--- authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- 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.)
I like where you ran with this post, Judy! I agree. That would be using the model as part of a sadhana, a tool to bring, as MMY would say, the point value to the infinite value. > > > > > 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 > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
