---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
So you're saying that an enlightened person loses the ability to descriminate
between a flower and a duck?
Or loses the ability to name things because they see the fundamental unity in
the diversity?
That reads like you've
Lawson, there's a wonderful tape in which someone asks Maharishi if in Unity a
person could marry anyone. Maharishi laughs and then explains that differences
don't disappear in Unity. It's just that they no longer dominate awareness.
On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 10:43 PM,
Yep. I was curious about that when he said it, as I wasn't sure what sort of
perceptual change would occur, perhaps even through the senses. It is actually
the introduction of an ever deepening and abiding silence, inside and out,
which unifies all the diversity, and even softens any negative
Fleetwood, I had an experience of Unity once. But it wasn't so much about
silence. It was so subtly about familiarity. Everything I was perceiving seemed
so familiar to me. Not because it was known in the usual sense. But because it
was as familiar to me as I am to myself. Very very subtle, yet
yeah, that is what I call silence, or bliss, I don't know what else to call it
- it has a lot of attributes, and you use a great word for it - familiarity.
That being the case, knowledge automatically follows attention; there are no
boundaries to formally navigate, between subject and object,
Well, maybe, maybe not.
Pure consciousness during TM seems to be very closely aligned with EEG of the
preliminary aspect of creativity found in non-meditation research on
creativity, and the EEG found in really-long-term TMers (especially those
participating in the Invincible America course)
This may be above my pay-grade, but if one is a transcendentalist/idealist,
then belief in classic cause and effect is incompatible with that belief . . .
or one has to significantly qualify what is meant by cause and effect. Many
folks who refer to them selves as transcendentalists/idealists
The way Maharishi explained the illusion of Maya is rather different than
what a lot of people understand.
Consciousness is not an illusion, nor is what most people call reality.
The illusion is that there is a fundamental difference between them.
This is the veil of maya: a thin,
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, LEnglish5@... wrote :
The way Maharishi explained the illusion of Maya is rather different than
what a lot of people understand.
Consciousness is not an illusion, nor is what most people call reality.
The illusion is that there is a fundamental
On 10/22/2014 3:07 PM, inmadi...@hotmail.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
This may be above my pay-grade, but if one is a
transcendentalist/idealist, then belief in classic cause and effect is
incompatible with that belief . . . or one has to significantly
qualify what is meant by cause and effect.
So you're saying that an enlightened person loses the ability to descriminate
between a flower and a duck?
Or loses the ability to name things because they see the fundamental unity in
the diversity?
L
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote :
---In
11 matches
Mail list logo
