On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Thanks for your thoughtful and poignant post New Morn:
On Jul 30, 2007, at 10:07 PM, new.morning wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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
On Jul 31, 2007, at 9:59 AM, jim_flanegin wrote:
Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is
very
clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional
state.
You must be misintepreting that. Its a very subtle difference
between Brahman and UC. Each could be
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and
UC being transitory states.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yet this is just new age speculation.
Au contraire, mon frere -- it is my
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC, GC and
UC being transitory states.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
On Jul 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, jim_flanegin wrote:
This reminds me of what Rory said a few posts back about CC,
GC and
UC being transitory states.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote:
Yet this is just new age speculation.
Rory wrote:
Au
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 31, 2007, at 9:59 AM, jim_flanegin wrote:
Yet this is just new age speculation. The tradition itself is
very
clear on what UC, videha-mukti, is and it is not a transitional
state.
You must be
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yet Jim in a post yesterday dismissed the analogy of acid induced
states of being as not valid because they were not permanent.
Though it was Rory who said that, I did want to add that the quid pro
quo regarding drug
---except for the natural drugs (neurotransmitters) produced by your
own body, some of them similar to the drug DMT.
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@ wrote:
Yet Jim in a post yesterday
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hyperbolicgeometry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
---except for the natural drugs (neurotransmitters) produced by
your
own body, some of them similar to the drug DMT.
Probably a matter of quantity in those cases.:-)
Excellent conversation. Thanks.
**
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Him:
I said, about your enlightened friend:
Good for him. Really. But no big deal. Why would it be?
Me:
I didn't say it was. Neither would he. But I was somehow under
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@
wrote:
Him:
No, I don't have time to clarify my position right now but you
might
Rory 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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Rory 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
jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote:
Hi Rory- yeah, but the diff in Brahman is that consciousness
concentrates into the particle, but doesn't really collapse into
it- snip
There is or can be a total collapse, as Krishna/Karttikeya begins to be
enlivened, but not one in which the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is why I say, as Brahman I am the Cosmic Consciousness of my
particle(s), instead of I am in C.C., and as Krishna/Karttikeya
I
am the God Consciousness of my particle(s), instead of I am in
G.C., and so on -- I
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote:
Hi Rory- yeah, but the diff in Brahman is that consciousness
concentrates into the particle, but doesn't really collapse
into
it- snip
There is or can be a total
jim_flanegin wrote:
Hi Rory- yeah, but the diff in Brahman is that
consciousness
concentrates into the particle, but doesn't really collapse
into
it- snip
Rory Goff wrote:
There is or can be a total collapse, as Krishna/Karttikeya begins
to be
enlivened,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
jim_flanegin wrote:
Hi Rory- yeah, but the diff in Brahman is that
consciousness
concentrates into the particle, but doesn't really
collapse
into
it- snip
Rory Goff wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, *each* bindu point remaining absolutely true to its self, and
yet veritably exploding with Bliss-- pretty cool, huh?
Yes :-)
Which brings me to the word, ignorance, a word which many seekers
don't like. At
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
Yes, *each* bindu point remaining absolutely true to its self,
and
yet veritably exploding with Bliss-- pretty cool, huh?
Yes :-)
Which
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
--- 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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this may be due to states of consciousness' being temporarily
attained via external means, rather than fully understood in terms of
the Self, which is beyond the various states. I have noticed
enhancements of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote:
I think this may be due to states of consciousness' being
temporarily
attained via external means, rather than fully understood in
terms of
the
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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for some excellent points and perspectives New! Nothing to
add
but a high five for being genuine.
And the alternative would be being
...a giraffe?:-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
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).
The answer, -- was weak in my
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@
wrote:
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
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning no_reply@
wrote:
Tying to Danas post, he ask cogently, the same sorts of
questions /
35 matches
Mail list logo
