On Apr 19, 2005, at 1:49 PM, akasha_108 wrote:
> 1) Do your teachers and traditions view BC as an understanding or an
> experiential reality?
They don't talk about Brahma-Chetana at all--I come from a
non-sectarian Maha-sandi tradition which is non-dual form of
meditation. What they would call "Unity consciousness" is directly
introduced in the student irrespective of time or place. Once one
understands experientially the View, that is they gain some
experiential certainty as to their own "inner Darshana" (if you will),
they check their "View" (their intellectual and experiential View) with
the teacher.
It cannot be described really in terms of an object. Brahman comes from
the Sanskrit root "brih", to grow. I think that highlights that it is a
natural organic growth out of what we already are.
> 2) Assuming its experiential reality, still, you appear to have stated
> that darshana has a valuable role in uncovering the corresponding
> experience. Is this correct?
Correct darshana assures correct path and correct path assures
realization.
> 3) It appears possible that some claims of Brahman are simply a well
> infused darshana. Comments?
These are merely claims. I see no substance in them that represent a
correct View. I am not willing to say specifically what those errors
are because what will happen is peoples egos will start modifying their
stories.
> 4) Enlivenment of shakti without corresponding shiva value could cause
> egomanical behavior -- if I have understood you. A well-infused
> darshana combined with such subtle ego, might cause an aspirant to
> make fairly extreme claims about realized states and experiences.
> Though such claims are false, they are believed by the aspirant --aka
> they are deluded. Have you observed this, or does this model seem to
> fit some of the posts on this list?
Yes, IMO.
> 5) You appear to have equated revelling in a darshana to vipassana.
> And that doing this is "no at all bad" (paraphrasing). I am trying to
> get to the role, negative or positive, of taking a view -- darshana
> -- in ones life, prior to its experiential reality.
No what I was referring to is common to people who practice a
meditation that lead to a "calm state". This is what TM, in essence,
is. You transcend thought (movement) and arrive at a state that is
relatively calm ("the gap"). Unfortunately when you get used to that
(the calm state) as the be-all and end-all: "the only way", you will
tend to misinterpret the stage of meditation beyond simple basic
transcendent style meditation (often because we firmly believe this is
the best meditation--in reality it is a beginning stage of meditation).
The next stage of meditation beyond here works with both the calm state
and the movement of thought as well as the senses. This is a basic
description of vipassana. You "open up" experience to embrace not just
the calm state, but other phenomenon--outside and inside. When this
happens spontaneously and you were not taught what the insight
(vipasyan~{(!~}) stage is like (e.g. TM-Sidhi practitioners), you mistake
this for the non-dual state.
Since the TM-Sidhi program begins with the basic calming
meditation--and then consciously begins to integrate specific
thoughts/formulae--this is similar to a vipasyan~{(!~} meditative state. As
this practice unfolds, people begin to embody the View of
vipasyan~{(!~}--they begin to "see things as they are". This is not final
liberation, but a part of a new style of meditation they are simply
unfamiliar with. The ego naturally grabs at something it would like to
believe: "I'm in <fill in blank>".
>
> Your view appears to be consistent with neo-TMO teachings -- someone
> posted such a while back -- that "moodmaking" is not frowned upon in
> TMO now a days -- because that which one puts ones attention on grows
> stronger in ones life, putting attention on attributes of a next state
> can help culture that.
What is the Sanskrit word for "moodmaking"? It's hard to know what that
really means, therefore I can't say. Bhava-kara?
>
> And your view appears consistent with teachings I have absorbed
> (perhaps incorrectly) from SS Ravi Shankar. He teaches many exercises
> to help culture the view and experience that everyone is divine.
> paraphrasing " how can you find God, if you can't find
> God in your neighbor." This and other of his teachings appear to me to
> encourage taking on, and living a darshana of Oneness -- even if that
> is not fully, or even remotely, an experiential reality.
Yeah, that makes sense. This is what inner-tantra practitioners do:
they consciously transform their environment into the mandala. Indeed
that's what happens when one goes into the non-dual state. This is the
gradual method as opposed to the sudden method (consciously
constructing the environment as divine). One requires you to fabricate
a reality provisionally, another has you relax into the Natural
Condition, non-dual contemplation, and the mandala arises spontaneously
as ones environment.
It's just two different ways of approaching ultimate reality. Both are
correct, just different.
-V.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
