Anon, you're hired as my official spokesperson! ;-) --- anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> see comments below. > > --- In [email protected], "Irmeli > Mattsson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], anonymousff > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > meli > > > > > > Irmeli wrote in response to Peter: > > > <<Clearly it is futile to discuss these issues > with you. With my > waking > > > state reality I just cannot comprehend you.>> > > > > > > **** > > > Such a shame - you each have so much to > contribute. BTW, there > may be > > > a problem with the term "waking state" here. > Irmeli appears to > be > > > using it to mean the state that the body/mind is > in when it > arises > > > from sleep and goes about the activities of the > day. Peter > appears to > > > be using it to mean the state that the body/mind > is in before a > > > certain level of realization in the field of > universal > consciousness. > > > After this, the body/mind still arises from > sleep and goes about > the > > > activities of the day. > > > > > > anonX > > > > > > > I understand enlightenment to be a prevalent > waking state > awareness. > > It depends on how we define enlightenment, what > attributes this > > enlightened awareness has. This has been my > conceptual basic > > assumption. I have stated this in many posts > earlier. > > Peter seems to be talking about something else. He > has explained > > waking state and enlightenment to be two different > things I have > > earlier asked him how he on daily basis manages to > alternate > between > > waking state and enlightenment? But I have got no > answer. > > Also many times earlier when I have commented on > his "no I" posts > he > > has not bothered to respond to me. > > > > I have had very easy to relate to Ken Wilber's > thinking and > > descriptions and conceptual way of expressing > himself from the > very > > first moment I encountered his writings a few > years ago. I mean I > can > > in his descriptions recognize my own subjective > reality, but not > in > > Peter's descriptions. > > > > I just read from the newest issue of "What is > Enlightenment" from > the > > Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen Dialogue a very good > description that > > pretty well describes my own conscious inner > reality. > > > > Quote: > > "Wilber: Moment to moment there is this > ever-present is-ness, and > yet > > as soon as you locate yourself in it, there is an > `I'. > > Cohen: Yes. The minute you locate yourself, the > whole world > appears. > > Wilber: Exactly. As soon as there is an `I', there > is an it or an > > object, and then there is a `we'; there is some > resonance with some > > other subjectivity someplace". > > > > Wilber explains also a little bit further in the > text: "When you > are > > in a causal, or nondual, open-eyes, ever-present, > non-effort > state, an > > I arises that is an authentic self." > > > > I hope this helps to clarify, what I have been > trying to > communicate. > > > > Irmeli > > **** > Thank you Irmeli for your response. I have read a > number of posts > from you since you first joined FFL. However, I go > through long > periods of not reading FFL, so I am sure that I have > missed many of > your contributions. > > On the topic of "waking state" I think it is > worthwhile to > understand that Peter uses that as a kind of jargon, > or shorthand > for "pre-enlightened state". I suggest that, when > reading what he > has to say, you make the substitution. Then you will > not confuse > your understanding of "waking state" (which is the > more common > usage) with his (which is Maharishi's usage). > > If you follow this suggestion, you will have a new > interpretation of > the conversations you have with him. For example, > you wrote: > > <<He has explained > > waking state and enlightenment to be two different > things I have > > earlier asked him how he on daily basis manages to > alternate > between waking state and enlightenment?>> > > His part of this would translate as: > > "He has explained that the pre-enlightened state and > enlightenment > are two different things." > > Then you would see that your question which followed > isn't actually > addressing what he had to say. > > Once getting past the confusion of terminology, it > starts to get > interesting to see the similarities and differences > in how each of > you define "enlightenment". > > Regarding the "no I" concept, if you have an > interest to understand > it better, there are some very articulate attempts > to describe this > experience, coming from people who had no > predisposition to expect > it, based on their own traditions. These have been > mentioned before > on FFL: > > Collision With the Infinite, by Suzanne Siegal > The Experience of No-Self, by Bernadette Roberts > > In the latter, there a thorough attempt to define > what is meant by > self. Such a definition is often missing from > discussions of no- > self, no-ego etc. Other writings by Bernadette > Roberts go into this > more thoroughly, such as the book "What is Self?". > > I mention this because you seem to have a curious > mind, willing to > entertain notions outside of your own. You may find > it worthwhile to > explore these authors. > > I don't know if this will make any difference to > your and Peter's > ongoing failure to communicate with each other, even > though you > intend to. :) > > > > > === message truncated === __________________________________ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com ------------------------ 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/
