I hadn't ever really understood -- or thought about -- why the intellect needs to be sharp to realize enlightenment. Or if I did, I forgot what I knew. So the explanation below was interesting. Thanks.
--- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], a_non_moose_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], a_non_moose_ff > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > That there are apparent contradictions as consciousness unfolds, > > > > > does not imply that ALL contradictory statements are valid or > > > > > "enlightened". Doublespeak, masquerading as rational or superior > > > > > insights, is the tool of charlatans and political repression. > It is > > > > > manifestation the orwellian vison of 1984. > > > > > > > > > > A clear, finely tuned intellect is necessary for realization and > > > > > appreciation of higher states. Muddled thinking, gross and over > > > > > reaching generalizations, are not a sign of higher states, but of > > > > > bondage and ignorance. > > > > > > > > Thanks for this. I haven't had such a good laugh > > > > in days. > > > > > > I dunno... maybe my thinking is muddled, but Akashanon's comment > > > didn't strike me as the least bit funny. > > > > > > Yesterday, while alone on a trip to Iowa City, the sentence, "A clear, > > > finely tuned intellect is necessary for realization and appreciation > > > of higher states." was in the back of my mind all day. And judging by > > > my recent experience, I disagree. I can see how a finely tuned > > > intellect would be useful for more accurately conveying in language > > > the experience of non-dual awareness, but for me, at least, the real > > > appreciation has been on the level of heart. Trying to analyze it > > > intellectually is only mildly interesting and somewhat frustrating; > > > but, just innocently being aware of the awareness is like bathing in > > love. > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > I think the word "necessary" was too strong. Though I think MMY in the > > Gita goes that far in saying that. Anyone have those quotes handy? > > "Quite useful" is perhaps a better restatement. > > > > "Trying to analyze it intellectually" is not away to realize IT. Many > > people get confused on this point. The intellect does realize IT via a > > forward analytical process, but but a reverse process of elimination. > > Like "The Dog that Did Not Bark". > > > > A refined and sharp intellect can clearly discern what is NOT IT. Via > > a neti neti process, false premises of IT fall away. Utimately, the > > intellect is able to discern between iteslf and IT (Purusha). > > This is a beautifully inverted and hyper-concise sort of sutra, that > > becomes clear when it happens. > > > > There is more to it. Through discrimination (and a growing clarity of > > IT being aware of ITself), the intellect realizes, (in an Eureka like > > moment), that the intellect is not the doer. > > > > Up to that point, via neti neti, common sense and reasoning, its clear > > that the doer, (the individual self) is not the body, and its not the > > cognitive/conceptual mind. Realization that the doer is not the > > intellect, or more precisely that the intellect is not a doer, is like > > a sword being pulled out of stone and used to cut away the last ropes > > holding "one" imprisoned. > > > > At that point its clear what the intellect is not, and what simply IS. > > The intellect which was thought, felt, held to be "the core", is found > > not to be "the core", and IT is realized to be "the CORE". It is this > > realization of what the "Core" is, is what the intellect can do well. > > It can realize the distiction between buddhi (intellect) and Purusha. > > > > On the surface, the words as they are in the sutras, do not sound > > profound, but rather obvious (as in "who would ever mistake the > > intellect which is active and discriminating with wholenss that is > > silence?") . Its when its realized that the real meaning of the sutra > > that the sutra's profoundness unfolds. Its a realization that the > > "core" is not the intellect, and what remains is the "CORE". And the > > intellect clearly realizes it is different from the CORE. What remains > > --- the fruits of the intellects ability to sharply discern "what is > > NOT" --- is the CORE. > > > > Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm afraid, a lot of that went > right over my head, but that's ok: there isn't much going on up there > anyway. > > Alex > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/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/
