It is kind of funny you posted this news on "David Wants to Fly," subject title.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" <yifuxero@...> wrote: > > somebody just jumped off the 15 story parking structure right next to the > building I work in. (one of those protestors since a large group of them is > camped outside - confirmed by a news account just now). > ... > I always pray for the dead (to Jesus), based on intuition/feelings coupled > with a minimum of psychic awareness. Somehow I don't believe that "Being" > will help them, so I'm siding with Orthodox Christianity on this one. > However, prayers to Kali might provide an equal assist. > > Taking a hint from the movie "Sixth-Sense"; the entity could easily sink into > the Hellish realms. Support from such sources as the Tibetan Book(s) of the > dead points to the benefits of prayers and mantras to assist the departed in > their journey into the beyond. > > http://www.atotheword.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/rapture-ready.jpg > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" <yifuxero@> wrote: > > > > thx, both of you...much food for thought! re - the East is unreal, meaning > > Wilber's "Great Tradition" or Adi-Da's Advaitayana-Buddhism (i.e. the > > impersonalist elements in Sanatana Dharma, as opposed to dualist Vaisnava > > or "orthodox" Christianity [non-Gnostic, say what the Pope recommends). > > ... > > I don't get the point. True "IT" is "unreal" in the sense of the rope not > > being the snake but definitely not "non-experiential". It's experienced as > > the Self. So what....then we go on the many claims that result from this > > Gnosis or Self-Knowledge. That's where people may find many a gripe, > > beginning with the concept of Happiness. > > ... > > How can people find fault with "IS-ness"? > > ... > > The question of the Vedic Gods is peripheral; since Ramana Maharshi as a > > proponent of Self-Realization at various times in his life was devoted to > > Vedic Gods, he made it clear that Ultimately (from his perspective); > > devotion such Gods was given up relatively speaking and totally engulfed > > within the unmanifest. > > ... > > In short, there are various claims as to happiness...; and I'll leave the > > "East" at that for now. > > ... > > As to Christianity, (orthodox Christianity as opposed to Gnosticism); there > > are claims as to the redeeming power of Christ's Crucifixion. > > Are such claims (as made by St. Paul and the various historical characters > > such as St. Xavier) true or false. What's the evidence? > > > > http://www.scottgbrooks.com/painting_liberty1.html > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Oct 10, 2011, at 3:18 PM, maskedzebra wrote: > > > > > > > Answer: I resist giving a simple response to this question. What > > > > follows here is strictly my own idiosyncratic view of the matter. I > > > > doubt I will take anyone with me in what I say. But I will go ahead > > > > anyway. Enlightenment, in the case of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, was real; > > > > real here means: functioning in a different context mechanically, > > > > behaviourally, experientially. Enlightenment *is* a separate and > > > > distinct state of awareness which is as different from waking state as > > > > waking state is to dream state. Enlightenment is like waking up from a > > > > dream, and it is, unquestionably, the experience of knowing the > > > > intention of the entire cosmos is acting through one's individual > > > > existence. Unless it has thismechanical, purposefulaspect, it can't > > > > be enlightenment. Not the way Maharishi defined it. Not the way > > > > Maharishi made it possible for me to know what he was experiencing. > > > > > > Well I hope you realize that this would also be a classical description > > > of an number of psychiatric disorders, including but not limited to > > > Schizotypal personality disorder or Schizophrenia. One should probably > > > include the more recent Kundalini psychosis. > > > > > > "Real" is a relative term. There is not any style of validation for these > > > states in Mahesh's system performed by someone known to be competent with > > > higher states of consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > > But as for the true reality of it: that is: does enlightenment > > > > represent the fulfillment, the perfection, the consummation of what it > > > > means to be a human being? this I reject categorically. > > > > > > Well, "pointing out" of the enlightened state is essential to grokking > > > the reality of what we experience or imagine as an enlightened state or > > > stage. The traditional presentation is that we've been so conditioned to > > > delusion for countless lives that we're much, much more likely to chose a > > > delusion as "our enlightenment". In one sense there are no enlightened > > > people, there's only enlightened action. Those who talk, inevitably, > > > don't know. > > > > > > > Enlightenmentany state that takes you outside of normal waking > > > > stateincluding transcendenceis ultimately an illusion. > > > > > > Unless enlightenment involves no modification, it is seeing thing as they > > > really are - just as they are. I think that was one of the hardest things > > > for people (like me) who were or are conditioned by Hindu- or Veda-think > > > to grok. > > > > > > > Note: I am not saying that it isn't something very real as measured by > > > > how it allows one to function, the experience it immutably affords one > > > > to have at all times, the stability of it, its unconquerable integrity. > > > > It is all these things. But the question becomes: *How* is it that this > > > > state of consciousness comes about? > > > > > > Buddhist awakeners might say it 'was there, from the beginning'. After > > > all, everything that's compounded, changes. > > > > > > > For sure, it is the perpetual integrated experience of transcendence. > > > > But, after all, does enlightenment correspond to objective reality? > > > > Does reality seek to have itself embodied in a human being in the form > > > > of enlightenment? > > > > > > Yes, of course it corresponds to objective reality. > > > > > > > > > > > No. A universal No to this. Which is why Maharishi started to come > > > > apart at the end; it is why (if I may speak personally) I started to > > > > come apart at the end. Enlightenmentif you're all out therecannot be > > > > sustained. And reality will bring it down. If, that is, you put > > > > yourself on the line: as in: I am enlightened; let me lead you to the > > > > promised land (Unity Consciousness). Just do this technique. Or: let me > > > > confront you inside the metaphysical drama of creation. > > > > > > From the tradition I come from, and the actual tradition of Christ some > > > believe, they might say that relaxation (unstressing?) continues to the > > > cellular level. One gets less and less encumbered - and then just returns > > > to the source of the five elements: light. > > > > > > > > > > > So, strictly speaking, yes, TM "can produce a style of psychosis" which > > > > could describe fittingly the state of enlightenment. But I have never > > > > seen *anyone* on the earth other than Maharishi that I believe is > > > > 'truly enlightened'. > > > > > > I have. But I have to say I don't feel nor had I ever experienced Mahesh > > > as "enlightened". A couple of minor siddhis? Maybe. And then even that > > > fell away. That would be my perception. > > > > > > But then maybe he was just not my Elvis. > > > > > > > Because, as I have said, enlightenment requires the cosmos to appear to > > > > be behind one's actions and supporting one's experience of a unified > > > > state of consciousness. Enlightenment should and can meet all testsbut > > > > one. All the tests short of reality deciding to confront it. Then > > > > Reality overpowers reality. And enlightenment is seen for what it > > > > really is: a very unnatural, deceitful, black-magical state of > > > > consciousness, which alienates one from who one really is. > > > > > > Well that brings up an interesting observation other yogis have made on > > > dark yogis like Mahesh. They are experts at producing forms of delusion, > > > mind-scars if you will, that can enslave one. > > > > > > > > > > As far as I am concerned Maharishi's version of what enlightenment is > > > > is the only true enlightenment of my lifetime. > > > > > > I'd honestly have to say the opposite: his is the only faux-enlightenment > > > system I've experienced directly. And it's also the only system of > > > meditation I know of that caused so much suffering to it's practitioners. > > > Shakyamuni was right: siddhis are the purest form of suffering. > > > > > > What does that say for someone who urged his students to cultivate > > > siddhis? > > > > > > > Maharishi lived out the truth of his enlightenmentuntil the universe, > > > > or what is behind the universe, decided it had had enough, and in its > > > > unfathomable providence decided to bring him down. And is still > > > > bringing him down. > > > > > > He's still a mystery. I'm open to "whatever". It could turn out the > > > fanatic marketing job he did in popularizing meditation will be the right > > > catalyst at the right time. And then we'll all have a good laugh. > > > > > > > > > > > But it brought me down too. So, then, I deny, challenge, the so-called > > > > enlightenment of anyone other than Maharishi. How so, Robin? Because I > > > > know I can destabilize and undo that illusion if it gets presented to > > > > me in the form of another human being. Not in the form of Maharishi, > > > > howevernot when I knew him; not when I was enlightened. The universe > > > > allowed Maharishi to represent itself, even though, when it really came > > > > down to it, it rejected him, and sent him on his way. And I am still > > > > suffering the consequences of this same kind of rejection. That is, I > > > > am still finding out how f***ked up I made myself by going into Unity > > > > Consciousness on that mountain in Switzerland. > > > > > > > > So, as long as one stays in waking state, one is all right. But anyone > > > > who claims to be enlightened, first of all is not enlightened in the > > > > sense that the universe or reality is getting behind that > > > > enlightenmentas it did in the case of Maharishi, as it did, in the > > > > case of myself; and secondly they are making themselves weaker as a > > > > human being than they otherwise would be were they to step out of their > > > > so-called enlightenment and become a normal waking state person again. > > > > Every guest on BatGap fits this description, and Rick's association > > > > with TM and Maharishi renders him far more subtle, fluent, savvy in his > > > > conversation about things cosmic than anyone of his guests. They are > > > > all in an illusion of one kind of another. > > > > > > It seems we agree on many things! > > > > > > > > > > > But, short of enlightenment, perhaps it's just fine to think one can > > > > evolve into a higher state of consciousness through TM or any other > > > > meditation technique. Myself, I have not outside of Maharishi > > > > encountered a single person who claims to be enlightened who can stand > > > > up to the confrontation of their enlightenment. They just get angry or > > > > out of control, and the falseness of their experience gets exposed. > > > > Nobody, by contrast, could lay a hand on Maharishi. But they could now. > > > > Same applies to myself. > > > > > > > > But since God is no longer enabling us to know his Creationand > > > > ourselvesthrough his own grace, well, then, everything is up for > > > > grabs. And everyone's reality is just as valid as anyone else's > > > > reality. But for sure enlightenment in some objective sense is a form > > > > of psychosisbut it may be supported by awesomely powerful invisible > > > > beings like Devas, or angels, or discarnate spirits. I think this > > > > causality applies to Maharishi, and I have come to believe applies to > > > > my myself. > > > > > > > > If there was anything valid or truthful or objective about > > > > enlightenment, the West would have made it an object of scientific > > > > study centuries agoand all those Jesuit Missionaries to India and > > > > Japan in the fifteenth century would have been brought up short when > > > > they encountered some Guru or Roshi. They did not, because > > > > enlightenment is a mystical state of consciousness which does not > > > > correspond to reality as it is governed and sustained (and was > > > > originally created) by a personal Creator. The Holy Ghost was with the > > > > Jesuits [like St Francis Xavier]. Enlightenment will never become part > > > > of philosophy, psychology, science, or literature: because it is *not > > > > real*. Therefore the East is ultimately, in its spirituality, unreal. > > > > The spirituality of the West once *was real*. The basis of its reality > > > > has gone. And therefore we in the Westespecially since psychedelics > > > > moved inhave followed the gods of the East. > > > > > > Some would say that the only extant remnant of the style of complete > > > awakening left on planet earth that corresponds to what Jesus of Nazareth > > > experienced is that of the Mahasandhi yogis of Tibet who, similarly, > > > simply dissolve into light: and thereby gain the simultaneous ability to > > > merge with hundreds of thousands of dakinis, in innumerable realms as > > > enlightened activity. > > > > > > If this wasn't the case, I doubt the Roman Catholic church would have so > > > much interest in a phenomenon that'd they'd have teams of scientists > > > waiting till the next time they get a report... > > > > > >
