Hiya, Llundrub! Many thanks for your posting; comments interleaved 
below:

--- In [email protected], "Llundrub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> ----I see a good bit of Theosophy in your explication, 
particularly Alice Bailey and her focus on the Pleades. I cannot say 
that the Pleades have any greater effect than any other stars upon 
the Earth.  

Yes, I did read Alice Bailey material for 1-2 years after "Brahman" 
(say 1982-1984) -- at which time it was most useful -- but had set 
it aside by the time the Galactic "politics" swam into awareness 
(say 1984-1986) and apparently played a significant part in our 
ascension (late 1986). I say apparently because attributing 
these "plasma-clouds" and their vibration-bliss-adjustments to the 
Pleiades felt quite right at the time, and I have as yet found no 
better attribution for them.

>The reason I said that the Earth's causal body was dissolving was 
>because the whole natural and ecological food chain which kept 
>organic life on Earth semi-orderly is being destroyed so that 
>simple cause and effect can no longer be relied upon. 

An interesting way to define the dissolution of the causal body.

> The Brahman thing confuses me intellectually. It makes no sense 
>too express oneself in terms of all things that are as if the 
>limited personality can function in that manner. No offense Rory, 
>but I think this is a mistake of the intellect for you.

None taken -- I have repeatedly stated that it is impossible for one 
who has not been taken by Brahman to conceive of it intellectually --
the habitual small-self or ego balks.  
 
> On the other hand, to say that one is one with the stream of life, 
>or of the essence of all, or a micro of the macro, or even one is 
>nothing at all, but contains everything, these are more rationally 
>sound expressions to me, as we are existing in time and space, even 
>though not of it.  To identify with a purview of some galactic 
>being is rather stilting as regards ones personal choices. Ie., how 
>can doing anything have any value in the cosmic scheme of things as 
>in a universe or multiverse of endless choices even the fate of 
>this small planet is unimportant, let alone what to make for 
dinner. 

I would respectfully disagree -- everything is important, on 
whatever scale our attention lies. This is one of the understandings 
unfolded in what I have called "Krishna Consciousness" -- when the 
Great Immensity is SO great that it is not even limited by also 
taking on "small" and personal bindu-consciousness -- but rather, in 
contracting its infinite immensity into a point it discovers itself 
to be the infinite as intensely lively "bliss". :-)

>Of course, if you had absolutely no  desires at all whatsoever then 
>it would be ok holding this purview as everything that came ones 
>way would be just wonderful. 

And that actually is the way it is, it seems to me, if we take the 
trouble to look: this too is Perfect. :-)

But as long as we have personal desires we must not take some slinky 
absolutist view of our condition lest looking into the abyss it look 
back into us. If one hadn't had their limited and limiting human 
conditioning and training then a galactic or cosmic stance also 
would have no meaning, so therefore also such conceptions are false 
and conditioned. Finally since a cosmic purview is still a purview, 
that means it is a conditioned and limited view. 

Just another lens or another "story," right. The galactic 
information is not directly correlatable with "Brahman," which is 
simply Understood as the Self by the Self -- nothing but THAT alone, 
eyes open or shut -- no difference anywhere. This is Perfect, NOW. 
It wasn't until a few years after "Brahman" took me that the 
galactic material unfolded.

>Only no view at all is unconditioned and truely of the essence.  So 
>I find it actually inhuman and mistaken to say and think such 
things as that everything exists in ME. 

Yes, whereas any other stance is completely impossible to me :-)
 
> Sure, as an unbounded self one is the same beyond all changing 
things and so as things change so also one can say that they have 
changed, as illusory as that change may be.  
> 
> But as noted Brahman consciousness was not a terminolgy used by 
any Vedic or tantric practitioner prior to its British 
popularization, which was probably just a sardonic slur in the 
beginning. Nonetheless, Maharishi has defined his Brahman 
consciousness as the ability to hold three deep levels of objects in 
the transcendent consciousness through all phases of life. This 
still implies some relativism as Maharishi's BC is not a galactic 
awareness though it's an awareness of the sameness of all 
phenomenon, regardless of time or place but still limited to time 
and place. 

Right -- again, the "Brahman" Understanding is simply the Self 
understnding the Self, that there is nothing but THAT, that 
perfection is now, has always been, and will always be. The galactic 
stuff I would associate more with several unfoldings a few years 
after "Brahman."
 
> My point is that I find it confusing to have someone say to me 
>that everything is an expression of them. It sets up a polarity 
>that cannot be overcome in language and far from teaching others 
>the truth it rather relativises it and baffles them.  If I am 
>confused then I stake my own case. 

Words fail, which is why immediately following this post I requested 
that this one be ignored, as simply providing more concepts to 
overcome. Nonetheless, I suspect it may have helped those who wished 
to be helped; both impulses are perfect :-)

>Moreover, how do the Pleades take their eggs this morning? 

That seems a little like asking how does my liver take its eggs this 
morning. Nonetheless, I take your point -- attend to what is in 
front of us NOW. Sometimes, it may happen that that is the 
Pleaides :-)









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/
 



Reply via email to