Nice idea. I have never encountered this, although I have encountered one teacher that could in the space of a few days get a fair number of persons to experience a shift in SOC, if only temporary, but it was not like a broadcast. If you have encountered such teachers of the second kind, do they have names? And what are the mechanics behind the ability to broadcast an SOC? I am asking this because your description makes it sound like a radio broadcast - a mental projection or something like that? It makes me think of something like in old science fiction movies (say 1940) where the doctor says "If I can just get to the laboratory I can create a ray which will change his SOC."
With the material you presented here, it seems like you could have just made this up. It is a great story idea, but how could someone find out that what you say here is real? The attack of Ray Gun Bob Swami, Five States of Consciousness Seminar for just $49.95 - One Day Only at... Do you have names, dates, locations? Who are these teachers? One of my favorite teachers was named Mentor. But he was just a character in a science fiction story, but he (or it) had the power to change a person's SOC. Remember, walking the path is fine. We all do this. But the idea is for the path to go away, and before it does, it is not all groovy and enjoyable, some really difficult experiences can arise. Some day "maybe" we can "discuss" your "extensive" use of quote "marks." --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > There is another way of teaching. > > > > It is possible, for teachers who are capable of such > > things, to talk about states of consciousness while > > "putting on" the SOC in question and then radiating or > > "broadcasting" it so powerfully that the students can > > "put it on" and "wear" it themselves as they listen to > > the talk. > > Continuing this rap because the subject is still fresh > in my mind as the result of reconnecting with a couple > of old friends who share my experience with the "Practice > method" and being able to discuss it with them... > > My opinion is that the "Practice" method described above > is possibly more interesting (for those who have run into a > teacher who can do it, and whose predilections groove with > that approach) than the "Theory" method in two respects. > First, the "hands on," "get to wear the SOC as it's being > described" approach is IMO more effective at presenting the > distinctions *between* different SOCs. Second, IMO it has > the benefit of loosening the students' attachment to any > particular SOC, and to believing that any of them are > "higher" or "better" or "more Real" than the others. > > My fondest memories of the "Practice" approach are when one > of the teachers I worked with would "broadcast" to us not > just one SOC, but many, and in a short period of time. This > was a very real experience of Tantra, the juxtaposition of > opposites. For example, the teacher might start the talk/ > demo by describing the nature of the world around us as seen > from waking state. Naturally, we would all be in that state > as he talked, and so the teacher's descriptions of the world > and How It Worked were obvious to us; all we had to do was > look around and see that his descriptions of the world > matched our subjective experience of it, from this > particular SOC. > > But then he'd "flip" us, and broadcast another state, say CC. > And everything would change. One's first impression, sitting > there in a completely different SOC, was that the world had > a completely different "look and feel" than it had only a few > seconds ago. Then the teacher would start to describe the > world and How It Worked from this second SOC, and again these > descriptions now matched our subjective experience. Whereas -- > and this is the important point -- the descriptions we'd been > given just a few seconds ago did not. They were no longer > "true" or valid from this new SOC. > > And then he'd "flip" us again. Say, into UC. And again, every- > thing would change. And then the teacher would describe the > mechanics of how the world worked from this SOC, and again it > would match our subjective experience of Unity. And then the > teacher would finish up the talk/demo by flipping us back and > forth between these different states of consciousness, at times > as quickly as he could snap his fingers. With every "flip," we > got to *experience* the "look and feel" of the world when seen > through this SOC and how it worked, so the distinctions between > the different states became very clear. It was in a very real > sense a "hands on demo" of Maharishi's "Knowledge is different > in different states of consciousness." > > As a result of having had this experience, I would reword MMY's > statement as "Reality is different in different states of con- > sciousness." When you've been "flipped" like this, several times > a week, for years, you don't really have the same relationship > to the word "Reality" that some have. In fact, you stop capital- > izing the word in your mind, because it's been made clear to you > that there is no such thing as Reality, only constantly-changing > realities, none "better" or "higher" than the other, only > different. > > This, in my opinion, was more valuable to me as a student of > self discovery than the experience -- as neat as it was -- of > getting to "put on and wear" all of these different states of > consciousness. The process of being "flipped" through many > of them, in rapid succession, with the nature of the world and > How It Worked changing with each "flip," left me with no way > to glom onto any of them as "Reality." I no longer even believe > in the *concept* of one "highest" Reality. There are just dif- > ferent subjective states of consciousness or awareness, in > each of which the world and How It Works (and thus the nature > of reality) is different. Not "better," not "higher," just > different. > > This is why I have been able to RELAX about my own spiritual > path, and not feel that I needed to seek any particular SOC. > I've been there, done that with many of them. And I enjoyed > them all. But none struck me -- either when I was "wearing" > them as the result of whatever it was that the teacher did > to "broadcast" them to me, or later, when I re-accessed > these states of consciousness on my own -- as any "ultimate" > or "highest" SOC that I should consider a "goal" or a valued > "destination" along the spiritual path. For me, the spiritual > journey is all about walking the path and enjoying the walk, > not "arriving" somewhere. YMMV. >
