Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Hi Harvey, > Is enlightenment a state? How could we tell if > someone were in the right state, or even if we were > in that state? I'd love to talk with you about this but I think you need to do us both a favor at the outset by defining " state. " I think this is one of those conversations that depends heavily on the definition of a key term. Best wishes, Rob - " Harvey Schneider " <haarvi1 <Realization > Friday, April 11, 2003 11:39 PM Re: Re: Judi's Ghost? > > > Hi Rob, > Is enlightenment a state? How could we tell if someone were > in the right state, or even if we were in that state? If enlightenment > is an understanding then it would seem to be subject to a simple > or complex explanation. We could take a multiple choice quiz > and get our enlightenment certificates at the end of the satsang > lecture. > Harvey > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Hi Harvey, > I wonder why you might think enlightenment involves > the ceasing to function of ego machinery. For many reasons. To cite just one, because Ramana Maharshi said so. > Why should anything have to stop? Because enlightenment, by definition, is seeing that the sense of " self " (in the sense of a doer and so forth) is an illusion. Because when the ego-illusion is seen through, it stops. Because in many traditions, it is believed that the best (perhaps only) way to see through the ego illusion is to stop it. The first sentence of Patanjali's famous Yoga textbook is, " Yoga is the stopping of motions of the mind. " > But who is the one telling > us this? Judi is telling us. When we say " Judi is dead, " we don't mean that Judi has ceased to write emails. We mean that Judi writes emails without any subjective sense that there is a self inside her that is directing this activity and making it happen. Best wishes, Rob - " Harvey Schneider " <haarvi1 <Realization > Friday, April 11, 2003 11:32 PM Re: Re: Judi's Ghost? > > Hi Bob, > I wonder why you might think enlightenment involves the ceasing to > function of ego machinery. Why should anything have to stop? > We are told that the old person has died. But who is the one telling > us this? > Harvey > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Hi Dan, > There's nothing to remind yourself of, Rob. Just sitting here, letting this be absorbed. > There's no one who needs be reminded. Okay, right. > Just remember this, a kiss is just a kiss, > a sigh is but a sigh -- Everything seems so flat and pleasureless in that mode. The absence of the bullshit is so keenly noted. Chelistically, Rob - " dan330033 " <dan330033 <Realization > Friday, April 11, 2003 6:41 PM Re: Judi's Ghost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Dear Tanya, > > The thing I really love about *Judi* is that she > couldn't give a f*** what I think of her, unlike the > rest of you whining brats. Yes, I agree. Also, she's funny as hell. The other day on her forum I asked her what she thought about the Vedantic idea of real Self in the heart cave, and she wrote back something like: " No self! No self! NO SELF! .... Works for me! " The word " me " , in that context, is so funny... I'm laughing again now. > Getting ready to die, - if not now when, - soon, you > wondrous creatures, soon. Good luck, Tanyaless Tanya. If it gets bad, keep in mind that you're no more ugly and no less wondrous than the rest of us. Love, Rob - " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan <Realization > Friday, April 11, 2003 8:40 PM Re: Judi's Ghost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > > There's nothing to remind yourself of, Rob. > > Just sitting here, letting this be absorbed. > > > There's no one who needs be reminded. > > Okay, right. > > > Just remember this, a kiss is just a kiss, > > a sigh is but a sigh -- > > Everything seems so flat and pleasureless in that > mode. The absence of the bullshit is so keenly > noted. > > Chelistically, > > Rob Ha! Indeed, Rob. It's just alternating pleasure and pain that builds up the scenario of drama. Without that drama -- It's just what it is. Chelated calcium to All, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 - " Rob Sacks " <editor <Realization > Monday, April 14, 2003 7:47 PM Re: Re: Judi's Ghost? > Dear Tanya, > > > > The thing I really love about *Judi* is that she > > couldn't give a f*** what I think of her, unlike the > > rest of you whining brats. > > Yes, I agree. Also, she's funny as hell. The other day > on her forum I asked her what she thought about the > Vedantic idea of real Self in the heart cave, and she > wrote back something like: > > " No self! No self! NO SELF! .... Works for me! " > > The word " me " , in that context, is so funny... I'm laughing > again now. > > > Getting ready to die, - if not now when, - soon, you > > wondrous creatures, soon. > > Good luck, Tanyaless Tanya. If it gets bad, keep in > mind that you're no more ugly and no less wondrous than > the rest of us. > > Love, > > Rob Hi Rob, First-off, I want to thank you for your clear and straightfoward responses to what I saw as challanging questions about your views on realisation - particularly the grounds you mentioned for believing in Judi's realization. I'm not sure I am yet clear about these issues, but I was impressed with the clarifications you presented. I also appreciated the reference you provided for Ramana's early thinking that his awakening experience may have been one of possession. This goes along with the idea that rather than living our lives, we are being lived. I have heard St Paul quoted as saying: " I live, no not I, but Christ lives in me. " I am curious about your question to Judi as to " the Vedantic idea of real Self in the heart cave. " Her answer of: " No self, No self, NO SELF " makes good sense. But this answer does not explain away the puzzle of why Ramana frequently spoke of tracing the 'I' to its home in the right side of the heart. He said that this heart which is the home of the 'I' is not the physical heart It would seem his statements were intended to be a guide to those pursuing self- inquiry, but I have no experience which might elucidate this idea. Still, there is no lack of seekers who claim to have verified Ramana's talk about the connection of the Self and the heart. Harvey 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.