experiences in the domes. In the domes the reaction to the THMD/THP experiences is "bullshit". Why does it take all of these special buzz words to describe an experience? Why further is it necessary to seemingly continue on with one of Maharishi's last lectures with show and tell or a lab demonstration? Good question. You're closer to the source so I'll have to defer to your impressions! Bevin and Hagelin give first preference to THMD/THP experiences and if there are none then experiences in the domes can be read. Oh that's just too funny. It's not easy being king.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
ruthsimplicity wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 > wrote: > >> enlightenment is that state of consciousness in which a person no >> longer identifies with, and gets lost in, the objects of perception. >> >> > > This sounds like the "I don't care anymore" definition of enlightenment. I usually ignore these threads because they really show how ignorant many people are on FFL about enlightenment. The best model is just the simple models that Indian adhere too. MMY complicated it to extract more money out of his followers. Keep raising the carrot. What we have he is a lot of anxiety over enlightenment. Enlightenment is simply moksha but one can intellectually masturbate all over that subject. As I've said many times one is on the road to enlightenment one once they no longer are anxious about it. To dissect the state is not going to get anyone there any faster.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 12:23 PM, boo_lives wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > Could you say more about the script - I'm curious what flavor of > enlightenment experience has gotten the approval. Is it still going on > now that mmy is gone? Who listens to the experience? Are they using > typical tmo buzzwords or are there new buzzwords? > > I'd heard quite a while ago that thmds were giving experiences to mmy > most every day and it was a big thing - to come up with an experience > that gets the ok from mmy is big currency on thmd (though not as big > as real currency) and it seemed women were really working on and > fretting over the wording of their experience flavors hoping it would > get a positive response. I'm curious about the buzzwords because I > believe there is a high percentage of deflected kundalini shakti > risings on thmd and I wonder if mmy, most likely another deflected, > likes those type of experiences or some other? > Been there, done that, plan to go back and do it again. There is no script given to the IA CPs. There is no script. However TMO people will be TMO people. What's expected is that you'll relate a #1 (Unity or beyond) experience. In the two domes, these experiences take the form of describing, with lots of heart, experiences that have to do with loss of self, with experiencing The Self, with experiences of infinity, bliss in every direction and in every thing. Each experience in the two domes is quite unique, stated in the idiom of the experiencer. The sidhi administrators read the experiences and make <<>> about what to leave in, what to leave out before the experience is read. The off campus experiences seem to be pages out of the same book. Some THMD will go on and on about experiencing the primal sounds, for example, and throw in as many of Maharishi's words used during his last year of teaching to us, just to let us know that these words have validity. One could be cynical here, but let's just let it be that what you place your attention on will grow and since Maharishi placed out attention there, that area will grow into #1 experiences. I have no idea what the THMD/THP feel about the experiences in the domes. In the domes the reaction to the THMD/THP experiences is "bullshit". Why does it take all of these special buzz words to describe an experience? Why further is it necessary to seemingly continue on with one of Maharishi's last lectures with show and tell or a lab demonstration? Bevin and Hagelin give first preference to THMD/THP experiences and if there are none then experiences in the domes can be read.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Vaj wrote: > > > > Of course you nailed that one right on the head--and let's not forget that > these are now *coached* advaita experiences ever since MMY presided over > the course dredging for moods. People are being encouraged to moodmake their > own projected feeling-tones into advaita experiences. It's the in thing I > hear. Without exception, they never vary from the pre-programmed script. > 'They're all actors and the Dome is their stage.' > > This definitely goes on in with the THP and THMD, whose experiences, incidently, are not read by the person having them. It is considerably less so (I re-read my own experiences every so often) in the two domes on campus. There there is an amazing amount of heart and none of this "let's use as many of the words Maharishi taught us in his final year in every sentence" in the experiences.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Jan 28, 2009, at 1:23 PM, boo_lives wrote: Of course you nailed that one right on the head--and let's not forget that these are now coached advaita experiences ever since MMY presided over the course dredging for moods. People are being encouraged to moodmake their own projected feeling-tones into advaita experiences. It's the in thing I hear. Without exception, they never vary from the pre-programmed script. 'They're all actors and the Dome is their stage.' Could you say more about the script - I'm curious what flavor of enlightenment experience has gotten the approval. Is it still going on now that mmy is gone? Who listens to the experience? Are they using typical tmo buzzwords or are there new buzzwords? It used to be when MMY would listen in at the dome, people spoke at the microphone and gave experiences. He praised some experiences and so that was what people learned to provide. I'd heard quite a while ago that thmds were giving experiences to mmy most every day and it was a big thing - to come up with an experience that gets the ok from mmy is big currency on thmd (though not as big as real currency) and it seemed women were really working on and fretting over the wording of their experience flavors hoping it would get a positive response. I'm curious about the buzzwords because I believe there is a high percentage of deflected kundalini shakti risings on thmd and I wonder if mmy, most likely another deflected, likes those type of experiences or some other? 'I am the Eternal' could probably tell you more, I think they were calling it 'the one' experience or something like that. He's shared some humorous examples. I think there are a lot of deflected risings in long term sidhas period. In deflected arisings my limited insight (not being on IAC) seems to indicate you're right, it's normal to have some kinds of experience like advaitic glimpses or even bipolar type manifestations and these are what MMY was coaching. But cultivation of siddhis does naturally favor that style of rising anyway. Sidhi practice seems to directly stimulate the cerebral cortex in some way that it follows an unusual path neurologically. Such deflected risings are of great benefit as these type of people stick around forever and even if they do leave the overall group are programmed parroters, like out of a TM brochure or an SCI tape.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Men who extol 'enlightenment talk' are rarely not on 'hallucinogenics' and never have adequate personal love experience worth talking about. Arhata http://www.freedomofspeech.netfirms.com/ --- On Wed, 1/28/09, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: From: enlightened_dawn11 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 4:56 PM agreed-- really well said dr. pete. enlightenment is real, viable and experienced- - just not by -thinking- raunchydog, i don't get your comments at all- care to clarify please? --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, "raunchydog" wrote: > > Excellent, Peter. It's exactly the map of the territory Maharishi has > been telling grasshopper, identifying for years with the weeds he's > been smokin'. > > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Peter wrote: > > > > Enlightenment is not what you think because: > > > > You can not get enlightened. > > > > A thought is necessarily bound by time and space and therefore has > nothing to do with enlightenment. > > > > You can not "model" enlightenment. > > > > So with those caveats. > > > > In ignorance you are somebody. A psychological private self that > relates to the world. > > > > Then you get 1st stage enlightenment and you are nobody. Actually, > no "you" to be or not to be. Consciousness becomes conscious of its > own consciousness and withdraws identity with any space/time > experience. No-Self. No localization of consciousness. Weird as shit > for the mind. "You" no longer exist, only consciousness within which > everything occurs. > > > > Then you get 2nd stage enlightenment Grasshopper. Now you are > everybody. Consciousness awakens to its bound value of space and time > as simply consciousness. All moving within itself. From "here to here > through there" according to Maharishi. Those are good words. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, Peter wrote: > > > > > From: Peter > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > > > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com > > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 8:18 PM > > > Enlightenment is not what you think. > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, ruthsimplicity > > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: ruthsimplicity > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of > > > enlightenment > > > > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com > > > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 5:10 PM > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, > > > enlightened_ dawn11 > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment is that state of consciousness in > > > which > > > > a person no > > > > > longer identifies with, and gets lost in, the > > > objects > > > > of perception. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This sounds like the "I don't care > > > anymore" > > > > definition of enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - - -- > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > > FairfieldLife- subscribe@ yahoogroups. com > > > > > > > > Or go to: > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/FairfieldL ife/ > > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups > > > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - - -- > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > FairfieldLife- subscribe@ yahoogroups. com > > > > > > Or go to: > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/FairfieldL ife/ > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Jan 28, 2009, at 1:02 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: and you know this, monkey, from your VAST EXPERIENCE with TM, right??? lets see, 4 years worth according to you, several decades ago...yup, qualifies for a banana... Four years? Not according to me!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Don't worry, we've set the blade extra low on the akashic landmower. On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:40 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: lol-- i got as far as the grasshopper living among the weeds and then got lost...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:27 PM, boo_lives wrote: That a (shocking small) percentage of long term sidhas have had "from here to here" advaita experiences doesn't prove anything about what MMY really taught and nurtured in his followers. Reality is from "here to here", people in every spiritual movt and probably more not in any movt have these natural advaita experiences, and so naturally some MMY devotees have too. But I'd say right now there are more sidhas in ffld being blocked from that natural experience by the keys that MMY/tmo have provided. Of course you nailed that one right on the head--and let's not forget that these are now coached advaita experiences ever since MMY presided over the course dredging for moods. People are being encouraged to moodmake their own projected feeling-tones into advaita experiences. It's the in thing I hear. Without exception, they never vary from the pre-programmed script. 'They're all actors and the Dome is their stage.'
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Me, EnlightenDawn and Raunch sit around, smoking grasshopper weed and engage in mental tantric practices between the domes. Oh, by the way, many years ago I walked between the domes when everybody was flying. Oh my God! I almost got electrocuted! The energy exchange between the domes was mind blowing. One big yoni, one big lingam. Stand back! --- On Wed, 1/28/09, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > From: enlightened_dawn11 > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 12:40 PM > lol-- i got as far as the grasshopper living among the weeds > and > then got lost... > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > "raunchydog" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > enlightened_dawn11 > > wrote: > > > > > > agreed-- really well said dr. pete. enlightenment > is real, > viable > > > and experienced-- just not by -thinking- > > > > > > raunchydog, i don't get your comments at all- > care to clarify > please? > > > > > > > Just jiving Peter. It's an analogy that obviously > failed. It's a > > stretch but my point was, the grasshopper identifies > with the > weeds in > > which he lives so much so that he smokes the > "weed" and > hallucinates > > his existence to be something "real." Sorry, > I can't wrap my brain > > around it any further than that. > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > "raunchydog" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Excellent, Peter. It's exactly the map > of the territory > Maharishi > > > has > > > > been telling grasshopper, identifying for > years with the weeds > he's > > > > been smokin'. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Enlightenment is not what you think > because: > > > > > > > > > > You can not get enlightened. > > > > > > > > > > A thought is necessarily bound by time > and space and > therefore > > > has > > > > nothing to do with enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > You can not "model" > enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > So with those caveats. > > > > > > > > > > In ignorance you are somebody. A > psychological private self > that > > > > relates to the world. > > > > > > > > > > Then you get 1st stage enlightenment > and you are nobody. > > > Actually, > > > > no "you" to be or not to be. > Consciousness becomes conscious > of its > > > > own consciousness and withdraws identity > with any space/time > > > > experience. No-Self. No localization of > consciousness. Weird > as > > > shit > > > > for the mind. "You" no longer > exist, only consciousness within > > > which > > > > everything occurs. > > > > > > > > > > Then you get 2nd stage enlightenment > Grasshopper. Now you are > > > > everybody. Consciousness awakens to its > bound value of space > and > > > time > > > > as simply consciousness. All moving within > itself. From "here > to > > > here > > > > through there" according to Maharishi. > Those are good words. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, Peter > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > From: Peter > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: > More definitions of > > > enlightenment > > > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, > 8:18 PM > > > > > > Enlightenment is not what you > think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, > ruthsimplicity > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: ruthsimplicity > > > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: > More definitions of > > > > > > enlightenment > > > > > > > To: > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.c
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
--- On Wed, 1/28/09, boo_lives wrote: > From: boo_lives > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 12:27 PM > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > "yifuxero" wrote: > > > > > > --you say, to paraphrase: (according to MMY, > those are good words). > > > But "You can not get enlightened" are > your words, not his. > > > He didn't often use the E word (if ever) in > the context of a > > > progression from CC -> BC -> UC; but he > might have said something > > > like: > > >"You can reach Unity Consciousness". > That being the case, MMY's > > > teachings would conflict with your Neo-Advaitin > nonsense. > > > > Who you calling a knuckle dragging Neo-Advaitin, > Buster? Them's > > fighten' words. Peter is obviously Advaitin, > there's not an ounce of > > Neo in him. Just to clarify the splitting of hairs, > here's an > > excellent description of "Traditional Advaita > versus Neo-Advaita:" > > http://tinyurl.com/c8b4yw > > > > In support of Peter the Great: > > > > "The range of creative intelligence is from here > to here." So > > obviously there's no place to "go". If I > could "go", I'd hop a bus to > > "there". So "here" it is: the > clown bus, the crazy passengers and the > > fun ride (knowledge, knower and the process of > knowing) beautifully > > woven together as one. Innocently pull one tread in > one amazing > > moment of "just be" and the mistake of > intellect instantly unravels. > > MMY wasn't jiving us when he said the concept of a > path is for the > > ignorant. So leave or stay on the bus, whatever, > I'm just glad MMY > > provided [keys to the bus (TM) and] such a glorious > map [SCI] to "just > > be" nowhere." > > > > raunchydog > > post #203856 > > > MMY spent 99% of his time talking about, aggressively > marketing, > obsessing over, developing world govts to rule over, and > trying to > black list anything that wasn't: HIS keys to the bus > and HIS roadmap, > and 1% doing "from here to here" talk. If you > look at tmo culture, > how people in the tmo actually think and live, it's all > keys and bus, > or to be more precise, Maharishi's Supreme Vedic Golden > Keys and > Maharishi's Most Glorious Unified Global Enlightened > Sat Yuga (with a > pure gold hemi-powered) Bus, please show your paid up in > full > officially approved dome badge to get on. > > MMY is worse than the Bible; you can support anything with > "maharishi > says" talk. I don't get picking out some phrases > he might have said > in the 70s to disprove what he and the tmo obviously are > today. > > That a (shocking small) percentage of long term sidhas have > had "from > here to here" advaita experiences doesn't prove > anything about what > MMY really taught and nurtured in his followers. Reality > is from > "here to here", people in every spiritual movt > and probably more not > in any movt have these natural advaita experiences, and so > naturally > some MMY devotees have too. But I'd say right now > there are more > sidhas in ffld being blocked from that natural experience > by the keys > that MMY/tmo have provided. It is amazing that more people are not Realized in the TMO. One reason, as you imply, is that Maharishi was way too successful in creating a waking state model that explained enlightenment. People have become trapped in the model. How this happens I don't know. But about Maharishi, make no mistake about it, he was a profoundly realized being. All that other bullshit was there too. I won't deny that, but his Realization was huge. If you experienced him directly, I don't see how you could miss this infinity walking around in a human body with a pretty curious Indian businessman personality. Maharishi's presence functioned as a profound catalyst for altering the foundations of "my" consciousness. I don't think there ever was an encounter with him that didn't blast me into some profound state of altered consciousness. I'd be a fool to reduce my conceptual understanding of him to some sort of un-enlightened con artist. > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
"You" can not get enlightened. This is very true. In waking state there is an experience of an individuality; a private psychological self. In waking state there is a mistaken notion that this individuality will get enlightened; that it will have some sort of "enlightened" experience. But the only reason a "you" exists is because consciousness is identified with and projected into some relative vehicle of mind and consciousness has become the object it identifies with. When consciousness becomes conscious of its own consciousness this identification is withdrawn and there is no longer a bound identity to consciousness. A "you" no longer exists. There is the mind, emotions and everything else, but there is no longer an identity with these vehicles. They just happen within a context of pure consciousness. They always were functioning like this, but a delusion of a "you" was present. --- On Tue, 1/27/09, yifuxero wrote: > From: yifuxero > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 11:00 PM > --you say, to paraphrase: (according to MMY, those are good > words). > But "You can not get enlightened" are your words, > not his. > He didn't often use the E word (if ever) in the context > of a > progression from CC -> BC -> UC; but he might have > said something > like: >"You can reach Unity Consciousness". That > being the case, MMY's > teachings would conflict with your Neo-Advaitin nonsense. > > - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > wrote: > > > > Enlightenment is not what you think because: > > > > You can not get enlightened. > > > > A thought is necessarily bound by time and space and > therefore has > nothing to do with enlightenment. > > > > You can not "model" enlightenment. > > > > So with those caveats. > > > > In ignorance you are somebody. A psychological private > self that > relates to the world. > > > > Then you get 1st stage enlightenment and you are > nobody. Actually, > no "you" to be or not to be. Consciousness > becomes conscious of its > own consciousness and withdraws identity with any > space/time > experience. No-Self. No localization of consciousness. > Weird as shit > for the mind. "You" no longer exist, only > consciousness within which > everything occurs. > > > > Then you get 2nd stage enlightenment Grasshopper. Now > you are > everybody. Consciousness awakens to its bound value of > space and time > as simply consciousness. All moving within itself. From > "here to here > through there" according to Maharishi. Those are good > words. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, Peter > wrote: > > > > > From: Peter > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions > of enlightenment > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 8:18 PM > > > Enlightenment is not what you think. > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, ruthsimplicity > > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: ruthsimplicity > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More > definitions of > > > enlightenment > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 5:10 PM > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > > enlightened_dawn11 > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment is that state of > consciousness in > > > which > > > > a person no > > > > > longer identifies with, and gets lost > in, the > > > objects > > > > of perception. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This sounds like the "I don't care > > > anymore" > > > > definition of enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > Or go to: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! > Groups > > > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Or go to: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Enlightenment is not what you think because: You can not get enlightened. A thought is necessarily bound by time and space and therefore has nothing to do with enlightenment. You can not "model" enlightenment. So with those caveats. In ignorance you are somebody. A psychological private self that relates to the world. Then you get 1st stage enlightenment and you are nobody. Actually, no "you" to be or not to be. Consciousness becomes conscious of its own consciousness and withdraws identity with any space/time experience. No-Self. No localization of consciousness. Weird as shit for the mind. "You" no longer exist, only consciousness within which everything occurs. Then you get 2nd stage enlightenment Grasshopper. Now you are everybody. Consciousness awakens to its bound value of space and time as simply consciousness. All moving within itself. From "here to here through there" according to Maharishi. Those are good words. --- On Tue, 1/27/09, Peter wrote: > From: Peter > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 8:18 PM > Enlightenment is not what you think. > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, ruthsimplicity > wrote: > > > From: ruthsimplicity > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of > enlightenment > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 5:10 PM > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > enlightened_dawn11 > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > enlightenment is that state of consciousness in > which > > a person no > > > longer identifies with, and gets lost in, the > objects > > of perception. > > > > > > > This sounds like the "I don't care > anymore" > > definition of enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > Or go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Now Raunch, did you pull that from memory? --- On Tue, 1/27/09, raunchydog wrote: > From: raunchydog > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 9:16 PM > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter > wrote: > > > > Enlightenment is not what you think. > > Morpheus: I know exactly what you mean, Peter. > > Morpheus: I imagine that right now you're feeling a bit > like Alice. > Tumbling down the rabbit hole? > Neo: You could say that. > Morpheus: I can see it in your eyes. You have the look of a > man who > accepts what he sees because he's expecting to wake up. > Ironically, > this is not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, > Neo? > Neo: No. > Morpheus: Why not? > Neo: 'Cause I don't like the idea that I'm not > in control of my life. > Morpheus: I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why > you're > here. You're here because you know something. What you > know, you can't > explain. But you feel it. You felt it your entire life. > That there's > something wrong with the world. You don't know what it > is, but it's > there. Like a splinter in your mind -- driving you mad. It > is this > feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what > I'm talking about? > Neo: The Matrix? > Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is? > (Neo nods his head.) > Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere, it is all around us. > Even now, in > this very room. You can see it when you look out your > window, or when > you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to > work, or > when go to church or when you pay your taxes. It is the > world that has > been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth. > Neo: What truth? > Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, > you were born > into bondage, born inside a prison that you cannot smell, > taste, or > touch. A prison for your mind. (long pause, sighs) > Unfortunately, no > one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for > yourself. > This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning > back. > (In his left hand, Morpheus shows a blue pill.) > Morpheus: You take the blue pill and the story ends. You > wake in your > bed and believe whatever you want to believe. (a red pill > is shown in > his other hand) You take the red pill and you stay in > Wonderland and I > show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes. (Long pause; Neo > begins to > reach for the red pill) Remember -- all I am offering is > the truth, > nothing more. > (Neo takes the red pill and swallows it with a glass of > water) > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 1/27/09, ruthsimplicity > wrote: > > > > > From: ruthsimplicity > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of > enlightenment > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 5:10 PM > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > enlightened_dawn11 > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment is that state of consciousness > in which > > > a person no > > > > longer identifies with, and gets lost in, > the objects > > > of perception. > > > > > > > > > > This sounds like the "I don't care > anymore" > > > definition of enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Or go to: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
Enlightenment is not what you think. --- On Tue, 1/27/09, ruthsimplicity wrote: > From: ruthsimplicity > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2009, 5:10 PM > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 > wrote: > > > > > > enlightenment is that state of consciousness in which > a person no > > longer identifies with, and gets lost in, the objects > of perception. > > > > This sounds like the "I don't care anymore" > definition of enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
> the most effective way to establish that state is by alternating the > practice of transcending with activity. the easiest way to do this > is through the regular (2x a day) practice of Transcendental > Maditation, or TM. ---Ah if you must know I started feeling the all oneness thing about six months before 9/11 after buying my first high powered rudraksha malas of three faced and one faced moon beads. I wore it to work. I felt the Shiva/Agni connection was good for cooking. You know you have to piss and other things sometimes and that's all good to remind us all how we start as smart little monkey apes and regress really to our prebirth state during -LIFE- only to reverse and forget everything we ever knew just so as to -DIE. So I don't really know if TM is the ultimate as during long resident courses they wouldn't even speak to the effects of visuals and colors and so on whereas the Tibetans have all that shit sussed out fully. The main idea here being that seing God in shit is probably the better way to quick realization than mere alternating mind of silence and mind of action. Truely the key being the mind, tantras then are keys to training the mind. And wearing Shiva around ones neck is a very close and personal tantra in any case. Sitting at a bar, seing Shiva twinkling in an offered line, and thank you Lord.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Jan 27, 2009, at 10:53 AM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: i meant Transcendental MEDitation, not "MADitation", though at times along the way i confess to have felt quite crazy.:) It was just a Freudian slip, I wouldn't worry too much about it. And about the crazy feelings, yes we all noticed, but we still are enjoying your posts. Please continue.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: More definitions of enlightenment
On Jan 27, 2009, at 10:50 AM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: the most effective way to establish that state is by alternating the practice of transcending with activity. the easiest way to do this is through the regular (2x a day) practice of Transcendental Maditation, or TM. Interesting how it doesn't seemed to have helped you SPELL YOUR FAVORITE FORM OF MEDITATION CORRECTLY! Unless of course you're actually practicing "Transcendental Maditation" in which case, yes, that does make a lot of sense. "Nobody in the game of football should be called a genius. A genius is somebody like Norman Einstein." —former NFL quarterback Joe Theisman
