Guest guest Posted September 7, 2001 Report Share Posted September 7, 2001 > > Gary: Either these special experiences are somehow related to ordinary > experience, so we can meaningfully talk about them even if haltingly. > > > San: If a so called " special " experience can be talked about (whether > meaningfully or nonsensically), it means it can be objectifed. If any > experience can be objectified, it is no difference from the experience of > getting your butt kicked. This misses my point in an earlier email about objective correlates. Talk about any experience doesn't objectify the experience; it refers to the objective correlates (the context) of the experience. Enlightenment as an experience is no different from feeling kicked. No amount of talk gives you the experience. And talking about either doesn't suddenly transform them into something objective. The difference between the two experiences is that the context for feeling kicked is clearer. The aim of the science of enlightenment is to identify the context for the experience of enlightenment. Gary Gary Schouborg Performance Consulting Walnut Creek, CA garyscho Publications and professional services: http://home.att.net/~garyscho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 7, 2001 Report Share Posted September 7, 2001 Hiya Gary, - Gary Schouborg Realization Friday, September 07, 2001 11:10 PM Awareness during sleep > > Gary: Either these special experiences are somehow related to ordinary> experience, so we can meaningfully talk about them even if haltingly.> > > San: If a so called "special" experience can be talked about (whether> meaningfully or nonsensically), it means it can be objectifed. If any> experience can be objectified, it is no difference from the experience of> getting your butt kicked.This misses my point in an earlier email about objective correlates. Talkabout any experience doesn't objectify the experience; it refers to theobjective correlates (the context) of the experience. San: When you believe that apperception, or enlightenment or whatever terminology you wish to use, has objective correlates to it, and it's just a question of finding and establishing these correlates, what you in fact are believeing, is that apperception exists within the duality of a "subject" and a separate to it, the objective correlates of the experience of apperception. Whereas apperception is perceiving without a perceiver and thus has no objective correlates to it. --------- Enlightenment as anexperience is no different from feeling kicked. San: I agree all experiences essentially are the same. That is why enlightenment is not an experience. ----- No amount of talk gives youthe experience. And talking about either doesn't suddenly transform theminto something objective. San: When I say, if anything that can be objectified, then that's not the real Mcoy, what I mean is that anything which can be objectified, is really bringing it into the duality of a subject-object relationship. Enlightenment or apperception is the end of this subject-object dualism. ----------- The difference between the two experiences is thatthe context for feeling kicked is clearer. The aim of the science ofenlightenment is to identify the context for the experience ofenlightenment. San: The "identifier" of the context for the experience of enlightenment will perforce have to be apart, separate from that context and thus any resultant science, which evolves from such an identificationactivity can only be conceptual. However by all means carry on with full gusto, if that is what arises at your end, Gary. Phenomenality to be complete has to cover all hilarities. Cheers Sandeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.