---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fleetwood_macncheese@...> wrote : Sure. As I said, my enlightenment is not provable.
M: Provable is one thing. Not being able to demonstrate anything that you would need to assume a higher states model is another. I hear music in my mind. That is subjective. I can't prove that I do. But I can demonstrate on the outside that I have a musical awareness. It just seems odd that such a state would have absolutely zero manifestation of "better." And of course Maharishi disagrees with you about the proof. The proof was supposed to be the siddhis but it just didn't turn out. And he did not believe that siddhis could not be demonstrated for the skeptical. He believed they could but again, failed. J: I DO achieve everything that I desire. M: I am not sure what you are saying here. So do I then. We all work toward our goals and if we haven't set the bar ridiculously high, we get there. Are you claiming that your version is somehow different from mine? What have you desired that came true that could not be explained by the process we all use to fulfill desires? Are you aware that the human mind has a cognitive flaw of shaping our memories so that we only remember the things we got fulfilled and conveniently forget hose that did not turn out? We are terrible at such self reported score keeping. J: Enlightenment is the state of pure awareness, 24 x 7, M: First of all you couldn't even know if you black out in deep sleep in between periods of wakefulness. You would have to have an MRI. I have nights where I don't believe I was ever in deep sleep, but by the clock I must have been. We are terrible reporters of sleep states. I am aware in my dreams too so that doesn't really count. And lets say you did, what is the value of that? Sleep is nice and it helps organize all sorts of stuff in our minds, creatively and for memory access. You are selling a feature as a benefit and I don't see what that is. During the day I have pure awareness too, it is called being alive as a sentient being. J: universal synchronicity. M: What is this and how do you know this? Can you distinguish this from a fanciful notion you have? J: It is a famous expression in the Gita, that an enlightened man sees darkness where the ignorant see light, and vice versa, so your comments are appropriate. Yes, I appear crazy to you, but you also appear out of touch with reality, to me. Other than that, I hope your day is going well! M: Always with the on upmanship putdowns. You don't appear crazy to me. You appear to have a fanciful notion about yourself as living in a superior state of consciousness that manifests absolutely nothing that seems superior. It comes off as a little insecure. You don't have to be a superior being to be respected and liked you know. Being an ordinary human is wonderful enough. But I do reject the notion that you are enlightened and I am ignorant. That is pure poopy pants posturing about something you could not know. By your own no-proof-needed assertions criteria, for all you know I am in the next state of enlightenment and am your guru trying to coax you along to my higher state. Subjective inflation can go both ways you know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote : OK Jim, lets look at your claim to be in a higher state of consciousness with a special access to knowledge. This is your claim so I say, show me how I can distinguish your claim from that of a born again Christian who claims to have had the experience of being saved. You both are claiming subjective knowledge that cannot be evaluated from outside. But you have an advantage in enlightenment. That package comes with the added claim that you can know things that people like me cannot know. Can you express one single thing as evidence that you are functioning on a higher mental level rather than a state of self delusion? There must be some way that you can demonstrate that you actually have a special mental ability with your higher state isn't there? And if there is not, then your state of mind is indistinguishable from any other person whose opinion of their specialness exceeds what others see in them. One more thing. The God you know inside had better keep his trap shut. If he decides that you are the pure vehicle for one single message to us, anything: Lil Debbie cakes are superior to Hostess cupcakes, The Mets will win whatever it is that those teams want to win, Halloween candy corn will cure cancer but only if you eat each section starting with the tip separately, ANYTHING... you will go from enlightened guy to lunatic in the time it takes anyone here to read your message. (Nabbie excepted course) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fleetwood_macncheese@...> wrote : As long as you are on the path to know the creator of the universe, as you put it, I am OK with that. I understand that your previous experiences with religion and TM, may have created a confusing concept of God, that you have rejected. No problem, God is endlessly creative, and will no doubt eventually make him and herself known to you, in a way that is yours alone, personally tailored for you. Once God awakes within you, you will know what I am talking about. Otherwise, it is nonsense to the waking state consciousness. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote : FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fleetwood_macncheese@...> wrote : J: Er, Curtis, you are mistaking your failure, for certainty M: I have no certainty and don't buy yours. J: And being very arrogant about it. M: I am the on saying I do not KNOW the creator of the universe. You are saying you do. Perhaps you have redefined this word too. J: Without a sense of pure awareness, not the forced experiences from rounding, that you have mentioned, but the real deal, 24x7, you are basing your conclusions on fantasy, and have no clue about real enlightenment. M: So you know all about my awareness from inside too perhaps? J: Your choice, and so far, a very poor one, just like yer buddy, there, in front of the tube. M: Yeah, I don't buy your claims. Sorry that this frankness makes you feel hostile. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : From: "curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 12:58 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Billy Graham: America is Just as Wicked... Atheists do not have to define what they do not believe in. They take the definitions from the believers and find them wanting. Yours included, to the degree that you have spelled out what it is. As usual, Curtis, I am in awe of your ability to interface with idiots as if they were actually worth the time. I keep getting stuck on the "idiot" part. To me, if a person believes in astrology, God, and the Maharishi Effect, that's kinda like the Trifecta of Idiocy. You can't actually become much more of a loser than that. :-) M: Well to be fair, there is nothing I have read hear (Nabbie included) that I didn't wholeheartedly embrace at one time in my life. I don't think of my past self as being an idiot, just a practicer of fallacious reasoning. I was just wrong about almost everything I believed. Simply and earnestly wrong. Kinda humbling really.