Ron, I'm really not trying to argue with you or "accuse" you of anything -- that's how you're reacting. I merely presented a different way of looking at your experience.
That you respond to that different way of seeing things as an accusation says more, IMO, than the experiences. More below, *again* not to argue or to accuse or to say that I'm "right" and you're "wrong" (neither of which I believe or am capable of stating definitively), but just to look at things from another point of view. How you relate to that different point of view is your business, just as your experience is your experience. I would never quibble with that experience, merely with how you interpret it, and merely to point out that there are other possible interpretations. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <sidha7001@> wrote: > > > > > > Note I am not being a parakeet when I tell you that my > > > experience is it is moving me faster to enlightenment. > > > Let me put it this way, I feel this very stronly. It is > > > giving experience of the things I hear are the signs of > > > what enlightenment is. > > > > With all due respect, and with the fervent hope that > > you are correct, I think you're forgetting something, > > Ron. Your *belief* that you are "moving faster to > > enlightenment" is based on what you *have been told*. > > Your *belief* that these things are the "signs of > > what enlightenment is" are based on *what you have > > been told*. > > > > You have made a decision to *believe* what you have > > been told. That doesn't necessarily make it so. > > I firmly stand by what I said- I am completely aware of the > experience and how it can be viewed by others as it is here. > This time, in light of a parakeet accusation... Parrot. Parakeets, as far as I know, cannot be taught to repeat phrases. > ...I paid close attention when i said that this is my > experience. And I appreciate that, and I have *no problem* with your experience. May you continue to have many more of them, and may you continue to enjoy them thoroughly. > I am stateing specifically the ice cream tastes good- > you beg to differ, telling me that just because I say > it tastes good, well I am just believing it because I > am told that , etc Go back and read what I wrote, as opposed to what you read into it. I *never* stated or even suggested that your experience of the "ice cream" was in any way false, or that it didn't taste sweet to you. I merely pointed out that your *interpretation* of the "meaning" of your experience of eating ice cream (experiencing kundalini phenomena and relating them to your spiritual progress) was open to other inter- pretations, and that it could have been biased by what you'd been *told* about such experiences. In Santa Fe, New Mexico there is a popular desert consisting of vanilla ice cream with cayenne pepper added to it. It's really delicious, a true taste treat. But if one had been primed before eating it with only the information that "ice cream is sweet," that would not prepare one for the real experience itself. Similarly, if a person tried to explain the experience of eating such a desert to someone who has never tried it, they're going to wonder about the person's perceptions: "This guy is describing the experience of eating ice cream as leaving a not-unpleasant but surprising burning taste in one's mouth and throat. That sure isn't *my* experience of eating ice cream, nor does it fit into *my* ideas of what ice cream is." Similarly, I have *no problem* with your experiences, whatever they may be. I'm only pointing out that there may be other ways of looking at and interpreting those experiences. > No, the experience is concrete - as concrete as who you > define who you are right now- That's not very concrete, dude. You might want to search for a different metaphor. :-) > so to the degree the concrete can be smashed with a sledge > hammer, that is how comcrete my experience is that I wrote And *as* experience, I have nothing to say about it. As *interpretation* of experience, I have the right to view it differently than you do. > > I sincerely hope it is, and that you are making all > > the progress that you feel you are, but from my point > > of view you could be experiencing normal, everyday > > bursts of energy that pretty much everyone on a > > spiritual path would be noticing if they had been > > told to pay attention to them and "weight" them and > > assign them value, and to *interpret* them as progress > > towards enlightenment. > > The knowing in this case is my own direct experience, no need > to be told anything. But you *were* told something. You were told that it's a *good* experience, one that indicates that you are making progress towards enlightenment. All I'm suggest- ing is that this might have colored your *interpretation* of the experience. > In this case, I wasn't asking the Guru, I was telling the Guru > what it is And the guru replied, giving you a specific interpretation of your experience. The interpretation is *not* the exper- ience, no more than the map is the territory. Again, all I'm saying is that there are other possible interpretations. > > In a TM context, for example, these things would be > > considered just another experience, and no weight > > would be given to them. > > What things? It is a state of consciousness known to me through > direct experience- directly related to the kundalini- I am paying > attention as I write that this is not a parakeet speaking since > you are throwing this accusation out, for which I would not deny > when it is past my own experience- will let you know in this > letter when I am reporting what the guru has to say as compared > with my own experience for which I tell the Guru what is there, > so far in this letter, that is the case. Cool. As I said, I'm *much* more interested in what *you* have to say than in anything your guru has to say. I would go so far as to say that I have *zero* interest in anything your guru has to say. But I'm interested in what you have to say. I might not *interpret* what you say about your experiences the same way you do. But that is not an accusation or an attack unless you choose to make it one. You seem to have done so. As to the "parrot" thang, I was just making the point that the *vast majority* of your posts here have not been you speaking, but you posting the words of your guru, as if they should mean something to us or be more valuable to us than your own words. I don't think they are, and am more interested in hearing *your* words than hers, that's all. > Maybe in my past posts, similar claims I am makeing above > are interpreted as what I am told verses what I concretely > experience. Again, since you don't seem to get it, I'm not *talking* about what you experience. I have *no problem* with yours or anyone else's experience; it's theirs, and as valid as experience *is*. How one *interprets* that experience is another matter, one that is open to being seen from many different points of view. > No, the above is direct experience and it is > beyond what I had in TM, however, cant speak for others > > > Same thing in many Buddhist > > traditions. But in the path you've chosen, these > > experiences have been described as special, as mean- > > ingful. That makes you special and your experiences > > meaningful. > > They are just what is there, what took and is taking place- > I am not in a position to label it because then it means > just where i am with regard to enlightenment, it should > even mean I am enlightened in order to box up and label > just where I am with the journey, I dont know what > enlightenment is like, I have only heard about it And I've experienced enlightenment many times. In my case, these were fleeting experiences, and they come and go, and furthermore, BFD. These experiences were very real to me, and I am comfortable with talking about them as if they were real. On the other hand, I cannot expect anyone else to believe that these experiences had anything to do with enlightenment. And I don't. Also, I might interpret the experiences in my own way, but that doesn't mean that anyone else hearing them can't, and won't, interpret them differently. That they do so doesn't mean that they're attacking me, merely that they see things a different way, from another point of view. > > > I reported in using the term everything is falling away > > > before i noticed it to be a common term used because > > > this is something many in my path are experiencing. > > > > And have been *told* that they "should* experience. > > And have been *told* that having these experiences > > makes them a little special, and indicates that they > > are making rapid progress towards enlightenment. So > > are they going to put a bit of emphasis on *having* > > these experiences? Well, duh. > > I dont follow you exactly but make no mistake about it, there > is both guidence and faith on my path, and as I said beyond > my own experience, I can only report what those claiming > enlightenment say- that is being a parakeet for the points- > that evil word parakeet. Parrot. A bird that repeats what it has been taught to say. No harm in that, and the person who taught it might have been *correct* in what it taught the bird to say. But the bird is *still* just repeating what it was taught to say. That's the feeling I get from many of your posts. You *may*, in fact, find that what you have been taught to say relates to your own personal experiences, and thus the words you're repeating have some validity in your opinion. But that doesn't change the fact that, so far, about 70-80% of what you've posted here on FFL were Someone Else's Words. You have *faith* that these words are correct. Your own personal experience convinces you that they *are* correct. Cool. But please understand that others may have different points of view on those words, and the possible validity of them. When they express those different points of view, they are not necessarily attacking you or accusing you of anything. They're just seeing things from a different point of view. > One can also be a parakeet in throwing the parakeet accusation > out- for it is the case that it is belief for all until > enlightenment... And in my opinion, even afterwards. I do not believe that the experience of enlightenment confers upon the experiencee any special abilities to discern Truth. Their experience of enlightenment is *still* Just Another Experience, and their interpretation of that experience, Just Another Interpretation. I *understand* that many do *not* believe as I do, and feel (as they have been told to feel) that when one is enlightened one sees "correctly," or accurately, or without any possible distortion. I do not believe this. > ...and there is, even in sincere ones on the path, a > mouthing off of what the guru says. > > to the degree that it is actualized, that part is not reading > or hearing about what the ice crea tastes like, it is tasting > it. Then to one that hasn't, they can accuse one of thinking > they are tasting it but not. No, they might merely be saying that the other person's description of and interpretation of what ice cream tastes like might not be *definitive*, and might not equate to Truth. It's Just Another Description, Just Another Interpretation. *No* description of ice cream (or enlightenment) *is* ice cream (or enlightenment). It's a description, an interpretation. Others are free to use other descriptions, and offer other interpretations. > This again is why I was mindfull above when I stated that > anyone opposing the points I stated are giving me an argument > that what I am saying I am tasting is wrong- Again, I never said or even suggested that. That was how you *interpreted* what I said. > I was very mindfull of what I wrote as my own experience- > again, yes, my direct experience is knowing it is in the > direction of enlightenment- it is as real as the report > of what cookies and cream tastes like (how real is the > transcient?) Is your *description* of cookies and ice cream *definitive*? Is it the "Truth" about cookies and ice cream, or merely an attempt to put your subjective experience of those things into words, and interpret them according to the things you have learned in your life? > > > Any opinion that disagrees with what I just said is like > > > one telling me that I am wrong about the ice cream tasting > > > sweet. > > > > No, it's merely reminding you that you were *told* > > that the ice cream would taste sweet, and that ice > > cream is the pathway to enlightenment. > > > > That doesn't > > necessarily mean that eating ice cream would get you > > enlightened. It might just make you fat. :-) > > Look, it doesn't mean that since you have decided that what > I report as experience is in fact not but rather I am told > this- Again, lighten up, dude. I *never said what you 'heard'*. I merely suggested that what you have been told all your life *about* ice cream is going to affect your experience of eating it, and is going to affect your description of the experience of eating ice cream after you've had it, and it's certainly going to affect how you interpret the experience, and how important it is. > Is there any room that I may be quite right? There is absolutely no question that you can be "right" about what the experience was *for you*, and about how you interpret the experience *for you*. That does not equate to being "right" for anyone else who has ever eaten ice cream. Or for someone who has also eaten ice cream and has a completely different way of describing it and interpreting it. > ...or is it written in stone that no matter what I report as > experience, you see it as I am a parakeet? Report your experience, without any reference to what your guru or any other authority figure or authority scripture has said about such experiences, and you're not being a parrot. Throw those things in, and I'm sorry, but I'm gonna hear a bit of a parrot squawk as subtext. :-) > That makes you a parakeet- you dont even have to read what I > wrote or listen to what i have to say, because no matter what > it is, I am in the favorite group of being a parakeet, > mouthing off what I was told without the expereicences to > back it up. Well, I will never win will I? Is it important for you to "win?" Seems to me that you're being awfully defensive about just being told that there are other ways of viewing your experiences and their relative importance than the way that you see them. > But I have won, for I know what I have - your comments telling > me what I have dont really have an impact, and I dont know that > anything I have to say impacts your thinking... Should it? Sounds a little as if you think it should. > ...beyong you packaging me into the parakeet group, and so it > remains Parrot group. :-) > > Here's a test for you. Is it *possible* that kundalini > > experiences mean absolutely *nothing* about one's > > proximity to enlightened states of mind, and that they > > are Just Another Phenomenon, one that shouldn't be > > "weighted" more than any other? > > it could be, it depends on many factors See? That wasn't so hard, was it? > > If you bristled at that idea, then I'd suggest that > > what you've been told about kundalini and its importance > > might have been aimed more at your ego than at freeing > > yourself from it. > > What is your background with Kundalini? Many experiences over many decades, none of them "weighted" or considered any more important than any other experience in my life, and less important to me than, say, my first taste of vanilla ice cream flavored with cayenne. Are we clear now? I am *not* trying to tell you that your experiences aren't real. I am *not* trying to tell you that they don't "mean" what you think they mean. I am merely saying that there are other ways of looking at those experiences. You seem to find that threatening in some way.
