Yes, confusing, I know...Perhaps I can explain it this way, by saying that later today I will be seeing my daughter, and in so doing, becoming a popsicle!!
--- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@...> wrote: > > Ha! Now I am really confused! Wouldn't a point be a particle? :-) > > Thanks! > > *L*L*L* > > --- In [email protected], doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > EXACTLY My Point!! :-) Welcome! > > > > --- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > > > Hey, Jim! Thanks! Glad to be back; it's good to see you. But now I am > > > confused; I thought I was a wavicle! :-) > > > > > > *L*L*L* > > > > > > R. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dude! WTF?! Glad to see you back, you particle, you!!! :-) > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I know we have had something much like this conversation before, > > > > > Lawson, but everything spirals, doesn't it? So here we are again, for > > > > > the first time! > > > > > > > > > > In my experience, anyhow, and that of most people I know well here in > > > > > Fairfield, the criteria for CC are entirely lost in UC and especially > > > > > BC, which though utterly indescribable is in many respects identical > > > > > to ignorance. Duality doesn't really predominate. Separation vs. > > > > > Unity is gone; inner vs. outer is gone; I vs. thou is gone; absolute > > > > > vs. relative is gone; rest vs. activity is gone; suffering vs. > > > > > ecstasy is gone; even permanence vs. impermanence is gone. In a > > > > > sense, for true permanence to acknowledge itself, the addiction to > > > > > growth through various states of consciousness is recognized for the > > > > > illusion it is and transcended. To be timeless, we simply stop > > > > > believing we are in any real sense subject to time. > > > > > > > > > > BC, our ordinary state of being, is a priori, and paradoxical, and > > > > > can be quite confusing -- as it is and always has been the status > > > > > quo, prior to the story-making faculty of the intellect itself -- and > > > > > probably requires an intellectual AhA for the intellect to even > > > > > recognize It, or Us. It is quite possible for someone to be "in" BC > > > > > -- as we all really are, anyhow -- and not even acknowledge It or Us > > > > > because one thinks one is still "losing" CC! Believing in the wave > > > > > rather than the ocean, as It Is, or believing in the story rather > > > > > than the storyteller! :-) > > > > > > > > > > Also in my experience, all the states of consciousness are not fixed > > > > > and permanent, but are merely teaching tools, shifting lenses to view > > > > > the single wholeness we have always been. We don;t need to keep > > > > > experiencing a particular state forever; we need only truly > > > > > appreciate it once, and then we are on to something new. New "states" > > > > > continue to unfold from different viewpoints as we move into > > > > > ignorance and suffering again and again and enlighten ourselves again > > > > > and again in different ways through different bodies. > > > > > > > > > > This surely contradicts what I said above about the permanent > > > > > timelessness of BC.... but BC is paradoxical, and contains all > > > > > opposites. What I say would certainly not be true if it didn't > > > > > immediately contradict itself! > > > > > > > > > > Love, Light and Laughter Always, > > > > > > > > > > R. > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > That might be, but the criteria for having some degree CC isn't > > > > > > perfect silence, but just never losing PC while engaged in activity. > > > > > > > > > > > > L. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
