--- In [email protected], "Marek Reavis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Comment below:
>
> **
>
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I sure did. As a result, I find it difficult
> > > > to think of the periods of so-called unenlight-
> > > > enment as "unreal." They were just as real as
> > > > the periods of enlightenment.
> > >
> > > "Periods of enlightenment"? Is your Self realization
> > > transient; it comes and goes?
> >
> > Well, duh. Someone wasn't paying attention
> > in class. :-)
> >
> > I've been saying this since I first arrived
> > on this group. It comes, it goes. Big deal.
> > The periods of realization are, to me, no
> > more interesting than the perids of non-
> > realization.
> >
> > I really *don't* think hierarchically.
> >
> **end**
>
> This is a great subject (or so I feel). My experience (and general
> attitude) mirrors Barry's. Don't claim to be Awake, but can't
figure
> out how I'm not. In my life there have been enlightenment episodes
> (an interesting paradox in itself) that have grounded me in an
> unshakeable conviction re the Reality of Self as I first learned
of it
> from Maharishi, and articulated by others, and in the wisdom
> traditions, and in my experience. 'Being' is just fine; I am never
> not; and I feel that if anyone here on this forum would look into
it
> they would be hard pressed to deny that for themselves, as well.
For
> myself it feels like it did when I was a little kid, even before I
> learned to talk.
>
> Nisargadatta posits the inquiry as (paraphrased): Were *you* born,
or
> was the body born (in consciousness)? And: Who were you before
this
> identity (the name and the form) was given to you (and drew your
> attention to it)?
>
> I might differ from Barry's position in that, if this isn't being
> Awake, I'm totally stoked about what That is. So, in that sense,
I do
> place a value on the state of enlightenment as opposed to
ignorance of
> It. But then again, it all seems to be good and as it should be,
so
> maybe we're not so far apart on this subject as it might seem.
>
> And certainly, within Totality, how can there be hierarchy?
>
Hierarchy of what? Hierarchy is an imposition of class structures
born of ego. It is useful when I go through the drive-in and am
asked what size soda I want, small, medium or large, and can be
helpful when classifying phenomena, but as an absolute mechanism, it
really doesn't exist. Only the ego has a need for hierarchy. Barry
may have a better answer, since he introduced the subject.
