I cannot understand how this kind of theoretical, intellectual speculation can help a person to evolve. If we knew how higher stages of consciousness than ours are, that knowing would be inevitably wrong, only a different way to organize our present stage of consciousness outwardly. With your present eyes, you just cannot see how the world looks like, when seen with much more accurate eyes that can perceive dimensions, your eyes cannot.
We cannot adopt a higher stage of consciousness than ours that way, we can only imitate it. And that imitation can even become a hindrance for further growth. We evolve best by uncovering the limitations and illusions of the perceptions our present stage creates. If the process of imitating takes up most of your attention, very little attention is left to uncovering the contradictions of our present stage. Often the hypocrisy that goes with imitation forms a safe hiding place for rigid and false thought forms. On the other hand we can for moments get peak experiences, experience glimpses of higher stages and that can be of help in uncovering the illusions that are hidden in our present stage. At least I have personally not been interested in higher stages. If you have a rigid preconceived idea, you are less open for the unexpected, which a new stage will be. Every thought and every experience regardless of how pure, subtle and transcendental it feels, when perceived in and through a physical body and nervous system, is always in the relative. We can only talk about the absolute, we cannot experience it. Irmeli --- In [email protected], "claudiouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My question though is, if in enlightenment the Knower is > the "infinite" Self, no longer the "point" ego, which effectively > gets overridden (apart from its organizing functions), then you are > left with a Self and a perceiving body. There might well be an > experience of "Self in all beings/ all beings in Self" but how true > can that be if it remains exclusively linked to the original "point" > body and its perceptions? As such it's just like a glorified relative > ego blessed with blissful oceanic feelings. It would only be a true > cosmic Self if, moving from infinity to "point", it no longer is > exclusively linked to the original "point" body, since Self is > omnipresent, at every point. That would make it less "relative" than > before, since it would now be linked with an infinity of "points" of > perception. You mention omniscience.. well if there is only ONE > Knower anyway... presumably in Unity this happens? Otherwise again it > would be a "point" hallucinating "infinity", with no "reality" to it. 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/
