[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Buck]

Yeah, sound design introducing our TM leadership at public forum meetings on 
stage, instead of Hail to the Chief  should play Joe Cocker's Something's 
Coming On as theme song for introducing John Hagelin as he comes up on stage to 
speak.  Would be fabulous. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viL7VxR__34 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"  
wrote:
>
> Forget that hippy stuff... time to turn it over to a new generation. What we 
> need now is hip-hop music with twerking Mother Divine ladies in tight, 
> flesh-colored, neck-to-ankle dresses.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote:
> >
> > Transcendentalism has always been the counter-point and criticism to 
> > materialism and the materialist.  Revolutionary transcendentalism standing 
> > for broad spiritual change is our revival message.  We should just own it 
> > in fact.  I feel we should adopt the musical cords of the guitar and 
> > keyboard in the Jefferson Airplane "Volunteers" from Woodstock as our 
> > branding musical introduction now to TM/David Lynch movement video 
> > productions.  Enough of that German male choral thing, old Pachelbel or 
> > that Mother Divine vocal they use now for video theme music.  Certainly the 
> > patriotic Airplane cords of revolution would bring people as American 
> > Volunteers back to the Domes to join in meditation for large purpose again.
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SboRijhWFDU 
> > 
> > -Buck in the Dome
> [snip]
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Alex Stanley]

Forget that hippy stuff... time to turn it over to a new generation. What we 
need now is hip-hop music with twerking Mother Divine ladies in tight, 
flesh-colored, neck-to-ankle dresses.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck"  wrote:
>
> Transcendentalism has always been the counter-point and criticism to 
> materialism and the materialist.  Revolutionary transcendentalism standing 
> for broad spiritual change is our revival message.  We should just own it in 
> fact.  I feel we should adopt the musical cords of the guitar and keyboard in 
> the Jefferson Airplane "Volunteers" from Woodstock as our branding musical 
> introduction now to TM/David Lynch movement video productions.  Enough of 
> that German male choral thing, old Pachelbel or that Mother Divine vocal they 
> use now for video theme music.  Certainly the patriotic Airplane cords of 
> revolution would bring people as American Volunteers back to the Domes to 
> join in meditation for large purpose again.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SboRijhWFDU 
> 
> -Buck in the Dome
[snip]

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Richard J. Williams]

> Diamonds and rust.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MSwBM_CbyY

>
Emmylou Harris, Joan Baez and Jackson Browne - July 27, 2013
http://youtu.be/giY3W6fxK_c 

   

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[bobpriced]

I'd say you have the makings of a pretty good picture maker.

What John Ford said to Spielberg:

https://plus.google.com/110761352298487979695/posts/EXKFgHgtgge
<https://plus.google.com/110761352298487979695/posts/EXKFgHgtgge>


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , Emily Reyn  wrote:
>
> Bob, you leave me without words - a good thing. :) And, thank you for
the documentary and musical links of last Thurs. Here's a picture from
the WA coast last week. Â Love, Emily
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/71633812@N08/9615960464/
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/71633812@N08/9615960464/>
>
>
>
> 
>  From: bobpriced bobpriced@...
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 4:31 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>
>
>
> Â
>
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqyXjjbsOos
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqyXjjbsOos>
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Xeno, thanks for sharingRe: this"Then all hell broke
loose. A vast amount of repressed material rose up and flowed out of me.
A total surprise. So clearly the awakening was not a clean slate. It was
ultra intense, say twenty times more intense than anything I had
experienced up to then. And the experience was truly unusual because
while my regular life flowed along, there was this other stuff that I
knew was not real, but it felt so real it was impossible to not act on
it."
> >
> >
>  Something akin to this happened to me once.except that I thought
it was real.  Smile.  Keep 'em coming Xeno.
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
anartaxius@ wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> , "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> > > anartaxius@ wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > > > and TM teachers.
> > > > >
> > > > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > > > process more
>  efficient.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > > > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > > > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > > > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
> > >
> > >
> > > I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
> > > experience means but how a description helps one navigate an
experience.
> > > Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been
'better' if
> > > I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not
going
> > > to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later
on, so
> > > they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but
what do
> > > I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not
understand
> > > what is
>  happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful,
> > > such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use
them
> > > in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking
things
> > > together.
> > >
> > > After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening
experience
> > > some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There
was
> > > something about this particular experience, unlike others I had
had long
> > > ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk
about
> > > it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of
repressed
> > > material rose up and flowed out of me. A tot

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Richard J. Williams]

emptybill:
> Pro'ly you didn't want to live in the land of the "Once Free".
> However, I think chanuckistan's political system is
> even more f'd up than here - although we're fast turning
> into a crime ridden, illegal overwhelmed, drug house of
> horrors.
>
Have you been watching cable TV lately? Breaking Bad or
Dexter?

> If I didn't have two daughters needing me,
>
You've got two daughters - I've got grand kids to take care of.
One is graduating from Beauty College - we're going to start a
wig business down in San Diego.

> I'd be better off down under.
>
Maybe - Rita went there several years ago to visit a friend,
down under in Australia, to Adelaide, which is down under
down under. We may be visiting there on our trip next year.

But, did you mean down under, under the ground? I know
things are bad out there. Go figure.

> Damn gotta go to work.
>
Now that's better!





> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > >
> > > AnniePurna
> > >
> > > You got yer psycho-RN training from the World Teacher,
> > > so I know you already know how "those demons" subvert the
> > > innocents from using their free-will power-to-choose.

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Richard J. Williams]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> I'm still waiting for the Lesbo Love Scene.
>
I'm still waiting for the gay and lesbian neo-nazi 
skinhead love scene. And, waiting for you to learn 
how to snip posts. At least you're top posting the 
one-liners now. LoL!
 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Well dear Ann - the thing to remember is Obba is basically a crazy woman.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Emily Reyn]

Bob, you leave me without words - a good thing. :) And, thank you for the 
documentary and musical links of last Thurs. Here's a picture from the WA coast 
last week.  Love, Emily

http://www.flickr.com/photos/71633812@N08/9615960464/




 From: bobpriced 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 4:31 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqyXjjbsOos 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> Hi Xeno, thanks for sharingRe: this"Then all hell broke loose. A vast 
> amount of repressed material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. 
> So clearly the awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say 
> twenty times more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the 
> experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed along, 
> there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so real it 
> was impossible to not act on it."
> 
>
 Something akin to this happened to me once.except that I thought it was 
real.  Smile.  Keep 'em coming Xeno.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" anartaxius@ 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> > anartaxius@ wrote:
> > 
> > > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > > and TM teachers.
> > > >
> > > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > > process more
 efficient.
> > >
> > > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
> > 
> > 
> > I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
> > experience means but how a description helps one navigate an experience.
> > Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been 'better' if
> > I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not going
> > to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later on, so
> > they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but what do
> > I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not understand
> > what is
 happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful,
> > such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use them
> > in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking things
> > together.
> > 
> > After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening experience
> > some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was
> > something about this particular experience, unlike others I had had long
> > ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk about
> > it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed
> > material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly the
> > awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty times
> > more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the
> > experience was truly
 unusual because while my regular life flowed along,
> > there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so real
> > it was impossible to not act on it. It was like my mind was split in two
> > with two parallel lives running simultaneously, one the present and the
> > other thoughts, feelings, behaviours from long ago. I had no clue what
> > was happening.
> > 
> > If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would have
> > said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe get
> > my meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
> > guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem to be
> > swept under the rug by TM t

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Jason]

> > ---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" anartaxius@ wrote:
> >
> > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > and TM teachers.
> > >
> > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > process more efficient.
> > >
> > >
> ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
> >
> >
---  "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  wrote:
>
> I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
> experience means but how a description helps one navigate an experience.
> Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been 'better' if
> I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not going
> to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later on, so
> they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but what do
> I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not understand
> what is happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful,
> such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use them
> in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking things
> together.
>
> After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening experience
> some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was
> something about this particular experience, unlike others I had had long
> ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk about
> it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed
> material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly the
> awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty times
> more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the
> experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed along,
> there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so real
> it was impossible to not act on it. It was like my mind was split in two
> with two parallel lives running simultaneously, one the present and the
> other thoughts, feelings, behaviours from long ago. I had no clue what
> was happening.
>
> If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would have
> said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe get
> my meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
> guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem to be
> swept under the rug by TM teachers, anything not in the template. I
> suspect they do not really have any training to handle them. I found a
> solution in what I was reading. It seems that after a clear awakening,
> one's ability to keep repressed material repressed simply falls apart.
> The can of worms is open, and if something triggers the experience, you
> cannot close it, and the experience really does seem like you are coming
> apart at the seams. All you can do is endure it. Nothing helps. It is as
> if finally there is enough room in your world to experience this. The
> intellectual knowledge that this is common, that others experienced it,
> and that it is super intense, and that you have to go through it because
> there is no way to back out, is really useful. Kind of like the
> emotional equivalent of childbirth as far as pain. That information,
> along with the stability conferred by awakening allowed me to get
> through it, just barely. Without that information I would have been a
> lot more confused, and perhaps would have done things even more stupid
> than had occurred to me to attempt at the time. Half of my time during
> this was acting on a mental delusion caused by the release. Finally it
> subsided after a few years. It was a strangely miserable/wonderful
> several years. After that my sense of stability was much, much greater,
> and the character of the experience that I had had before this happened
> was much clearer. Maybe it will happen again. I simply do not know.
>
> The result now I would not call bliss, but a sense of profound evenness
> that has been stable for some time. I have no illusions that this
> evenness will never be disrupted again. But it has been pretty nice.
>
> An example of evenness occurred a couple of days ago. I was preparing
> breakfast. I had put a small amount of oil in a frying pan. Then while
> it heated up, I sat down at the table and started to read the following
> comic (courtesy of Randall Monroe a

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> Funny reply.
> 
> A 'smerican hugh?
> 
> Pro'ly you didn't want to live in the land of the "Once Free".

Being head nurse of the psycho  WT ER up here and having vowed to overlook the 
land of the World Teacher for eternity I am bound to stay in this sacred place 
called Victoria. I take my position and status seriously so I am bound to the 
land up here. You never know, one day the WT himself might return to claim his 
rightful status once again and for that we can all rejoice. Only this time you 
better be boned up on your first person ontology and forget the demon thing - 
so passe.

> However, I think chanuckistan's political system is
> even more f'd up than here - although we're fast turning
> into a crime ridden, illegal overwhelmed, drug house of
> horrors.

>From afar what I see is a country riddled with the wrong kind of patriotism 
>based on erroneous reasoning and reaction. While the US has a lot going for it 
>I can't handle all that Star Spangled Banner and in my 57 years on this planet 
>I have only spent about 20 years of that on your side of the border. 

And as far as politics goes, government is doomed to be run by humans therefore 
what do you expect? If you go "Down Under" you will have to listen to that 
accent though and that is almost worse than knowing you live in a country where 
"Duck Dynasty" was conceived of and broadcast. Lawd, help us.
> 
> If I didn't have two daughters needing me, I'd be better off
> down under.
> 
> Damn gotta go to work.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > >
> > > AnniePurna
> > >
> > > You got yer psycho-RN training from the World Teacher,
> > > so I know you already know how "those demons" subvert the
> > > innocents from using their free-will power-to-choose. Heh, Heh.
> > I like that image of "psycho-RN training from the World Teacher". It
> has
> > such a cool ring to it. Am I really that formidable? A Nurse Ratched?
> > OK, I'm game if you are. Now turn around, bend over and down with
> the...
> > well we could play nurse all day but I better answer the rest of your
> > post.
> > >
> > > FYI - A chamber has to be empty to receive the trust of the
> > > fitted bullet - but the heat only erupts as the round explodes.
> > Yea, yea, of course it's empty, you just fired all the bullets and now
> > it is hot, very  hot. I'm not sure you hit anything but it made a big
> > sound.
> > >
> > > Also FYI - My mom was a jumper. My parents bred
> > > quarter-horse and appaloosa. One of the apps was a
> > > cutting horse and a joy to ride. But that was never my
> > > main interest.
> > Whoa cowboy. Quarter horses are not known for their jumping prowess
> but
> > they can cut alright. You need to have some pretty good stickem to
> stay
> > on those babies. They turn and stop and wheel like nobody's business.
> I
> > couldn't stay on one of those even. You wouldn't have a chance. Appys
> > can be pretty to look at but they're also stubborn as mules for some
> > reason. They never have decent tails either, no hair.
> > >
> > > BTW - Enjoy your North American domicile while you can - after
> > > all the 'smericans you chanuckistani's hate are the sole
> > > protectors of your sweet hyperborean paradise.
> > Whoa again sweet cheeks. I'm American.
> > >
> > > Just remember that death is stalking us all, even when we're
> > > acting like it isn't so.
> > Well, being the Woody Allenish hypochondriac that I am I am infinitely
> > aware of death and disease every waking moment. I live death baby,
> > believe me.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Annie Gottagun
> > > >
> > > > Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now
> > you're
> > > smoking hot.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> > > > > So glad you finally showed what you really
> > > > > learned in secret from the World Teacher.
> > > >
> > > > "in secret"?
> > > >
> > > > > You too are now a discerner of intent and
> > > > > the disguised motivations of the demons.
> > > >
> > > > Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this
> > kinda
> > > bitter guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.
> > > >
> > > > > Gotta a circle of disciples yet?
> > > >
> > > > Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm
> not
> > > sure they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes
> > or
> > > help me pick apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty
> > > chamber/smoking gun? We have a rather large, abandoned orchard with
> > > pears and figs and plums (both golden and purple) blackberries,
> holly,
> > > peaches, cherries and the deer and rats and birds love to eat there.
> > > This is where I and my would-be disciples somet

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

Funny reply.

A 'smerican hugh?

Pro'ly you didn't want to live in the land of the "Once Free".
However, I think chanuckistan's political system is
even more f'd up than here - although we're fast turning
into a crime ridden, illegal overwhelmed, drug house of
horrors.

If I didn't have two daughters needing me, I'd be better off
down under.

Damn gotta go to work.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> >
> > AnniePurna
> >
> > You got yer psycho-RN training from the World Teacher,
> > so I know you already know how "those demons" subvert the
> > innocents from using their free-will power-to-choose. Heh, Heh.
> I like that image of "psycho-RN training from the World Teacher". It
has
> such a cool ring to it. Am I really that formidable? A Nurse Ratched?
> OK, I'm game if you are. Now turn around, bend over and down with
the...
> well we could play nurse all day but I better answer the rest of your
> post.
> >
> > FYI - A chamber has to be empty to receive the trust of the
> > fitted bullet - but the heat only erupts as the round explodes.
> Yea, yea, of course it's empty, you just fired all the bullets and now
> it is hot, very  hot. I'm not sure you hit anything but it made a big
> sound.
> >
> > Also FYI - My mom was a jumper. My parents bred
> > quarter-horse and appaloosa. One of the apps was a
> > cutting horse and a joy to ride. But that was never my
> > main interest.
> Whoa cowboy. Quarter horses are not known for their jumping prowess
but
> they can cut alright. You need to have some pretty good stickem to
stay
> on those babies. They turn and stop and wheel like nobody's business.
I
> couldn't stay on one of those even. You wouldn't have a chance. Appys
> can be pretty to look at but they're also stubborn as mules for some
> reason. They never have decent tails either, no hair.
> >
> > BTW - Enjoy your North American domicile while you can - after
> > all the 'smericans you chanuckistani's hate are the sole
> > protectors of your sweet hyperborean paradise.
> Whoa again sweet cheeks. I'm American.
> >
> > Just remember that death is stalking us all, even when we're
> > acting like it isn't so.
> Well, being the Woody Allenish hypochondriac that I am I am infinitely
> aware of death and disease every waking moment. I live death baby,
> believe me.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Annie Gottagun
> > >
> > > Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now
> you're
> > smoking hot.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> > > > So glad you finally showed what you really
> > > > learned in secret from the World Teacher.
> > >
> > > "in secret"?
> > >
> > > > You too are now a discerner of intent and
> > > > the disguised motivations of the demons.
> > >
> > > Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this
> kinda
> > bitter guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.
> > >
> > > > Gotta a circle of disciples yet?
> > >
> > > Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm
not
> > sure they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes
> or
> > help me pick apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty
> > chamber/smoking gun? We have a rather large, abandoned orchard with
> > pears and figs and plums (both golden and purple) blackberries,
holly,
> > peaches, cherries and the deer and rats and birds love to eat there.
> > This is where I and my would-be disciples sometimes pick apples for
> the
> > horses which we gather in wheelbarrows; there are just so many
apples
> > and these are many types of heritage apples grafted onto other
apples
> > trees by the previous property owner. Oh, and we have one horse
buried
> > in that orchard. An old jumper who deserved to be placed in the
ground
> > underneath the fruit trees so that he didn't have to be carted off
and
> > thrown into a pit at the local dump. He wasn't my horse but he
earned
> > the privilege to come and find a quiet resting spot after a life of
> > racing for 8 years and jumping for another 12. My old mare of 29
years
> > will be buried in that orchard next to him. Her name is Annapurna.
You
> > might like her; she is wise and gentle and beautiful.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Raviola
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > > > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> > > > >
> > > > > EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like
> > Buck, at
> > > > least in your intention to silence.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> AnniePurna
>
> You got yer psycho-RN training from the World Teacher,
> so I know you already know how "those demons" subvert the
> innocents from using their free-will power-to-choose. Heh, Heh.
I like that image of "psycho-RN training from the World Teacher". It has
such a cool ring to it. Am I really that formidable? A Nurse Ratched?
OK, I'm game if you are. Now turn around, bend over and down with the...
well we could play nurse all day but I better answer the rest of your
post.
>
> FYI - A chamber has to be empty to receive the trust of the
> fitted bullet - but the heat only erupts as the round explodes.
Yea, yea, of course it's empty, you just fired all the bullets and now
it is hot, very  hot. I'm not sure you hit anything but it made a big
sound.
>
> Also FYI - My mom was a jumper. My parents bred
> quarter-horse and appaloosa. One of the apps was a
> cutting horse and a joy to ride. But that was never my
> main interest.
Whoa cowboy. Quarter horses are not known for their jumping prowess but
they can cut alright. You need to have some pretty good stickem to stay
on those babies. They turn and stop and wheel like nobody's business. I
couldn't stay on one of those even. You wouldn't have a chance. Appys
can be pretty to look at but they're also stubborn as mules for some
reason. They never have decent tails either, no hair.
>
> BTW - Enjoy your North American domicile while you can - after
> all the 'smericans you chanuckistani's hate are the sole
> protectors of your sweet hyperborean paradise.
Whoa again sweet cheeks. I'm American.
>
> Just remember that death is stalking us all, even when we're
> acting like it isn't so.
Well, being the Woody Allenish hypochondriac that I am I am infinitely
aware of death and disease every waking moment. I live death baby,
believe me.
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Annie Gottagun
> >
> > Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now
you're
> smoking hot.
> > >
> > > Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> > > So glad you finally showed what you really
> > > learned in secret from the World Teacher.
> >
> > "in secret"?
> >
> > > You too are now a discerner of intent and
> > > the disguised motivations of the demons.
> >
> > Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this
kinda
> bitter guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.
> >
> > > Gotta a circle of disciples yet?
> >
> > Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm not
> sure they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes
or
> help me pick apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty
> chamber/smoking gun? We have a rather large, abandoned orchard with
> pears and figs and plums (both golden and purple) blackberries, holly,
> peaches, cherries and the deer and rats and birds love to eat there.
> This is where I and my would-be disciples sometimes pick apples for
the
> horses which we gather in wheelbarrows; there are just so many apples
> and these are many types of heritage apples grafted onto other apples
> trees by the previous property owner. Oh, and we have one horse buried
> in that orchard. An old jumper who deserved to be placed in the ground
> underneath the fruit trees so that he didn't have to be carted off and
> thrown into a pit at the local dump. He wasn't my horse but he earned
> the privilege to come and find a quiet resting spot after a life of
> racing for 8 years and jumping for another 12. My old mare of 29 years
> will be buried in that orchard next to him. Her name is Annapurna. You
> might like her; she is wise and gentle and beautiful.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Raviola
> > > > >
> > > > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> > > >
> > > > EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like
> Buck, at
> > > least in your intention to silence.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Devi is after me again empty baby - she is recommending this game for you

http://www.muchgames.com/games/demon-girl-dress-up

She thinks it may be the cure for your emotional handicap fueled fantasies.

[image: Inline image 1]


On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:18 PM, emptybill  wrote:

> AnniePurna
>
> You got yer psycho-RN training from the World Teacher,
> so I know you already know how "those demons" subvert the
> innocents from using their free-will power-to-choose. Heh, Heh.
>
> FYI - A chamber has to be empty to receive the trust of the
> fitted bullet - but the heat only erupts as the round explodes.
>
> Also FYI - My mom was a jumper. My parents bred
> quarter-horse and appaloosa. One of the apps was a
> cutting horse and a joy to ride. But that was never my
> main interest.
>
> BTW - Enjoy your North American domicile while you can - after
> all the 'smericans you chanuckistani's hate are the sole
> protectors of your sweet hyperborean paradise.
>
> Just remember that death is stalking us all, even when we're
> acting like it isn't so.
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Annie Gottagun
> >
> > Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now you're
> smoking hot.
> > >
> > > Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> > > So glad you finally showed what you really
> > > learned in secret from the World Teacher.
> >
> > "in secret"?
> >
> > > You too are now a discerner of intent and
> > > the disguised motivations of the demons.
> >
> > Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this kinda
> bitter guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.
> >
> > > Gotta a circle of disciples yet?
> >
> > Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm not
> sure they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes or
> help me pick apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty
> chamber/smoking gun? We have a rather large, abandoned orchard with
> pears and figs and plums (both golden and purple) blackberries, holly,
> peaches, cherries and the deer and rats and birds love to eat there.
> This is where I and my would-be disciples sometimes pick apples for the
> horses which we gather in wheelbarrows; there are just so many apples
> and these are many types of heritage apples grafted onto other apples
> trees by the previous property owner. Oh, and we have one horse buried
> in that orchard. An old jumper who deserved to be placed in the ground
> underneath the fruit trees so that he didn't have to be carted off and
> thrown into a pit at the local dump. He wasn't my horse but he earned
> the privilege to come and find a quiet resting spot after a life of
> racing for 8 years and jumping for another 12. My old mare of 29 years
> will be buried in that orchard next to him. Her name is Annapurna. You
> might like her; she is wise and gentle and beautiful.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Raviola
> > > > >
> > > > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> > > >
> > > > EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like
> Buck, at
> > > least in your intention to silence.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
>
> Or go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

AnniePurna

You got yer psycho-RN training from the World Teacher,
so I know you already know how "those demons" subvert the
innocents from using their free-will power-to-choose. Heh, Heh.

FYI - A chamber has to be empty to receive the trust of the
fitted bullet - but the heat only erupts as the round explodes.

Also FYI - My mom was a jumper. My parents bred
quarter-horse and appaloosa. One of the apps was a
cutting horse and a joy to ride. But that was never my
main interest.

BTW - Enjoy your North American domicile while you can - after
all the 'smericans you chanuckistani's hate are the sole
protectors of your sweet hyperborean paradise.

Just remember that death is stalking us all, even when we're
acting like it isn't so.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> >
> > Annie Gottagun
>
> Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now you're
smoking hot.
> >
> > Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> > So glad you finally showed what you really
> > learned in secret from the World Teacher.
>
> "in secret"?
>
> > You too are now a discerner of intent and
> > the disguised motivations of the demons.
>
> Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this kinda
bitter guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.
>
> > Gotta a circle of disciples yet?
>
> Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm not
sure they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes or
help me pick apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty
chamber/smoking gun? We have a rather large, abandoned orchard with
pears and figs and plums (both golden and purple) blackberries, holly,
peaches, cherries and the deer and rats and birds love to eat there.
This is where I and my would-be disciples sometimes pick apples for the
horses which we gather in wheelbarrows; there are just so many apples
and these are many types of heritage apples grafted onto other apples
trees by the previous property owner. Oh, and we have one horse buried
in that orchard. An old jumper who deserved to be placed in the ground
underneath the fruit trees so that he didn't have to be carted off and
thrown into a pit at the local dump. He wasn't my horse but he earned
the privilege to come and find a quiet resting spot after a life of
racing for 8 years and jumping for another 12. My old mare of 29 years
will be buried in that orchard next to him. Her name is Annapurna. You
might like her; she is wise and gentle and beautiful.
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Raviola
> > > >
> > > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> > >
> > > EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like
Buck, at
> > least in your intention to silence.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[bobpriced]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqyXjjbsOos




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> Hi Xeno, thanks for sharingRe: this"Then all hell broke loose.
A vast amount of repressed material rose up and flowed out of me. A
total surprise. So clearly the awakening was not a clean slate. It was
ultra intense, say twenty times more intense than anything I had
experienced up to then. And the experience was truly unusual because
while my regular life flowed along, there was this other stuff that I
knew was not real, but it felt so real it was impossible to not act on
it."
>
> Something akin to this happened to me once.except that I thought
it was real.  Smile.  Keep 'em coming Xeno.
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
anartaxius@ wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> > anartaxius@ wrote:
> >
> > > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > > and TM teachers.
> > > >
> > > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > > process more efficient.
> > >
> > > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
> >
> >
> > I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
> > experience means but how a description helps one navigate an
experience.
> > Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been
'better' if
> > I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not
going
> > to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later on,
so
> > they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but
what do
> > I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not
understand
> > what is happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become
useful,
> > such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use
them
> > in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking things
> > together.
> >
> > After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening
experience
> > some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was
> > something about this particular experience, unlike others I had had
long
> > ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk
about
> > it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed
> > material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly
the
> > awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty
times
> > more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the
> > experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed
along,
> > there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so
real
> > it was impossible to not act on it. It was like my mind was split in
two
> > with two parallel lives running simultaneously, one the present and
the
> > other thoughts, feelings, behaviours from long ago. I had no clue
what
> > was happening.
> >
> > If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would
have
> > said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe
get
> > my meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
> > guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem
to be
> > swept under the rug by TM teachers, anything not in the template. I
> > suspect they do not really have any training to handle them. I found
a
> > solution in what I was reading. It seems that after a clear
awakening,
> > one's ability to keep repressed material repressed simply falls
apart.
> > The can of worms is open, and if something triggers the experience,
you
> > cannot close it, and the experience really does seem like you are
coming
> > apart at the seams. All you can do is endure it. Nothing helps. It
is as
> > if finally there is enough room in your world to experience this.
The
> > intellectual knowledge that this is common, that others experienced
it,
> > and that it is super intense, and that you have to go through it
because
> > there is no way to back out, is really useful. Kind of like the
> > emotional equivalent of chil

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Oh dear Ann please forgive my empty baby, the Devi & I vouch for him. He
may lack social, emotional skills, talk gibberish - but he is innocent and
totally harmless.




On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Ann  wrote:

>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> >
> > Annie Gottagun
>
> Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now you're
> smoking hot.
> >
> > Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> > So glad you finally showed what you really
> > learned in secret from the World Teacher.
>
> "in secret"?
>
> > You too are now a discerner of intent and
> > the disguised motivations of the demons.
>
> Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this kinda
> bitter guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.
>
> > Gotta a circle of disciples yet?
>
> Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm not sure
> they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes or help me
> pick apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty chamber/smoking
> gun? We have a rather large, abandoned orchard with pears and figs and
> plums (both golden and purple) blackberries, holly, peaches, cherries and
> the deer and rats and birds love to eat there. This is where I and my
> would-be disciples sometimes pick apples for the horses which we gather in
> wheelbarrows; there are just so many apples and these are many types of
> heritage apples grafted onto other apples trees by the previous property
> owner. Oh, and we have one horse buried in that orchard. An old jumper who
> deserved to be placed in the ground underneath the fruit trees so that he
> didn't have to be carted off and thrown into a pit at the local dump. He
> wasn't my horse but he earned the privilege to come and find a quiet
> resting spot after a life of racing for 8 years and jumping for another 12.
> My old mare of 29 years will be buried in that orchard next to him. Her
> name is Annapurna. You might like her; she is wise and gentle and beautiful.
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Raviola
> > > >
> > > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> > >
> > > EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like Buck, at
> > least in your intention to silence.
> >
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
>
> Or go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

I just talked to Devi empty baby and she is - like me, really really
concerned about your childish fantasies. Once you come back home - we can
address your emotional, social handicaps.

You are coming back home - aren't you empty baby?



On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:23 PM, emptybill  wrote:

>
>
> O' raviola you finally found me - appearing in the form of my mentor:
> *
> Vajrabhairava*, the impenetrable terrifier *who is death to death itself*
>
> and his wife ...
>
> *Vajravetali,* the adamintine vampiress who sucks the life-blood
> of the samaya breakers, the oath violators who violate their
> original "words of divine honor" to help sentient beings.
>
> However, as a Brahma-rakshasa you wouldn't know about that.
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> >
> > I see you empty..OMG how can I ever forgive myself
> >
> > [image: Inline image 1]
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@...wrote:
>
> >
> > > Empty baby - I only asked you to go the abode of Raakshasaas to provide
> > > the perspective on how the innocence and playfulness of this dark
> Krishna
> > > appears to them. You can come back now empty baby.
> > >
> > > Oh wait a minute - are you stuck baby? OMG - why did I ever ask you to
> go
> > > there, so stupid of me. That idiot empty thinks that is the reality -
> fuck
> > > !!!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:54 PM, emptybill emptybill@... wrote:
> > >
> > >> This is how the guile, artifice and self-indulgence
> > >> of a fool displays itself o' ego-bloated brahma rakshasa.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Is this how the innocence, beauty and playfulness of Krishna comes
> > >> across to you oh empty Rakshasaa?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:12 PM, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Raviola
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > >> > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> To subscribe, send a message to:
> > >> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> > >>
> > >> Or go to:
> > >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> > >> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
> 
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

O' raviola you finally found me - appearing in the form of my mentor:

Vajrabhairava, the impenetrable terrifier who is death to death itself

and his wife ...

Vajravetali, the adamintine vampiress who sucks the life-blood
of the samaya breakers, the oath violators who violate their
original "words of divine honor" to help sentient beings.

However, as a Brahma-rakshasa you wouldn't know about that.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> I see you empty..OMG how can I ever forgive myself
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Ravi Chivukula
chivukula.ravi@...wrote:
>
> > Empty baby - I only asked you to go the abode of Raakshasaas to
provide
> > the perspective on how the innocence and playfulness of this dark
Krishna
> > appears to them. You can come back now empty baby.
> >
> > Oh wait a minute - are you stuck baby? OMG - why did I ever ask you
to go
> > there, so stupid of me. That idiot empty thinks that is the reality
- fuck
> > !!!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:54 PM, emptybill emptybill@... wrote:
> >
> >> This is how the guile, artifice and self-indulgence
> >> of a fool displays itself o' ego-bloated brahma rakshasa.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Is this how the innocence, beauty and playfulness of Krishna
comes
> >> across to you oh empty Rakshasaa?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:12 PM, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Raviola
> >> > >
> >> > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> >> > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> To subscribe, send a message to:
> >> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> >>
> >> Or go to:
> >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> >> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> Annie Gottagun

Oh empty chamber, all those bullets you keep expelling and now you're smoking 
hot.
> 
> Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
> So glad you finally showed what you really
> learned in secret from the World Teacher.

"in secret"?

> You too are now a discerner of intent and
> the disguised motivations of the demons.

Are you a demon?! Yoiks and all this time I mistook you for this kinda bitter 
guy without the sweetness but a man nevertheless.

> Gotta a circle of disciples yet?

Well, not a circle exactly, more like a trapezoidal figure. I'm not sure 
they're disciples exactly, they come and ride with me sometimes or help me pick 
apples in the orchard. Do you ever pick apples empty chamber/smoking gun? We 
have a rather large, abandoned orchard with pears and figs and plums (both 
golden and purple) blackberries, holly, peaches, cherries and the deer and rats 
and birds love to eat there. This is where I and my would-be disciples 
sometimes pick apples for the horses which we gather in wheelbarrows; there are 
just so many apples and these are many types of heritage apples grafted onto 
other apples trees by the previous property owner. Oh, and we have one horse 
buried in that orchard. An old jumper who deserved to be placed in the ground 
underneath the fruit trees so that he didn't have to be carted off and thrown 
into a pit at the local dump. He wasn't my horse but he earned the privilege to 
come and find a quiet resting spot after a life of racing for 8 years and 
jumping for another 12. My old mare of 29 years will be buried in that orchard 
next to him. Her name is Annapurna. You might like her; she is wise and gentle 
and beautiful.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Raviola
> > >
> > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> >
> > EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like Buck, at
> least in your intention to silence.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emilymae.reyn]

Hi Xeno, thanks for sharingRe: this"Then all hell broke loose. A vast 
amount of repressed material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So 
clearly the awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty 
times more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the 
experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed along, there 
was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so real it was 
impossible to not act on it."

Something akin to this happened to me once.except that I thought it was 
real.  Smile.  Keep 'em coming Xeno.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> anartaxius@ wrote:
> 
> > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > and TM teachers.
> > >
> > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > process more efficient.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
> 
> 
> I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
> experience means but how a description helps one navigate an experience.
> Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been 'better' if
> I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not going
> to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later on, so
> they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but what do
> I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not understand
> what is happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful,
> such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use them
> in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking things
> together.
> 
> After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening experience
> some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was
> something about this particular experience, unlike others I had had long
> ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk about
> it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed
> material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly the
> awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty times
> more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the
> experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed along,
> there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so real
> it was impossible to not act on it. It was like my mind was split in two
> with two parallel lives running simultaneously, one the present and the
> other thoughts, feelings, behaviours from long ago. I had no clue what
> was happening.
> 
> If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would have
> said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe get
> my meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
> guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem to be
> swept under the rug by TM teachers, anything not in the template. I
> suspect they do not really have any training to handle them. I found a
> solution in what I was reading. It seems that after a clear awakening,
> one's ability to keep repressed material repressed simply falls apart.
> The can of worms is open, and if something triggers the experience, you
> cannot close it, and the experience really does seem like you are coming
> apart at the seams. All you can do is endure it. Nothing helps. It is as
> if finally there is enough room in your world to experience this. The
> intellectual knowledge that this is common, that others experienced it,
> and that it is super intense, and that you have to go through it because
> there is no way to back out, is really useful. Kind of like the
> emotional equivalent of childbirth as far as pain. That information,
> along with the stability conferred by awakening allowed me to get
> through it, just barely. Without that information I would have been a
> lot more confused, and perhaps would have done things even more stupid
> than had occurred to me to attempt at the time. Half of my time during
> this was acting on a mental delusion caused by the release. Finally it
> subsided after a few years. It was a strangely miserabl

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Grandpa Xeno -it's perfectly OK for you to share your experiences with the
emotionally, psychologically stunted like Uncle Tantrum and Aunt Share, but
please, I repeat DO NOT share your psychotically enlightened experiences
with normal people.

STAY AWAY FROM CIVILIZATION !!!



On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
anartax...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> anartaxius@ wrote:
>
> > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > and TM teachers.
> > >
> > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > process more efficient.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
>
> I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an experience
> means but how a description helps one navigate an experience. Obviously, if
> I have the thought that things might have been 'better' if I had had more
> useful information at the time, this thought is not going to apply to me
> now, but it might be useful to someone else later on, so they do not get
> quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but what do I do, if anything,
> when such and such happens, and I do not understand what is happening?
> Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful, such as what a screw
> is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use them in what circumstance,
> and how these items relate to sticking things together.
>
> After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening experience some
> years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was something
> about this particular experience, unlike others I had had long ago, that I
> could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk about it stymied me.
> Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed material rose up and
> flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly the awakening was not a
> clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty times more intense than
> anything I had experienced up to then. And the experience was truly unusual
> because while my regular life flowed along, there was this other stuff that
> I knew was not real, but it felt so real it was impossible to not act on
> it. It was like my mind was split in two with two parallel lives running
> simultaneously, one the present and the other thoughts, feelings,
> behaviours from long ago. I had no clue what was happening.
>
> If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would have
> said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe get my
> meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
> guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem to be
> swept under the rug by TM teachers, anything not in the template. I suspect
> they do not really have any training to handle them. I found a solution in
> what I was reading. It seems that after a clear awakening, one's ability to
> keep repressed material repressed simply falls apart. The can of worms is
> open, and if something triggers the experience, you cannot close it, and
> the experience really does seem like you are coming apart at the seams. All
> you can do is endure it. Nothing helps. It is as if finally there is enough
> room in your world to experience this. The intellectual knowledge that this
> is common, that others experienced it, and that it is super intense, and
> that you have to go through it because there is no way to back out, is
> really useful. Kind of like the emotional equivalent of childbirth as far
> as pain. That information, along with the stability conferred by awakening
> allowed me to get through it, just barely. Without that information I would
> have been a lot more confused, and perhaps would have done things even more
> stupid than had occurred to me to attempt at the time. Half of my time
> during this was acting on a mental delusion caused by the release. Finally
> it subsided after a few years. It was a strangely miserable/wonderful
> several years. After that my sense of stability was much, much greater, and
> the character of the experience that I had had before this happened was
> much clearer. Maybe it will happen again. I simply do not know.
>
> The result now I would not call bliss, but a sense of profound evenness
> that has been stable 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

I see you empty..OMG how can I ever forgive myself

[image: Inline image 1]


On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Ravi Chivukula wrote:

> Empty baby - I only asked you to go the abode of Raakshasaas to provide
> the perspective on how the innocence and playfulness of this dark Krishna
> appears to them. You can come back now empty baby.
>
> Oh wait a minute - are you stuck baby? OMG - why did I ever ask you to go
> there, so stupid of me. That idiot empty thinks that is the reality - fuck
> !!!
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:54 PM, emptybill  wrote:
>
>> This is how the guile, artifice and self-indulgence
>> of a fool displays itself o' ego-bloated brahma rakshasa.
>>
>>
>>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>> >
>> > Is this how the innocence, beauty and playfulness of Krishna comes
>> across to you oh empty Rakshasaa?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:12 PM, "emptybill" emptybill@... wrote:
>> >
>> > > Raviola
>> > >
>> > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
>> > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> To subscribe, send a message to:
>> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
>>
>> Or go to:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
>> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Empty baby - I only asked you to go the abode of Raakshasaas to provide the
perspective on how the innocence and playfulness of this dark Krishna
appears to them. You can come back now empty baby.

Oh wait a minute - are you stuck baby? OMG - why did I ever ask you to go
there, so stupid of me. That idiot empty thinks that is the reality - fuck
!!!




On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:54 PM, emptybill  wrote:

> This is how the guile, artifice and self-indulgence
> of a fool displays itself o' ego-bloated brahma rakshasa.
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >
> > Is this how the innocence, beauty and playfulness of Krishna comes
> across to you oh empty Rakshasaa?
> >
> >
> > On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:12 PM, "emptybill" emptybill@... wrote:
> >
> > > Raviola
> > >
> > > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
>
> Or go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

This is how the guile, artifice and self-indulgence
of a fool displays itself o' ego-bloated brahma rakshasa.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Is this how the innocence, beauty and playfulness of Krishna comes
across to you oh empty Rakshasaa?
>
>
> On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:12 PM, "emptybill" emptybill@... wrote:
>
> > Raviola
> >
> > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[bobpriced]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , turquoiseb  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 , "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> anartaxius@ wrote:
>
> > > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > > and TM teachers.
> > >
> > > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > > process more efficient.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> > told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> > one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> > was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.
>
>
> I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
> experience means but how a description helps one navigate an
experience.
> Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been 'better'
if
> I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not
going
> to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later on,
so
> they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but what
do
> I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not understand
> what is happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful,
> such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use
them
> in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking things
> together.
>
> After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening experience
> some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was
> something about this particular experience, unlike others I had had
long
> ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk about
> it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed
> material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly
the
> awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty
times
> more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the
> experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed
along,
> there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so
real
> it was impossible to not act on it. It was like my mind was split in
two
> with two parallel lives running simultaneously, one the present and
the
> other thoughts, feelings, behaviours from long ago. I had no clue what
> was happening.
>
> If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would
have
> said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe get
> my meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
> guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem to
be
> swept under the rug by TM teachers, anything not in the template. I
> suspect they do not really have any training to handle them. I found a
> solution in what I was reading. It seems that after a clear awakening,
> one's ability to keep repressed material repressed simply falls apart.
> The can of worms is open, and if something triggers the experience,
you
> cannot close it, and the experience really does seem like you are
coming
> apart at the seams. All you can do is endure it. Nothing helps. It is
as
> if finally there is enough room in your world to experience this. The
> intellectual knowledge that this is common, that others experienced
it,
> and that it is super intense, and that you have to go through it
because
> there is no way to back out, is really useful. Kind of like the
> emotional equivalent of childbirth as far as pain. That information,
> along with the stability conferred by awakening allowed me to get
> through it, just barely. Without that information I would have been a
> lot more confused, and perhaps would have done things even more stupid
> than had occurred to me to attempt at the time. Half of my time during
> this was acting on a mental delusion caused by the release. Finally it
> subsided after a few years. It was a strangely miserable/wonderful
> several years. After that my sense of stability was much, much
greater,
> and the character of the experience that I had had before this
happened
> was much clearer. Maybe it will happen again. I simply do not know.
>
> The result now I would not call bliss, but a sense of profound
evenness
> that has been stable for some time. I have no illusions that this
> evenness will never be disrupted again. But it has been pretty nice.
>
> An example of evenness occurred a couple of days ago

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
anartaxius@ wrote:

> > I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind
> > of full circle, I ended up reading about things that
> > initially propelled me on the journey, and found answers
> > to questions I could not find easily within the TM org
> > and TM teachers.
> >
> > What propelled the restoration of interest in all this was
> > a sudden unexpected shift in experience. Everything I had
> > thought had failed, proved in retrospect to have been
> > useful, but to have had more specific information at
> > specific times in my life would possibly have made the
> > process more efficient.
>
> I'm not convinced that would be true. "Information" that
> told you what an experience "meant" would have been just
> one more bit of misinformation, after all. The experience
> was what it was -- nothing more, and nothing less.


I was thinking along the lines of not what a description of an
experience means but how a description helps one navigate an experience.
Obviously, if I have the thought that things might have been 'better' if
I had had more useful information at the time, this thought is not going
to apply to me now, but it might be useful to someone else later on, so
they do not get quite so stuck. Not so much what this means, but what do
I do, if anything, when such and such happens, and I do not understand
what is happening? Certain traditional hand-me-downs do become useful,
such as what a screw is, and what a screwdriver is, and how to use them
in what circumstance, and how these items relate to sticking things
together.

After what I would call a very clear but subdued awakening experience
some years ago, things were pretty nice for several years. There was
something about this particular experience, unlike others I had had long
ago, that I could not grasp in any way. Even the attempt to talk about
it stymied me. Then all hell broke loose. A vast amount of repressed
material rose up and flowed out of me. A total surprise. So clearly the
awakening was not a clean slate. It was ultra intense, say twenty times
more intense than anything I had experienced up to then. And the
experience was truly unusual because while my regular life flowed along,
there was this other stuff that I knew was not real, but it felt so real
it was impossible to not act on it. It was like my mind was split in two
with two parallel lives running simultaneously, one the present and the
other thoughts, feelings, behaviours from long ago. I had no clue what
was happening.

If I had asked a TM teacher what was happening they probably would have
said I was 'just unstressing, that I should take it easy and maybe get
my meditation checked or something'. No really useful information or
guidelines that apply directly. Extreme experiences like this seem to be
swept under the rug by TM teachers, anything not in the template. I
suspect they do not really have any training to handle them. I found a
solution in what I was reading. It seems that after a clear awakening,
one's ability to keep repressed material repressed simply falls apart.
The can of worms is open, and if something triggers the experience, you
cannot close it, and the experience really does seem like you are coming
apart at the seams. All you can do is endure it. Nothing helps. It is as
if finally there is enough room in your world to experience this. The
intellectual knowledge that this is common, that others experienced it,
and that it is super intense, and that you have to go through it because
there is no way to back out, is really useful. Kind of like the
emotional equivalent of childbirth as far as pain. That information,
along with the stability conferred by awakening allowed me to get
through it, just barely. Without that information I would have been a
lot more confused, and perhaps would have done things even more stupid
than had occurred to me to attempt at the time. Half of my time during
this was acting on a mental delusion caused by the release. Finally it
subsided after a few years. It was a strangely miserable/wonderful
several years. After that my sense of stability was much, much greater,
and the character of the experience that I had had before this happened
was much clearer. Maybe it will happen again. I simply do not know.

The result now I would not call bliss, but a sense of profound evenness
that has been stable for some time. I have no illusions that this
evenness will never be disrupted again. But it has been pretty nice.

An example of evenness occurred a couple of days ago. I was preparing
breakfast. I had put a small amount of oil in a frying pan. Then while
it heated up, I sat down at the table and started to read the following
comic (courtesy of Randall Monroe at xkcd.com):

  [xkcd comic: Questions]

I found this comic hilarious, but because it was so dense, I just kept
reading. After an interval, the smoke dete

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

Annie Gottagun

Thanks for finally clarifying it all.
So glad you finally showed what you really
learned in secret from the World Teacher.
You too are now a discerner of intent and
the disguised motivations of the demons.
Gotta a circle of disciples yet?


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann"  wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote:
> >
> > Raviola
> >
> > Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> > Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
>
> EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like Buck, at
least in your intention to silence.

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emilymae.reyn]

Share, the question was not *what* do you get triggered by, the question was: 
"how does being "very triggered" manifest within you?"  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Emily, I get really triggered by yahoo a lot these days. Does that count?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: emilymae.reyn 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 9:32 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> Share, as you go about your day, remember to watch those triggers of yours 
> and take heed of what you are learning in your own words: " I'm 
> learning, especially here on FFL, that it's best NEVER to blast someone 
> unkindly." 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> >
> > Share, here's another direct question for you.  Re: "Whereas I'm very 
> > triggered by what I call
> > snide and sly attacks," how does being "very triggered" manifest within 
> > you? 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ha ha.  Share, I laughed heartily at what you said also.  What is 
> > > "triggered"  within you about yourself and your attempts at "snide and 
> > > sly?"  P.S.  This is a direct question. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > > > 
> > > > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > > > the moment you read my post.
> > > > 
> > > > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > > > 
> > > > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > > > 
> > > > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > > > 
> > > > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >  From: authfriend 
> > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >   
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Share, Monday:
> > > > > 
> > > > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > > > 
> > > > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > > > 
> > > > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

Emily, I get really triggered by yahoo a lot these days. Does that count?




 From: emilymae.reyn 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 9:32 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
Share, as you go about your day, remember to watch those triggers of yours and 
take heed of what you are learning in your own words: " I'm learning, 
especially here on FFL, that it's best NEVER to blast someone unkindly." 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> Share, here's another direct question for you.  Re: "Whereas I'm very 
> triggered by what I call
> snide and sly attacks," how does being "very triggered" manifest within you? 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> >
> > Ha ha.  Share, I laughed heartily at what you said also.  What is 
> > "triggered"  within you about yourself and your attempts at "snide and 
> > sly?"  P.S.  This is a direct question. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > > 
> > > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > > the moment you read my post.
> > > 
> > > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > > 
> > > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > > 
> > > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > > 
> > > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >  From: authfriend 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > > 
> > > > Share, Monday:
> > > > 
> > > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > > 
> > > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > > 
> > > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > > 
> > > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Judy, I think Xeno has addressed this topic with you quite
> thoroughly.

Well, no, he didn't, Share. He took a shot, but it was
rather feeble.

> I'll add that you think you know THE truth about people's 
> motivations,

Now who's mind-reading?



In some cases, yes. Not all but some (as I explained to
Xeno, but I guess you missed that).

> etc. but all you have, just like the rest of us, are your
> opinions. Staunchly held and defended,

Not "just like the rest of us." Or at least not just like
*some* of the rest of us. All opinions are not on an equal
footing as to their validity, you see.




 but opinions nonetheless. Carry on...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: authfriend 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 8:59 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> >
> > Now Judy, you're also trying to practice mind reading, and 
> > unsuccessfully so.
> 
> Now, Share, you know I don't trust you to tell the truth,
> especially about yourself.
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > > 
> > > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > > the moment you read my post.
> > > 
> > > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > > 
> > > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > > 
> > > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > > 
> > > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >  From: authfriend 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > > 
> > > > Share, Monday:
> > > > 
> > > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > > 
> > > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > > 
> > > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > > 
> > > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

Judy, I think Xeno has addressed this topic with you quite thoroughly. I'll add 
that you think you know THE truth about people's motivations, etc. but all you 
have, just like the rest of us, are your opinions. Staunchly held and defended, 
but opinions nonetheless. Carry on...





 From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 8:59 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> Now Judy, you're also trying to practice mind reading, and 
> unsuccessfully so.

Now, Share, you know I don't trust you to tell the truth,
especially about yourself.

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > 
> > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > the moment you read my post.
> > 
> > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > 
> > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > 
> > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > 
> > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >  From: authfriend 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > 
> > > Share, Monday:
> > > 
> > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > 
> > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > 
> > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > 
> > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > >
> >
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emilymae.reyn]

Share, as you go about your day, remember to watch those triggers of yours and 
take heed of what you are learning in your own words: " I'm learning, 
especially here on FFL, that it's best NEVER to blast someone unkindly." 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> Share, here's another direct question for you.  Re: "Whereas I'm very 
> triggered by what I call
> snide and sly attacks," how does being "very triggered" manifest within you?  
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> >
> > Ha ha.  Share, I laughed heartily at what you said also.  What is 
> > "triggered"  within you about yourself and your attempts at "snide and 
> > sly?"  P.S.  This is a direct question.  
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > > 
> > > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > > the moment you read my post.
> > > 
> > > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > > 
> > > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > > 
> > > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > > 
> > > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >  From: authfriend 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > > 
> > > > Share, Monday:
> > > > 
> > > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > > 
> > > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > > 
> > > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > > 
> > > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emilymae.reyn]

Share, here's another direct question for you.  Re: "Whereas I'm very triggered 
by what I call
snide and sly attacks," how does being "very triggered" manifest within you?  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> Ha ha.  Share, I laughed heartily at what you said also.  What is "triggered" 
>  within you about yourself and your attempts at "snide and sly?"  P.S.  This 
> is a direct question.  
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > 
> > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > the moment you read my post.
> > 
> > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > 
> > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > 
> > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > 
> > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >  From: authfriend 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > 
> > > Share, Monday:
> > > 
> > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > 
> > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > 
> > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > 
> > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emilymae.reyn]

Ha ha.  Share, I laughed heartily at what you said also.  What is "triggered"  
within you about yourself and your attempts at "snide and sly?"  P.S.  This is 
a direct question.  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> 
> No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> the moment you read my post.
> 
> > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> 
> No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> 
> > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> 
> My, what an intelligent observation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >  From: authfriend 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > 
> > Share, Monday:
> > 
> > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > snide and sly attacks."
> > 
> > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > 
> > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > next snide/sly attack.
> > 
> > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> Now Judy, you're also trying to practice mind reading, and 
> unsuccessfully so.

Now, Share, you know I don't trust you to tell the truth,
especially about yourself.


> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> > 
> > No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> > the moment you read my post.
> > 
> > > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> > 
> > No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> > 
> > > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> > 
> > My, what an intelligent observation.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >  From: authfriend 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > > 
> > > Share, Monday:
> > > 
> > > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > > snide and sly attacks."
> > > 
> > > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > > 
> > > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > > next snide/sly attack.
> > > 
> > > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

Now Judy, you're also trying to practice mind reading, and unsuccessfully so.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly
> 
> No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
> the moment you read my post.
> 
> > and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> > don't consider this post snide and sly either.
> 
> No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.
> 
> > But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> > whatever it is you're always on the alert for.
> 
> My, what an intelligent observation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >  From: authfriend 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> > 
> > Share, Monday:
> > 
> > "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> > straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> > snide and sly attacks."
> > 
> > I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> > primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> > 
> > But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> > next snide/sly attack.
> > 
> > I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly

No, I don't think so, Share. At least, we didn't up until
the moment you read my post.

> and also obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I
> don't consider this post snide and sly either.

No, this one's just straightforwardly dishonest.

> But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for
> whatever it is you're always on the alert for.

My, what an intelligent observation.




>  From: authfriend 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> > but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?
> 
> Share, Monday:
> 
> "I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
> straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
> snide and sly attacks."
> 
> I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
> primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."
> 
> But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
> next snide/sly attack.
> 
> I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

Judy, obviously we have different definitions of snide and sly and also 
obviously you think yours is the right one. BTW, I don't consider this post 
snide and sly either.


But interesting to see that you're always on the alert for whatever it is 
you're always on the alert for.



 From: authfriend 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 6:43 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?

Share, Monday:

"I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
snide and sly attacks."

I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."

But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
next snide/sly attack.

I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> See, emptybill, according to Ann, it's ok if you scold Buck,
> but not ok if you scold Ravi. No go figuring needed, right?

Share, Monday:

"I think I'm less bothered by turq because his attacks are
straight forward. Whereas I'm very triggered by what I call
snide and sly attacks."

I guffawed at the hyposcrisy when I read that, since Share's
primary mode of attack on FFL has always been "snide and sly."

But I figured I'd wait to make that observation until her
next snide/sly attack.

I didn't even have to wait 24 hours.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Is this how the innocence, beauty and playfulness of Krishna comes across to 
you oh empty Rakshasaa?


On Aug 26, 2013, at 7:12 PM, "emptybill"  wrote:

> Raviola
> 
> Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>> 
>> Is this what Grandpa Xeno had to say in his defense? Why can't he say
> so himself? Why does he need you to speak on his behalf?
>> 
>> What do the doctors say - that it's acceptable behavior as long as the
> object of the deranged rant not a family member? It's very frustrating,
> there seems to be no end in sight to Grandpa's pathological behavior.
>> 
>> P.S may be you were joking but Judy's not my aunt - YOU are, unless
> you are singing Grandpa tune? OMG - I hope not.
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:57 AM, "sharelong60" sharelong60@... wrote:
>> 
>>> but but but Ravi, Xeno wrote this in reply to your aunt Judy!
>>> 
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Chivukula"
> chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
 
 OMFG get a clue, next time please keep your intellectual vomit to
 yourselves no one other than my deluded Aunt Share even pays
> attention
 to your bullshit.
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> 
> Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your
 experiences
> sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I
> felt
 so
> sick reading your vomit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
> anartaxius@ wrote:
> 
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@
 wrote:
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
>> wrote:
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
 
> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> ceased
 to
>> believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the
 development
>> of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this*
 experience or
>> does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not)
 enlightened.
 
> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
 others, but
>> you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to
> all
>> individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with
> the
>> experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person
 ontology
>> remains just that.
 
> My opinion, anyway.
 
> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant
> something
 like
>> Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format,
> a
>> schedule, a list of "symptoms."
 
 First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid
 of,
>>> 
>>> I question this and every other statement you've made
>>> in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
>>> to describing your own experience.
>> 
>> I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is
> just
>> experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience,
> singular.
>> Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer.
> It
 is not
>> uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be
 experiencing
>> something similar.
>> 
>> There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of
 experience.
>> And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having
> these
>> experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM,
> there
 are
>> lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
>> 
>> I say these things across the board because that is the way I
 experience
>> these things and there is some support in the environment for
> this
 way of
>> describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this
> is
>> special with me.
>> 
>> You have every prerogative to question (although you have not
 actually
>> questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question
 it).
>> Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield
 because as
>> you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and
> anomalies',
 so
>> there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline
> using
 the
>> terms M used is just one way one could try to map general
> categories
 of
>> experience.
>> 
>> For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of
 unity if
>> we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath,
> and
 lacks
>> certain characteristics that a presumably normal person would
> have,
 so he
>> would be a significant outlier in any scheme that purports to
 categorise
>> enlightenment benchmarks.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ann]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
>
> Raviola
> 
> Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
> Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.

EB, you are always scolding someone. Now you're sounding like Buck, at least in 
your intention to silence.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >
> > Is this what Grandpa Xeno had to say in his defense? Why can't he say
> so himself? Why does he need you to speak on his behalf?
> >
> > What do the doctors say - that it's acceptable behavior as long as the
> object of the deranged rant not a family member? It's very frustrating,
> there seems to be no end in sight to Grandpa's pathological behavior.
> >
> > P.S may be you were joking but Judy's not my aunt - YOU are, unless
> you are singing Grandpa tune? OMG - I hope not.
> >
> >
> > On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:57 AM, "sharelong60" sharelong60@ wrote:
> >
> > > but but but Ravi, Xeno wrote this in reply to your aunt Judy!
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Chivukula"
> chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
> > >>
> > >> OMFG get a clue, next time please keep your intellectual vomit to
> > >> yourselves no one other than my deluded Aunt Share even pays
> attention
> > >> to your bullshit.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your
> > >> experiences
> > >>> sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I
> felt
> > >> so
> > >>> sick reading your vomit.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
> > >>> anartaxius@ wrote:
> > >>>
> >  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@
> > >> wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> >  wrote:
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> ceased
> > >> to
> >  believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the
> > >> development
> >  of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this*
> > >> experience or
> >  does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not)
> > >> enlightened.
> > >>
> > >>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > >> others, but
> >  you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to
> all
> >  individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with
> the
> >  experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person
> > >> ontology
> >  remains just that.
> > >>
> > >>> My opinion, anyway.
> > >>
> > >>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant
> something
> > >> like
> >  Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format,
> a
> >  schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > >>
> > >> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid
> > >> of,
> > >
> > > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > > to describing your own experience.
> > 
> >  I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is
> just
> >  experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience,
> singular.
> >  Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer.
> It
> > >> is not
> >  uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be
> > >> experiencing
> >  something similar.
> > 
> >  There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of
> > >> experience.
> >  And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having
> these
> >  experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM,
> there
> > >> are
> >  lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
> > 
> >  I say these things across the board because that is the way I
> > >> experience
> >  these things and there is some support in the environment for
> this
> > >> way of
> >  describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this
> is
> >  special with me.
> > 
> >  You have every prerogative to question (although you have not
> > >> actually
> >  questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question
> > >> it).
> >  Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield
> > >> because as
> >  you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and
> anomalies',
> > >> so
> >  there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline
> using
> > >> the
> >  terms M used is just one way one could try to map general
> categories
> > >> of
> >  experience.
> > 
> >  For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of
> > >> unity if
> >  we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath,
> and
> > >> lacks
> >  certa

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

Raviola

Yer like a teenage boy high on meth.
Stop sounding like a fool ... fool.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Is this what Grandpa Xeno had to say in his defense? Why can't he say
so himself? Why does he need you to speak on his behalf?
>
> What do the doctors say - that it's acceptable behavior as long as the
object of the deranged rant not a family member? It's very frustrating,
there seems to be no end in sight to Grandpa's pathological behavior.
>
> P.S may be you were joking but Judy's not my aunt - YOU are, unless
you are singing Grandpa tune? OMG - I hope not.
>
>
> On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:57 AM, "sharelong60" sharelong60@... wrote:
>
> > but but but Ravi, Xeno wrote this in reply to your aunt Judy!
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Chivukula"
chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
> >>
> >> OMFG get a clue, next time please keep your intellectual vomit to
> >> yourselves no one other than my deluded Aunt Share even pays
attention
> >> to your bullshit.
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your
> >> experiences
> >>> sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I
felt
> >> so
> >>> sick reading your vomit.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
> >>> anartaxius@ wrote:
> >>>
>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@
> >> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
>  wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
ceased
> >> to
>  believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the
> >> development
>  of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this*
> >> experience or
>  does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not)
> >> enlightened.
> >>
> >>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> >> others, but
>  you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to
all
>  individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with
the
>  experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person
> >> ontology
>  remains just that.
> >>
> >>> My opinion, anyway.
> >>
> >>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant
something
> >> like
>  Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format,
a
>  schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> >>
> >> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid
> >> of,
> >
> > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > to describing your own experience.
> 
>  I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is
just
>  experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience,
singular.
>  Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer.
It
> >> is not
>  uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be
> >> experiencing
>  something similar.
> 
>  There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of
> >> experience.
>  And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having
these
>  experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM,
there
> >> are
>  lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
> 
>  I say these things across the board because that is the way I
> >> experience
>  these things and there is some support in the environment for
this
> >> way of
>  describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this
is
>  special with me.
> 
>  You have every prerogative to question (although you have not
> >> actually
>  questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question
> >> it).
>  Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield
> >> because as
>  you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and
anomalies',
> >> so
>  there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline
using
> >> the
>  terms M used is just one way one could try to map general
categories
> >> of
>  experience.
> 
>  For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of
> >> unity if
>  we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath,
and
> >> lacks
>  certain characteristics that a presumably normal person would
have,
> >> so he
>  would be a significant outlier in any scheme that purports to
> >> categorise
>  enlightenment benchmarks.
> 
>  I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I always have
> >> trouble
>  trying to shelf them in some coherent way. My system here is
> >> generally by
>  time period and the composer's name, using the date of death as a
> >> mark

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Is this what Grandpa Xeno had to say in his defense? Why can't he say so 
himself? Why does he need you to speak on his behalf?

What do the doctors say - that it's acceptable behavior as long as the object 
of the deranged rant not a family member? It's very frustrating, there seems to 
be no end in sight to Grandpa's pathological behavior.

P.S may be you were joking but Judy's not my aunt - YOU are, unless you are 
singing Grandpa tune? OMG - I hope not.


On Aug 26, 2013, at 4:57 AM, "sharelong60"  wrote:

> but but but Ravi, Xeno wrote this in reply to your aunt Judy!
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Chivukula"  
> wrote:
>> 
>> OMFG get a clue, next time please keep your intellectual vomit to
>> yourselves no one other than my deluded Aunt Share even pays attention
>> to your bullshit.
>> 
>> 
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your
>> experiences
>>> sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I felt
>> so
>>> sick reading your vomit.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
>>> anartaxius@ wrote:
>>> 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@
>> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
 wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased
>> to
 believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the
>> development
 of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this*
>> experience or
 does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not)
>> enlightened.
>> 
>>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
>> others, but
 you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all
 individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with the
 experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person
>> ontology
 remains just that.
>> 
>>> My opinion, anyway.
>> 
>>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something
>> like
 Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a
 schedule, a list of "symptoms."
>> 
>> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid
>> of,
> 
> I question this and every other statement you've made
> in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> to describing your own experience.
 
 I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is just
 experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience, singular.
 Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer. It
>> is not
 uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be
>> experiencing
 something similar.
 
 There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of
>> experience.
 And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having these
 experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM, there
>> are
 lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
 
 I say these things across the board because that is the way I
>> experience
 these things and there is some support in the environment for this
>> way of
 describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this is
 special with me.
 
 You have every prerogative to question (although you have not
>> actually
 questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question
>> it).
 Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield
>> because as
 you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and anomalies',
>> so
 there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline using
>> the
 terms M used is just one way one could try to map general categories
>> of
 experience.
 
 For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of
>> unity if
 we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath, and
>> lacks
 certain characteristics that a presumably normal person would have,
>> so he
 would be a significant outlier in any scheme that purports to
>> categorise
 enlightenment benchmarks.
 
 I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I always have
>> trouble
 trying to shelf them in some coherent way. My system here is
>> generally by
 time period and the composer's name, using the date of death as a
>> marker
 within a time period and beyond that I can remember where most
>> composers
 lie on the time line.
 
 I think M's scheme for enlightenment is workable for many people, it
>> is
 more detailed than some schemes, but in the end any scheme turns out
>> to be
 nonsense, but it has applicability for giving one a bearing while on
>> the
 path. If a person's 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[emptybill]

Your claim poses itself as generalizable and universally
true and therefore negates itself as a false claim.

But who needs objectivity in "mere" thought?
Just another belief system ... no doubt.


> That is all that *anyone* has, or has had, in *any*
> era of human existence. The attempt to portray one's
> subjective experience as objective or universal or
> even as something to be desired or aspired to is IMO
> sheer narcissism.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
anartaxius@ wrote:
> >
> > I am describing my own experience. That is all I have.
>
> That is all that *anyone* has, or has had, in *any*
> era of human existence. The attempt to portray one's
> subjective experience as objective or universal or
> even as something to be desired or aspired to is IMO
> sheer narcissism.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

but but but Ravi, Xeno wrote this in reply to your aunt Judy!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Chivukula"  
wrote:
>
> OMFG get a clue, next time please keep your intellectual vomit to
> yourselves no one other than my deluded Aunt Share even pays attention
> to your bullshit.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> >
> > Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your
> experiences
> > sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I felt
> so
> > sick reading your vomit.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
> > anartaxius@ wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@
> wrote:
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> > >  wrote:
> > > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased
> to
> > > believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the
> development
> > > of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this*
> experience or
> > > does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not)
> enlightened.
> > > >>
> > > >>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> others, but
> > > you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all
> > > individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with the
> > > experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person
> ontology
> > > remains just that.
> > > >>
> > > >>> My opinion, anyway.
> > > >>
> > > >>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something
> like
> > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a
> > > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > >>
> > > >> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid
> of,
> > > >
> > > > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > > > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > > > to describing your own experience.
> > >
> > > I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is just
> > > experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience, singular.
> > > Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer. It
> is not
> > > uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be
> experiencing
> > > something similar.
> > >
> > > There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of
> experience.
> > > And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having these
> > > experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM, there
> are
> > > lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
> > >
> > > I say these things across the board because that is the way I
> experience
> > > these things and there is some support in the environment for this
> way of
> > > describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this is
> > > special with me.
> > >
> > > You have every prerogative to question (although you have not
> actually
> > > questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question
> it).
> > > Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield
> because as
> > > you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and anomalies',
> so
> > > there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline using
> the
> > > terms M used is just one way one could try to map general categories
> of
> > > experience.
> > >
> > > For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of
> unity if
> > > we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath, and
> lacks
> > > certain characteristics that a presumably normal person would have,
> so he
> > > would be a significant outlier in any scheme that purports to
> categorise
> > > enlightenment benchmarks.
> > >
> > > I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I always have
> trouble
> > > trying to shelf them in some coherent way. My system here is
> generally by
> > > time period and the composer's name, using the date of death as a
> marker
> > > within a time period and beyond that I can remember where most
> composers
> > > lie on the time line.
> > >
> > > I think M's scheme for enlightenment is workable for many people, it
> is
> > > more detailed than some schemes, but in the end any scheme turns out
> to be
> > > nonsense, but it has applicability for giving one a bearing while on
> the
> > > path. If a person's experience is anomalous, a scheme will appear to
> be
> > > wrong to that person.
> > >
> > > In retrospect a scheme might even seem more on point than when one
> was on
> > > the path, because when you are on the path, you do not really know
> what you
> > > are headed for, or even where you are, and a benchmark isn't a
> specific
> > > experience, it is an general category of experience so making a
> mistake in
> > > interpreting what is going on is certainly a reasonable assumption.
> Even
> 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

Xeno and turq, great discussion here and 2 points: first, my understanding of 
neti neti is that it's a phase on the spiritual path when one is subtly 
recognizing what enlightenment is NOT in terms of experience rather than 
theories as presented below. This phase is followed by another which could be 
characterized by the words: and this also, and this also.

Secondly, I personally find Maharishi's teaching great exactly because it is so 
simple and allows for wide variety of experience. As a map it gives, IMO, great 
overall directions which frees up one's attention and allows a person to enjoy 
the scenery all along the way. 




 From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 3:36 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. 

snip


An argument that will be lost on many here. The *most*
common description of long-term TMers one encounters
out in the larger spiritual marketplace is "Stuck in
their heads." They've been given SO many maps that
they have lost touch with the fact that at best they
were crude representations of a territory, and in
most cases one they've never walked.

> Bear in mind that when dealing with enlightenment, one 
> is ultimately not dealing with rational discourse, but 
> dealing with a quality of life that underlies, so to 
> speak, everything else in experience, one attempts to 
> align with that, but one is not always able to apply 
> the intellect to a situation because intellect is a 
> subset of experience, kind of in its own little 
> compartment; it handles attempting to organise verbal 
> representations a wider world of experience, but is 
> not that experience, it's a filter for that experience, 
> which means something is cut out or blocked when it is use. 

Yup. What has often fascinated me is the number of 
supposed seekers who use "intellectual understanding"
to *block* the very experience they're seeking. As far
as I can tell, the more strongly people believe that 
they know what enlightenment is, the less likely they
are to ever experience it.

> If you fail to align with the wider experience, you try 
> again, and again. You are not polishing your intellect - 
> it might improve, or even get worse. You are polishing 
> something you cannot even see, kind of like a seagull 
> riding the currents of the air, learning to gracefully 
> move on a bedrock of mystery. 

I would characterize what you are describing more in 
terms of "neti neti" -- "trying on" different theories
and then discarding them, one after another. 

snip

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

OMFG get a clue, next time please keep your intellectual vomit to
yourselves no one other than my deluded Aunt Share even pays attention
to your bullshit.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your
experiences
> sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I felt
so
> sick reading your vomit.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
> anartaxius@... wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" authfriend@
wrote:
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
> >  wrote:
> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased
to
> > believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the
development
> > of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this*
experience or
> > does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not)
enlightened.
> > >>
> > >>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
others, but
> > you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all
> > individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with the
> > experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person
ontology
> > remains just that.
> > >>
> > >>> My opinion, anyway.
> > >>
> > >>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something
like
> > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a
> > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > >>
> > >> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid
of,
> > >
> > > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > > to describing your own experience.
> >
> > I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is just
> > experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience, singular.
> > Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer. It
is not
> > uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be
experiencing
> > something similar.
> >
> > There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of
experience.
> > And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having these
> > experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM, there
are
> > lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
> >
> > I say these things across the board because that is the way I
experience
> > these things and there is some support in the environment for this
way of
> > describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this is
> > special with me.
> >
> > You have every prerogative to question (although you have not
actually
> > questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question
it).
> > Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield
because as
> > you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and anomalies',
so
> > there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline using
the
> > terms M used is just one way one could try to map general categories
of
> > experience.
> >
> > For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of
unity if
> > we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath, and
lacks
> > certain characteristics that a presumably normal person would have,
so he
> > would be a significant outlier in any scheme that purports to
categorise
> > enlightenment benchmarks.
> >
> > I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I always have
trouble
> > trying to shelf them in some coherent way. My system here is
generally by
> > time period and the composer's name, using the date of death as a
marker
> > within a time period and beyond that I can remember where most
composers
> > lie on the time line.
> >
> > I think M's scheme for enlightenment is workable for many people, it
is
> > more detailed than some schemes, but in the end any scheme turns out
to be
> > nonsense, but it has applicability for giving one a bearing while on
the
> > path. If a person's experience is anomalous, a scheme will appear to
be
> > wrong to that person.
> >
> > In retrospect a scheme might even seem more on point than when one
was on
> > the path, because when you are on the path, you do not really know
what you
> > are headed for, or even where you are, and a benchmark isn't a
specific
> > experience, it is an general category of experience so making a
mistake in
> > interpreting what is going on is certainly a reasonable assumption.
Even
> > the belief in a scheme might be useful just to keep you going.
> >
> > My experiences were in some ways anomalous and that led to much
doubt. I
> > went through a long period where I did not want to read anything
about
> > spiritual development, meditating all the while, but just not
interested in
> > hearing about or discussing it. Also run-of-the-mill TM discussions
can be
> > incred

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. 

That is all that *anyone* has, or has had, in *any*
era of human existence. The attempt to portray one's
subjective experience as objective or universal or
even as something to be desired or aspired to is IMO
sheer narcissism. 

> There is just experience. Not experiences, with an 
> 's', but experience, singular. Experience*s* are 
> like sub directories or folders on a computer. It 
> is not uncommon these days, others on this forum 
> certainly seem to be experiencing something similar. 

If you're talking about the type of experience that
people characterize as "enlightenment," it should
sober up people claiming it that even *I* have had
such experience. Unlike them, I didn't try to make
it more than what it was -- Just Another Experience.

> There are a number of people in Fairfield having this 
> kind of experience. And, I am confident, many others 
> in all walks of life having these experiences. It is 
> in the air. It is not just a matter of TM, there are 
> lots of groups and people bent on awakening and 
> succeeding. 

Interestingly, the scientific literature is full of
people who have never even *heard* of enlightenment
having experiences that "seekers" associate only with
it, and only with having practiced "techniques" to
develop such experiences. Things like witnessing 
during waking or sleep are common, as are moments
of no-thought, and of perceptions of silence or 
stillness underlying (and simultaneous with) all 
other experience. And, of course, we probably would
not have had the psychological diagnosis of dissoc-
iation if people hadn't felt separate from their
egos.

> I say these things across the board because that is 
> the way I experience these things and there is some 
> support in the environment for this way of describing 
> human experience in long term meditators. None of this 
> is special with me.

That is probably because you don't try to *make* it
special with you, or characterize yourself as "special"
because you've had such experience. Others should learn
from your example. :-)

> You have every prerogative to question (although you 
> have not actually questioned anything above, you have 
> only stated that you question it). Mapping out benchmarks 
> for spiritual development is a minefield because as you 
> said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and 
> anomalies', so there are people who are not going to 
> fit the mold. My outline using the terms M used is just 
> one way one could try to map general categories of 
> experience. 

Agreed. It's a convenient "shorthand" to use on a forum
like this one, where many people have not been exposed
to other, possibly more precise ways of describing the
experience.

> For example, Charles Manson shows a number of 
> characteristics of unity if we examine his statements, 
> but he is also insane, a psychopath, and lacks certain 
> characteristics that a presumably normal person would 
> have, so he would be a significant outlier in any scheme 
> that purports to categorise enlightenment benchmarks. 

NOT in terms of the experiences themselves, just in terms
of the mythical "side effects" that spiritual traditions
claim for such experiences. They're "supposed" to make you
all good and happy and life-supported and all that. I've
never bought that, and suspect that there is no connection
between these types of experience and behavior. 

> I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I 
> always have trouble trying to shelf them in some coherent 
> way. My system here is generally by time period and the 
> composer's name, using the date of death as a marker 
> within a time period and beyond that I can remember 
> where most composers lie on the time line. 
> 
> I think M's scheme for enlightenment is workable for 
> many people, it is more detailed than some schemes, but 
> in the end any scheme turns out to be nonsense, but it 
> has applicability for giving one a bearing while on the 
> path. If a person's experience is anomalous, a scheme 
> will appear to be wrong to that person. 

NO map is ever the territory.

> In retrospect a scheme might even seem more on point than 
> when one was on the path, because when you are on the 
> path, you do not really know what you are headed for, or 
> even where you are, and a benchmark isn't a specific 
> experience, it is an general category of experience so 
> making a mistake in interpreting what is going on is 
> certainly a reasonable assumption. Even the belief in 
> a scheme might be useful just to keep you going. 
> 
> My experiences were in some ways anomalous and that led 
> to much doubt. I went through a long period where I did 
> not want to read anything about spiritual development, 
> meditating all the while, but just not interested in 
> hearing about or discussing it. Also run-of-the-mill 
> TM discussions can be incredibly

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Ravi Chivukula]

Do you realize Grandpa Xeno how psychopathically deranged your experiences
sound? You are too alienated emotionally, psychologically - god I felt so
sick reading your vomit.




On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius <
anartax...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"
>  wrote:
> >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to
> believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the development
> of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* experience or
> does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> >>
> >>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but
> you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all
> individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with the
> experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology
> remains just that.
> >>
> >>> My opinion, anyway.
> >>
> >>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a
> schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> >>
> >> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of,
> >
> > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > to describing your own experience.
>
> I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is just
> experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience, singular.
> Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer. It is not
> uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be experiencing
> something similar.
>
> There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of experience.
> And, I am confident, many others in all walks of life having these
> experiences. It is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM, there are
> lots of groups and people bent on awakening and succeeding.
>
> I say these things across the board because that is the way I experience
> these things and there is some support in the environment for this way of
> describing human experience in long term meditators. None of this is
> special with me.
>
> You have every prerogative to question (although you have not actually
> questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question it).
> Mapping out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield because as
> you said, 'I think there are likely many exceptions and anomalies', so
> there are people who are not going to fit the mold. My outline using the
> terms M used is just one way one could try to map general categories of
> experience.
>
> For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of unity if
> we examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath, and lacks
> certain characteristics that a presumably normal person would have, so he
> would be a significant outlier in any scheme that purports to categorise
> enlightenment benchmarks.
>
> I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I always have trouble
> trying to shelf them in some coherent way. My system here is generally by
> time period and the composer's name, using the date of death as a marker
> within a time period and beyond that I can remember where most composers
> lie on the time line.
>
> I think M's scheme for enlightenment is workable for many people, it is
> more detailed than some schemes, but in the end any scheme turns out to be
> nonsense, but it has applicability for giving one a bearing while on the
> path. If a person's experience is anomalous, a scheme will appear to be
> wrong to that person.
>
> In retrospect a scheme might even seem more on point than when one was on
> the path, because when you are on the path, you do not really know what you
> are headed for, or even where you are, and a benchmark isn't a specific
> experience, it is an general category of experience so making a mistake in
> interpreting what is going on is certainly a reasonable assumption. Even
> the belief in a scheme might be useful just to keep you going.
>
> My experiences were in some ways anomalous and that led to much doubt. I
> went through a long period where I did not want to read anything about
> spiritual development, meditating all the while, but just not interested in
> hearing about or discussing it. Also run-of-the-mill TM discussions can be
> incredibly boring.
>
> At any point in a spiritual path all one really needs is information that
> applies directly to what one's experience or experiences are just at that
> time, and not any other drivel; it does not always work to apply cookie
> cutter templates.
>
> The TM movement does not really want you to look at other stuff, but
> eventually that is what helped me most; I took complete control of 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  
> wrote:
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to believe 
>>> that there is a universally applicable scheme for the development of 
>>> enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* experience or does 
>>> have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
>>   
>>> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but you 
>>> can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all individuals 
>>> without exception, any more than you can do it with the experience of 
>>> falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains just that.
>> 
>>> My opinion, anyway.
>> 
>>> [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
>>> Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
>>> schedule, a list of "symptoms."
>> 
>> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of,
> 
> I question this and every other statement you've made
> in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> to describing your own experience.

I am describing my own experience. That is all I have. There is just 
experience. Not experiences, with an 's', but experience, singular. 
Experience*s* are like sub directories or folders on a computer. It is not 
uncommon these days, others on this forum certainly seem to be experiencing 
something similar. 

There are a number of people in Fairfield having this kind of experience. And, 
I am confident, many others in all walks of life having these experiences. It 
is in the air. It is not just a matter of TM, there are lots of groups and 
people bent on awakening and succeeding. 

I say these things across the board because that is the way I experience these 
things and there is some support in the environment for this way of describing 
human experience in long term meditators. None of this is special with me.

You have every prerogative to question (although you have not actually 
questioned anything above, you have only stated that you question it). Mapping 
out benchmarks for spiritual development is a minefield because as you said, 'I 
think there are likely many exceptions and anomalies', so there are people who 
are not going to fit the mold. My outline using the terms M used is just one 
way one could try to map general categories of experience. 

For example, Charles Manson shows a number of characteristics of unity if we 
examine his statements, but he is also insane, a psychopath, and lacks certain 
characteristics that a presumably normal person would have, so he would be a 
significant outlier in any scheme that purports to categorise enlightenment 
benchmarks. 

I have a collection of Classical music recordings. I always have trouble trying 
to shelf them in some coherent way. My system here is generally by time period 
and the composer's name, using the date of death as a marker within a time 
period and beyond that I can remember where most composers lie on the time 
line. 

I think M's scheme for enlightenment is workable for many people, it is more 
detailed than some schemes, but in the end any scheme turns out to be nonsense, 
but it has applicability for giving one a bearing while on the path. If a 
person's experience is anomalous, a scheme will appear to be wrong to that 
person. 

In retrospect a scheme might even seem more on point than when one was on the 
path, because when you are on the path, you do not really know what you are 
headed for, or even where you are, and a benchmark isn't a specific experience, 
it is an general category of experience so making a mistake in interpreting 
what is going on is certainly a reasonable assumption. Even the belief in a 
scheme might be useful just to keep you going. 

My experiences were in some ways anomalous and that led to much doubt. I went 
through a long period where I did not want to read anything about spiritual 
development, meditating all the while, but just not interested in hearing about 
or discussing it. Also run-of-the-mill TM discussions can be incredibly boring. 

At any point in a spiritual path all one really needs is information that 
applies directly to what one's experience or experiences are just at that time, 
and not any other drivel; it does not always work to apply cookie cutter 
templates. 

The TM movement does not really want you to look at other stuff, but eventually 
that is what helped me most; I took complete control of my 'program' away from 
the movement over time because it failed to provide the information I needed 
when I needed it. 

I experimented and researched. But eventually it was kind of full circle, I 
ended up reading about things that initially propelled me on the journey, and 
found answers to questions I could not find easily within the

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Well said, Z! The clearest, most balanced post from you I have seen.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to believe 
> > that there is a universally applicable scheme for the development of 
> > enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* experience or does 
> > have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
>   
> > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but you 
> > can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all individuals 
> > without exception, any more than you can do it with the experience of 
> > falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains just that.
> 
> > My opinion, anyway.
> 
> > [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
> > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
> > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> 
> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of, one ends 
> up with a unity-centric ontology, the basic progression is that the mind's 
> focus on individuality shifts to universality, and the ego is left without a 
> job. The ego is why a person fears death. It's a fiction that conveniently 
> wraps around various processes going on in experience, but it dies with great 
> difficulty for most.
> 
> Conventionally we still use nomenclature when we converse with other bodies 
> because it simplifies communication to say 'yours', 'mine', 'me', 'I', etc., 
> when transferring information between minds. As we start out, everyone has a 
> personal ontology experience, so what is unique about what everyone has? It's 
> like different coloured coffee cups, that are otherwise all the same.
> 
> The basic scheme of enlightenment is 'me' progressing to 'everything all 
> together'. The details in between I think are pretty much as you surmise - 
> different people experience the letting go of intitial state of spiritual 
> progress differently, though there seem to be some basic commonalities. 
> 
> In attempting to 'harmonise' various traditions, I would say the common 
> states described would correspond to M's WC, CC, and UC/BC. Traditions with 
> meditation might add TC, although some, perhaps those meditating with 
> mindfulness kinds of meditation, may not experience TC at all because that 
> meditation is really aimed at UC (which is probably why many find it more 
> difficult than TM). 
> 
> Mindfulness meditators may become aware at some point they are in a state 
> that is with TM called CC; in other words, TC is not necessarily described as 
> the goal, since in this meditation, you just sit there silently, which is how 
> meditation functions in unity, there not being an inward and outward stroke. 
> As far as I am aware, TM is not necessarily superior to these other methods 
> as far as the final result; more important may be how much you want the final 
> result. GC is more interesting as some traditions would consider the refined 
> visions of GC as just sensory illusions, which then dissipate when unity 
> dawns.
> 
> The greatest difficulty I have heard people mention when talking of their 
> experience outside of the TM movement is the loss of the sense of small self, 
> or ego. Some people simply chicken out when they see that enlightenment is 
> not about personal ontology. If they manage to chicken out prior to a very 
> clear awakening, they might be able to go back to being the fake person they 
> were before without much difficulty. People with a strong ego-structured mind 
> might have the most resistance to this process of 'enlightenment'. Some 
> people become frightened, really frightened. They have so much invested in 
> 'who they are'.
> 
> Enlightenment is not about your specialness in any way other than the 
> capacity to be enlightened, so when you reach that threshold where you can go 
> either way, you can either be a coward, or accept the fact you are going to 
> die before your physical death. If the awakening is clear enough you do not 
> get to go back, and any remaining issues you have you just have to hack 
> through them, which really means they hack through the fictional 'you' until 
> that 'you' is basically history. This is not necessarily pleasant.
> 
> I think you are correct in assuming that the progression of experience is 
> highly variable depending on the starting point and the 'karma' of the 
> person, the history associated with an individual body. Some never make it; 
> some breeze through without a hitch or any seeming progression (a very small 
> number), and everyone else is in between somewhere. 
> 
> I suppose if you had a map of what might happen, it might be like a map of 
> the United States with New York on one side, and San Francisco on the other, 
> and some vague change of colour in between annotate

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

> 
> Key words: "that you apply across the board"

Right; I don't know about across the board. I wouldn't say it is a majority of 
people's takes on it here in FF, but it is that of many of the people I know 
well here, and perhaps close to a majority of the people I know very well. 
There seem to be more and more people here reporting similar "deaths" or 
awakenings that I am aware of, anyhow.
 
> What I question is whether any of the elements Xeno 
> describes are universally applicable. I think there
> are likely many exceptions and anomalies.

Undoubtedly.
 
> I did not suggest that any individual's reported
> experience was a lie.

 
No, nor did I mean to imply such; I was agreeing with Xeno's last line, that 
any such description is of necessity a big, big lie, but we do the best we can 
:-) 


> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to 
> > > > > believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the 
> > > > > development of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have 
> > > > > *this* experience or does have *that* experience, it means they are 
> > > > > (or are not) enlightened.
> > > >   
> > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, 
> > > > > but you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to 
> > > > > all individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with 
> > > > > the experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person 
> > > > > ontology remains just that.
> > > > 
> > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > 
> > > > > [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
> > > > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
> > > > > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > > 
> > > > First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of
> > > 
> > > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > > to describing your own experience. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > , one ends up with a unity-centric ontology, the basic progression is 
> > > that the mind's focus on individuality shifts to universality, and the 
> > > ego is left without a job. The ego is why a person fears death. It's a 
> > > fiction that conveniently wraps around various processes going on in 
> > > experience, but it dies with great difficulty for most.
> > > > 
> > > > Conventionally we still use nomenclature when we converse with other 
> > > > bodies because it simplifies communication to say 'yours', 'mine', 
> > > > 'me', 'I', etc., when transferring information between minds. As we 
> > > > start out, everyone has a personal ontology experience, so what is 
> > > > unique about what everyone has? It's like different coloured coffee 
> > > > cups, that are otherwise all the same.
> > > > 
> > > > The basic scheme of enlightenment is 'me' progressing to 'everything 
> > > > all together'. The details in between I think are pretty much as you 
> > > > surmise - different people experience the letting go of intitial state 
> > > > of spiritual progress differently, though there seem to be some basic 
> > > > commonalities. 
> > > > 
> > > > In attempting to 'harmonise' various traditions, I would say the common 
> > > > states described would correspond to M's WC, CC, and UC/BC. Traditions 
> > > > with meditation might add TC, although some, perhaps those meditating 
> > > > with mindfulness kinds of meditation, may not experience TC at all 
> > > > because that meditation is really aimed at UC (which is probably why 
> > > > many find it more difficult than TM). 
> > > > 
> > > > Mindfulness meditators may become aware at some point they are in a 
> > > > state that is with TM called CC; in other words, TC is not necessarily 
> > > > described as the goal, since in this meditation, you just sit there 
> > > > silently, which is how meditation functions in unity, there not being 
> > > > an inward and outward stroke. As far as I am aware, TM is not 
> > > > necessarily superior to these other methods as far as the final result; 
> > > > more important may be how much you want the final result. GC is more 
> > > > interesting as some traditions would consider the refined visions of GC 
> > > > as just sensory illusions, which then dissipate when unity dawns.
> > > > 
> > > > The greatest difficulty I have heard people mention when talking of 
> > > > their experience outside of the TM movement is the loss of the sense of 
> > > > small self, or ego. Some people simply chicken out when they see that 
> > > > enlightenment is not about personal ontology. If they manage to chick

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> Matches my take on it rather closely, anyhow, as well as (near as I can tell) 
> that of a number of others here in FF -- we must share the same big, big lie 
> :-)

Key words: "that you apply across the board"

What I question is whether any of the elements Xeno 
describes are universally applicable. I think there
are likely many exceptions and anomalies.

I did not suggest that any individual's reported
experience was a lie.





> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to 
> > > > believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the 
> > > > development of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* 
> > > > experience or does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are 
> > > > not) enlightened.
> > >   
> > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but 
> > > > you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all 
> > > > individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with the 
> > > > experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology 
> > > > remains just that.
> > > 
> > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > 
> > > > [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
> > > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
> > > > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > 
> > > First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of
> > 
> > I question this and every other statement you've made
> > in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> > to describing your own experience. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > , one ends up with a unity-centric ontology, the basic progression is that 
> > the mind's focus on individuality shifts to universality, and the ego is 
> > left without a job. The ego is why a person fears death. It's a fiction 
> > that conveniently wraps around various processes going on in experience, 
> > but it dies with great difficulty for most.
> > > 
> > > Conventionally we still use nomenclature when we converse with other 
> > > bodies because it simplifies communication to say 'yours', 'mine', 'me', 
> > > 'I', etc., when transferring information between minds. As we start out, 
> > > everyone has a personal ontology experience, so what is unique about what 
> > > everyone has? It's like different coloured coffee cups, that are 
> > > otherwise all the same.
> > > 
> > > The basic scheme of enlightenment is 'me' progressing to 'everything all 
> > > together'. The details in between I think are pretty much as you surmise 
> > > - different people experience the letting go of intitial state of 
> > > spiritual progress differently, though there seem to be some basic 
> > > commonalities. 
> > > 
> > > In attempting to 'harmonise' various traditions, I would say the common 
> > > states described would correspond to M's WC, CC, and UC/BC. Traditions 
> > > with meditation might add TC, although some, perhaps those meditating 
> > > with mindfulness kinds of meditation, may not experience TC at all 
> > > because that meditation is really aimed at UC (which is probably why many 
> > > find it more difficult than TM). 
> > > 
> > > Mindfulness meditators may become aware at some point they are in a state 
> > > that is with TM called CC; in other words, TC is not necessarily 
> > > described as the goal, since in this meditation, you just sit there 
> > > silently, which is how meditation functions in unity, there not being an 
> > > inward and outward stroke. As far as I am aware, TM is not necessarily 
> > > superior to these other methods as far as the final result; more 
> > > important may be how much you want the final result. GC is more 
> > > interesting as some traditions would consider the refined visions of GC 
> > > as just sensory illusions, which then dissipate when unity dawns.
> > > 
> > > The greatest difficulty I have heard people mention when talking of their 
> > > experience outside of the TM movement is the loss of the sense of small 
> > > self, or ego. Some people simply chicken out when they see that 
> > > enlightenment is not about personal ontology. If they manage to chicken 
> > > out prior to a very clear awakening, they might be able to go back to 
> > > being the fake person they were before without much difficulty. People 
> > > with a strong ego-structured mind might have the most resistance to this 
> > > process of 'enlightenment'. Some people become frightened, really 
> > > frightened. They have so much invested in 'who they are'.
> > > 
> > > Enlightenment is not about your specialness in any way other than the 
> > > capacity to be enlightened, so when you reach that threshold wh

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

Matches my take on it rather closely, anyhow, as well as (near as I can tell) 
that of a number of others here in FF -- we must share the same big, big lie :-)


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius"  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to 
> > > believe that there is a universally applicable scheme for the development 
> > > of enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* experience or 
> > > does have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> >   
> > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but 
> > > you can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all 
> > > individuals without exception, any more than you can do it with the 
> > > experience of falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology 
> > > remains just that.
> > 
> > > My opinion, anyway.
> > 
> > > [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
> > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
> > > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > 
> > First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of
> 
> I question this and every other statement you've made
> in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
> to describing your own experience. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , one ends up with a unity-centric ontology, the basic progression is that 
> the mind's focus on individuality shifts to universality, and the ego is left 
> without a job. The ego is why a person fears death. It's a fiction that 
> conveniently wraps around various processes going on in experience, but it 
> dies with great difficulty for most.
> > 
> > Conventionally we still use nomenclature when we converse with other bodies 
> > because it simplifies communication to say 'yours', 'mine', 'me', 'I', 
> > etc., when transferring information between minds. As we start out, 
> > everyone has a personal ontology experience, so what is unique about what 
> > everyone has? It's like different coloured coffee cups, that are otherwise 
> > all the same.
> > 
> > The basic scheme of enlightenment is 'me' progressing to 'everything all 
> > together'. The details in between I think are pretty much as you surmise - 
> > different people experience the letting go of intitial state of spiritual 
> > progress differently, though there seem to be some basic commonalities. 
> > 
> > In attempting to 'harmonise' various traditions, I would say the common 
> > states described would correspond to M's WC, CC, and UC/BC. Traditions with 
> > meditation might add TC, although some, perhaps those meditating with 
> > mindfulness kinds of meditation, may not experience TC at all because that 
> > meditation is really aimed at UC (which is probably why many find it more 
> > difficult than TM). 
> > 
> > Mindfulness meditators may become aware at some point they are in a state 
> > that is with TM called CC; in other words, TC is not necessarily described 
> > as the goal, since in this meditation, you just sit there silently, which 
> > is how meditation functions in unity, there not being an inward and outward 
> > stroke. As far as I am aware, TM is not necessarily superior to these other 
> > methods as far as the final result; more important may be how much you want 
> > the final result. GC is more interesting as some traditions would consider 
> > the refined visions of GC as just sensory illusions, which then dissipate 
> > when unity dawns.
> > 
> > The greatest difficulty I have heard people mention when talking of their 
> > experience outside of the TM movement is the loss of the sense of small 
> > self, or ego. Some people simply chicken out when they see that 
> > enlightenment is not about personal ontology. If they manage to chicken out 
> > prior to a very clear awakening, they might be able to go back to being the 
> > fake person they were before without much difficulty. People with a strong 
> > ego-structured mind might have the most resistance to this process of 
> > 'enlightenment'. Some people become frightened, really frightened. They 
> > have so much invested in 'who they are'.
> > 
> > Enlightenment is not about your specialness in any way other than the 
> > capacity to be enlightened, so when you reach that threshold where you can 
> > go either way, you can either be a coward, or accept the fact you are going 
> > to die before your physical death. If the awakening is clear enough you do 
> > not get to go back, and any remaining issues you have you just have to hack 
> > through them, which really means they hack through the fictional 'you' 
> > until that 'you' is basically history. This is not necessarily pleasant.
> > 
> > I think you are correct in assuming that the progression of experience is 
> > highly variable de

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to believe 
> > that there is a universally applicable scheme for the development of 
> > enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* experience or does 
> > have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
>   
> > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but you 
> > can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all individuals 
> > without exception, any more than you can do it with the experience of 
> > falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains just that.
> 
> > My opinion, anyway.
> 
> > [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
> > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
> > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> 
> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of

I question this and every other statement you've made
in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
to describing your own experience. 






, one ends up with a unity-centric ontology, the basic progression is that the 
mind's focus on individuality shifts to universality, and the ego is left 
without a job. The ego is why a person fears death. It's a fiction that 
conveniently wraps around various processes going on in experience, but it dies 
with great difficulty for most.
> 
> Conventionally we still use nomenclature when we converse with other bodies 
> because it simplifies communication to say 'yours', 'mine', 'me', 'I', etc., 
> when transferring information between minds. As we start out, everyone has a 
> personal ontology experience, so what is unique about what everyone has? It's 
> like different coloured coffee cups, that are otherwise all the same.
> 
> The basic scheme of enlightenment is 'me' progressing to 'everything all 
> together'. The details in between I think are pretty much as you surmise - 
> different people experience the letting go of intitial state of spiritual 
> progress differently, though there seem to be some basic commonalities. 
> 
> In attempting to 'harmonise' various traditions, I would say the common 
> states described would correspond to M's WC, CC, and UC/BC. Traditions with 
> meditation might add TC, although some, perhaps those meditating with 
> mindfulness kinds of meditation, may not experience TC at all because that 
> meditation is really aimed at UC (which is probably why many find it more 
> difficult than TM). 
> 
> Mindfulness meditators may become aware at some point they are in a state 
> that is with TM called CC; in other words, TC is not necessarily described as 
> the goal, since in this meditation, you just sit there silently, which is how 
> meditation functions in unity, there not being an inward and outward stroke. 
> As far as I am aware, TM is not necessarily superior to these other methods 
> as far as the final result; more important may be how much you want the final 
> result. GC is more interesting as some traditions would consider the refined 
> visions of GC as just sensory illusions, which then dissipate when unity 
> dawns.
> 
> The greatest difficulty I have heard people mention when talking of their 
> experience outside of the TM movement is the loss of the sense of small self, 
> or ego. Some people simply chicken out when they see that enlightenment is 
> not about personal ontology. If they manage to chicken out prior to a very 
> clear awakening, they might be able to go back to being the fake person they 
> were before without much difficulty. People with a strong ego-structured mind 
> might have the most resistance to this process of 'enlightenment'. Some 
> people become frightened, really frightened. They have so much invested in 
> 'who they are'.
> 
> Enlightenment is not about your specialness in any way other than the 
> capacity to be enlightened, so when you reach that threshold where you can go 
> either way, you can either be a coward, or accept the fact you are going to 
> die before your physical death. If the awakening is clear enough you do not 
> get to go back, and any remaining issues you have you just have to hack 
> through them, which really means they hack through the fictional 'you' until 
> that 'you' is basically history. This is not necessarily pleasant.
> 
> I think you are correct in assuming that the progression of experience is 
> highly variable depending on the starting point and the 'karma' of the 
> person, the history associated with an individual body. Some never make it; 
> some breeze through without a hitch or any seeming progression (a very small 
> number), and everyone else is in between somewhere. 
> 
> I suppose if you had a map of what might happen, it might be like a map of 
> the United States with New York on one side, and San Fran

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" 
 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> 
> > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually ceased to believe 
> > that there is a universally applicable scheme for the development of 
> > enlightenment, such that if someone doesn't have *this* experience or does 
> > have *that* experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
>   
> > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than others, but you 
> > can't make absolute, across-the-board "rules" that apply to all individuals 
> > without exception, any more than you can do it with the experience of 
> > falling in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains just that.
> 
> > My opinion, anyway.
> 
> > [to Dr Dumbass] Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like 
> > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline, format, a 
> > schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> 
> First-person ontology is the thing that enlightenment gets rid of

I question this and every other statement you've made
in this post that you apply across the board, as opposed
to describing your own experience. 






, one ends up with a unity-centric ontology, the basic progression is that the 
mind's focus on individuality shifts to universality, and the ego is left 
without a job. The ego is why a person fears death. It's a fiction that 
conveniently wraps around various processes going on in experience, but it dies 
with great difficulty for most.
> 
> Conventionally we still use nomenclature when we converse with other bodies 
> because it simplifies communication to say 'yours', 'mine', 'me', 'I', etc., 
> when transferring information between minds. As we start out, everyone has a 
> personal ontology experience, so what is unique about what everyone has? It's 
> like different coloured coffee cups, that are otherwise all the same.
> 
> The basic scheme of enlightenment is 'me' progressing to 'everything all 
> together'. The details in between I think are pretty much as you surmise - 
> different people experience the letting go of intitial state of spiritual 
> progress differently, though there seem to be some basic commonalities. 
> 
> In attempting to 'harmonise' various traditions, I would say the common 
> states described would correspond to M's WC, CC, and UC/BC. Traditions with 
> meditation might add TC, although some, perhaps those meditating with 
> mindfulness kinds of meditation, may not experience TC at all because that 
> meditation is really aimed at UC (which is probably why many find it more 
> difficult than TM). 
> 
> Mindfulness meditators may become aware at some point they are in a state 
> that is with TM called CC; in other words, TC is not necessarily described as 
> the goal, since in this meditation, you just sit there silently, which is how 
> meditation functions in unity, there not being an inward and outward stroke. 
> As far as I am aware, TM is not necessarily superior to these other methods 
> as far as the final result; more important may be how much you want the final 
> result. GC is more interesting as some traditions would consider the refined 
> visions of GC as just sensory illusions, which then dissipate when unity 
> dawns.
> 
> The greatest difficulty I have heard people mention when talking of their 
> experience outside of the TM movement is the loss of the sense of small self, 
> or ego. Some people simply chicken out when they see that enlightenment is 
> not about personal ontology. If they manage to chicken out prior to a very 
> clear awakening, they might be able to go back to being the fake person they 
> were before without much difficulty. People with a strong ego-structured mind 
> might have the most resistance to this process of 'enlightenment'. Some 
> people become frightened, really frightened. They have so much invested in 
> 'who they are'.
> 
> Enlightenment is not about your specialness in any way other than the 
> capacity to be enlightened, so when you reach that threshold where you can go 
> either way, you can either be a coward, or accept the fact you are going to 
> die before your physical death. If the awakening is clear enough you do not 
> get to go back, and any remaining issues you have you just have to hack 
> through them, which really means they hack through the fictional 'you' until 
> that 'you' is basically history. This is not necessarily pleasant.
> 
> I think you are correct in assuming that the progression of experience is 
> highly variable depending on the starting point and the 'karma' of the 
> person, the history associated with an individual body. Some never make it; 
> some breeze through without a hitch or any seeming progression (a very small 
> number), and everyone else is in between somewhere. 
> 
> I suppose if you had a map of what might happen, it might be like a map of 
> the United States with New York on one side, and San Fran

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> But, Tattoo, as I have expressed many, many times, emptiness and fullness are 
> both exemplified by Rich Corinthian Leather!
 
I get it, Boss! Emptiness for the cow is fullness for Chrysler Cordoba!

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

But, Tattoo, as I have expressed many, many times, emptiness and fullness are 
both exemplified by Rich Corinthian Leather!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> Gahaha! 
> 
> "You see, Tattoo, here on Fantasy Island everyone gets exactly what we 
> imagine...His fault, your fault; it's all Maya fault..."
> 
> (And if I were asked today, here and now, about my current take on emptiness 
> and fullness etc., I would have to say, "I have no idea!" That is pretty much 
> my stock answer for everything.)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > Boss Boss de plane de plane!!
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > Yes, me tattoo!
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > OK. I personally greatly enjoyed the story of the seven states of 
> > > > consciousness - Kept me occupied for years, as I continued TM, etc.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the
> > > > > > fact, but as a map, it sucks, big time.
> > > > > 
> > > > > That isn't what I'm saying either. Never mind.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > > > > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > > > > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which 
> > > > > > > >oddly enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has 
> > > > > > > >and never will be a process followed that results in liberation. 
> > > > > > > >The wraiths on the MUM campus prove that.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > > > > > just that.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ 
> > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for 
> > > > > > > > > > myself, that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) 
> > > > > > > > > > after it is established - Believe me, I have tried, 
> > > > > > > > > > diligently!! 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a 
> > > > > > > > > > lot of pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake 
> > > > > > > > > > up from their dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender 
> > > > > > > > > > completely, the pure awareness stays largely hidden from 
> > > > > > > > > > view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you mine, 
> > > > > > > > > > if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power 
> > > > > > > > > > > > in the 
> > > > > > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogrou

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

Doc, now it's my turn to say: What?! I've never claimed to be in CC much less 
UC! 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> Yep, I can agree that the ego trip of CC, IS, as you imply, *significantly 
> different* than the ego trip of UC, especially from the EGO's POV - LOL. 
> 
> So, please enjoy your UC ego trip, Share, and I mean that sincerely! I love 
> you too!:-) 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > ooops...:-)
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah, a lot of chapters. But I think that thing about being without the 
> > > three gunas is in chapter 2. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > You can take that up with Krishna. PS The Gita has a lot of Chapters, 
> > > > doesn't it? - 18 or something. Yeah, the space between CC and UC is 
> > > > almost insignificant, given that both are ego trips.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Doc, if Arjuna had been in UC at the beginning of the Gita, then 
> > > > > Krishna would not have needed to tell him to be without the three 
> > > > > gunas! 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
> > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > > >  
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >   
> > > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to 
> > > > > one's singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized 
> > > > > state to grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still 
> > > > > present in the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality 
> > > > > is an illusion begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible 
> > > > > oneness that the heart and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Unity isn't the end of the road, simply the furthest Maharishi could 
> > > > > go with a symptomatic description. Unity is not the same thing as 
> > > > > Yoga, or Union, comprehensively. Unity SOC is the state of Arjuna's 
> > > > > mind before Krishna's discourse takes him beyond That.
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Yep, went back and read posts 312097 and 299555.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I pointed out to the "Muni of Monte Cassino" (a number of times)
> > > > > > > that none of the descriptions of his purported "Unity 
> > > > > > > Consciousness"
> > > > > > > conform to Shankara's explanations - whether in the 
> > > > > > > BrahmaSutraBhasya,
> > > > > > > UpanishadBhasya or BhagavadGitaBhasya.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Such "grand enlightenment" appears to have been Robin's own
> > > > > > > neo-Advaitic epiphanies later aggrandized and grafted upon 
> > > > > > > Maharishi's
> > > > > > > explanations.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Nuh-uh. Maharishi's teaching was where he first encountered
> > > > > > explanations of enlightenment.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Maharishi's descriptions themselves are a form of
> > > > > > > neo-yogic advaita and Robin was unwilling to tacitly match his own
> > > > > > > purported "enlightenment" with the explanations of traditional
> > > > > > > advaita.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Right. He was a disciple of Maharishi.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > He wouldn't even continue a conversation bringing it up for
> > > > > > > consideration.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > This unwillingness was, for me, a clue to Robin's delusive
> > > > > > > self-absorption .
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Actually it was completely irrelevant. Think about it for
> > > > > > a minute. What good would it have done him at this point to
> > > > > > consider matching his experience with that of other
> > > > > > descriptions? What good would it have done him back then,
> > > > > > for that matter?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > You've really never made any sense on this topic, empty.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Yazuka!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> OH, I get it now -- Tattoo am asi; Om Tattoo Sat! 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > A Tattoo?? :-)
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on 
> > > > what the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> > > > I am That CC
> > > > Thou art That GC
> > > > All this is That UC
> > > > That alone is Brahman
> > >  
> > > One of my all-time favorite formulas! (Or stories, if you prefer) :-)
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

Gahaha! 

"You see, Tattoo, here on Fantasy Island everyone gets exactly what we 
imagine...His fault, your fault; it's all Maya fault..."

(And if I were asked today, here and now, about my current take on emptiness 
and fullness etc., I would have to say, "I have no idea!" That is pretty much 
my stock answer for everything.)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> Boss Boss de plane de plane!!
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Yes, me tattoo!
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > OK. I personally greatly enjoyed the story of the seven states of 
> > > consciousness - Kept me occupied for years, as I continued TM, etc.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the
> > > > > fact, but as a map, it sucks, big time.
> > > > 
> > > > That isn't what I'm saying either. Never mind.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > > > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > > > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which 
> > > > > > >oddly enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has 
> > > > > > >and never will be a process followed that results in liberation. 
> > > > > > >The wraiths on the MUM campus prove that.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > > > > just that.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ 
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for 
> > > > > > > > > myself, that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) 
> > > > > > > > > after it is established - Believe me, I have tried, 
> > > > > > > > > diligently!! 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a 
> > > > > > > > > lot of pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake 
> > > > > > > > > up from their dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender 
> > > > > > > > > completely, the pure awareness stays largely hidden from 
> > > > > > > > > view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you mine, if 
> > > > > > > > > you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in 
> > > > > > > > > > > the 
> > > > > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Enlightenm

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Boss Boss de plane de plane!!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> 
> Yes, me tattoo!
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > OK. I personally greatly enjoyed the story of the seven states of 
> > consciousness - Kept me occupied for years, as I continued TM, etc.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the
> > > > fact, but as a map, it sucks, big time.
> > > 
> > > That isn't what I'm saying either. Never mind.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > > > 
> > > > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly 
> > > > > >enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never 
> > > > > >will be a process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths 
> > > > > >on the MUM campus prove that.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > > > just that.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, 
> > > > > > > > that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is 
> > > > > > > > established - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot 
> > > > > > > > of pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from 
> > > > > > > > their dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, 
> > > > > > > > the pure awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it 
> > > > > > > > as God's game of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. 
> > > > > > > > You go first." 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in 
> > > > > > > > > > the 
> > > > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

OH, I get it now -- Tattoo am asi; Om Tattoo Sat! 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> A Tattoo?? :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on 
> > > what the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> > > I am That CC
> > > Thou art That GC
> > > All this is That UC
> > > That alone is Brahman
> >  
> > One of my all-time favorite formulas! (Or stories, if you prefer) :-)
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

My point ed-zackerly, no pfun intended.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> Maybe one of those temporary ones... 'cause, you know, we might change our 
> minds someday :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > A Tattoo?? :-)
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on 
> > > > what the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> > > > I am That CC
> > > > Thou art That GC
> > > > All this is That UC
> > > > That alone is Brahman
> > >  
> > > One of my all-time favorite formulas! (Or stories, if you prefer) :-)
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

Yes, me tattoo!


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> OK. I personally greatly enjoyed the story of the seven states of 
> consciousness - Kept me occupied for years, as I continued TM, etc.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the
> > > fact, but as a map, it sucks, big time.
> > 
> > That isn't what I'm saying either. Never mind.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > > 
> > > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly 
> > > > >enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never 
> > > > >will be a process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on 
> > > > >the MUM campus prove that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > > just that.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, 
> > > > > > > that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is 
> > > > > > > established - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of 
> > > > > > > pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from 
> > > > > > > their dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the 
> > > > > > > pure awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it as 
> > > > > > > God's game of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. You go 
> > > > > > > first." 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

Maybe one of those temporary ones... 'cause, you know, we might change our 
minds someday :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> A Tattoo?? :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on 
> > > what the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> > > I am That CC
> > > Thou art That GC
> > > All this is That UC
> > > That alone is Brahman
> >  
> > One of my all-time favorite formulas! (Or stories, if you prefer) :-)
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Yep, I can agree that the ego trip of CC, IS, as you imply, *significantly 
different* than the ego trip of UC, especially from the EGO's POV - LOL. 

So, please enjoy your UC ego trip, Share, and I mean that sincerely! I love you 
too!:-) 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> ooops...:-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, a lot of chapters. But I think that thing about being without the 
> > three gunas is in chapter 2. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > You can take that up with Krishna. PS The Gita has a lot of Chapters, 
> > > doesn't it? - 18 or something. Yeah, the space between CC and UC is 
> > > almost insignificant, given that both are ego trips.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Doc, if Arjuna had been in UC at the beginning of the Gita, then 
> > > > Krishna would not have needed to tell him to be without the three 
> > > > gunas! 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ________
> > > >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > 
> > > > Unity isn't the end of the road, simply the furthest Maharishi could go 
> > > > with a symptomatic description. Unity is not the same thing as Yoga, or 
> > > > Union, comprehensively. Unity SOC is the state of Arjuna's mind before 
> > > > Krishna's discourse takes him beyond That.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Yep, went back and read posts 312097 and 299555.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I pointed out to the "Muni of Monte Cassino" (a number of times)
> > > > > > that none of the descriptions of his purported "Unity Consciousness"
> > > > > > conform to Shankara's explanations - whether in the 
> > > > > > BrahmaSutraBhasya,
> > > > > > UpanishadBhasya or BhagavadGitaBhasya.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Such "grand enlightenment" appears to have been Robin's own
> > > > > > neo-Advaitic epiphanies later aggrandized and grafted upon 
> > > > > > Maharishi's
> > > > > > explanations.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Nuh-uh. Maharishi's teaching was where he first encountered
> > > > > explanations of enlightenment.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Maharishi's descriptions themselves are a form of
> > > > > > neo-yogic advaita and Robin was unwilling to tacitly match his own
> > > > > > purported "enlightenment" with the explanations of traditional
> > > > > > advaita.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Right. He was a disciple of Maharishi.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > He wouldn't even continue a conversation bringing it up for
> > > > > > consideration.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This unwillingness was, for me, a clue to Robin's delusive
> > > > > > self-absorption .
> > > > > 
> > > > > Actually it was completely irrelevant. Think about it for
> > > > > a minute. What good would it have done him at this point to
> > > > > consider matching his experience with that of other
> > > > > descriptions? What good would it have done him back then,
> > > > > for that matter?
> > > > > 
> > > > > You've really never made any sense on this topic, empty.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

Yeah, a lot of chapters. But I think that thing about being without the three 
gunas is in chapter 2. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> You can take that up with Krishna. PS The Gita has a lot of Chapters, doesn't 
> it? - 18 or something. Yeah, the space between CC and UC is almost 
> insignificant, given that both are ego trips.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Doc, if Arjuna had been in UC at the beginning of the Gita, then Krishna 
> > would not have needed to tell him to be without the three gunas! 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in the 
> > Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion begins 
> > to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart and 
> > intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > 
> > Unity isn't the end of the road, simply the furthest Maharishi could go 
> > with a symptomatic description. Unity is not the same thing as Yoga, or 
> > Union, comprehensively. Unity SOC is the state of Arjuna's mind before 
> > Krishna's discourse takes him beyond That.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Yep, went back and read posts 312097 and 299555.
> > > > 
> > > > I pointed out to the "Muni of Monte Cassino" (a number of times)
> > > > that none of the descriptions of his purported "Unity Consciousness"
> > > > conform to Shankara's explanations - whether in the BrahmaSutraBhasya,
> > > > UpanishadBhasya or BhagavadGitaBhasya.
> > > > 
> > > > Such "grand enlightenment" appears to have been Robin's own
> > > > neo-Advaitic epiphanies later aggrandized and grafted upon Maharishi's
> > > > explanations.
> > > 
> > > Nuh-uh. Maharishi's teaching was where he first encountered
> > > explanations of enlightenment.
> > > 
> > > > Maharishi's descriptions themselves are a form of
> > > > neo-yogic advaita and Robin was unwilling to tacitly match his own
> > > > purported "enlightenment" with the explanations of traditional
> > > > advaita.
> > > 
> > > Right. He was a disciple of Maharishi.
> > > 
> > > > He wouldn't even continue a conversation bringing it up for
> > > > consideration.
> > > > 
> > > > This unwillingness was, for me, a clue to Robin's delusive
> > > > self-absorption .
> > > 
> > > Actually it was completely irrelevant. Think about it for
> > > a minute. What good would it have done him at this point to
> > > consider matching his experience with that of other
> > > descriptions? What good would it have done him back then,
> > > for that matter?
> > > 
> > > You've really never made any sense on this topic, empty.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

ooops...:-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> Yeah, a lot of chapters. But I think that thing about being without the three 
> gunas is in chapter 2. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > You can take that up with Krishna. PS The Gita has a lot of Chapters, 
> > doesn't it? - 18 or something. Yeah, the space between CC and UC is almost 
> > insignificant, given that both are ego trips.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Doc, if Arjuna had been in UC at the beginning of the Gita, then Krishna 
> > > would not have needed to tell him to be without the three gunas! 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > 
> > > Unity isn't the end of the road, simply the furthest Maharishi could go 
> > > with a symptomatic description. Unity is not the same thing as Yoga, or 
> > > Union, comprehensively. Unity SOC is the state of Arjuna's mind before 
> > > Krishna's discourse takes him beyond That.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yep, went back and read posts 312097 and 299555.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I pointed out to the "Muni of Monte Cassino" (a number of times)
> > > > > that none of the descriptions of his purported "Unity Consciousness"
> > > > > conform to Shankara's explanations - whether in the BrahmaSutraBhasya,
> > > > > UpanishadBhasya or BhagavadGitaBhasya.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Such "grand enlightenment" appears to have been Robin's own
> > > > > neo-Advaitic epiphanies later aggrandized and grafted upon Maharishi's
> > > > > explanations.
> > > > 
> > > > Nuh-uh. Maharishi's teaching was where he first encountered
> > > > explanations of enlightenment.
> > > > 
> > > > > Maharishi's descriptions themselves are a form of
> > > > > neo-yogic advaita and Robin was unwilling to tacitly match his own
> > > > > purported "enlightenment" with the explanations of traditional
> > > > > advaita.
> > > > 
> > > > Right. He was a disciple of Maharishi.
> > > > 
> > > > > He wouldn't even continue a conversation bringing it up for
> > > > > consideration.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This unwillingness was, for me, a clue to Robin's delusive
> > > > > self-absorption .
> > > > 
> > > > Actually it was completely irrelevant. Think about it for
> > > > a minute. What good would it have done him at this point to
> > > > consider matching his experience with that of other
> > > > descriptions? What good would it have done him back then,
> > > > for that matter?
> > > > 
> > > > You've really never made any sense on this topic, empty.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

What? :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> My (admittedly dim) recollection of the whole "emptiness vs. fullness" 
> dialectic is it was simply two ways of seeing Brahman or Wholeness -- the 
> Nirguna, essentially Wholeness perceived through the mind as "No-thing," the 
> unchanging Void, which may take over all of the "relative" in a kind of Dark 
> Night of the Soul (or "crucifixion" or "Nirvana"); and the Saguna, or 
> Wholeness perceived through the heart as "Every-thing," discovered on ceasing 
> the hitherto-unconscious resistance to the unchanging Void (and judgment of 
> "out there"), and surrendering whole-heartedly into That as the Emptiful Us 
> (or "resurrection")... but doubtless this is merely the self-deluded 
> brain-fart of a raving tranced-out guru wanna-be. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> > of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum 
> > of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. 
> > Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be 
> > finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC 
> > > to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else 
> > > is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course 
> > > under the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, 
> > > that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate 
> > > at all.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: iranitea 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > 
> > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a 
> > > series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he 
> > > speaks of the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both 
> > > he calls 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. 
> > > (I don't think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > > 
> > > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite 
> > > of the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it 
> > > is not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks 
> > > of Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is 
> > > on the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but 
> > > may be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

OK. I personally greatly enjoyed the story of the seven states of consciousness 
- Kept me occupied for years, as I continued TM, etc.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the
> > fact, but as a map, it sucks, big time.
> 
> That isn't what I'm saying either. Never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > 
> > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly 
> > > >enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will 
> > > >be a process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM 
> > > >campus prove that.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > just that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, 
> > > > > > that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is 
> > > > > > established - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of 
> > > > > > pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their 
> > > > > > dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure 
> > > > > > awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's 
> > > > > > game of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

A Tattoo?? :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> >
> > Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on what 
> > the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> > I am That CC
> > Thou art That GC
> > All this is That UC
> > That alone is Brahman
>  
> One of my all-time favorite formulas! (Or stories, if you prefer) :-)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

You can take that up with Krishna. PS The Gita has a lot of Chapters, doesn't 
it? - 18 or something. Yeah, the space between CC and UC is almost 
insignificant, given that both are ego trips.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Doc, if Arjuna had been in UC at the beginning of the Gita, then Krishna 
> would not have needed to tell him to be without the three gunas! 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: "doctordumbass@..." 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity predominates, 
> over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's singular identity. 
> The identity must shift to a less localized state to grow beyond the Unity 
> SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in the Unity SOC, although the 
> perception that this duality is an illusion begins to take hold, due to the 
> incontrovertible oneness that the heart and intellect begin to sense, 
> outwardly. 
> 
> Unity isn't the end of the road, simply the furthest Maharishi could go with 
> a symptomatic description. Unity is not the same thing as Yoga, or Union, 
> comprehensively. Unity SOC is the state of Arjuna's mind before Krishna's 
> discourse takes him beyond That.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Yep, went back and read posts 312097 and 299555.
> > > 
> > > I pointed out to the "Muni of Monte Cassino" (a number of times)
> > > that none of the descriptions of his purported "Unity Consciousness"
> > > conform to Shankara's explanations - whether in the BrahmaSutraBhasya,
> > > UpanishadBhasya or BhagavadGitaBhasya.
> > > 
> > > Such "grand enlightenment" appears to have been Robin's own
> > > neo-Advaitic epiphanies later aggrandized and grafted upon Maharishi's
> > > explanations.
> > 
> > Nuh-uh. Maharishi's teaching was where he first encountered
> > explanations of enlightenment.
> > 
> > > Maharishi's descriptions themselves are a form of
> > > neo-yogic advaita and Robin was unwilling to tacitly match his own
> > > purported "enlightenment" with the explanations of traditional
> > > advaita.
> > 
> > Right. He was a disciple of Maharishi.
> > 
> > > He wouldn't even continue a conversation bringing it up for
> > > consideration.
> > > 
> > > This unwillingness was, for me, a clue to Robin's delusive
> > > self-absorption .
> > 
> > Actually it was completely irrelevant. Think about it for
> > a minute. What good would it have done him at this point to
> > consider matching his experience with that of other
> > descriptions? What good would it have done him back then,
> > for that matter?
> > 
> > You've really never made any sense on this topic, empty.
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

Doc, if Arjuna had been in UC at the beginning of the Gita, then Krishna would 
not have needed to tell him to be without the three gunas! 




 From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity predominates, 
over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's singular identity. 
The identity must shift to a less localized state to grow beyond the Unity SOC. 
The core fear of duality is still present in the Unity SOC, although the 
perception that this duality is an illusion begins to take hold, due to the 
incontrovertible oneness that the heart and intellect begin to sense, 
outwardly. 

Unity isn't the end of the road, simply the furthest Maharishi could go with a 
symptomatic description. Unity is not the same thing as Yoga, or Union, 
comprehensively. Unity SOC is the state of Arjuna's mind before Krishna's 
discourse takes him beyond That.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill"  wrote:
> > 
> > Yep, went back and read posts 312097 and 299555.
> > 
> > I pointed out to the "Muni of Monte Cassino" (a number of times)
> > that none of the descriptions of his purported "Unity Consciousness"
> > conform to Shankara's explanations - whether in the BrahmaSutraBhasya,
> > UpanishadBhasya or BhagavadGitaBhasya.
> > 
> > Such "grand enlightenment" appears to have been Robin's own
> > neo-Advaitic epiphanies later aggrandized and grafted upon Maharishi's
> > explanations.
> 
> Nuh-uh. Maharishi's teaching was where he first encountered
> explanations of enlightenment.
> 
> > Maharishi's descriptions themselves are a form of
> > neo-yogic advaita and Robin was unwilling to tacitly match his own
> > purported "enlightenment" with the explanations of traditional
> > advaita.
> 
> Right. He was a disciple of Maharishi.
> 
> > He wouldn't even continue a conversation bringing it up for
> > consideration.
> > 
> > This unwillingness was, for me, a clue to Robin's delusive
> > self-absorption .
> 
> Actually it was completely irrelevant. Think about it for
> a minute. What good would it have done him at this point to
> consider matching his experience with that of other
> descriptions? What good would it have done him back then,
> for that matter?
> 
> You've really never made any sense on this topic, empty.
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[obbajeeba]

Thanks, Share,

Brain farts made me think of combustion.
Does belief make this happen, or is it just a spontaneous en-lighting
experience?

http://in.screen.yahoo.com/baby-catches-fire-own-173000572.html
<http://in.screen.yahoo.com/baby-catches-fire-own-173000572.html>


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> In the Veda is written
> Brahman says: my indestructible maya
> Maybe the world is simply God's self deluded brain fart!
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" rorygoff@ wrote:
> >
> > My (admittedly dim) recollection of the whole "emptiness vs.
fullness" dialectic is it was simply two ways of seeing Brahman or
Wholeness -- the Nirguna, essentially Wholeness perceived through the
mind as "No-thing," the unchanging Void, which may take over all of the
"relative" in a kind of Dark Night of the Soul (or "crucifixion" or
"Nirvana"); and the Saguna, or Wholeness perceived through the heart as
"Every-thing," discovered on ceasing the hitherto-unconscious resistance
to the unchanging Void (and judgment of "out there"), and surrendering
whole-heartedly into That as the Emptiful Us (or "resurrection")... but
doubtless this is merely the self-deluded brain-fart of a raving
tranced-out guru wanna-be.
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to
GC is one of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the
entire spectrum of perceived reality to consider, but is not the
movement from UC, onward. Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are
the same. There can also be finest perception in GC and not a shred of
UC.
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement
from CC to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the
fullness of emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that
there is something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that
something else is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that
emptiness. Of course under the influence of a soma laden physiology,
especially the heart, that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of
emptiness so not separate at all.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely
allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >  From: iranitea no_re...@yahoogroups.com
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Â
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity
predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's
singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to
grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in
the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion
begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart
and intellect begin to sense, outwardly.
> > > > >
> > > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even
though, I don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind
me of a series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course -
where he speaks of the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of
emptiness (both he calls 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous
of duality here. (I don't think he means the emptiness of the
Buddhists).
> > > >
> > > > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity,
despite of the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place
where it is not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and
he speaks of Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness -
Fullness is on the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this
is highly allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for
Shakti, but may be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one
you describe.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

My (admittedly dim) recollection of the whole "emptiness vs. fullness" 
dialectic is it was simply two ways of seeing Brahman or Wholeness -- the 
Nirguna, essentially Wholeness perceived through the mind as "No-thing," the 
unchanging Void, which may take over all of the "relative" in a kind of Dark 
Night of the Soul (or "crucifixion" or "Nirvana"); and the Saguna, or Wholeness 
perceived through the heart as "Every-thing," discovered on ceasing the 
hitherto-unconscious resistance to the unchanging Void (and judgment of "out 
there"), and surrendering whole-heartedly into That as the Emptiful Us (or 
"resurrection")... but doubtless this is merely the self-deluded brain-fart of 
a raving tranced-out guru wanna-be. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum of 
> perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. Both 
> the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be finest 
> perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC to 
> > GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else is, 
> > fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course under 
> > the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, that 
> > emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate at all.
> > 
> > 
> > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely allegorical 
> > but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: iranitea 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > 
> > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a series 
> > of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he speaks of 
> > the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both he calls 
> > 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. (I don't 
> > think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > 
> > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite of 
> > the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it is 
> > not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks of 
> > Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is on 
> > the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but may 
> > be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

In the Veda is written
Brahman says: my indestructible maya
Maybe the world is simply God's self deluded brain fart!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> My (admittedly dim) recollection of the whole "emptiness vs. fullness" 
> dialectic is it was simply two ways of seeing Brahman or Wholeness -- the 
> Nirguna, essentially Wholeness perceived through the mind as "No-thing," the 
> unchanging Void, which may take over all of the "relative" in a kind of Dark 
> Night of the Soul (or "crucifixion" or "Nirvana"); and the Saguna, or 
> Wholeness perceived through the heart as "Every-thing," discovered on ceasing 
> the hitherto-unconscious resistance to the unchanging Void (and judgment of 
> "out there"), and surrendering whole-heartedly into That as the Emptiful Us 
> (or "resurrection")... but doubtless this is merely the self-deluded 
> brain-fart of a raving tranced-out guru wanna-be. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> > of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum 
> > of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. 
> > Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be 
> > finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC 
> > > to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else 
> > > is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course 
> > > under the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, 
> > > that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate 
> > > at all.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: iranitea 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > 
> > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a 
> > > series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he 
> > > speaks of the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both 
> > > he calls 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. 
> > > (I don't think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > > 
> > > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite 
> > > of the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it 
> > > is not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks 
> > > of Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is 
> > > on the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but 
> > > may be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the
> fact, but as a map, it sucks, big time.

That isn't what I'm saying either. Never mind.



> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > 
> > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly enough 
> > >is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will be a 
> > >process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM campus 
> > >prove that.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > 
> > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > just that.
> > > > 
> > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that 
> > > > > pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established 
> > > > > - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of 
> > > > > pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their 
> > > > > dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure 
> > > > > awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's game 
> > > > > of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

Well as Shrek would say, better out than in!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
> >
> > Dom, dom, I think he meant, nap out.  Typo, I guess. ;)
> > One sees lots of napping in the domes.
> 
>  
> Ayuh. And brain-farts, too, IIRC, at least in the men's dome. I hear the 
> women are too lady-like for that.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> > >
> > > ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > >
> > ---  iranitea  wrote:
> >
> > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.

(Just for the record, iranitea's reply is meaningless in the
context of what he was commenting on. He knows that but was
just trying to be clever.)

> ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> 
> Which means he was never enlightened in the past.

Maybe, maybe not.

> Please note, he also claimed that Khomeni was enlightened.

Um, yes, did you think I wasn't aware of this?
  
> He even seemed to imply that his E was hindu type and 
> Khomeni's E was islamic type.

Sort of, yes. Different religious contexts. And...?

You know, it's just so *foolish* for anyone here to try
to discern what it was that happened to Robin some 36
years ago. It's foolish *in general* for any of us to
try to determine another person's state of consciousness.

We just are not in a position to know when the only
actual *data* we have are what the person him/herself
says about his/her subjective experience. And it's even
more of a limitation when that data is in the form of
words on a monitor screen, rather than a "live" encounter
with the person himself.

What is truly ludicrous--infantile, in fact, not to
mention obnoxious--is to argue with or even *attack* a
person for describing his subjective experience as
enlightenment, as if you could possibly know more about
the nature of what he experienced than he does on the
basis of your book-larnin' (or even your own experiences).

Jason, you said in your post to Emily that you were just
trying to be "objective." Well, you really can't *be*
objective about another person's *subjective* state.

Seems to me the appropriate stance toward a person who
has made a claim of enlightenment, currently or in the
past, is a neutral one, without judgment one way or the
other. Just accept what the person says for what it is,
asking questions if what the person says is unclear.
Don't try to stuff them into some box to fit *your*
understanding of what enlightenment is and isn't, no
matter how many ancient texts you've studied.

And don't sell the universe--nature--short. There's more
than one way to skin a cat, more ways than any of us are
able to imagine. I would go so far as to say that no two
individuals have ever developed enlightenment the same way,
or experienced it the same way once it was developed.

Enlightenment just isn't *conceptual*.

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba  wrote:
>
> Dom, dom, I think he meant, nap out.  Typo, I guess. ;)
> One sees lots of napping in the domes.

 
Ayuh. And brain-farts, too, IIRC, at least in the men's dome. I hear the women 
are too lady-like for that.

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[obbajeeba]

Dom, dom, I think he meant, nap out.  Typo, I guess. ;)
One sees lots of napping in the domes.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> I've never seen anyone in the Dome with a map out!
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the fact, but 
> > as a map, it sucks, big time.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > 
> > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly 
> > > >enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will 
> > > >be a process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM 
> > > >campus prove that.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > just that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, 
> > > > > > that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is 
> > > > > > established - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of 
> > > > > > pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their 
> > > > > > dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure 
> > > > > > awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's 
> > > > > > game of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[RoryGoff]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on what 
> the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> I am That CC
> Thou art That GC
> All this is That UC
> That alone is Brahman
 
One of my all-time favorite formulas! (Or stories, if you prefer) :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the fact, but as a 
map, it sucks, big time.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> 
> Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly enough 
> >is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will be a 
> >process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM campus 
> >prove that.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > 
> > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > just that.
> > > 
> > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that 
> > > > pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established - 
> > > > Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > 
> > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of pure 
> > > > awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their dream of 
> > > > ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure awareness stays 
> > > > largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you 
> > > > mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > 
> > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

I don't think the more in UC has to do with identity. I think in CC the 
identity is already infinite. But not perception, and there is duality between 
that and the finest relative in GC. In UC the duality drops away. In Brahman it 
drops away not only in terms of the first object of perception but for all of 
them.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> I wasn't aware that we disagreed on what the nature of that more is? Can you 
> explain, please?
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
> >
> > Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on what 
> > the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> > I am That CC
> > Thou art That GC
> > All this is That UC
> > That alone is Brahman
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Doc, I think we're saying the same thing, simply using different 
> > > > language. I agree that the Me Self of CC and the Me Self of GC are the 
> > > > same, infinite, absolute, fullness of fullness NON CHANGING. 
> > > 
> > > **Although the Jiva is realized in CC and GC, there is further for it to 
> > > go, in realizing its infinite identity. So although it is in essence, 
> > > non-changing, in terms of our relationship with it, it DOES change, and 
> > > expand further from its state in CC and GC, and UC. Infinity becoming 
> > > more infinite, not simply in terms of its potential, but in terms of its 
> > > identity.
> > > 
> > > > But in CC the relative is seen as separate and different, ever 
> > > > changing. Actually Maharishi calls the relative a mass of death, 
> > > > because of its ever changing quality. It is not until the finest 
> > > > relative joins the Me Self in infinitude that UC is realized.
> > > 
> > > **Yes, although the dynamic is similar, there is an identity shift that 
> > > occurs after UC. Unity Consciousness is recognizing the oneness between 
> > > you and me. Still an ego-trip.
> > > 
> > > **There are similar dynamics of transcendence and growth, in every stage, 
> > > as the Jiva matures, but each phase serves a distinct purpose, and it is 
> > > incorrect to say that the journey from CC to GC, is the same as that from 
> > > UC, on. So, we are not really saying the same thing, though both 
> > > descriptions are related, as being part of the overall process of 
> > > enlightenment.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:28 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is 
> > > > one of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire 
> > > > spectrum of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from 
> > > > UC, onward. Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There 
> > > > can also be finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from 
> > > > > CC to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the 
> > > > > fullness of emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized 
> > > > > that there is something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that 
> > > > > something else is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that 
> > > > > emptiness. Of course under the influence of a soma laden physiology, 
> > > > > especially the heart, that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of 
> > > > > emptiness so not separate at all.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > &

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

I've never seen anyone in the Dome with a map out!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the fact, but as 
> a map, it sucks, big time.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > 
> > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly enough 
> > >is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will be a 
> > >process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM campus 
> > >prove that.
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > 
> > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > just that.
> > > > 
> > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that 
> > > > > pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established 
> > > > > - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of 
> > > > > pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their 
> > > > > dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure 
> > > > > awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's game 
> > > > > of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Does Judy go to the Dome? I am confused.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> I've never seen anyone in the Dome with a map out!
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, that's what I meant too. It makes perfect sense after the fact, but 
> > as a map, it sucks, big time.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened
> > > 
> > > Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
> > > Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
> > > a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly 
> > > >enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will 
> > > >be a process followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM 
> > > >campus prove that.
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > > > > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > > > > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > > > > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > > > > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > > > > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > > > > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > > > > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > > > > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > > > > just that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My opinion, anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, 
> > > > > > that pure awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is 
> > > > > > established - Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of 
> > > > > > pure awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their 
> > > > > > dream of ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure 
> > > > > > awareness stays largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's 
> > > > > > game of, "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment 
> > > > > > > > (kaivalya), 
> > > > > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" 
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

I wasn't aware that we disagreed on what the nature of that more is? Can you 
explain, please?


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sharelong60"  wrote:
>
> Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on what 
> the nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
> I am That CC
> Thou art That GC
> All this is That UC
> That alone is Brahman
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > Doc, I think we're saying the same thing, simply using different 
> > > language. I agree that the Me Self of CC and the Me Self of GC are the 
> > > same, infinite, absolute, fullness of fullness NON CHANGING. 
> > 
> > **Although the Jiva is realized in CC and GC, there is further for it to 
> > go, in realizing its infinite identity. So although it is in essence, 
> > non-changing, in terms of our relationship with it, it DOES change, and 
> > expand further from its state in CC and GC, and UC. Infinity becoming more 
> > infinite, not simply in terms of its potential, but in terms of its 
> > identity.
> > 
> > > But in CC the relative is seen as separate and different, ever changing. 
> > > Actually Maharishi calls the relative a mass of death, because of its 
> > > ever changing quality. It is not until the finest relative joins the Me 
> > > Self in infinitude that UC is realized.
> > 
> > **Yes, although the dynamic is similar, there is an identity shift that 
> > occurs after UC. Unity Consciousness is recognizing the oneness between you 
> > and me. Still an ego-trip.
> > 
> > **There are similar dynamics of transcendence and growth, in every stage, 
> > as the Jiva matures, but each phase serves a distinct purpose, and it is 
> > incorrect to say that the journey from CC to GC, is the same as that from 
> > UC, on. So, we are not really saying the same thing, though both 
> > descriptions are related, as being part of the overall process of 
> > enlightenment.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:28 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is 
> > > one of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire 
> > > spectrum of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from 
> > > UC, onward. Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There 
> > > can also be finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from 
> > > > CC to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the 
> > > > fullness of emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that 
> > > > there is something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that 
> > > > something else is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that 
> > > > emptiness. Of course under the influence of a soma laden physiology, 
> > > > especially the heart, that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of 
> > > > emptiness so not separate at all.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  From: iranitea 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to 
> > > > > one's singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized 
> > > > > state to grow beyond the Unity SO

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[sharelong60]

Doc, I agree that there is more to go after UC. I'd say we disagree on what the 
nature of that more is. Maybe it's like this:
I am That CC
Thou art That GC
All this is That UC
That alone is Brahman

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Doc, I think we're saying the same thing, simply using different language. 
> > I agree that the Me Self of CC and the Me Self of GC are the same, 
> > infinite, absolute, fullness of fullness NON CHANGING. 
> 
> **Although the Jiva is realized in CC and GC, there is further for it to go, 
> in realizing its infinite identity. So although it is in essence, 
> non-changing, in terms of our relationship with it, it DOES change, and 
> expand further from its state in CC and GC, and UC. Infinity becoming more 
> infinite, not simply in terms of its potential, but in terms of its identity.
> 
> > But in CC the relative is seen as separate and different, ever changing. 
> > Actually Maharishi calls the relative a mass of death, because of its ever 
> > changing quality. It is not until the finest relative joins the Me Self in 
> > infinitude that UC is realized.
> 
> **Yes, although the dynamic is similar, there is an identity shift that 
> occurs after UC. Unity Consciousness is recognizing the oneness between you 
> and me. Still an ego-trip.
> 
> **There are similar dynamics of transcendence and growth, in every stage, as 
> the Jiva matures, but each phase serves a distinct purpose, and it is 
> incorrect to say that the journey from CC to GC, is the same as that from UC, 
> on. So, we are not really saying the same thing, though both descriptions are 
> related, as being part of the overall process of enlightenment.
> > 
> > 
> > ________
> >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:28 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> > of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum 
> > of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. 
> > Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be 
> > finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC 
> > > to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else 
> > > is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course 
> > > under the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, 
> > > that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate 
> > > at all.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: iranitea 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > 
> > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a 
> > > series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he 
> > > speaks of the fullness of f

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

excuses, excuses! :-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> I think they know it already. And like the rest of us, doing their best to 
> live this knowing in life (-:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: "doctordumbass@..." 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 9:24 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> Sounds good - please pass this along to those practicing the sidhi 
> techniques! :-)
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > I'd say this is why Maharishi came out with the sidhas: so that these 
> > concepts do not have to be torture but can be simply yet fully lived.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: "doctordumbass@" 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:30 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > To your last point, yes, these concepts are torture, if they are not 
> > realized.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is 
> > > one of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire 
> > > spectrum of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from 
> > > UC, onward. Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There 
> > > can also be finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from 
> > > > CC to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the 
> > > > fullness of emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that 
> > > > there is something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that 
> > > > something else is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that 
> > > > emptiness. Of course under the influence of a soma laden physiology, 
> > > > especially the heart, that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of 
> > > > emptiness so not separate at all.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  From: iranitea 
> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to 
> > > > > one's singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized 
> > > > > state to grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still 
> > > > > present in the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality 
> > > > > is an illusion begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible 
> > > > > oneness that the heart and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > > 
> > > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, 
> > > > I don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a 
> > > > series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he 
> > > > speaks of the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both 
> > > > he calls 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality 
> > > > here. (I don't think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > > > 
> > > > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, 
> > > > despite of the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a 
> > > > place where it is not,at least the possibility of such a place, 
> > > > emptiness, and he speaks of Fullness moving because of the fear it has 
> > > > of emptiness - Fullness is on the move - was the phrase he used. I 
> > > > always thought, this is highly allegorically, fullness on the move 
> > > > would be a synonym for Shakti, but may be it is borne out of an 
> > > > experience, just like the one you describe.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
>
> That's allright Emily. Robin is really a warm, friendly, 
> kind, compasssionate person.

Yes. Thank you for making that point, Jason. One would
never know this from the way some here go after him,
though.




> The point is I was making an assessment objectively as 
> possible.  This dosen't make him any less of a human being. 
>  He too is a seeker like the rest of us. 
> 
> 
> ---  "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> >
> > Jason, I concede to ignorance on the matter of "enlightenment."  Now, "an 
> > enlightenment experience" is something else altogether in my mind.  My 
> > conscience had a pang (I'd like to call it a moment of enlightenment) on my 
> > drive towards the ocean today (my life is like a milk run - I have so many 
> > stops I can never get anywhere) and I'd like to apologize for the rude and 
> > crude term (pull your head out of your ass) I used.  I was channeling my 
> > father on that one, but as I'm trying to teach my children that they can't 
> > blame *everything* on their mother, I will give dear old dad a break on 
> > this.  I won't say that one again - even to Barry.  
> > 
> > I could also blame my rudeness on the cup of coffee, the upset within over 
> > the situation in Syria, or the idea that I find the discussion of "whether 
> > or not Robin was enlightened, was never enlightened (according to certain 
> > criteria), is still enlightened and doesn't know it, etc. etc., kind of 
> > pointless.  However, I'll just stick with the apology and tell you that I'm 
> > sorry I was such a jerk.  Emily. 
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ---  "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Re: "You speak as if he really had an enlightenment experience."
> > > > 
> > > > Of course he did, you numbskull - not that he now considers it the 
> > > > accurate "reality" by which life is lived.  You should be able to pick 
> > > > up on this - even I, with enlightenment experiences (back in the day) 
> > > > attributable only to LSD, have the requisite brain cells left necessary 
> > > > to objectively determine this fact.  You haven't done your research. 
> > > > Clearly he wrote sincerely - back then and now (and even as the Master 
> > > > of Irony - he's sincere - that's the brilliance of it all, really).  
> > > > Jason, you need to pull your head out of your ass on this and go get a 
> > > > cuppa something. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > I agree that he wrote sincerely.  However, I doubt that he 
> > > was really in enlightenment or any higher state.  Robin's 
> > > recount of those "experiences" simply doesn't tally with the 
> > > accounts of other yogis and seekers.
> > > 
> > > Basicaly, in eastern philosophy enlightenment is an one way 
> > > trip.  You discover who you are and that's it.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Uh-huh. Delusional then, when thinking that the Ayatollah
> > > > > Khomeini was
> > > > > > > > > in Unity Consciousness (just like him) but so NOT delusional
> > > > > now, when
> > > > > > > > > trying to blame all of this on "intelligences and forces 
> > > > > > > > > beyond
> > > > > his own
> > > > > > > > > control and understanding."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For the record, Robin has repeatedly blamed his own character
> > > > > > > > flaws for the ability of these intelligences and forces he
> > > > > > > > speaks of to influence him. Barry carefully omits to mention
> > > > > > > > this.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > You mean something like the devil or satan?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I suppose something *like* that, but you'd have to ask him.
> > > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Could it be 'Dissociative Identity Disorder'?
> > > > > 
> > > > > http://sfhelp.org/gwc/false_self.htm
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > Robin's statement is downright schizophrenic.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oh? Would you like to elaborate? (Which statement?)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > He speaks as if he literally sees these "intelligences" and
> > > > > "forces", which IMO are imaginary.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > Has it occured to you that it's *you* who could be in
> > > > > > > delusion about Robin's enlightenment and experiences?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What would my delusion be, exactly? What do you think my
> > > > > > beliefs are about Robin?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just out of curiosity, do you believe there is no
> > > > > > intelligence nor any forces in the universe beyond your
> > > > > > control and understanding?
> > > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > You speak as if he really had an enlightenment experience.
> > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened

Not what I meant by "scheme." I meant something like
Maharishi's "Seven States of Consciousness"--an outline,
a format, a schedule, a list of "symptoms."




>, the very best that they can do is exhaust themselves, which oddly enough is 
>how awakening happens. So, yes, there never has and never will be a process 
>followed that results in liberation. The wraiths on the MUM campus prove that.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> > ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> > scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> > someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> > experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> > 
> > Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> > others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> > "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> > any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> > in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> > just that.
> > 
> > My opinion, anyway.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that pure 
> > > awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established - 
> > > Believe me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > > 
> > > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of pure 
> > > awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their dream of 
> > > ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure awareness stays 
> > > largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you 
> > > mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > > >
> > > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > > 
> > > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > > 
> > > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

I agree. If a person schemes to become enlightened, the very best that they can 
do is exhaust themselves, which oddly enough is how awakening happens. So, yes, 
there never has and never will be a process followed that results in 
liberation. The wraiths on the MUM campus prove that.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
> ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
> scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
> someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
> experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.
> 
> Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
> others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
> "rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
> any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
> in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
> just that.
> 
> My opinion, anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that pure 
> > awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established - Believe 
> > me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> > 
> > The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of pure 
> > awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their dream of 
> > ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure awareness stays 
> > largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you 
> > mine, if you show me yours. You go first." 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > >
> > > cardemaister wrote:
> > > 
> > > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > > > the guNa-s become 
> > > >
> > > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > > 
> > > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > > 
> > > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > > 
> > > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

I think they know it already. And like the rest of us, doing their best to live 
this knowing in life (-:





 From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 9:24 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
Sounds good - please pass this along to those practicing the sidhi techniques! 
:-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> I'd say this is why Maharishi came out with the sidhas: so that these 
> concepts do not have to be torture but can be simply yet fully lived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: "doctordumbass@..." 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:30 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> 
> 
> 
>   
> To your last point, yes, these concepts are torture, if they are not realized.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> > of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum 
> > of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. 
> > Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be 
> > finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC 
> > > to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else 
> > > is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course 
> > > under the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, 
> > > that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate 
> > > at all.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: iranitea 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > 
> > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a 
> > > series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he 
> > > speaks of the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both 
> > > he calls 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. 
> > > (I don't think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > > 
> > > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite 
> > > of the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it 
> > > is not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks 
> > > of Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is 
> > > on the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but 
> > > may be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> > >
> >
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[authfriend]

Over the years I've been on this forum, I have gradually
ceased to believe that there is a universally applicable
scheme for the development of enlightenment, such that if
someone doesn't have *this* experience or does have *that*
experience, it means they are (or are not) enlightened.

Some experiences (or lack of same) may be more common than
others, but you can't make absolute, across-the-board
"rules" that apply to all individuals without exception,
any more than you can do it with the experience of falling
in love. The uniqueness of first-person ontology remains
just that.

My opinion, anyway.





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that pure 
> awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established - Believe 
> me, I have tried, diligently!! 
> 
> The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of pure 
> awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their dream of 
> ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure awareness stays 
> largely hidden from view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you mine, 
> if you show me yours. You go first." 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > cardemaister wrote:
> > 
> > > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > > the guNa-s become 
> > >
> > > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > > universe that could reverse that process... 
> > 
> > That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > > 
> > > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> > 
> > Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> Doc, I think we're saying the same thing, simply using different language. I 
> agree that the Me Self of CC and the Me Self of GC are the same, infinite, 
> absolute, fullness of fullness NON CHANGING. 

**Although the Jiva is realized in CC and GC, there is further for it to go, in 
realizing its infinite identity. So although it is in essence, non-changing, in 
terms of our relationship with it, it DOES change, and expand further from its 
state in CC and GC, and UC. Infinity becoming more infinite, not simply in 
terms of its potential, but in terms of its identity.

> But in CC the relative is seen as separate and different, ever changing. 
> Actually Maharishi calls the relative a mass of death, because of its ever 
> changing quality. It is not until the finest relative joins the Me Self in 
> infinitude that UC is realized.

**Yes, although the dynamic is similar, there is an identity shift that occurs 
after UC. Unity Consciousness is recognizing the oneness between you and me. 
Still an ego-trip.

**There are similar dynamics of transcendence and growth, in every stage, as 
the Jiva matures, but each phase serves a distinct purpose, and it is incorrect 
to say that the journey from CC to GC, is the same as that from UC, on. So, we 
are not really saying the same thing, though both descriptions are related, as 
being part of the overall process of enlightenment.
> 
> 
> 
>  From: "doctordumbass@..." 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:28 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum of 
> perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. Both 
> the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be finest 
> perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC to 
> > GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else is, 
> > fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course under 
> > the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, that 
> > emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate at all.
> > 
> > 
> > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely allegorical 
> > but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  From: iranitea 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > 
> > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a series 
> > of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he speaks of 
> > the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both he calls 
> > 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. (I don't 
> > think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > 
> > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite of 
> > the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it is 
> > not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks of 
> > Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is on 
> > the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but may 
> > be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Sounds good - please pass this along to those practicing the sidhi techniques! 
:-)

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> I'd say this is why Maharishi came out with the sidhas: so that these 
> concepts do not have to be torture but can be simply yet fully lived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  From: "doctordumbass@..." 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:30 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
>  
> 
> 
>   
> To your last point, yes, these concepts are torture, if they are not realized.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> > of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum 
> > of perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. 
> > Both the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be 
> > finest perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> > >
> > > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC 
> > > to GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else 
> > > is, fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course 
> > > under the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, 
> > > that emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate 
> > > at all.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely 
> > > allegorical but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  From: iranitea 
> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > > 
> > > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a 
> > > series of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he 
> > > speaks of the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both 
> > > he calls 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. 
> > > (I don't think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > > 
> > > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite 
> > > of the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it 
> > > is not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks 
> > > of Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is 
> > > on the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but 
> > > may be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

I'd say this is why Maharishi came out with the sidhas: so that these concepts 
do not have to be torture but can be simply yet fully lived.





 From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:30 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
To your last point, yes, these concepts are torture, if they are not realized.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
>
> I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one 
> of perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum of 
> perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. Both 
> the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be finest 
> perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC to 
> > GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> > emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> > something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else is, 
> > fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course under 
> > the influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, that 
> > emptiness turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate at all.
> > 
> > 
> > And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely allegorical 
> > but also quite literal, mean physical.
> > 
> > 
> > ________________
> >  From: iranitea 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> > >
> > > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in 
> > > the Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion 
> > > begins to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart 
> > > and intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > > 
> > Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> > don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a series 
> > of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he speaks of 
> > the fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both he calls 
> > 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. (I don't 
> > think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> > 
> > He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite of 
> > the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it is 
> > not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks of 
> > Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is on 
> > the move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> > allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but may 
> > be it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
> >
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Jason]

That's allright Emily. Robin is really a warm, friendly, 
kind, compasssionate person.

The point is I was making an assessment objectively as 
possible.  This dosen't make him any less of a human being. 
 He too is a seeker like the rest of us. 


---  "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
>
> Jason, I concede to ignorance on the matter of "enlightenment."  Now, "an 
> enlightenment experience" is something else altogether in my mind.  My 
> conscience had a pang (I'd like to call it a moment of enlightenment) on my 
> drive towards the ocean today (my life is like a milk run - I have so many 
> stops I can never get anywhere) and I'd like to apologize for the rude and 
> crude term (pull your head out of your ass) I used.  I was channeling my 
> father on that one, but as I'm trying to teach my children that they can't 
> blame *everything* on their mother, I will give dear old dad a break on this. 
>  I won't say that one again - even to Barry.  
> 
> I could also blame my rudeness on the cup of coffee, the upset within over 
> the situation in Syria, or the idea that I find the discussion of "whether or 
> not Robin was enlightened, was never enlightened (according to certain 
> criteria), is still enlightened and doesn't know it, etc. etc., kind of 
> pointless.  However, I'll just stick with the apology and tell you that I'm 
> sorry I was such a jerk.  Emily. 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > ---  "emilymae.reyn"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Re: "You speak as if he really had an enlightenment experience."
> > > 
> > > Of course he did, you numbskull - not that he now considers it the 
> > > accurate "reality" by which life is lived.  You should be able to pick up 
> > > on this - even I, with enlightenment experiences (back in the day) 
> > > attributable only to LSD, have the requisite brain cells left necessary 
> > > to objectively determine this fact.  You haven't done your research. 
> > > Clearly he wrote sincerely - back then and now (and even as the Master of 
> > > Irony - he's sincere - that's the brilliance of it all, really).  Jason, 
> > > you need to pull your head out of your ass on this and go get a cuppa 
> > > something. 
> > > 
> > > 
> ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > 
> > I agree that he wrote sincerely.  However, I doubt that he 
> > was really in enlightenment or any higher state.  Robin's 
> > recount of those "experiences" simply doesn't tally with the 
> > accounts of other yogis and seekers.
> > 
> > Basicaly, in eastern philosophy enlightenment is an one way 
> > trip.  You discover who you are and that's it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Uh-huh. Delusional then, when thinking that the Ayatollah
> > > > Khomeini was
> > > > > > > > in Unity Consciousness (just like him) but so NOT delusional
> > > > now, when
> > > > > > > > trying to blame all of this on "intelligences and forces beyond
> > > > his own
> > > > > > > > control and understanding."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For the record, Robin has repeatedly blamed his own character
> > > > > > > flaws for the ability of these intelligences and forces he
> > > > > > > speaks of to influence him. Barry carefully omits to mention
> > > > > > > this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > You mean something like the devil or satan?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I suppose something *like* that, but you'd have to ask him.
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could it be 'Dissociative Identity Disorder'?
> > > > 
> > > > http://sfhelp.org/gwc/false_self.htm
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > > Robin's statement is downright schizophrenic.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh? Would you like to elaborate? (Which statement?)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > He speaks as if he literally sees these "intelligences" and
> > > > "forces", which IMO are imaginary.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > > Has it occured to you that it's *you* who could be in
> > > > > > delusion about Robin's enlightenment and experiences?
> > > > >
> > > > > What would my delusion be, exactly? What do you think my
> > > > > beliefs are about Robin?
> > > > >
> > > > > Just out of curiosity, do you believe there is no
> > > > > intelligence nor any forces in the universe beyond your
> > > > > control and understanding?
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > You speak as if he really had an enlightenment experience.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[Share Long]

Doc, I think we're saying the same thing, simply using different language. I 
agree that the Me Self of CC and the Me Self of GC are the same, infinite, 
absolute, fullness of fullness NON CHANGING. But in CC the relative is seen as 
separate and different, ever changing. Actually Maharishi calls the relative a 
mass of death, because of its ever changing quality. It is not until the finest 
relative joins the Me Self in infinitude that UC is realized.





 From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:28 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
 


  
I am sorry, but this is incorrect, Share. The movement from CC to GC is one of 
perceiving the finest relative. This gives the mind the entire spectrum of 
perceived reality to consider, but is not the movement from UC, onward. Both 
the "me" of CC, and the "me" of GC are the same. There can also be finest 
perception in GC and not a shred of UC. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long  wrote:
>
> iranitea, I would say that this is a description of the movement from CC to 
> GC where fullness of fullness, the Absolute moves into the fullness of 
> emptiness, the relative. The Self in CC has recognized that there is 
> something else and the heartfelt inquiry into what that something else is, 
> fuels the ability to overcome the fear of that emptiness. Of course under the 
> influence of a soma laden physiology, especially the heart, that emptiness 
> turns out to be the fullness of emptiness so not separate at all.
> 
> 
> And would it not be wonderful if these concepts were not merely allegorical 
> but also quite literal, mean physical.
> 
> 
> 
>  From: iranitea 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 6:13 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@  wrote:
> >
> > Robin could have been in Unity consciousness, where similarity 
> > predominates, over differences. But that SOC is still relative to one's 
> > singular identity. The identity must shift to a less localized state to 
> > grow beyond the Unity SOC. The core fear of duality is still present in the 
> > Unity SOC, although the perception that this duality is an illusion begins 
> > to take hold, due to the incontrovertible oneness that the heart and 
> > intellect begin to sense, outwardly. 
> > 
> Dr.D this is an interesting POV, what you say makes sense (even though, I 
> don't know what is really the case here). But it does remind me of a series 
> of tapes - probably the spiritual development course - where he speaks of the 
> fullness of fullness, and the fullness of emptiness (both he calls 
> 'fullness'). Obviously emptiness is synonymous of duality here. (I don't 
> think he means the emptiness of the Buddhists). 
> 
> He then goes on to describe, that the fullness, obviously Unity, despite of 
> the fact that it is everywhere, senses, that there is a place where it is 
> not,at least the possibility of such a place, emptiness, and he speaks of 
> Fullness moving because of the fear it has of emptiness - Fullness is on the 
> move - was the phrase he used. I always thought, this is highly 
> allegorically, fullness on the move would be a synonym for Shakti, but may be 
> it is borne out of an experience, just like the one you describe.
>


 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How the deluded see the world....

[doctordumbass]

Actually it is true, or at least I have verified it for myself, that pure 
awareness cannot be destroyed (muddied?) after it is established - Believe me, 
I have tried, diligently!! 

The very curious thing, though, is that someone can have a lot of pure 
awareness established, and yet, until they wake up from their dream of 
ego-bound identity, and surrender completely, the pure awareness stays largely 
hidden from view. I look at it as God's game of, "I'll show you mine, if you 
show me yours. You go first." 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> cardemaister wrote:
> 
> > As per yoga-suutras, when one "reaches" enlightenment (kaivalya), 
> > the guNa-s become 
> >
> > puruSaartha-shuunya. AFAIK, there's no force or power in the 
> > universe that could reverse that process... 
> 
> That's the standard belief, yes. Maybe it's not correct?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > 
> > > Robin claims enlightenment *in the past*, decades ago. 
> > 
> > Enlightenment is always *in the present*, never in the past.
> 
> Robin does not claim to be enlightened in the present.
>