--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > People make a mistake when they view advaitin > > > > teachings as presenting conceptual models of > > > > Realization for a waking state intellect. For the > > > > waking state intellect they are obviously lacking as > > > > you and others have pointed out. It doesn't mean what > > > > they say is false or wrong, its just that they are > > > > meant to be applied in two ways: as a tool for > > > > transcendence or as a conceptual understanding of a > > > > direct experience that you are having. Contrast this > > > > with MMY's teaching which presents a conceptual model > > > > of Realization for a waking state intellect. The > > > > waking state mind has something to chew on... > > > > > > I would add, "and to cling to, as a mechanism for > > > keeping the actual experience of realization away..." > > > > And some waking-state minds cling to this notion > > about other waking-state minds, fervently believing > > (hoping?) that these other minds chew on the conceptual > > model in order to keep the actual experience of > > realization away, when in fact "chewing on" and > > "clinging to" aren't necessarily always joined at the > > hip (especially when one has the regular experience > > of transcending). > <snip> > > Yep, important distinction to make- that with the regular > experience of transcending, that clinging will eventually > give way.
Or there is no "clinging" to begin with, just "chewing." With repeated transcending, you can't get enough of a grip on the conceptual model to "cling" to it. Nor does "chewing" get in the way; rather, it helps dissolve the model bit by bit as it's constantly being modified by experience. The more you chew, the more the model turns into a mush, and the more you have to just swallow and be done with it. Chewing is a terrific metaphor for the process! Another aspect of this is that in contemplating the conceptual model in any depth, paradoxically, logic *itself* tells you why it's the wrong tool for the job. That's a very liberating recognition that actually brings the model within a hair's- breadth of the experience, to where you can just step smoothly right over the gap. (Especially, again, if you've been transcending regularly, so you aren't stepping into unfamiliar territory, as it were.)
