Comment below:

**

--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing 
> > Gurudev floating in lotus 
> > > position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry 
> > juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and 
> > carefully said "we might chalk that up to 'beautiful 
> > > unstressing...'"
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Lawson
> > >
> > Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't 
> > have a clue.
> 
> This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By
> what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective 
experiences? 
> The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on 
top
> was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably
> Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience
> was valid.  In my experience in the movement there always seemed 
to be
> a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with 
details
> like that.  But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract:
> 
> I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden 
bliss
> and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the 
Veda...
> 
> The chances that this person would get the big "attaboy" from the
> powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other 
mighty
> mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, 
Zombie
> experiences.  They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping 
pong
> with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a 
collective
> "Wow, that's heavy. You are soooo special.  Would you bless my
> beads...no?  How about blessing my Blackberry?"
> 
> So can others evaluate such experiences?  Do people think that
> Maharishi had a magical way of knowing what someone was 
experiencing
> inside?  Did he or his minions just give you a once over to see if 
you
> appeared to be a dipshit, and if you gave off dipshit vibes they
> assumed it was phony?   There seemed to be an inordinate number of 
hot
> chicks whose experiences got a positive nod...celestial vision, 
that
> sort of thing.  Does hotness give you a pass? 
> 
> I've had my own experiences, I know how compelling they feel.  I've
> taken the position that the mind is a wonderful thing and capable 
of
> all sorts of detailed compelling experiences, but that we generally
> suck at distinguishing fact from fantasy with subjective 
experiences. 
> 
> Any perspective input is welcome.  And my premise is that making 
such
> distinctions in life really does matter. 
> 
**snip to end**

Curtis, my (partial and somewhat tangential) take on this is that 
whether or not the experience is available to any objective 
confirmation is one thing, but the value of the experience to the 
subject is what's real, regardless.  In other words, the experience 
of something red in a dream doesn't mean that the red object of the 
dream has/had any objective reality but I know red when I see red 
and the experience of redness in the dream itself was real and to 
the degree that experiencing redness that one more time, or 
experiencing that particular hue (maybe a red that isn't available 
in the objective world) has implications, either small or large, to 
me an an experiencer and a knower of anything.

So it always does seem to come down to how you operate or express 
whatever your "knowingness" is in the world.  In my own head I keep 
coming back to New.Morning's definition of any enlightenment worth 
having is one that generates positive effects both in the individual 
and in the individual's sphere of influence (and therefore, by 
extrapolation, to the world at large).  If you keep getting great 
experiences but operate primarily as a shitheel, it doesn't 
necessarily mean that you're not merely witnessing that reality (and 
consequently enlightened under that criterion), but so what?

The Tao Te Ching seems to give the best traditional/cultural guide 
as to how to evaluate a "superior" person that gives me a sense of 
the value of higher states of consciousness for me.  It's not 
inconsistent with what Maharishi taught nor with Advaita, but 
clearly relates that someone who knows the Tao flows with 
circumstances as they develop and utilizes everything that comes 
his/her way with grace and kindness and intelligence.  Patience, 
forebearance, humility, friendliness, compassion, happiness -- good 
qualities, all, and what I desire for myself and others as the 
anticipated and growing fruits of awakening.  Or even as my old SRM 
lapel pin has inscribed around the little bas-relief image of Guru 
Dev: "Peace, Energy, Happiness" -- that's good enough for me.

Reply via email to