On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Share Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> ** > > > Nice list, Xeno. Maharishi also once called CC a stepping stone. Good or > something like that. But a stepping stone. > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Xenophaneros Anartaxius <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Friday, March 15, 2013 10:46 AM > *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Barry and Curtis's hubris [was Re: A lie is > only a lie] > > > --- In [email protected], doctordumbass@... <no_reply@...> > wrote: > > > > Listen up, punk. I owe you exactly *nothing* in terms of how I live my > life and continue my spiritual journey. I have responded once now to your > childish prattling. That is all you are getting from me. You've got issues, > and know as much about me, as you do the man in the moon. > > > > If you need extra attention, perhaps you need to run your, "I am in a > mental hospital", routine again. What a jerk off. > > > > DOCTORDUMBASS TO RAVI CHIVUKULA: > > 'Oh Ravi. As a highly born Indian, you of all people should know that > enlightenment is impossible to discern by actions. Why? Because spiritual > evolution is just that - evolution. So it isn't something like graduating > from engineering school, and then being able to build a better widget. It > moves. Enlightenment moves. So once the initial Liberation occurs, and we > are established in Silence, it is a continuous process of growth, much more > quickly than before.'' > > 'Glad we got that out of the way. What is next?' > > 'Oh yeah, how you cringe whenever I claim my enlightenment. Please get > over it. It doesn't somehow magically revert my consciousness to that of > one ignorant to his fundamental nature, to someone unenlightened, when you > or Barry do not like me saying such a thing. Like Byron Katie says, "you > can argue with reality, and you'll only be wrong 100% of the time."' > > 'So yeah, no one EVER says they are enlightened, as if it is like uttering > a curse. That is why I do it - It is both accurate, and causes severe > cognizant dissonance in people like you. Oh goodie!!' > > 'As for the rest of your opinion, yeah, I don't like you much now, either. > I think that covers it, kiddo.' > > While I am not particularly thrilled with Ravi's antics at times, the > tenor of this response makes me wonder what you signify by the term > 'enlightenment', and what you signify by the phrases 'initial Liberation', > and 'established in Silence'. > > Now, I too have had experiences of insight, but sometimes there is > something unseemly with one's behaviour after having had such experiences, > something that does not reflect on the true nature of those experiences. I > think this has to do with our general conditioning, but also cultural > conditioning, and specifically spiritual path conditioning. > > For example, in the TM scheme of things, Cosmic Consciousness seems to be > considered 'realisation', 'liberation'. Now in Zen Buddhism, for example, > this would not be considered liberation, it would be considered a stepping > stone experience toward liberation, but basically one would be considered > to be in a delusional state, because you are identified with the silent > state of being. That you were previously identified with the active state > of being, and are not now, does not free one from delusion. > > While a few people seem to glide into unity, realisation tends to be a > sudden insight into the nature of being, clear or foggy. How much that > insight fades after it occurs may be a function of how much stress (using > TM terminology) is in the system. > > Especially with initial experiences there is a strong tendency, of which > we are usually almost completely unaware, to be full of ourselves. We now > 'know' something others do not know. Our ego co-ops the experience and we > strut around like total ass holes with our new-found toy. And if we are > more aged and mature and we have a truly deep insight, this may, almost > certainly, occur to some extent, and it can be very subtle, and we may be > unaware yet, of its insidious presence. In some traditions this is called > the 'stink of enlightenment'. It can last for years and years. > > Now I am making up some rules here (and copping some from various > teachers): > > *If you are still seeking a higher level of experience, you are not > liberated. > > *If you feel the realisations you have had are important, that you look > back on them, you are not liberated. > > *If you do not see that enlightenment is a kind of cosmic joke, but is a > deadly serious goal, you are not liberated. > > *If you think you have a new, improved relationship with the universe, you > are not liberated. > > *If you think others lack enlightenment or the capacity thereto, you are > not liberated. That does not mean you are absent the full value of > enlightenment or ever were. > > *These rules are baloney but if applied properly may keep one from > tripping over one's own feet to some extent. Do not pay attention to the > man manipulating behind the curtain, unless that man is you. > > It is really a stretch to claim enlightenment because realisation brings > absolutely nothing new to life, gives one nothing that one can lord over > others, gives one nothing one can give to others, gives one nothing that > can improve others. A thorn to remove a thorn as M said, a delusion to > remove a delusion. The path is a smokescreen to trick one into letting > everything go. > > Everyone here on FFL is your friend, if you see the world without a chip > in your eye. > > > > >
