--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> 
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > <snip> 
> > > As I understand it, CC, GC, UC (etc.) refer to
> > > specific types of experience at certain points
> > > along a continuum of experience. I'm not sure
> > > of the distinction Vaj is making between "state"
> > > and "stage," but again in my understanding there
> > > would be points along the continuum of development
> > > of consciousness at which each of these types of
> > > experience becomes permanent.  These points would
> > > be sequential in the sense that permanent UC
> > > would not be achieved until after permanent GC had
> > > been achieved, and permanent GC would not occur
> > > until after permanent CC had been achieved.
> > > 
> > > This does *not* mean that one cannot have 
> > > experiences of UC before even permanent CC has
> > > been achieved, and so on.  So in that sense
> > > they aren't sequential; they're sequential in
> > > terms of the order in which each becomes
> > > permanent, in my understanding of what MMY
> > > teaches.
> > > 
> > Yes, that is my understanding based on my experience also. By 
> > culturing the nervous system through TM and TM-Sidhis 
> > with activity, our physiology becomes refined to do exactly as 
> > say above; each state (CC, GC, UC) becomes a permanent stepping 
> > stone to the next one above it. Also as you say, we can have 
> > intermittent experiences of advanced states before they are 
> > permanent. You are absolutely correct.
> Well, good!
> I still think part of the confusion about all this
> has to do with the arbitrariness of the points that
> are identified as GC and UC (CC is a different case).
> In other words, MMY identifies, for example, the GC
> point as the set of experiences D, E, and F; but he
> could just as well have chosen a point a little
> farther along the continuum and defined it as the set
> of experiences E, F, and G.  My guess is he chose
> the GC point as he did simply because experiences E,
> F, and G happen to have a sort of logical coherence
> for explanatory purposes.  (Same for UC and points
> beyond.)

Its tough for me to say very much about CC, because there is nothing 
there to really grab onto or discuss; more of a binary experience, 
its either there or it isn't. And UC is similar in the experience 
itself, also either being there or not, though UC distiguishes 
itself oddly by its extent. In other words, I can be in UC 100%, up 
to this point or that point (LOL)...

So the state in which it is easiest for me personally to talk about 
is GC, because the criterion is so unambiguous; experiencing "the 
finest relative". Having grown into such an experience, I can see 
now why he has chosen the criterion he did, and why it is a concrete 
indicator of such a state. Also, why that criterion clearly 
distinguishes GC as a state unto itself.
> Not that any of these are really discrete "points";
> it's just a matter of focusing somewhere on the
> continuum and taking a snapshot, as it were, and
> then identifying the types of experiences that show
> up in the snapshot.  

Very definitely a continuum. uummmm...lol!

Not that the experiences are
> discrete, either...

Actually the experiences are unmistakably discrete.

it's sort of like taxonomy, where
> the lines between species can be quite blurred; we 
> impose the system that distinguishes them for our
> own convenience.
True- on the one hand it is a choice to develop the system that fits 
the best for us, and on the other hand, it is completely valid and 
instructionally helpful to do so. Much more immediately useful than 
the taxonomy of species, btw...

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get to your groups with one click. Know instantly when new email arrives

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to