--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
> If I may leap into the fray... How high does the non-I leap? > There appear to be two distinctions > here. One, can the intellect locate the Self, or enlightenment? and > Two, can it subsequently be described? Perhaps three. Or even four. Your word "locate" had the connotation to me of "finding the Self from raw deduction". So my quick response was "no". You answered yes, so I assume you mean, when Self experiences Self, can the intellect identify "its there". if thats what you man, then "yes". So its useful to clarify if the reference is to finding "something unknown", or identifying something thats already there, and distinguishing it from "other", or seeing it the same as (previously) "other" . The mind is as or even much more involved "description" than the intellect. Intellect can say "this, not this" in terms of descriptors that the mind passes by it for "review". But the mind does the conceptual work, the framing of the issue, the development of a framework of understanding. So can the mind (with a bit of help from the intellect) describe Self -- but only with poetic markers, and only if it is "adjacent" -- that there is Experience. But the descriptors are only markers -- like describing love to a drunk chipmunk. One can make an attempt to do so, but (mostly) only in "poetic" languange. Just as love can only (mostly) be described poetically (but not limited to poems). But the same pre and post issue is there. The mind can try to create poetic markers for what is already there. It can't, from scratch, without the "adjacent" experience, conceptualize what the experience is. So there is a 2x2 matrix: Mind/intellect x Experience / non-experience (or pre/post). One needs to clearly identify which of the four cells one is refering to when one is talking about locating and describing Self. > My take on this, if I may, is that the intellect easily locates the > Self. However, it is impossible to describe unless we are speaking > with someone who is enlightened and then it is more of a non-verbal > acknowledgement between the interested parties. The love poetry (try Neruda) makes sense (often) to one who is either in love, or who has been in love. Its sill garbage to one who had not. I say often because no single words or markers are universal, IMO. Ones markers may or may not make sense to another -- even if the experience is the same. (and maybe the experience is different -- but thats a whole other experience). ------------------------ 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/
