--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter Sutphen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 18, 2005, at 10:03 AM, jyouells2000 wrote:
Agreed 'sign's of awakening' can only be self
reported. The difference
between nearly infinite and infinite is infinite.
It's a catagory
difference. Once it is clearly known that
unbounded is not a 'really
big space', and that eternal is not a 'really long
time' the whole
idea of relative signs falls apart...
In many traditions one checks ones View, their inner
experience and POV
with a teacher who's 'been there, done that'. I
can't tell you how many
people I've met who thought they were enlightened
after a certain
experience or shift in awareness. In every case the
experience was a
symptom of some part of awakening or some aspect of
the Path. In the
first part of my training a portion was on people
who will report
instances of enlightenment after practicing certain
practices, so there
is a practical literature out there on this very
topic, it's just not
generally discussed outside the tradition (let alone
on email lists).
-V.
Yes, what is usually discussed on an e-mail list are
peoples' mental models of enlightenment and how wrong
you are if you don't express your experience of
enlightenment within the confines of my mental model.
Thats among the reasons I find the use of the label of enlightenment
counter productive if not meaningless. It appears to me that there are
a variety of experience, the variety driven probably by different
nervous sytems, different practices, different starting points etc.
Discussion of experiences can be useful in clarifying whats happening.
Discussion of what the arbitrary labels of A E do or do not mean
seems less useful
Why people cling to using AE labels continues to baffle me. As Vaj
has pointed out in several recent posts, or my take on them, is that
there is always more stuff to unfold, more stuff to dissolve or
integrate. To draw a discrete line and say all of this is
pre-enlightenment and all of that is post enlightenment seems silly
and as you point out triggers a lot of silly discussion.
However, I am open to the possibility that some actually find real
value in using lsuch A E labels, categorizations and
differentiations (us and them). What puzzles me is why those that use
such labels don't appear to be able to define them well. I applaud you
(Peter) for your definition the other day:
CC is baby awakening. Cessation of identification of
consciousness with mind. End of I and me.
However, for me that definition raise the question: Is this both a
necessary and sufficient condition for enlightenment, per your POV?
Same question to Vaj (and for all of the following questions)
From your conceptual framework of defining what enlightenment means to
you, you appear to find this a necessary feature / experience /
fundamental shift. If there is not cessation of identification of
consciousness with mind --end of I and me, there is never anything
that could be called enlightenmet, in your view. Is that correct?
The larger question is whether just having cessation of
identification of consciousness with mind -- end of I and me is
singularly sufficient for you to use the label enlightened for
yourself or others? Or are there other necessary features / attributes
experience that are necessary for the enlightenment label?
I have no A E conceptual models and thus am not trying to fit any
experience into any conceptual model. Nor am I personally seeking to
conceptual posit what enlightenment is. Like I say, for me, its a
bogus concept. But since others find value in the term, and use it, it
facilitates communication to cleary define terms, particularly one
that has such a wide range of possible connotations. That said,
cessation of identification of consciousness with mind -- end of I
and me -- appears to me experientially to be a weak form or
preliminary sort of experience. But if state is what is meant by A
E, it would explain or give mor credence to the often banter claim
that so many are popping into A E.
So again, is cessation of identification of consciousness with mind --
end of I and me both a necessary and sufficient condition for
enlightenment and or awakening per your POV?
This question is directed specifically to Peter and Vaj, and Tom if he
is around, and certainly all others who which to contribute.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
