--- In [email protected], Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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..." > > > > But in MMY's model, CC, at least, is inevitable. It > > is merely a product of a transition in how > > the brain works. > > I don't see CC as a product of brain functioning. > Brain functioning is reflected in the functioning of > mind and vice versa. Consciousness realizing its own > unlocalized nature will profoundly effect brain > functioning but not the other way around. >
Err, and how could you tell the difference? As I said in a slightly different context, trying to draw disintions between mind/brain/ consciousness is using a piece of charcoal todraw on burnt wood. Where do you draw the line and how do you know where you drew it? > > > In MMY's model, all the > > intellectual theory is meant to do is provide a > > comfortable interpretation of this transition to > > alleviate the discomfort that might arise > > from intellectual confusion. > > MMY's model is great for a waking state understanding > of Realization. After Realization the knowledge to > understand what is happening is there, but it is not > conceptualized as it was in waking state prior to > Realization. Many, if not all, of the waking state > assumptions regarding Realization and many other > things are radically alter after Realization. There is > not a continuum of "S/self" from waking state into CC. > That is an assumption of the waking state intellect > because it doesn't have a friggin' clue what will > happen in Realization. How can it? It only knows > waking state. There is a radical change in conceptual > understanding of Realization from waking state to the > intellect functioning in Realization. Realization can > not be conceived in waking state, but the waking state > intellect doesn't know that. > > Where did I or MMY or whatever say therewas a continuum of self from waking state into CC? There is a transition of physiological state, certainly (according to my own experience and belief as colored by MMY's theory), but the transition from self to Self is neither abrupt or gradual. > >
