Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Turq, Turq, Turq, that is a totally excellent understanding of the roadrunner as metaphor. I might have to dedicate my next poem to you for that one. When I just now saw Judy's first post of the week, I thought What do you bet it's a put-down of Turq? Too bad I didn't have millions to bet or some wiling fool to bet with cause the odds were astronomically in my favor. While settling into my ring-side seat, I'd like to suggest that she's right with some, though by no means all, of her objections. And even when she's right, she's missing your intention. Even so, of course, there was absolutely no need for her final paragraph in which she indulges in an unwarranted personal attack by means of a generalization about your supposed inability to understand research. --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The roadrunner's going to keep getting away. That's just the way things work in this cartoon universe. Actually, there was one exception. If the roadrunner is enlightenment and Wile E. Coyote is the seeker, there WAS one moment in which he transcended the laws of this cartoon universe and realized his dream. He *caught* the roadrunner. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJJW7EF5aVk This is a potent metaphor for how close I think scientists are ever going to get to defining samadhi and enlightenment. :-) Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Well, no, Judy, I'm not gonna explain stuff; I prefer to wait for Turq's comments. On the other hand, look at your phrasing: Turq needs to... Listen to people who use this phrase or some variant: You need to... Who are you to say what other people need to do or to understand etc? More likely that you need them to do or understand. Turq, I'm sure has no such need as you impute to him, albeit perhaps unconsciously. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turq, Turq, Turq, that is a totally excellent understanding of the roadrunner as metaphor. I might have to dedicate my next poem to you for that one. When I just now saw Judy's first post of the week, I thought What do you bet it's a put-down of Turq? Too bad I didn't have millions to bet or some wiling fool to bet with cause the odds were astronomically in my favor. While settling into my ring-side seat, I'd like to suggest that she's right with some, though by no means all, of her objections. Actually I made only one objection, Angela. But why don't you expand a bit and tell us what you all my objections were, along with your considered opinion about which were right and which weren't, and why? And even when she's right, she's missing your intention. Er, no, I was confirming that his intention was correct while pointing out that it was entirely in line with what Lawson was saying. Barry thought he was *criticizing* Lawson, because Barry does not understand either what Lawson was saying, or how the TM researchers study samadhi. If you disagree, why don't you tell us what you think Barry's intention was? Even so, of course, there was absolutely no need for her final paragraph in which she indulges in an unwarranted personal attack by means of a generalization about your supposed inability to understand research. I've been telling Barry for some time that he needs to pay some attention to what the research actually involves before sounding off on it, because he virtually always gets it all fouled up. Oh, and don't bother to hold onto your ringside seat, because Barry won't be responding to my post (at least not substantively). Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Judy, several unwarranted assumptions: Unwilling and unable are not equivalent. People may need to know, but that is not the same as saying to Turq, You need towhatever. I'm disappointed: you're smart enough not to make those errors. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, no, Judy, I'm not gonna explain stuff; I prefer to wait for Turq's comments. No, I didn't think you'd be able to explain yourself. On the other hand, look at your phrasing: Turq needs to... Listen to people who use this phrase or some variant: You need to... Who are you to say what other people need to do or to understand etc? I'm not the least bit surprised to find you believe people don't need to know what they're talking about before they spout off, Angela. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Thanks, for the link, Turq, I'll want to read more stories. The roadrunner story was a great read. --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turq, Turq, Turq, that is a totally excellent understanding of the roadrunner as metaphor. I might have to dedicate my next poem to you for that one. It's not my metaphor. I stole that one from the Rama - Frederick Lenz guy I studied with for so long. It just knocked my socks off the first time I heard it, and does to this day. One of my Road Trip Mind stories was about this wonderful metaphor, and my real-life encounter with a real roadrunner. I still have the stuffed Wile E. Coyote spoken about in the story. He sits up on one of my bookcases look- ing down at me as I write this. http://ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/rtm27.html When I just now saw Judy's first post of the week, I thought What do you bet it's a put-down of Turq? Too bad I didn't have millions to bet or some wiling fool to bet with cause the odds were astronomically in my favor. How could you expect anything less. Or, more sadly, more? Two of my best friends have a saying about a third friend we have in common. He's a sweet guy at heart, but has some...uh... ego issues. ( He produced the film What the bleep... ) Their saying is, We love Bill, but he never fails to disappoint. While settling into my ring-side seat, I'd like to suggest that she's right with some, though by no means all, of her objections. Being in a fiesta mood, I will agree with you. And even when she's right, she's missing your intention. Here I not only agree but offer you a high-five for seeing. I think the root cause is that she is so out of touch with intention *itself*, esp- ecially her own. Even so, of course, there was absolutely no need for her final paragraph in which she indulges in an unwarranted personal attack by means of a generalization about your supposed inability to understand research. Get used to it. I have. It's not going to change. Because that would mean that Judy has changed. And I think we all know by now that *that* is never going to be allowed to happen. --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: The roadrunner's going to keep getting away. That's just the way things work in this cartoon universe. Actually, there was one exception. If the roadrunner is enlightenment and Wile E. Coyote is the seeker, there WAS one moment in which he transcended the laws of this cartoon universe and realized his dream. He *caught* the roadrunner. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJJW7EF5aVk This is a potent metaphor for how close I think scientists are ever going to get to defining samadhi and enlightenment. :-) Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Good one, Turq, that about encapsulates what I've thought often about her comments: Out of touch with intention itself. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: snip And even when she's right, she's missing your intention. Here I not only agree but offer you a high-five for seeing. I think the root cause is that she is so out of touch with intention *itself*, esp- ecially her own. But note that (a) Barry didn't read my post, and (b) he's no more able than Angela to explain how I missed his intention. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
That's a great rap, Turq. I was aware of Intention Itself, but had not found its more than obvious name. But I have often told the poets I work with that the impulse to write a poem is necessarily deep. That's if they're really intending to write a poem rather than writing a piece of crap whose real intention it is to say, Look how sensitive I am, or recently, Look how gutsy I am etc. I don't work with writers like that. So thanks again for the term Intention Itself. Worthy improvement on Kant's Das Ding Ansich I'd suggest an editorial change for: To lower as many others as possible to my plane of awareness to read instead To lower as many others as possible to a plane of awareness lower than mine. --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good one, Turq, that about encapsulates what I've thought often about her comments: Out of touch with intention itself. Intent is not really *dealt with* in the TM dogma. It's very possible to miss its value. In some of the other traditions I studied, we were taught specifically to cut through the fog of someone's word and suss out their *intent* in saying them. She never had that training; she probably doesn't even believe that such a sussing is possible. On this forum, a focus on intent would involve reading someone's post and then thinking, What did this person hope to *accomplish* by posting this? If the answer to that question is, To uplift others to a more noble or interesting plane of awareness, then you are dealing with one sort of being. If the answer to that question is, To lower as many others as possible to my plane of awareness, then you're dealing with another sort of being. Interestingly, that is the factor that is kill- ing Hillary in the polls and helping Obama. The people can feel each of their *intents*, and are reacting accordingly. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: snip And even when she's right, she's missing your intention. Here I not only agree but offer you a high-five for seeing. I think the root cause is that she is so out of touch with intention *itself*, esp- ecially her own. But note that (a) Barry didn't read my post, and (b) he's no more able than Angela to explain how I missed his intention. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vaj wrote: In the tradition I practice in it is considered essential to resolve Correct View (of the nature of ultimate reality) from the very get go. If you are amiss the teacher can and will help you 'trim your sails' or refine your tack. This is the great pitfall of commercial meditation teachers and their methods. I keep wondering why people here continue to intellectually masturbate over these states of consciousness. Once you are on your way down the road it doesn't matter. In my tradition the guru just looks at your face and from the glow he can tell you are getting somewhere. There is really no distinctions in my tradition between cosmic consciousness, god consciousness or unity. We don't waste time on that. The goal is moksha. Sometimes the descriptions here would leave people somewhat if not totally dysfunctional and that wouldn't be of any practical value. But then blind men describing an elephant :-) You misunderstand our intent, Bhairitu. We sit around and intellectually masturbate here on FFL because we LIKE masturbation. Plus, we're acting out of compassion for the elephant. Hey!, elephants are human, too, and like a little bit of attention. All these blind guys and gals feeling him up gets HIM off, too. :-) And you liked your response so well you posted it twice? :-) Not to change the subject but why is it you can walk the streets of Spain and other places in Europe at night safely? I have a theory (which the neo-libertarians here won't like) but maybe the thugs are too busy feeling the elephant though I thought it was about touching their monkey.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
I didn't say it was of no value. I said I don't see why the state is higher. If I experience two radically different states of consciousness at will, then why would I call one higher than the other? They are different. They each have their points. The fact that there are different states and that I can experience them tells me that there must be a deeper reality than any of them. --- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One of my favorite quotes from last week is this from Sandy Ego: Now I will explain myself, and please see if you can discriminate between what I am saying, and what you think I am saying. If he creates his world with his thoughts and perceptions, and, moreover thinks this is what everyone else should also be doing or they're deluded, then, how, in heaven's name can I know what anyone saying? I can only know what I think they're saying. I'm pasting an interesting article below about a scientist who recorded her experience of having a stroke and then spoke about it on TED talks because it may shed an interesting light on higher states. I've had experiences of what's been described as Unity, I can switch into that experience at will, but, for the life of me, I can't see that it is a higher state than any other state I've experienced. They're just states, useful for some things, not so useful for others. And no matter how much my experience is that I am the author of my universe, my body still ages. I'm a very, very long way from the time I had a job in a key club, wearing stilettos and net stockings while delivering heavy trays of food and drinks from a dirty kitchen to dirty old men. Well, I don't know that there is really such a thing as Unity consciousness using the TM definition, but it is obvious that you are not and never have been in that state, by the TM definition. I'm not convinced that such a state exists in anyone currently, or, if it does, that MMY ever was in it, but, using the TM definition, which you have implicitly acknowledged, you are not and never have been, in said state. THAT said, I can see why you don't find the non-existence of the state in yourself to be of any value... Just an observation. Lawson Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Yes, exactly. I am that...etc. That is my experience. I like the experience, but it's not convenient when interacting with others to actually experience them in that way. So I don't go there when I'm talking to the guy at Walmart to ask him where the stuff is that I want. On the other hand, I like getting together with a good friend who can also experience that state, though there is never much to say to each other. Still, the companionship is deep and lovely. So, yeah, I can go there and it's great. But I think of it as just another outfit to wear, not better than any other. a --- Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: One of my favorite quotes from last week is this from Sandy Ego: Now I will explain myself, and please see if you can discriminate between what I am saying, and what you think I am saying. If he creates his world with his thoughts and perceptions, and, moreover thinks this is what everyone else should also be doing or they're deluded, then, how, in heaven's name can I know what anyone saying? I can only know what I think they're saying. I'm pasting an interesting article below about a scientist who recorded her experience of having a stroke and then spoke about it on TED talks because it may shed an interesting light on higher states. I've had experiences of what's been described as Unity, I can switch into that experience at will, but, for the life of me, I can't see that it is a higher state than any other state I've experienced. They're just states, useful for some things, not so useful for others. And no matter how much my experience is that I am the author of my universe, my body still ages. I'm a very, very long way from the time I had a job in a key club, wearing stilettos and net stockings while delivering heavy trays of food and drinks from a dirty kitchen to dirty old men. Well, I don't know that there is really such a thing as Unity consciousness using the TM definition, but it is obvious that you are not and never have been in that state, by the TM definition. I'm not convinced that such a state exists in anyone currently, or, if it does, that MMY ever was in it, but, using the TM definition, which you have implicitly acknowledged, you are not and never have been, in said state. THAT said, I can see why you don't find the non-existence of the state in yourself to be of any value... Just an observation. Lawson Until proven otherwise, I claim there is a state of Unity Consciousness as defined by MMY (tho as you I can not speak to what the above experience is) My first UC (type) experience was on a rounding course - and had been having CC state for about a week (BTW, on that winter course there were snow drifts inside the hallways of Howard Dorm, and sorta warm water a few hours a week, anyone else there at that time?) and I took some advice from Walter Koch who once said that if one is 'feeling Being' do what you can to shake it and don't try to hold on to it. Anyways, I was at the cafeteria eating heavy foods like tons of peanut butter and yukking it up with the 'rebels' trying to shake Being, and someone I did not know very well walked into the room and I witnessed myself walking into the room - and what almost caused to upload my mouthful of food was that the -- I am That, You are That -- is not a metaphor, it is not some warm fuzzy poetic leap, but is is a crisp undeniable recognition - - and over the next few days the frequency of such recognitions increased Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
a person in unity according to your understanding no longer experiences life? My understanding is that one does still experience life, but knowledge is certainly different in that state. I don't experience the world as separate from me. Another way of saying the same thing is that I don't experience me as located in only the body I inhabit in this life. --- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't say it was of no value. I said I don't see why the state is higher. If I experience two radically different states of consciousness at will, then why would I call one higher than the other? They are different. They each have their points. The fact that there are different states and that I can experience them tells me that there must be a deeper reality than any of them. Well, unity isn't an experience, according to my understanding. Lawson Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Well, there's another example of how worthless it is to try to have a conversation about experiences of other states of consciousness. --- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a person in unity according to your understanding no longer experiences life? My understanding is that one does still experience life, but knowledge is certainly different in that state. I don't experience the world as separate from me. Another way of saying the same thing is that I don't experience me as located in only the body I inhabit in this life. Mi mi mi mi... Ahem. La la la la. same old song. Lawson --- sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: I didn't say it was of no value. I said I don't see why the state is higher. If I experience two radically different states of consciousness at will, then why would I call one higher than the other? They are different. They each have their points. The fact that there are different states and that I can experience them tells me that there must be a deeper reality than any of them. Well, unity isn't an experience, according to my understanding. Lawson Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
On Mar 1, 2008, at 5:01 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a person in unity according to your understanding no longer experiences life? My understanding is that one does still experience life, but knowledge is certainly different in that state. I don't experience the world as separate from me. Another way of saying the same thing is that I don't experience me as located in only the body I inhabit in this life. Mi mi mi mi... Ahem. La la la la. same old song. This why it is important--some might say 'vital'--for a student to resolve such issues directly with their teacher. Have some questions as to whether or not you've attained the View of Unity? Ask a good teacher. S/he'll tell you, if they're authentic teachers. In the tradition I practice in it is considered essential to resolve Correct View (of the nature of ultimate reality) from the very get go. If you are amiss the teacher can and will help you 'trim your sails' or refine your tack. This is the great pitfall of commercial meditation teachers and their methods.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
On Mar 1, 2008, at 5:01 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a person in unity according to your understanding no longer experiences life? My understanding is that one does still experience life, but knowledge is certainly different in that state. I don't experience the world as separate from me. Another way of saying the same thing is that I don't experience me as located in only the body I inhabit in this life. Mi mi mi mi... Ahem. La la la la. same old song. This why it is important--some might say 'vital'--for a student to resolve such issues directly with their teacher. Have some questions as to whether or not you've attained the View of Unity? Ask a good teacher. S/he'll tell you, if they're authentic teachers. In the tradition I practice in it is considered essential to resolve Correct View (of the nature of ultimate reality) from the very get go. If you are amiss the teacher can and will help you 'trim your sails' or refine your tack. This is the great pitfall of commercial meditation teachers and their methods.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
On Mar 1, 2008, at 2:31 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't say it was of no value. I said I don't see why the state is higher. If I experience two radically different states of consciousness at will, then why would I call one higher than the other? They are different. They each have their points. The fact that there are different states and that I can experience them tells me that there must be a deeper reality than any of them. Well, unity isn't an experience, according to my understanding. It is an experience, just not a conventional experience.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Vaj wrote: On Mar 1, 2008, at 5:01 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a person in unity according to your understanding no longer experiences life? My understanding is that one does still experience life, but knowledge is certainly different in that state. I don't experience the world as separate from me. Another way of saying the same thing is that I don't experience me as located in only the body I inhabit in this life. Mi mi mi mi... Ahem. La la la la. same old song. This why it is important--some might say 'vital'--for a student to resolve such issues directly with their teacher. Have some questions as to whether or not you've attained the View of Unity? Ask a good teacher. S/he'll tell you, if they're authentic teachers. In the tradition I practice in it is considered essential to resolve Correct View (of the nature of ultimate reality) from the very get go. If you are amiss the teacher can and will help you 'trim your sails' or refine your tack. This is the great pitfall of commercial meditation teachers and their methods. I keep wondering why people here continue to intellectually masturbate over these states of consciousness. Once you are on your way down the road it doesn't matter. In my tradition the guru just looks at your face and from the glow he can tell you are getting somewhere. There is really no distinctions in my tradition between cosmic consciousness, god consciousness or unity. We don't waste time on that. The goal is moksha. Sometimes the descriptions here would leave people somewhat if not totally dysfunctional and that wouldn't be of any practical value. But then blind men describing an elephant :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
What makes you think I have not consulted teachers or that the teachers I have consulted were bogus? On the other hand: I have not lost the ability to live the state some of us are pleased to call the state of ignorance. I don't personally like that term for it. There is nothing ignorant about Ruth and Curtis--on the contrary, but they are both empiricists in the classical sense of the term, which is a good definition of what the Marshies of the world call ignorance. I find that both Ruth and Curtis are very clear thinkers and very honest. Moreover, Curtis has a killer sense of humor that I appreciate a lot, while Ruth has real humility. I like the way they think. Now, you might argue that if I have not lost the ability to be ignorant then Unity is not firmly established. In my view, however, it IS established in the sense that it is accessible all the time--it's just not convenient all the time. On the other hand: Who exactly will tell me that the teachers I've consulted were bogus or the real deal. You? On yet another of my many hands: Am I to give up what is most sacred in me, my imagination, and believe what a teacher tells me without question because that teacher has your good housekeeping stamp of approval? To give up my imagination would be to make the teacher's teaching into a mere religion, a dogma. --- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 1, 2008, at 5:01 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a person in unity according to your understanding no longer experiences life? My understanding is that one does still experience life, but knowledge is certainly different in that state. I don't experience the world as separate from me. Another way of saying the same thing is that I don't experience me as located in only the body I inhabit in this life. Mi mi mi mi... Ahem. La la la la. same old song. This why it is important--some might say 'vital'--for a student to resolve such issues directly with their teacher. Have some questions as to whether or not you've attained the View of Unity? Ask a good teacher. S/he'll tell you, if they're authentic teachers. In the tradition I practice in it is considered essential to resolve Correct View (of the nature of ultimate reality) from the very get go. If you are amiss the teacher can and will help you 'trim your sails' or refine your tack. This is the great pitfall of commercial meditation teachers and their methods. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Unity Consciousness?
Stu wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I keep wondering why people here continue to intellectually masturbate over these states of consciousness. Once you are on your way down the road it doesn't matter. In my tradition the guru just looks at your face and from the glow he can tell you are getting somewhere. There is really no distinctions in my tradition between cosmic consciousness, god consciousness or unity. We don't waste time on that. The goal is moksha. Sometimes the descriptions here would leave people somewhat if not totally dysfunctional and that wouldn't be of any practical value. But then blind men describing an elephant :-) As far as I can figure from this yoga practice its all about growth. As long as there is movement towards greater complexity, greater plurality and unification we are on the right track. Any attempt to break it down into steps is subjective. Sometimes interesting, usually a distraction. s. Exactly. And there are a lot of distracted people on this group. :)
