Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
From: anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Suppose we made up a fake and derivative religion, telling people that there is a field of force that we are immersed in, called 'Dada'. And we tell people it is possible to experience this field if we put all our attention on sensing it, day and night. We tell them that after some time one can experience, say, 'Dada stage 1', which is the experience of silence at night while asleep. Now it seems possible that some people will now report this after a time, that they experience silence at night. This might be the result of the shift of attention, but is also might be the result of a general placebo effect, you tell someone things are a certain way long enough and with enough emphasis, they may start to experience it. Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other people are reporting that they've had that experience, too. And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now. So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me, too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the same thing on his new group. What I've always wished someone would do is MAKE UP a new experience, and then either report it in the domes or post it on The_Leak, and then sit back and watch how long it is until others start piling on and claiming to have had the same experience themselves. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it. The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a license plate on a fuzzy photograph. I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones appearing here, such as this post from Jim: 'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws of nature' predominate?' 'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile, though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to evolve.' A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences, and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir up a discussion. Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo, provided a person is not too stuck in the goo. I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief. People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here, but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come around with their pamphlets. I am typically cordial to them, and attempt to ask odd questions. I am thinking I could be more direct and just ask them why they want me to adopt their mythology. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other people are reporting that they've had that experience, too. And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now. So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me, too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the same thing on his new group. What I've always wished someone would do is MAKE UP a new experience, and then either report it in the domes or post it on The_Leak, and then sit back and watch how long it is until others start piling on and claiming to have had the same experience themselves. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now. Yep, I know whom you mean. And exactly this has happened in the past, but then this 'experience' I had is very real even now, and why should another person not having had it. I'm actually glad that other people too had it, It's not very common, but not so rare either. Regarding, how intense it is, and how persistent is anyones guess, and how you actually interpret is, is yet another story. So, right, I also dislike this one-upmanship that's so obvious. Especially if you have gone at least 10 steps above the highest here usually ennumerated SOC. I once had a friend, who told me each time I met him, which initiation I had just received. I don't remember where I was, when I last met him. Each time I narrated an experience or a meeting with one master I had met, he would tell me, it was an important initiation. I had experiences, but couldn't at all relate to his story about initiations, and sure enough he would give me some himself. Finally he became a guru himself, invented or rather cognized his own system of transference of a new cosmic power, he just had discovered in the fast universe in an actually very different galaxy. He still has some following, has written books etc. His system is a sort of spiritualized variant of Reiki, he doesn't call it like this, but it sounds like it, definitely not my calling.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I have never considered, even for a moment, posting on The_Leak. About once a week -- under the advice of my cop friend here in Leiden -- I do a quick search of the forum for my name and scan the list of posts at the top level to make sure neither Jim nor Nabby are continuing their illegal activities with regard to me and my family. That's why I noticed that Buck tried to start an argument over there -- and failed -- by reposting an exchange from FFL that never even escalated to argument level here. That exercise, though, is about the only contact I want with the group. The dynamic, as far as I can tell, is similar to the now-abandoned Batgap forum -- anyone can claim anything they want, and no one will ever challenge them. Newage (rhymes with sewage) laissez-faire, to the max. Not my kinda scene. As far as I can tell, there is no one there who could even *understand* the usual depth of your posts, much less respond to them in a way you'd find interesting. Just my opinion... From: anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 4:22 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it. The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a license plate on a fuzzy photograph. I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones appearing here, such as this post from Jim: 'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws of nature' predominate?' 'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile, though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to evolve.' A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences, and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir up a discussion. Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo, provided a person is not too stuck in the goo. I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief. People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here, but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come around with their pamphlets. I am typically cordial to them, and attempt to ask odd questions. I am thinking I could be more direct and just ask them why they want me to adopt their mythology. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other people are reporting that they've had that experience, too. And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now. So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me, too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the same
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
You forget, Jimmie was interviewed on BATGAP - that has to mean he is
enlightened, no?
From: anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone
there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would
not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because
Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While
I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it.
The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very
articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a
license plate on a fuzzy photograph.
I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of
de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced
myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones
appearing here, such as this post from Jim:
'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process
continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a
for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled
here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws
of nature' predominate?'
'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile,
though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to
evolve.'
A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally
unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences,
and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly
de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences
though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir
up a discussion.
Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect
and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your
challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall
wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being
expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo,
provided a person is not too stuck in the goo.
I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into
a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief.
People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here,
but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come
around with their pamphlets. I am typically cordial to them, and attempt to ask
odd questions. I am thinking I could be more direct and just ask them why they
want me to adopt their mythology.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're
getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the
well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new
experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other
people are reporting that they've had that experience, too.
And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react
every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he
report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was
something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now.
So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me,
too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just
starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved
as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the
same thing on his new group.
What I've always wished someone would do is MAKE UP a new experience, and
then either report it in the domes or post it on The_Leak, and then sit back
and watch how long it is until others start piling on and claiming to have
had the same experience themselves. :-)
#yiv7277606607 #yiv7277606607 -- #yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv7277606607
#yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv7277606607
#yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp #yiv7277606607hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv7277606607 #yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp #yiv7277606607ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv7277606607 #yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp .yiv7277606607ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv7277606607 #yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp .yiv7277606607ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv7277606607 #yiv7277606607ygrp-mkp .yiv7277606607ad
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Him and Ravi Chivukula. Virtual supernovas in the celestial panorama of
consciousness.
From: Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
You forget, Jimmie was interviewed on BATGAP - that has to mean he is
enlightened, no?
From: anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone
there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would
not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because
Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While
I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it.
The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very
articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a
license plate on a fuzzy photograph.
I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of
de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced
myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones
appearing here, such as this post from Jim:
'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process
continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a
for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled
here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws
of nature' predominate?'
'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile,
though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to
evolve.'
A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally
unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences,
and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly
de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences
though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir
up a discussion.
Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect
and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your
challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall
wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being
expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo,
provided a person is not too stuck in the goo.
I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into
a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief.
People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here,
but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come
around with their pamphlets. I am typically cordial to them, and attempt to ask
odd questions. I am thinking I could be more direct and just ask them why they
want me to adopt their mythology.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote :
Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're
getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the
well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new
experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other
people are reporting that they've had that experience, too.
And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react
every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he
report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was
something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now.
So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me,
too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just
starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved
as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the
same thing on his new group.
What I've always wished someone would do is MAKE UP a new experience, and
then either report it in the domes or post it on The_Leak, and then sit back
and watch how long it is until others start piling on and claiming to have
had the same experience themselves. :-)
#yiv0076379499 #yiv0076379499 -- #yiv0076379499ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0076379499
#yiv0076379499ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0076379499
#yiv0076379499ygrp-mkp
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Ravi was interviewed on BATGAP?!?! I did not know that. Too bad Rick never got Robin and Andy on tape - then he could'a done a round table interview with all of them and labeled it the 4 Horsemen interview. From: TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 11:39 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence Him and Ravi Chivukula. Virtual supernovas in the celestial panorama of consciousness. From: Michael Jackson mjackso...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence You forget, Jimmie was interviewed on BATGAP - that has to mean he is enlightened, no? From: anartax...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 10:22 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it. The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a license plate on a fuzzy photograph. I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones appearing here, such as this post from Jim: 'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws of nature' predominate?' 'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile, though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to evolve.' A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences, and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir up a discussion. Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo, provided a person is not too stuck in the goo. I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief. People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here, but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come around with their pamphlets. I am typically cordial to them, and attempt to ask odd questions. I am thinking I could be more direct and just ask them why they want me to adopt their mythology. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other people are reporting that they've had that experience, too. And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now. So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me, too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the same thing on his new group. What I've always wished someone
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I'm participating because davidfb108 has been saying stuff that I can recognize in my own experience. I recognize him from the BATGAP Yahoo group, but I've never interacted with him before. These days, I am seldom inspired to communicate openly about personal matters. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartax...@yahoo.com wrote : I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it. The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a license plate on a fuzzy photograph. I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones appearing here, such as this post from Jim: 'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws of nature' predominate?' 'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile, though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to evolve.' A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences, and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir up a discussion. Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo, provided a person is not too stuck in the goo. I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief. People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here, but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come around with their pamphlets. I am typically cordial to them, and attempt to ask odd questions. I am thinking I could be more direct and just ask them why they want me to adopt their mythology. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : Especially if the people reporting experience of the placebo feel that they're getting attention or pats on the back for reporting it. For example, the well-documented phenomenon in the Fairfield domes where someone reports a new experience, one that hasn't been mentioned before, and by week's end 20 other people are reporting that they've had that experience, too. And I think we all remember the was a certain former FFL member would react every time someone would report a new experience here. Not *only* would he report having had that same experience before, but he'd say that it was something he *used* to have, back a few years, but that he'd outgrown it now. So for him any reported experience became not only an opportunity to claim Me, too, it became an opportunity to claim Me, too, back when I was just starting...don't worry, someday you'll get past it, too, and become as evolved as I am, and thus assert his superiority. Presumably he's still doing the same thing on his new group. What I've always wished someone would do is MAKE UP a new experience, and then either report it in the domes or post it on The_Leak, and then sit back and watch how long it is until others start piling on and claiming to have had the same experience themselves. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I watched the entire video of Jim, as he was making such a fuss on FFL. I found his explanation of his experience rather opaque. I do think he had some sort of intense opening but because his explanations do not have a lot of intellectual resolution, I find them difficult to parse. Basically he says he is in silence 24/7 which could place him in CC territory, but he avoided saying much more so its ambiguous. As we have been discussing, CC is not such a great hot state, and seems rather common now among meditators of various meditation systems. In observing meditators for some four decades, I do not find that people's personalities change that much. I had mini awakenings long ago, but as time has passed found that it is very easy to over-interpret their significance and 'depth'. A really solid awakening pretty much knocks you off the saddle of whatever horse you happen to be riding, and can take years to assimilate what was experienced. Ravi's video was pulled, so I never saw it. I found a blog he has. He seems much more rational there than when he was on FFL, even though I do not agree with his view of things. I guess it is easier to sound rational when people are not calling you on your game. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Ravi was interviewed on BATGAP?!?! I did not know that. Too bad Rick never got Robin and Andy on tape - then he could'a done a round table interview with all of them and labeled it the 4 Horsemen interview. From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 11:39 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence Him and Ravi Chivukula. Virtual supernovas in the celestial panorama of consciousness. From: Michael Jackson mjackson74@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence You forget, Jimmie was interviewed on BATGAP - that has to mean he is enlightened, no? From: anartaxius@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 10:22 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it. The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a license plate on a fuzzy photograph. I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones appearing here, such as this post from Jim: 'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws of nature' predominate?' 'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile, though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to evolve.' A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally unexpected character. When I was younger I had more spectacular experiences, and while a glimpse of what I would call 'real' came through, they were mostly de-stressing and hallucinatory. Those sort of pie in the sky experiences though, seem like the kind that could be reported on the peaked that would stir up a discussion. Being around like-minded people tends to be more comfortable, but the intellect and sense of what is real also suffers when one is not challenged. Your challenges tend not to be intellectual arguments but more like a stone wall wherein one crashes upon. An absolute rejection of the point of view being expressed, and I think that can be an effective technique for unwinding woo, provided a person is not too stuck in the goo. I find it interesting that the groups on the peaked and here have settled into a less confrontational mode, and I think this has a lot to do with belief. People do not like to have cherished ideas ripped to shreds. It's Winter here, but no snow at the moment. Come Spring, I expect Jehovah's witnesses to come around
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I saw him on Batgap before seeing him on FFL. He totally put me off. He comes across so extrovert and superficial - no thank you. And then his silly insistence for acknowledging his 'enlightenment'. Even the word 'The_Peak' is a commedy. The first thing, I look for, in anyone claiming any sort of 'enlightenment' is a sense of detachment. The people I know whom I regard as enlightened, have a strong sense of inner independence and detachment. You can feel it in the air. That is very different from compassion and love, which is the next thing to look for. This is simply missing. Maybe the Bhagavad Gita is after all wrong that there are no signs for enlightenment, or maybe there are no signs for enlightenment, but there are some signs for non-enlightenment. So, all in all I found him shallow, easily upset and rude. I remember Maharishi warning us from 'moody Brahman', I understand today, to be a sort of mixed up realization, not grounded, down-to-earth, and with delusional fantasies. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartaxius@... wrote : I watched the entire video of Jim, as he was making such a fuss on FFL. I found his explanation of his experience rather opaque. I do think he had some sort of intense opening but because his explanations do not have a lot of intellectual resolution, I find them difficult to parse. Basically he says he is in silence 24/7 which could place him in CC territory, but he avoided saying much more so its ambiguous. As we have been discussing, CC is not such a great hot state, and seems rather common now among meditators of various meditation systems. In observing meditators for some four decades, I do not find that people's personalities change that much. I had mini awakenings long ago, but as time has passed found that it is very easy to over-interpret their significance and 'depth'. A really solid awakening pretty much knocks you off the saddle of whatever horse you happen to be riding, and can take years to assimilate what was experienced. Ravi's video was pulled, so I never saw it. I found a blog he has. He seems much more rational there than when he was on FFL, even though I do not agree with his view of things. I guess it is easier to sound rational when people are not calling you on your game. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote : Ravi was interviewed on BATGAP?!?! I did not know that. Too bad Rick never got Robin and Andy on tape - then he could'a done a round table interview with all of them and labeled it the 4 Horsemen interview. From: TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 11:39 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence Him and Ravi Chivukula. Virtual supernovas in the celestial panorama of consciousness. From: Michael Jackson mjackson74@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence You forget, Jimmie was interviewed on BATGAP - that has to mean he is enlightened, no? From: anartaxius@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 10:22 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence I have been thinking of going on the peaked, but there is already someone there who writes about experience similar to the way I do, so maybe it would not matter. I doubt you could get on the peaked with out a pseudonym because Jim was so annoyed that you would not recognise his 'enlightened status'. While I think he had some sort of profound experience, I think his ego co-opted it. The other problem with interpreting what Jim's experience was is he is not very articulate in expressing experiences in general, it's like trying to read a license plate on a fuzzy photograph. I notice Alex is over there now, they seem to be discussing various kinds of de-stressing prior to and following awakening, things I have experienced myself. In general the posts over there have a much higher woo factor than ones appearing here, such as this post from Jim: 'Just as we were magnetically attracted to Earth, does the same process continue, after we work out our karma here, but on another planet? Just as a for instance, perhaps we continue to have desires that cannot be fulfilled here, on Earth, and then gravitate towards another world where different 'laws of nature' predominate?' 'I am not all that interested in any alternatives to here, for quite awhile, though I am curious about the mechanics of it all, how life continues to evolve.' A good, clean realisation seems to have a zero wow factor, and is of a totally unexpected
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
And, on some hard drive somewhere, I have an .FLV file of it that I never once watched. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartax...@yahoo.com wrote : Ravi's video was pulled, so I never saw it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Interesting that Rick finally yanked the Ravi video. I remember we (Rick and I)
had a discussion about it on FFL once, and I was a proponent of leaving it up,
*as a cautionary tale* of how badly Rick could fuck up and be taken in with
regard to who is enlightened and who is not.
I suggested that he leave the video up, but comment on it as I have above. Last
I heard, that is what he had done.
Too bad in many ways that it's no longer available. He was quite the loon. But
more important, because of Rick he became for a short time a loon with a forum,
and a loon with an audience for whom to act loony.
That's very dangerous, and I still feel some kind of record of that should have
been left.
From: j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 11:56 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
And, on some hard drive somewhere, I have an .FLV file of it that I never
once watched.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartax...@yahoo.com wrote :
Ravi's video was pulled, so I never saw it.
#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407 -- #yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp #yiv2651662407hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp #yiv2651662407ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp .yiv2651662407ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp .yiv2651662407ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407ygrp-mkp .yiv2651662407ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407ygrp-sponsor
#yiv2651662407ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407ygrp-sponsor #yiv2651662407ygrp-lc #yiv2651662407hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407ygrp-sponsor #yiv2651662407ygrp-lc .yiv2651662407ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2651662407 #yiv2651662407activity span
.yiv2651662407underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2651662407
.yiv2651662407attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv2651662407 .yiv2651662407attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 .yiv2651662407attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2651662407 .yiv2651662407attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2651662407 .yiv2651662407attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv2651662407 .yiv2651662407bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2651662407
.yiv2651662407bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 dd.yiv2651662407last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2651662407 dd.yiv2651662407last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2651662407
dd.yiv2651662407last p span.yiv2651662407yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv2651662407 div.yiv2651662407attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 div.yiv2651662407attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv2651662407 div.yiv2651662407file-title a, #yiv2651662407
div.yiv2651662407file-title a:active, #yiv2651662407
div.yiv2651662407file-title a:hover, #yiv2651662407 div.yiv2651662407file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407 div.yiv2651662407photo-title a,
#yiv2651662407 div.yiv2651662407photo-title a:active, #yiv2651662407
div.yiv2651662407photo-title a:hover, #yiv2651662407
div.yiv2651662407photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2651662407
div#yiv2651662407ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2651662407ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv2651662407yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2651662407
.yiv2651662407green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2651662407 .yiv2651662407MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2651662407 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407photos div div {border:1px solid
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407photos div label
{color:#66;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv2651662407
#yiv2651662407reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv2651662407
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
I wonder what led Rick to interview him to start with?
From: TurquoiseBee turquoi...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Interesting that Rick finally yanked the Ravi video. I remember we (Rick
and I) had a discussion about it on FFL once, and I was a proponent of leaving
it up, *as a cautionary tale* of how badly Rick could fuck up and be taken in
with regard to who is enlightened and who is not.
I suggested that he leave the video up, but comment on it as I have above. Last
I heard, that is what he had done.
Too bad in many ways that it's no longer available. He was quite the loon. But
more important, because of Rick he became for a short time a loon with a forum,
and a loon with an audience for whom to act loony.
That's very dangerous, and I still feel some kind of record of that should have
been left.
From: j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 11:56 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
And, on some hard drive somewhere, I have an .FLV file of it that I never
once watched.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anartax...@yahoo.com wrote :
Ravi's video was pulled, so I never saw it.
#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846 -- #yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp #yiv3479606846hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp #yiv3479606846ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp .yiv3479606846ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp .yiv3479606846ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846ygrp-mkp .yiv3479606846ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846ygrp-sponsor
#yiv3479606846ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846ygrp-sponsor #yiv3479606846ygrp-lc #yiv3479606846hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846ygrp-sponsor #yiv3479606846ygrp-lc .yiv3479606846ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3479606846 #yiv3479606846activity span
.yiv3479606846underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3479606846
.yiv3479606846attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv3479606846 .yiv3479606846attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 .yiv3479606846attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3479606846 .yiv3479606846attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3479606846 .yiv3479606846attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv3479606846 .yiv3479606846bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3479606846
.yiv3479606846bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 dd.yiv3479606846last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3479606846 dd.yiv3479606846last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3479606846
dd.yiv3479606846last p span.yiv3479606846yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv3479606846 div.yiv3479606846attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 div.yiv3479606846attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv3479606846 div.yiv3479606846file-title a, #yiv3479606846
div.yiv3479606846file-title a:active, #yiv3479606846
div.yiv3479606846file-title a:hover, #yiv3479606846 div.yiv3479606846file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846 div.yiv3479606846photo-title a,
#yiv3479606846 div.yiv3479606846photo-title a:active, #yiv3479606846
div.yiv3479606846photo-title a:hover, #yiv3479606846
div.yiv3479606846photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3479606846
div#yiv3479606846ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3479606846ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv3479606846yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv3479606846
.yiv3479606846green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv3479606846 .yiv3479606846MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv3479606846 o {font-size:0;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv3479606846
#yiv3479606846photos div div {border:1px
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
From: lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Like as not, a lot of people ARE in CC (whether via the practice of TM, or just because) but don't see it as a big deal because, as MMY points out, it is merely normal. Of course, the sine qua non of CC is that one has PC even during deep sleep, so perhaps that is lacking in many people... I have the opposite issue: witnessing sleep has been around almost continuously (except during a few life-threatening illnesses over the decades) within a few weeks that I first learned TM. It's the waking state integration that appears to be lacking, although... When I inadvertently went off prozac abruptly a few years ago, and had 12 hours of non-stop, viciously and horrifically violent suicidal ideation, I still had permanent presence of pure sense-of-self that was untouched by the rather Grade-Z horror movie continuously running through my mind, and I never felt an urge to act on any of that stuff. ...I'd prefer to think that I'm not really in CC rather than CC being THIS useless as a higher state of consciousness. With all due respect, in pursuit of your I prefer to think fantasies, it seems to me that you're ignoring a third (and far more likely) possibility. Namely, that witnessing sleep, which MMY made so much of, has *absolutely nothing to do with higher states of consciousness*. It's just something that happens. To people who meditate, and to people who don't. And it means nothing in terms of state of consciousness, in either group.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
That's obviously a possibility as well. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote : From: LEnglish5@... [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Like as not, a lot of people ARE in CC (whether via the practice of TM, or just because) but don't see it as a big deal because, as MMY points out, it is merely normal. Of course, the sine qua non of CC is that one has PC even during deep sleep, so perhaps that is lacking in many people... I have the opposite issue: witnessing sleep has been around almost continuously (except during a few life-threatening illnesses over the decades) within a few weeks that I first learned TM. It's the waking state integration that appears to be lacking, although... When I inadvertently went off prozac abruptly a few years ago, and had 12 hours of non-stop, viciously and horrifically violent suicidal ideation, I still had permanent presence of pure sense-of-self that was untouched by the rather Grade-Z horror movie continuously running through my mind, and I never felt an urge to act on any of that stuff. ...I'd prefer to think that I'm not really in CC rather than CC being THIS useless as a higher state of consciousness. With all due respect, in pursuit of your I prefer to think fantasies, it seems to me that you're ignoring a third (and far more likely) possibility. Namely, that witnessing sleep, which MMY made so much of, has *absolutely nothing to do with higher states of consciousness*. It's just something that happens. To people who meditate, and to people who don't. And it means nothing in terms of state of consciousness, in either group.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Even in sleep the brain shows a lot of activity. Quite a lot of the activity of the brain does not come into conscious awareness, but there are various ways of directing attention that allow more of that to be consciously experienced. The questions is is that activity already there and we just do not notice it. A common experience of looking at planets through a telescope is to see a small disk, but it appears blank. With repeated viewing and practice, that is, familiarity and training, details can be seen on the surface. It is not that the details were absent, just that the eye and mind had to be directed where and how to look. Suppose we made up a fake and derivative religion, telling people that there is a field of force that we are immersed in, called 'Dada'. And we tell people it is possible to experience this field if we put all our attention on sensing it, day and night. We tell them that after some time one can experience, say, 'Dada stage 1', which is the experience of silence at night while asleep. Now it seems possible that some people will now report this after a time, that they experience silence at night. This might be the result of the shift of attention, but is also might be the result of a general placebo effect, you tell someone things are a certain way long enough and with enough emphasis, they may start to experience it. I have experienced internal witnessing episodes as the result of certain combinations of anti-histamines and decongestants. I know someone, a soldier in the Vietnam War, who told me he basically was aware all night in sleep, that he had this state of alertness where he had to be ready at any time for combat. So witnessing might come about through various ways the nervous system can function. There is research that indicates people practicing various kinds of meditation do experience changes in the way the brain is signally in sleep, that seems to correspond with the subjective experience of some awareness during sleep, and a similar kind of silent experience during waking The question is how significant is this? I think Lawson's Prozac episode is really interesting. After all witnessing is just seeing something. At any time we experience, we witness, and it does not matter what that experience is. The added sense of some 'extra' silence during an experience is basically a clue we are experience with a bit more detail than before, but it is not really more consciousness, it is a greater appreciation of the consciousness that is already there. Add to that the droning refrain 'this is a significant step towards enlightenment', and the mind becomes overjoyed that something good and expected is happening, when in fact not a whole lot more is really happening. Like Lawson, I have experience what for me would be a nightmare state while at the same time some continuity of witnessing was going on, because my mind and attention had been trained to notice it. Yet as Bhairitu pointed out, many do not seem to have these experiences even after many many years of practice. In the 1960s, M pointed out that consciousness does not expand, rather mind expands. That is just another way of saying the mind becomes more adept at noticing the content and quality of experience. Whatever practice you are doing, it is training the mind in some way when you are repeating the practice day after day. A state like CC is described in traditions other than TM; it is a rather common benchmark, yet all this 'state' is, is just noticing that there is silence along with activity. There is no requirement that the experiences themselves are good or bad, blissful or agony. I think M said contact with the absolute is blissful (for the sake of argument, assuming there is 'absolute'). When the mind relaxes and settles down, especially in the early days of a practice — if it is going well — the experience is comforting and has the sense of relief and mitigation of those slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. That is where bliss comes in, but once that experience has become familiar, the sense of blissfulness just becomes ordinary. If you experience yourself as silent, then contact with silence is no longer possible so there is no mitigation, no relief. A blissful shift from dread to silence does not occur, for now you experience dread along with silence. A lot a spiritual advertising is basically overemphasising the wonder of the sense of relief one gets when one starts out on a path of self realisation. That may get you into a practice, and it may help keep you at it for a while, but once the cracks the practice makes in your sense of reality starts letting in glimpses of reality as it is going to be experienced, as the mind notices more of what it going on in there, you may balk at proceeding further unless you can be convinced that what is happening is something necessary to go through. Some people are
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
As soon as one stops anticipating higher states of consciousness then they will easily come. Maybe because I was always struggling for income until the 1990s, enlightenment was not at the top of my priorities list. In fact I recall MMY saying survival first, enlightenment second. And he also had this little joke about people being told that God was coming and they all so obsessed with the idea he was coming that they missed the plane he was on. :-D On 12/26/2014 09:53 PM, lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] wrote: Like as not, a lot of people ARE in CC (whether via the practice of TM, or just because) but don't see it as a big deal because, as MMY points out, it is merely normal. Of course, the sine qua non of CC is that one has PC even during deep sleep, so perhaps that is lacking in many people... I have the opposite issue: witnessing sleep has been around almost continuously (except during a few life-threatening illnesses over the decades) within a few weeks that I first learned TM. It's the waking state integration that appears to be lacking, although... When I inadvertently went off prozac abruptly a few years ago, and had 12 hours of non-stop, viciously and horrifically violent suicidal ideation, I still had permanent presence of pure sense-of-self that was untouched by the rather Grade-Z horror movie continuously running through my mind, and I never felt an urge to act on any of that stuff. ...I'd prefer to think that I'm not really in CC rather than CC being THIS useless as a higher state of consciousness. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, noozguru@... wrote : PC becomes a screen on which all activity including mental is played. If I want just pure consciousness, these days I just look at it. The bigger question is after all these years of sadhana why doesn't everyone have that experience? On 12/26/2014 01:47 AM, aryavazhi wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... wrote : Um, ok... The most detailed research on pure consciousness showed that the subject didn't press a button signalling that they had had a PC episode until *after* their physiology reverted to normal. They didn't notice PC. They noticed the transition *out of* PC. Yes. Just to let you know: it did serve me well for many years - so I do know it well. But it is very different from the more fully aware state without any thought, except for the basic awareness of the state itself. Thought is so subtle, that you are aware of what is going on, but you cannot actively think. And it is more related to the chakras and kundalini. But whatever. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... wrote : But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular experience, and any experience is by the mind. Actually, sensory experiences happen because raw sensory data comes into the brain via the thalamus and is routed to the cortext via connections called thalamo-cortical feedback loops. Internal thinking is perceived when processed data from the cortex is fed back to the thalamus and merged into the incoming raw sensory data. This is called thinking. The process of transcending is when the activity of the thalamus becomes less and so the funneling of raw sensory data and/or the merging of processed data becomes less. This happens whenever one allows the mind to wander but is facilitated by what we call Transcendental Meditation. Which is not the same as you describe below, it maybe less, but is not zero. When the thalamus no longer allows ANY data to come in from the outside and no longer allows ANY processed data to be merged with the (now non-existent) raw data stream, and yet the part of the thalamus that promotes the connectivity between distant parts of the cortex remains functioning normally, one has no internal experience, no external experience--that is, nt thoughts--and yet the brain is still alert. This is samadhi. In TM what you experience of TC is not fully alert. When you are fully aware, you already have a thought. It's not samadhi. Real samadhi is when the kundalini rises to the top chakra. And it certainly has a physiological signature: I just described it. There is a physiological signature, but it has nothing to do with samadhi, it is only your imagination L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Um...here's a question for you, Lawson.
In subjects who self-report as experiencing 24/7 witnessing, did this
physiological measurement you call pure consciousness or PC appear when
they were meditating? If so, did it *also* disappear when they began thinking
other thoughts and transitioned out of it?
The reason I ask is that if it didn't persist at all times (and, of course,
they're telling the truth about their experiences and right about what they
mean), then what you're measuring is NOT PC as defined by Maharishi. It's
something else. We know this because his definitions of CC were that PC
persists at all times, whether one is having thoughts or activity or not.
So if the state you're calling PC doesn't persist in your supposed CC
subjects, then either 1) what you're measuring isn't PC but something else, 2)
the people claiming to be in CC aren't, or 3) both.
From: lengli...@cox.net [FairfieldLife] FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2014 2:53 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Um, ok...
The most detailed research on pure consciousness showed that the subject didn't
press a button signalling that they had had a PC episode until *after* their
physiology reverted to normal.
They didn't notice PC. They noticed the transition *out of* PC.
But whatever.
L
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having
a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some
keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular
experience, and any experience is by the mind.
Actually, sensory experiences happen because raw sensory data comes into the
brain via the thalamus and is routed to the cortext via connections called
thalamo-cortical feedback loops.
Internal thinking is perceived when processed data from the cortex is fed back
to the thalamus and merged into the incoming raw sensory data. This is called
thinking.
The process of transcending is when the activity of the thalamus becomes less
and so the funneling of raw sensory data and/or the merging of processed data
becomes less. This happens whenever one allows the mind to wander but is
facilitated by what we call Transcendental Meditation.
Which is not the same as you describe below, it maybe less, but is not zero.
When the thalamus no longer allows ANY data to come in from the outside and no
longer allows ANY processed data to be merged with the (now non-existent) raw
data stream, and yet the part of the thalamus that promotes the connectivity
between distant parts of the cortex remains functioning normally, one has no
internal experience, no external experience--that is, nt thoughts--and yet the
brain is still alert.
This is samadhi.
In TM what you experience of TC is not fully alert. When you are fully aware,
you already have a thought.
It's not samadhi. Real samadhi is when the kundalini rises to the top chakra.
And it certainly has a physiological signature: I just described it.
There is a physiological signature, but it has nothing to do with samadhi, it
is only your imagination
L #yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536 -- #yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp #yiv5566869536hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp #yiv5566869536ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp .yiv5566869536ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp .yiv5566869536ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536ygrp-mkp .yiv5566869536ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536ygrp-sponsor
#yiv5566869536ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536ygrp-sponsor #yiv5566869536ygrp-lc #yiv5566869536hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536ygrp-sponsor #yiv5566869536ygrp-lc .yiv5566869536ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv5566869536
#yiv5566869536activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv5566869536 #yiv5566869536activity span
.yiv5566869536underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv5566869536
.yiv5566869536attach
{clear:both
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
PC becomes a screen on which all activity including mental is played. If I want just pure consciousness, these days I just look at it. The bigger question is after all these years of sadhana why doesn't everyone have that experience? On 12/26/2014 01:47 AM, aryavazhi wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : Um, ok... The most detailed research on pure consciousness showed that the subject didn't press a button signalling that they had had a PC episode until *after* their physiology reverted to normal. They didn't notice PC. They noticed the transition *out of* PC. Yes. Just to let you know: it did serve me well for many years - so I do know it well. But it is very different from the more fully aware state without any thought, except for the basic awareness of the state itself. Thought is so subtle, that you are aware of what is going on, but you cannot actively think. And it is more related to the chakras and kundalini. But whatever. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote : But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular experience, and any experience is by the mind. Actually, sensory experiences happen because raw sensory data comes into the brain via the thalamus and is routed to the cortext via connections called thalamo-cortical feedback loops. Internal thinking is perceived when processed data from the cortex is fed back to the thalamus and merged into the incoming raw sensory data. This is called thinking. The process of transcending is when the activity of the thalamus becomes less and so the funneling of raw sensory data and/or the merging of processed data becomes less. This happens whenever one allows the mind to wander but is facilitated by what we call Transcendental Meditation. Which is not the same as you describe below, it maybe less, but is not zero. When the thalamus no longer allows ANY data to come in from the outside and no longer allows ANY processed data to be merged with the (now non-existent) raw data stream, and yet the part of the thalamus that promotes the connectivity between distant parts of the cortex remains functioning normally, one has no internal experience, no external experience--that is, nt thoughts--and yet the brain is still alert. This is samadhi. In TM what you experience of TC is not fully alert. When you are fully aware, you already have a thought. It's not samadhi. Real samadhi is when the kundalini rises to the top chakra. And it certainly has a physiological signature: I just described it. There is a physiological signature, but it has nothing to do with samadhi, it is only your imagination L
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The real nature of transcendence
Like as not, a lot of people ARE in CC (whether via the practice of TM, or just because) but don't see it as a big deal because, as MMY points out, it is merely normal. Of course, the sine qua non of CC is that one has PC even during deep sleep, so perhaps that is lacking in many people... I have the opposite issue: witnessing sleep has been around almost continuously (except during a few life-threatening illnesses over the decades) within a few weeks that I first learned TM. It's the waking state integration that appears to be lacking, although... When I inadvertently went off prozac abruptly a few years ago, and had 12 hours of non-stop, viciously and horrifically violent suicidal ideation, I still had permanent presence of pure sense-of-self that was untouched by the rather Grade-Z horror movie continuously running through my mind, and I never felt an urge to act on any of that stuff. ...I'd prefer to think that I'm not really in CC rather than CC being THIS useless as a higher state of consciousness. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, noozguru@... wrote : PC becomes a screen on which all activity including mental is played. If I want just pure consciousness, these days I just look at it. The bigger question is after all these years of sadhana why doesn't everyone have that experience? On 12/26/2014 01:47 AM, aryavazhi wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... wrote : Um, ok... The most detailed research on pure consciousness showed that the subject didn't press a button signalling that they had had a PC episode until *after* their physiology reverted to normal. They didn't notice PC. They noticed the transition *out of* PC. Yes. Just to let you know: it did serve me well for many years - so I do know it well. But it is very different from the more fully aware state without any thought, except for the basic awareness of the state itself. Thought is so subtle, that you are aware of what is going on, but you cannot actively think. And it is more related to the chakras and kundalini. But whatever. L ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... mailto:LEnglish5@... wrote : But as you said, of course, transcendence has nothing to do with either having a thought, or having no thought. It is not a physiological signature, as some keep telling here, a physiological signature, can only relate to a particular experience, and any experience is by the mind. Actually, sensory experiences happen because raw sensory data comes into the brain via the thalamus and is routed to the cortext via connections called thalamo-cortical feedback loops. Internal thinking is perceived when processed data from the cortex is fed back to the thalamus and merged into the incoming raw sensory data. This is called thinking. The process of transcending is when the activity of the thalamus becomes less and so the funneling of raw sensory data and/or the merging of processed data becomes less. This happens whenever one allows the mind to wander but is facilitated by what we call Transcendental Meditation. Which is not the same as you describe below, it maybe less, but is not zero. When the thalamus no longer allows ANY data to come in from the outside and no longer allows ANY processed data to be merged with the (now non-existent) raw data stream, and yet the part of the thalamus that promotes the connectivity between distant parts of the cortex remains functioning normally, one has no internal experience, no external experience--that is, nt thoughts--and yet the brain is still alert. This is samadhi. In TM what you experience of TC is not fully alert. When you are fully aware, you already have a thought. It's not samadhi. Real samadhi is when the kundalini rises to the top chakra. And it certainly has a physiological signature: I just described it. There is a physiological signature, but it has nothing to do with samadhi, it is only your imagination L
