1635[Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW
- Jan 2, 2003Hi Greg:
That is a great example, it cuts through the mud. However it seems
to me the word understand can mean either an experience or not.
If one means to know something then that is not experience. Knowing
is construed as consciousness in this sense which is pure and
If one means to have understanding dawn then it is. The dissolving
of a fantasy could be considered as an event/experience or not
depending on your understanding of the word.
I think timeline has something to do with it. Take the distraction
of sloth. It can keep me from meditating tonight. It can also be
considered a personality trait that limits my life's goals. These
two ways of looking at the same word while similar are still.
--- In email@example.com, Gregory Goode
> The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you canthink of - understanding is "in back of it." If understanding *were*
experiential (and I don't mean understanding how to fill out one's
tax form), then it would be just another whiff that comes and goes.
>the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking
> It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace
downstairs one Christmas eve and seeing my parents wrap the
presents. They talked about they'd make the bike be from Santa...).
But what was left was not a mental image constantly remembered and
rehearsed ("There is no Santa, there is no Santa).
>Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....
> No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a
>the cessation of that experience too!
> So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for
>guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-)
> At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
> >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i
and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you
> >what's wrong with Sarlo?
> > > understanding is experiential.
> > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
> > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>