Thanks for some excellent points and perspectives New! Nothing to add but a high five for being genuine.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > 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 :-) > > > > > With all due respect, and I mean that earnestly, and I am not > presenting an argument -- but rather simply making some observations. > > In college, I took a course titled "Altered States of Consciousness" > taught by Charles Tart -- who had written the definitive text on the > topic at that time -- and was on the map as a key, if not the key > researcher in such. He once commented that he had friends who took > lots of very pure acid every weekend -- and had experiences described > along the way Rory descibes his. And we all nodded -- having had > firneds or peers along the same lines-- many of us coming of age > before LSD was made illegal -- and some vials of very pure stuff was > "widely" available. > > But he lamented, that these friends did not seem to benefit any from > such experiences --as real as they seemed to be. They did not change > behaviors, they did not produce deep new insights in their fields, > they did not become more compassionate or reflecting any sort of moral > or ethical growth. > > Tying to Danas post, he ask cogently, the same sorts of questions / > observations of Dr Tart (Charlie to many on campus). Jim may be > eternally free -- Rory plays with his particles, Tom has his hardrive > loaded every morning by the cosmic computer. All of which is good and > fine. > > But there is nothing either in their descriptions of their states, or > their manifest behavior, insights, cognitive and logical capabilities > etc that appeal much to me, inspire me to do anything to move in the > direction of their attainments. Nor does it fit my evolving view of a > "meaningful" life. See my adjacent post. > > And a side point, going back to posts of last week: the discussion on > how do you know you are awake and not in a dream. (That is in a state > as analogous to waking as is dreaming). How do you know for sure you > are not in Plato's cave. How do you know that 3 dimensions is the end > all and be all and not missing out stupendously just as a flatliner -- > in a two dimensional existence -- is compared to our existence. > > The answer, -- was weak in my view. the answer being, imo, along the > lines of being awake is a state of being and not a state of thought, > And thus open KNOWS a state of being, a priori, no proof needed. > > In conversations with a number of my acid gulping friends and peers, > an some experiences of my own, the consensus was similar: Being on > good acid is a state of Being and its obvious that one is Awake > compared to "being straight". But how substantial was that state of > being. Per above discussion. >
