--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@...> wrote: > > 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?
Yes, but they would do you no good. Two of the four I've met are now dead, and the other two I have heard went back to Bhutan, and are no longer working with non-Bhutanese or non-Tibetan students. They gave work- ing with Westerners a shot on teaching tours and (from what I am told) now prefer to work only with people who can make a longer-term commitment. They didn't like the "drop in" approach. > And what are the mechanics behind the ability to broadcast > an SOC? I have no earthly idea. I report only on my subjective experience of working with these teachers. > I am asking this because your description makes it sound like > a radio broadcast - a mental projection or something like that? Something like that. Or, as I have suggested in the past about "darshan," being able to put on a SOC so powerfully that others in the audience could be in the same room and somehow "recognize" in the teacher's SOC the counterpart of a "matching" SOC that was within them, just not realized yet, and as a result "access" it. That's a more "non-doing" theory, but this is pure spec- ulation on my part. I have no idea how it was done, only *that* it was done. > 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." It sounds completely "science fictiony," until you have experienced it. Having done so does not make it in the least more understandable or less fantastic; but you've had the subjective experience. > With the material you presented here, it seems like you could > have just made this up. I could have, but I didn't. On the other hand, if it pleases you to consider it fiction, that is your right and I won't spend even the tiniest bit of effort trying to convince you otherwise. I don't understand it myself; I just experienced it. And clearly I'm not attempting to "sell" it to anyone, because as far as I know there is nothing to sell any more. You may treat what I wrote however you want. I wrote it because I ran into some old friends and we got to talking about this form of teaching (which we all have experienced), and that was fresh in my mind. I wrote what I wrote (as I often do) in an attempt to clarify *for myself* some of the discussions we had and the thoughts still rattling around in my head as a result. > It is a great story idea, but how could someone find out that > what you say here is real? Even worse, if you experienced it yourself, how could you convince *yourself* that it was real, much less anyone else? :-) That's the position I'm in. > Remember, walking the path is fine. We all do this. But the > idea is for the path to go away... According to whom? Not according to me. For me, the path is just for the walking, without any fixed destination or goal. > ...and before it does, it is not all groovy and enjoyable, > some really difficult experiences can arise. Speak for yourself. Attempts to speak for everyone don't usually impress me very much. :-) > Some day "maybe" we can "discuss" your "extensive" use of > quote "marks." Or not. I care as little about what you think of my writing style as I do what you think of its content. Really. But thanks for responding in a civil manner. That is not always the case on this forum.
