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

[Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW

Expand Messages
  • texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@aol.com>
    Hi 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
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi 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
      attributeless.

      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.
      different.

      Love
      Bobby G.


      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Gregory Goode
      <goode@d...> wrote:
      > The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can
      think 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.
      >
      > It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace
      the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking
      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).
      >
      > No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a
      Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....
      >
      > So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for
      the cessation of that experience too!
      >
      > Love,
      >
      > --Greg
      >
      > At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
      > >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i
      guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-)
      and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you
      standing on?
      > >what's wrong with Sarlo?
      > >mirela
      > >
      > > > understanding is experiential.
      > >
      > > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
      > > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
    • Athanor
      dear Greg, when you realised that there is no Santa, it was an experiential understanding.. (you have watched your parents-experience) mirela ... From: Gregory
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        dear Greg,
        when you realised that there is no Santa, it was an experiential understanding.. (you have watched your parents-experience)
        mirela
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Gregory Goode
        To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com ; meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 4:12 PM
        Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW


        The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can think 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.

        It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking 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).

        No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....

        So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for the cessation of that experience too!

        Love,

        --Greg

        At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
        >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you standing on?
        >what's wrong with Sarlo?
        >mirela
        >
        > > understanding is experiential.
        >
        > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
        > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        ADVERTISEMENT




        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Gregory Goode
        Dear Mirela, You re right -- that moment *was* an experience. I saw my parents do the stuff they attributed to Santa Claus, and the jig was up. That bit of
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Mirela,

          You're right -- that moment *was* an experience. I saw my parents do the stuff they attributed to Santa Claus, and the jig was up. That bit of seeing on my part was a definite experience in time and place, and came to an end.

          But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what was had dissolved. The belief in Santa Claus had dissolved. I didn't acquire a NEW belief to be rehearsed and practiced ("There is no Santa Claus"). Rather, it was the non-occurrence of the (mythical) experience of Santa Claus.

          That's one reason that the nondual path is sometimes called the "Via Negativa." It's not additive, it's subtractive.

          Love,

          --Greg

          At 07:09 PM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
          >dear Greg,
          >when you realised that there is no Santa, it was an experiential understanding.. (you have watched your parents-experience)
          >mirela
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: Gregory Goode
          > To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com ; meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 4:12 PM
          > Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW
          >
          >
          > The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can think 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.
          >
          > It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking 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).
          >
          > No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....
          >
          > So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for the cessation of that experience too!
          >
          > Love,
          >
          > --Greg
          >
          > At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
          > >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you standing on?
          > >what's wrong with Sarlo?
          > >mirela
          > >
          > > > understanding is experiential.
          > >
          > > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
          > > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          > ADVERTISEMENT
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
          >
          >
          >
          >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          >meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.