---Thanks, most interesting, as usual!.  After you master out of body 
travel to other planets, here's some questions for you:
Assuming there are intelligent creatures on other planets, do such 
civilizations have the equivalent of....
1. NASCAR
2. What types of music: a. Country and Western, b. classical, c. rock 
and roll, d. other.
3. Do they practice TM?
4. How about cuisines?: a. Chinese, b. Mexican, c. Italian, d. other. 

 In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <rorygoff@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
> wrote:
> > > <snip> 
> > > In contrast, those who cling so strongly to what
> > > > they believe now, to the point of being incapable
> > > > of stating even the *possibility* that these beliefs
> > > > might be less than perfect, have made a commitment
> > > > to STAYING THE SAME. They are actively *resisting*
> > > > change, and thus resisting the very enlightenment
> > > > they profess to seek.
> > > >
> > > But you could be wrong. :-)
> > 
> > Yes, this is the interesting thing -- for the most part we can 
> only see 
> > what we BE, or have been. Getting back to M. Scott Peck's model 
> for a 
> > moment, on closer look it all appears to be simple, alternating 
> > currents or strata or layers of particle-identification and field-
> > identification. 
> > 
> > Thus his POV-1 (Chaos) is the emergence of small-I particle-
> > identification, the unruly child. 
> > 
> > Then his POV-2 (Fundamentalism) is the first emergence of field-
> > identification, subservience of the chaotic "evil"-I to a larger 
> whole -
> > - one of rules, society, tribal consciousness (one could argue 
> that 
> > this is actually its second appearance, after the prenatal mother-
> child 
> > we-ness). 
> > 
> > Next his POV-3 (Eclecticism) is the re-emergence of small-I 
> particle 
> > identification, now with broadly expanded freedoms. One now sees 
> the 
> > limiting or relative nature of the belief-systems of one's 
> previous 
> > fundamentalism.
> > 
> > Next his POV-4 (Love) is a new spiral of field-identification, 
> Being 
> > the Perfection of what IS, and so on. Beginning to see the 
> relative 
> > nature of *all* of our stories, even the one giving the subtitles 
> in 
> > this moment. Beginning to see *we have a choice* in how we gather 
> and 
> > interpret data -- and that it's the "finest feeling level" we 
> choose 
> > which determines our mental interpretrations and sense-gathering. 
> > Another great relief, yet more freedom, etc. 
> > 
> > Next we could posit a POV-5 (Bliss) wherein we BE this great 
field 
> now 
> > *collapsing* its totality into particular point(s) of awareness, 
> > embodying phsyical, literal, bliss. Now we see that the small I 
> and the 
> > large I are the same.
> > 
> > And so on, and so on -- constantly alternating strata of fluid 
and 
> > particle, in ever-rising harmonics. 
> > 
> > When one is speaking a particular or a field truth, from whatever 
> > level, one will tend to be heard, resonated with, by those 
> identifying 
> > primarily with some harmonic of that given stratum. Thus one 
> expressing 
> > the particular truth of "I-as-bliss" will resonate with the 
> Eclectics 
> > *and* the Chaotics, both of whom are Doing Their Own Thing. One 
> > expressing the field truth of "Only One" will resonate with the 
> Lovers 
> > and the Fundamentalists, both of whom are experiencing profound 
> > devotion and mergence with the One.
> > 
> > We could see these alternating layers of particle- and field-
> > identification as themselves the alternating denser-and-rarer 
> strata of 
> > cosmic speech....
> > 
> > *L*L*L*
> >
> Dude-ji! I was just thinking about the whole particle/wave 
> perception alternation, though I didn't carry it into group 
dynamics 
> as you have. Yummy stuff! 
> 
> On another topic, I've been noticing some interesting things around 
> sleep. My first experience about a year ago (?) on getting to sleep 
> was to consciously blank my mind of thought, and fatigue would take 
> over, I'd slip on the banana peel, and down for the count. After 
> several months I became too interested or I could say in Love with 
> the active part of my mind, and it didn't seem fair to annihilate 
it 
> willfully just to go to sleep, but I *had* to go to sleep. So I'd 
> surf on my mantra for hours dipping into dreamland and back out. 
But 
> this wasn't satisfying because I wasn't really in a clean state of 
> mind- kinda meditating and kinda thinking and kinda dreaming and 
> kinda sleeping. Not much to be gained from the experience. So, next 
> I saw that I could isolate my mind into at least two sections, one 
> logical thinkiing piece which would do its own thing, and my 
> dinosaur mind, watching autonomous nervous system stuff like 
> regulating breath and heart beat, kidney and liver function, blood 
> flow, neurotransmitter activity and stuff like that. Once I saw 
each 
> part as a clear entity, it was then just a matter of turning my 
> attention to the dinosaur mind, and dropping into sleep. I no 
longer 
> had to negate the active logical mind, just tweaking my attention 
so 
> that it would no longer get drawn in that direction, like any other 
> control of the senses, though I am not sure which subtle sense is 
> involved, feels like touch and sight combined. Anyway, on with the 
> show! :-)
>


Reply via email to