--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
> wrote:
> >
>  
> > This common usage of the term "tradition" has the added
> > side benefit of enabling the TB who wields it of putting
> > down those who *have* had spiritual experiences.

>
>  
> > This common usage of the term "tradition" has the added
> > side benefit of enabling the TB who wields it of putting
> > down those who *have* had spiritual experiences.

I am sure that is true sometimes. But it appears to be an abstract
point. I don't see anyone putting down eperiences. Rather there is
discussion of the disvalue of using terms defined in one tradition to
label experiences in some ad hoc fashion, disregardng the "source"
traditions' definitions (at least without clafification).  This, at
best is weak writing and communicatons. At worst, it can be a
slight-of-hand  tool used by charlatans to hoodwink people.

Perhaps my view of "tradition" is traditonal and not "common".
Regardless that doesn't diminish the points made that a system of
knowledge (aka "tradition") provides: i) consistent terminology (not
always or often intechangable with other systems), ii) a database of
experiences resulting from various practices by varied subjects,
culminating in a sort of roadmap, iii) a set of practices to realize
such experinces, iv) a means of validating experiences (s ubjective
reflection is not always accurate)

> Because
> > those experiences don't necessarily jibe with what the
> > "tradition" told the TB to expect, 

I suppose thats true in some circles, but is an out of the blue
abstract point not appearing relevant or at least related to the
discussion at hand.

There are many "traditions" aka systems of development -- each with
internaly consistent terminology, methods, and means of validation. A
key point is that not all terms, techniques and means of validation
are interoperable between traditions. 

Your term "TB" appears to refer to a TM true believer, a sort of
calcified mind-type stemming from a single traditon. Not really
relevant to the discussion at hand, but I am sure  its would a valid
point in a discussion of that context.

> the TB can use the
> > word "tradition" to attempt to discredit the person who
> > has actually had a few experiences,

Ok. I suppose so. A point not related to any recent post that I can
see, but a good point. My post on "tradition", which you appear to be
referecing had nothing to do with such. Perhaps you are seeing mirages
on the page reflected from the brilliance of sandunes in your mind. 

No one that I can see is trying to discredit experiences, but rather
to seek clarity on peoples interpretions of them -- and the tightening
of misleading non-interoperarble vocabulary across traditions to
describe such experiences. Its kind of like trying to seek clarity in
the language of someone who sees a home run in baseball and shouts
"great touchdown! You really jammed that puck down their throat. What
a slam dunk! A terrific ace. You really slammed that one in the corner
pocket. What a fabulous strike".   







------------------------ 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/
 


Reply via email to