---Claudiouk,this is a good summary of my own POV.IMO a person's
enlightenment can't be seperated from how they interpret
it .The interpretation to some degree structures the experience.
Kevin
In [email protected], "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Still being one of those "waking state" seekers of "enlightenment"
> myself, I would agree that I might be defensively attached to a
> particular and no doubt limiting view and understandings of it.
> However it does seem that people with "experiences" of enlightenment
> in this forum, and more generally outside it, seem themselves
> also "attached" to explanations or descriptions that don't correlate
> much between eachother. For instance you have MMY followers using
> typical TMO lingo, versus Buddhists finding no God or Self in
> enlightenment as gainst Christian mystics whose expositions have
> another character altogether. Could it be, I wonder sometimes, that
> enlightenment is a real phenomenon but idiosyncratic, depending on
> brain chemistry on one hand and cultural heritage on the other, and
> there is no way of establishing the "superiority" of one claim
> against another; also that we are dealing here ultimately with
> purely "subjective" experiences and accounts, however lofty, sacred,
> universal etc one might experience them as being "ultimate reality".
> However unlike drug-induced experiences, "enlightenment" is a natural
> human capacity and beneficial.
>
> , although aware of the and yes at times
> --- In [email protected], Peter Sutphen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- shanti2218411 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > ---Actually I think your response makes my point
> > > since for you my
> > > description of my experience of unboundedbess
> > > changing"isn't
> > > really real,but really clever" while on the other
> > > hand I think my
> > > experience of unboundedness has changed in the way I
> > > described.However
> > > the way I described this change apparently doesn't
> > > make sense to you
> > > and therefore doesn't seem "real" to you.Which of
> > > course points out
> > > the difficulty if not the futility of trying to
> > > describe changes in
> > > the experience of conciousness.I think this is one
> > > of the reasons why
> > > its probably a good idea not to say too much about
> > > your expereinces.
> > > Kevin
> >
> > I see people reacting to reports of "spiritual"
> > experiences in two ways. The first is healthy. The
> > experiences inspire and can challenge the belief
> > systems of the listener. Discussion can lead to a much
> > deeper understanding of these experiences and the
> > nature of evolution of consciousness. An authentic
> > growth of understanding and insight has occurred. The
> > other response is purely defensive. The experiences
> > challenge the listeners belief system but there is so
> > much invested in that belief system that they reject
> > the experience outright. Unless experience conforms to
> > the waking state model of enlightenment they are
> > defensively attached to, it is invalid and the person
> > is at best delusional and at worst intentionally
> > sowing seeds of doubt (i.e., an agent of the "dark
> > forces"). These people confuse their emotional
> > investment in their belief system with divine
> > "intuition". They never question their beliefs:
> > they're fanatics. A possibly very dangerous place to
> > be.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
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/
