Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Interesting Comment From Email

Expand Messages
  • jodyrrr
    ... ly@y... ... I suppose Bob. However, any expectation about the experience of a realizer made by a non-realizer has no basis in fact, as only those who are
    Message 1 of 9 , Mar 12, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety <no_rep=
      ly@y...>
      wrote:
      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
      > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
      > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
      > <no_reply@y...>
      > > wrote:
      > > > One of our long time members had this to say about "Enlightened"
      > people:
      > > >
      > > > "When someone is making judgements about someone else, this alone
      > > > indicates that they see themselves as separate from the rest of
      > > > creation, and red-flags their not being enlightened."
      > > >
      > > > Comments?
      > >
      > > Just another occluding expectation about enlightenment.
      > >
      > > To believe you will cease to distinguish between different
      > > people and objects, let alone discard critical thought, is
      > > just one of the many things people *BELIEVE* (rather than
      > > know experientially) about enlightenment.
      >
      > Dear Jodiji,
      > Well, I hear what you are saying, and as with all your statements, I
      > respect and value it, but perhaps your judgement of the statement
      > being "Just another occluding expectation about enlightenment." may
      > also be 'Just another occluding expectation about enlightenment' as
      > well.

      I suppose Bob. However, any expectation about the experience of
      a realizer made by a non-realizer has no basis in fact, as only those
      who are realizers are in possession of the "facts." But even if a
      realizer made the above characterization, s/he is only speaking out
      of their own experience. Realizers, like all people, are as individual
      as snowflakes. One realizer may find no reason to evaluate the
      statements of others, another may spend all his time doing so.

      There are many examples of enlightened assholes. Nirsagadatta
      and U.G. Krishnamurti come to mind. Ramakrishna could also be
      quite the jerk in certain, limited circumstances, as were his two
      main disciples Vivekananda and Brahmananda, depending on the
      circumstances.

      > And your saying that says it condones a belief that one ceases
      > "to distinguish between different people and objects" may be just your
      > unique extraploation of what was said.

      True.

      > Viewed another way, I think it
      > can be seen that the statement shows the basic discrimination and
      > dispassion that are the foundations of Raja and Jnana Yoga, and not at
      > all a discarding of critical thought (which actually may be what the
      > fallen St. Martha might rightly call "a good thing").

      Again, we can look toward Vivekananda as an example of a realizer
      who was full of critical judgements and not afraid to express them,
      often much to the chargrin of his Western hosts. He travelled coast-
      to-coast in America in the end of the 19th century on a lecture/debating
      tour where he regularly handed his opponents a new round rear-end
      orifice.

      > > Believing such will only serve to create a template in
      > > the mind which enlightenment will not fit into (as it will
      > > not fit *ANY* template the mind creates for it.)
      >
      > Yes, I like and agree with the template/concept that enlightenment
      > will not fit into...any template the mind creates.

      And spiritual culture is literally *brimming* with these templates.
      Our writer's comments, regardless of where they are coming from
      experientially, only serve to distribute and reinforce one such
      template, that of enlightened folk always being nice and never
      having a reason to critique the statements of another.

      > > The end
      > > result is the occlusion of understanding due to mistaken
      > > impressions about it being taken for fact rather than the
      > > fiction they are.
      >
      > Well, couldn't this be seen as a judgement about the state of the
      > writer, and that they aren't enlightened, and know by experience of
      > what they are sharing here?

      That's one reading of it, and probably the closest to my intent.
      But, if we accept the writer as enlightened, then s/he is just
      imposing their personal definition of enlightenment, based on
      their own patterns of behavior and expectations for themselves.

      It follows the contours of the standard Vedic boilerplate about
      what enlightenment is and what it results in vis å vis the person
      it apparently happens to. But I've found in my own experience
      out of my own life, and that of my friends whom I would call
      jnanis, that enlightenment has no standard with regards to the
      individuals who come under its umbrella. IOW, there's just as
      many personal and individual differences in the enlightened
      as the unenlightened. Enlightenment doesn't change who you
      were, at least not all at once, at least not in every case.

      There is a brain, and that brain connects to memories, and
      these memories and patterns of behavior change over time,
      usually quite slowly, rather than all at once. So, while the
      understanding we are calling enlightenment is the same in
      terms of what becomes known to that life, the characteristics
      of that life are probably going to keep rolling in the same
      general manner that it always has.

      > And that what you have said is fact and
      > not fiction, but not so for what they said. Quite a judgement....and
      > to go back to the initial statement, does this mean that there are red
      > flags going up?

      The red flags of others have no bearing on 'this' or my life
      as an expounder on 'this'. I'm quite aware as an individual that
      I come off as an over-opinionated asshole, and I expect nobody
      to take my word for my own understanding. IOW, I send red flags
      up in others all the time, and it changes nothing with regards to
      what I as an individual know, or my convictions about what I am
      saying.

      I suppose others would call that pig-headed. All I can really
      say to them is, "Oink, oink." ;)

      > In any event, thanks for the good stuff. As always, your insight is
      > conducive to self inquiry and that surely is "a good thing".
      > Peace and blessings,
      > Bob

      No prob Bob. I'd apologize for giving enlightenment a bad name,
      but I see that as a good thing, as it helps to tear down those
      expectations and occluding templates that so many are trying
      to fit into their heads as a way to come to the understanding
      they seek.

      --jody.
    • medit8ionsociety
      ... Yo Bobby G, Actually, I think what we see on these lists that could be called beating a dead horse are the ever ongoing judgements about others states of
      Message 2 of 9 , Mar 12, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "texasbg2000"
        <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote:
        > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
        > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > One of our long time members had this to say about "Enlightened"
        > people:
        > >
        > > "When someone is making judgements about someone else, this alone
        > > indicates that they see themselves as separate from the rest of
        > > creation, and red-flags their not being enlightened."
        > >
        > > Comments?
        >
        > Hi Bob:
        >
        > I certainly don't want to beat a dead horse, but...
        >
        > it seems to me that making judgments about others is indeed an
        > indication of "'being' absorbed in one's mind".
        >
        > Love
        > Bobby G.

        Yo Bobby G,
        Actually, I think what we see on these lists that could be called
        "beating a dead horse" are the ever ongoing judgements about others
        states of consciousness. And to me too, this is certainly "'being'
        absorbed in one's mind". And I think that we all have better things to
        do than that:-)
        Peace and blessings,
        Bob
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.