Akasha:
> > Does it strike anyone else as funny, even absurd, that the whole
> > paradigm about enlightenment on this list is dichotomous, digital,
> > either "on or off"?
Unc:
> YES! That's exactly the issue.
> I realized that some time back, during the discussions
> about 'appreciation.' Some comment by, I think, Tom
> made me completely abandon my old paradigm and come up
> with a new one that more accurately described my
> subjective experience.
A:
> > Pure consciousness begins from the first mediation. If not before.
U:
> Before. There has never been a moment in my life when
> I was not enlightened.
That's the one point on all of this where I think we differ. First, I
see no value in labels such as enlightenment. It can create
distinctions, it can creates longing for "titles", it can create false
egos, it can creates scams, etc. And the upside is?
I just never appreciated it
> until a three-week period in Fiuggi, when the 24/7 wit-
> nessing made it impossible not to appreciate. Since
> then, that witnessing has slipped from foreground to
> background many times, but what I realized during the
> 'appreciation' discussion is that it has always been
> present. What I realized when I first appreciated it
> was that it had *always* been present.
A:
yes, all that is good. And similar. But if one wanted to play the
labels game, it would seem that when the attention of Awareness (of
awareness) slips from foreground to background, its not E. But I
think E labels are bogus, so who cares. Claim all you want. :)
A:
> > And it can be delicate at first, and fade (yellow dye and cloth
anyone?) and become "overshadowed". But it keeps coming back.
Sometimes more noticable, sometimes present only when one notices it
--- "where are my glasses?" ("you are wearng them, silly") is a good
analogy.
U:
> And when you lighten up about it, you can bring it from
> background to foreground any time you want. It's just
> the neatest thing.
A:
YES. And it is always accessable. It is bitchin. Still, in that
stage, I would hold that is not E. If I was playing the label game.
U:
> The thing that brought it from background to foreground
> most recently was, strangely enough, watching an old
> movie on DVD. It was Roger Corman's, "The Raven," which
> starred Vincent Price, Peter Lorre, Boris Karloff, and
> a young guy in one of his first film roles, as Peter
> Lorre's son. This young actor was SO bad that it made
> you want to cringe. It was just amazing to watch. It
> was like I was watching a brilliant actor brilliantly
> playing the part of the worst actor ever filmed.
>
> I was. It was Jack Nicholson. The thing is, he was a
> great actor even then. He just didn't appreciate it,
> so his range was limited, and he clung to old ideas of
> being a bad actor, trapped by ignorance and inexperience.
> It wasn't true. All that he ever became was already
> present, just not appreciated, and thus unused.
Nice example.
> That's the thing that is striking me about all these
> conversations last night and this morning. Some people
> who have learned to appreciate what has always been
> present are talking to others who have not. The ones
> who have not appreciated their own enlightenment are
> playing a role, clinging to the illusion of their
> ignorance as strongly as Jack was clinging to the
> illusion of being a bad actor in The Raven. It's
> all very, very, very, very funny.
Perhaps I am viewed as one of those. I just am not interested in the
label game. Labels are not real. Experience and Understanding are
real. And both are spectral - extending along a long/wide spectrum.
But for scientific measurement purposes, which may have some value, I
would "label" E as continual foreground of PC. All thes other "states"
stages we have talked about are nice developments.
Thats why I think "E" has been highly devalued in these neo-advaita
years. Its drawing a target around the already shot arrow. "I am here,
so this must be the goal." I am old skewl perhaps. I think there are
actual classic "standards" that few I am aware of have met. But many
poo poo and label such as inaccurate, out of date, and/or stemming
from a "bad translation".
All are having fine experiences. That does not make them E. But if it
gets someone off, or satifies some ego need, they should go for it.
I am happy with my experiences. I am not denying anything. Except
devaluation and BS.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
