--- In [email protected], Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > John, actually the word inertia suggests a dull mind to me, one under the > influence of tamas guna. Whereas the phrase noisy mind suggests one having > more of a rajasic tendency. I think conditioning could give rise to either > situation and that situation could be ever changing depending on one's > prakriti or inherent nature, which I bet can be seen in the jyotish chart. My > guess is that those with kapha constitution would be relatively stable if a > bit leaning in the dull direction. Pitta people would tend to rajasic minds. > I think restful alertness is a great solution, infinite dynamism balanced by > infinite silence. Maharishi explained that between these two arises infinite > wakefulness.
Does it make you feel somehow better or safer or more cocooned in some way to speak about the characteristics of the world in this way? Do you ever just look at yourself in more concrete and fundamental/down-to-Earth ways, Share? When you write like this it is like you are using this buffer zone of jargon to say something that could be viewed so much more direct, simpler, truer. Can you remove this 'insulation' you have come to adopt in the way you speak and just say it like it is? The overlay of this ayurvedic and jyotish gobbledygook speak just seems to hide what is really (or could be) really going on. Or maybe what you say is all deep truth and my Saturn nodes coupled with Venus' tamasic shoelaces have tangled in the web of Rahu. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: John <jr_esq@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, August 5, 2013 4:42 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Culture of Illusion > > > > Â > Lawson, > > It all depends on what is your definition of cosmic consciousness. But > having a noisy mind appears to be an indication of an inertia due to having a > conditioned mind. What do you think? > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > Well, "putting" one's mind into silence sounds a bit contrived, to me. > > > > Someone in CC doesn't necessarily have a quiet mind. In fact, someone in CC > > might have a very noisy mind -- conceivably even noisier than before they > > "attained" CC -- though the trend should be towards more silence over time, > > or such is my understanding. > > > > L > > > > --- In [email protected], doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > David needs to speak for himself. There is not necessarily a "we", in his > > > comment. > > > > > > Thought is the *only* reason Mr. Frawley, and you, John, are able to > > > share this piece of spinach with us. The engineers that developed this > > > technology of communication, needed to think deeply, and continuously, to > > > put this together. > > > > > > If I may hazard a guess, David F. has just discovered that 90% of his > > > thoughts are useless energy and momentum, spent maintaining a story. It > > > is a common, though by no means, universal malady. > > > > > > Once he sees this, perhaps Dave can put his mind into silence, and simply > > > recognize the Divine utility of thought - the other 10%. In the meantime, > > > his projecting isn't helping. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > > > "Thought, if we learn to observe it, is a reaction-mechanism devoid of > > > > true consciousness. It is the inertia of our conditioning that we fail > > > > to truly question." > > > > > > > > David Frawley > > > > > > > > > >
