--- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <rick@>
wrote:
> > Him:
> > > No, I don't have time to clarify my position right now but you
> > might
> > > remember that I don't doubt the notion of continuous
witnessing
> > (in fact,
> > > I've had very long stretches of it) nor even of "celestial
> vision/
> > god
> > > consciousness" (though it is defined and described variously);
> > it's just
> > > that direct experiences has taught me that these experiences
are
> > not very
> > > valuable. I don't call these states enlightenment, thought
they
> > DO fit
> > > the Hindu model of what the term (in it's various forms: bodhi,
> > > jivanmukta, brahmavidya, etc.) means.
> >
> > This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC
and
> > UC being transitory states. I remember distinctly "peaking" on
GC
> > experiences; seeing angels, Deities, Galactic visions away from
> > earth, Guru Dev, blah, blah, blah, and through it all, I was
> > definitely NOT enlightened.
> >
> > My vision was certainly clear, and this skill I picked up by
> > practicing siddhis has stayed with me, but just because I could
see
> > such things, and dwell in both Heaven and Hell didn't mean that
I
> > had achieved my eternal freedom, Self Realization, or
enlightenment
> > yet.:-)
>
> Yes, I have found as long as "I" am claiming C.C., G.C., or U.C.,
> and "Brahman" has not yet claimed "me," I am not fully liberated,
and
> am still attached or bound to experience.
>
> Along these same lines, when you were asking about how we fall
into
> ignorance, I find that consciousness *constantly* collapses into
the
> particle, to experience the effect of our causative and innocent
> thought as a created being, to enter into the world of our own
> making. If the consciousness *believes* the particle-experience,
or
> is caught in a given belief, it identifies with the concreteness
of
> the effect and forgets the subtle simplicity of its own cause; it
> finds the bindu to be binding, and experiences the ignorance of
the
> particle, or more accurately the particle's ignorance of the
freedom
> of ourself, of That-Self.
>
> When we remember "Oh, yes, this particle-experience is not me; it
is
> only one infinitesimal particle in the emptiful, Indefinable,
> Ungraspable That-Self," then Brahman remembers itself, and acts as
> the "Cosmic Consciousness" of the particle -- and so on, as
described
> earlier :-)
>
Hi Rory- yeah, but the diff in Brahman is that consciousness
concentrates into the particle, but doesn't really collapse into it-
in my experience, it remains 'springy' so that the concentration
within the particle even feels temporary and playful- same with any
focus during thought or activity. So the senses themselves are
harnessed by Brahman, if we can say such a thing. So the senses and
the overall experience is so much more intense, and yet, it is all
ephemeral, like clouds or sunlight.:-)
