> Much more interesting than any of this, though, was
> Jim Flanegin's response to the original post ...
...
This is a thoughtful and potentially useful counterpoint
to Vaj's analysis. [sequencing changed]
Yes, but it reaises some points for discussion (not the same as
arguments supporting entrenched POVs)
> -------
> Hi Vaj, and thanks for your comments and perspective on collective
> satsanging here on FFL (I am assuming this is the group you refer to
> and have been observing...).
>
> I can certainly see from one POV how a group of awakened individuals
> could appear to have some silent codependent agreement with one
> another, driven by ego satisfaction. And how from this same POV,
> there is no argument and little criticism within the group because
> this would fracture the codependent nature of it.
>
> On the other hand, from another POV, I can see the enjoyment of a
> group of awakened individuals sharing perspectives on a state of
> ultimate freedom. With no consequences to other observers, one way
> or another- no $$ requested, or follow up meetings advertised...
Sure, both possibilities exist. I see Vaj's post as simply adding a
new hypothesis to be considered along with the "conventional" POV.
Like anything, if the shoe fits wear it.
> Because the same event is observed and experienced differently
> according to our consciousness, I cannot say that everyone should
> experience this group of awakened individuals in the same way.
>
> However, a couple of key points about this discussion:
>
> 1. determination of awakening, or not, of another is something
> sensed on a feeling level. Proclamations do no good, unless the
> person is walking the walk so to speak.
Yes. And while I am only commenting on FFL, not all SS, IMO, the walk
and talk have not always appear consistent. Such apparent
inconsistencies are good, and fair grounds for questioning, IMO.
> Unfortunately it seems that
> the ones best able to see another's awakening are those who are
> awake themselves...
And unforetunately, those stuck in groupthink and co-dependency cycles
are usually not the ones to first or best recognize it. Outside
observers can be helpful in point out some patterns.
> 2. the challenging of awakened states is helpful to a point. However
> to ceaselessly challenge,
However, IMO, its a good thing regularly raise observations and
questions about: unclear points, ramifications and implications of
points raised, inconsistencies, paradoxes, contradictions,diversions,
poor logic, and unsubstantied claims of fact.
> disagree
Why should one agree with claims that appear shallow or contradictory,
and/or interpretations that are sigualr and absolutist?
> and insult those who state that
> they are awakened can be harmful to observers of this dialogue.
Insults are not productive -- except perhaps in the very special
circumstnace when claims of universal love and compassion, as well as
"no ego", etc. are made. In that specialized case, limited "insults"
--while perhaps not of the highest form of behavior, but widely
deployed on FFL in many areas of discussion -- can be a form of
inquiry: "Does this person really have no ego. If so, what is
manifestly (in their writing) feeling diminished when insults are cast?"
And if/when they cast insults, it raises issues of reciprocity, and
the depth of thier universal love and compassion.
> It
> does no harm to the awakened person, for obvious reasons.
Yet some react pretty vehemently against such. So it raises questions.
>But it is
> not a good thing in my opinion to in effect broadcast a message that
> awakening is not possible for the typical seeker, unless an endless
> and often nebulous set of conditions are met first.
I am not aware of anyone doing that. If that is your take, I questions
how "seeing things exactly as they are" your perception is as claimed.
What I observe are statements that in a tradition -- say TM, "MMY
defines enlightenment as such, with these attributes, and these tests
of it. Are you experienceing these?". The same with other traditions.
For example, in some tibetian traditions, enlightenement is defined as
as such, with these attributes, and these tests of it. Are you
experienceing these?"
Perhaps someone has defined enlightenment in their own way, such as
Rory. Such persons may not make any claims that it has much to do with
TM or any other traditions' enlightenment. Thats fine, particularly as
long as its explicitly stated. What I find of interest to question,
is when claimants to enlightenment cannot or will not define what they
personally mean by the term they are using, or whether what they are
claiming is different from the TM or other traditions of enlightenment
or awakening.
>
> Awakening is not something easily established. It takes much
> dedication, devotion, faith, strength, and discrimination for anyone
> who truly wants to reach that goal.
And do you consider it possible that some may be misinterpreting some
experience, as "enlightenment"? That their discrimination might be
off, or flawed?
> To state regularly as some here
> have done, that such an experience can never be established by the
> tools many of have at our disposal (TM and TM-Sidhis), is to me a
> disservice to those whose ardently seek to have their deepest
> desires fulfilled.
I am not clear who is saying that. Can you be specific? Is it Vaj you
have in mind? As I understand his view (for which he has not submitted
evidence, so its remains a hypothesis IMO), its that TM may take one
to some beneficial state, but that there are advanced techniques in
other traditions that go beyond that.
> Seeking is a normal and often difficult part of the process of
> awakening.
Thats your opinion. I hold a different view -- that seeking itself is
part of the cycle of bondage. Trinity has pointed out that he believes
that is a classic Advaitian view.
> As we work on one area and the next, creating gradually
> and permanenently our awakened selves,
the "awakened selves" are composed of polished parts? The Awakened
Self was once not awake? If this really is your view, we fundamentally
differ in a most high regard.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
