Guest guest Posted July 19, 2006 Report Share Posted July 19, 2006 Hello Everyone- I have a topic that I keep coming back to in my mind. It is about the experience versus the explanation, that is the subjective approach versus the objective approach. For me I am always curious when one speaks of their visions how this manifests in their experience. Is it in a dream? or in the minds eye? does it appear in a closed eye view? does it appear in the normal field of vision? if so how does it look different than what is seen normally? or does your field of vision get completely replaced by the vision? I think this is just as important as the images that come. One reason for this is an interest in the degrees or manner of ecstatic states. Also I believe the way these visions come and how they feel has certain meaning for an individual in regards to the furthering of their subjective inquiry. The reflection on these experiential elements I think will retain an attention on the individual's subjectivity which is where all the real lessons are learned. How the symbols that are experienced fit into a system of thought, mystical or otherwise, is more of an objective approach, useful but not the same as the subjective approach. I feel the same about the usage of the word energy. I try not to use this word, probably mostly because I am contrary, but also because it is more often than not poorly defined when used and I am at a loss personally to be more accurate if I were to use it. The question in using the term energy is what kind of energy is it? how is it different from other energy? how is it transfered? and most telling is how do I differentiate energies? This is an objective approach and the last question, how do we differentiate energy, shows that really it is tied into the subjective experience. For me I am trying to use the word excitation as this is something I can qualify to a degree and again it puts the attention back to the subjective. Even though I feel that speaking of the subjective allows me to be more accurate finding accuracy is not an easy task. I think we conceptualize and speak through association and comparison which is an objective approach and as many of you know the ecstatic experience defies comparison to normative experience, so in being accurate one must accept a degree of fundamental inaccuracy. Regardless though for me I do gain a familiarity to different sorts of these experiences even though each experience is unique. So the effort to be accurate as accurate as possible may be useful in this regard. Some how in here I have a sense that I am referring to the two that is one and the one that is two as a fundamental aspect of the subjective inquiry. Does anyone see this as well? Particular, changing and elusive verses absolute, consistent and recognizable. Just a notion that is coming to me. Enough for now, more later- BBTY4TB to you all- Bret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 19, 2006 Report Share Posted July 19, 2006 Until we truly know ourselves without doubt, then we have to accept the concept of some inaccuracy. I agree with this completely. Visions.... where are they and how do we see them. Great questions, but I would love to know where they come from and why and what are outcomes. Do they serve a purpose? My last vision was behind my eyelids, as if they were the screen It was like watching a clear and detailed movie. I even got an address out of it. I was in a relaxed state, meditative. I asked my guide to 'show me a path I need to see'. Moments later, I was looking at a garden type cemetery, as I was standing on the outside of it by the street. It was very pretty with an iron fence and an address that said 'Garden 100th Tool St'. So if this rings a bell with anyone, please let me know. My view was taken quickly to inside a business building filled with Oriental design and professional business furniture. I felt as if was an Embassy of some sort. My view was from the next level up on a balcony looking down. There were two Asian men in suits sitting on a couch, then leaving. My view went down the hall and down stairs that I clearly remember. The second to the last step was longer than the rest, and I remember this used to bother me greatly. As I view the corridors below, I saw there was a woman and child, they too were Asian. The small 2 yr old began choking and I witnessed the woman she was with panicking and sobbing. I saw that I now entered the view as a whole person, turning into the person who was witnessing this. I tried to help the child, but failed and watched her die. My physical eyes opened and I heard the word 'Opar'. I didn't know who the woman was in my vision, but knew she was the Opar. The child was my daughter in a past life. I knew this was true to me. I sat there sobbing, wanting to know why I was shown this. At least I know where my great fear of choking came from. I would and still fall into a panic when one of my kids starts to cough from food. The experience was incredible! The details and realism were phenomenal. As far as energy, it is all linked together. We need to evolve more in order to connect more deeply into this oneness. When one is submerged in the oneness, everything makes perfect sense. It has to be experienced and not just told. Our human brains don't have the capability to fully understand it all. That's my 2 cents worth. lisa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 19, 2006 Report Share Posted July 19, 2006 Dear Brett Hi Yes lol. I tend to agree The subjective becomes the objective and then the objective becomes the subjective, in this context it seems to be similarities as to between time and space in its effects of, over wise known evolution of consciousness. Where as the spirit itself does not evolve because it is beyond duality and therefore unaffected by it. Though the subjective and objective become excited, then vibrates, due to the incoming awareness or association of spirit. Also; as thoughts become colored by prior experiences of the material world, the objective does as well and can become the subjective. It becomes an on going battle to what is reality yet we can distinguish what is astral and what is material when we remain balanced. Yet outside of k discussions the unbelievers would think we would be mad. SHHH its not for their eyes and ears unless they seek. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra On Behalf Of Bret Arenson Thursday, 20 July 2006 1:41 PM Visions and Excitation Hello Everyone- I have a topic that I keep coming back to in my mind. It is about the experience versus the explanation, that is the subjective approach versus the objective approach. For me I am always curious when one speaks of their visions how this manifests in their experience. Is it in a dream? or in the minds eye? does it appear in a closed eye view? does it appear in the normal field of vision? if so how does it look different than what is seen normally? or does your field of vision get completely replaced by the vision? I think this is just as important as the images that come. One reason for this is an interest in the degrees or manner of ecstatic states. Also I believe the way these visions come and how they feel has certain meaning for an individual in regards to the furthering of their subjective inquiry. The reflection on these experiential elements I think will retain an attention on the individual's subjectivity which is where all the real lessons are learned. How the symbols that are experienced fit into a system of thought, mystical or otherwise, is more of an objective approach, useful but not the same as the subjective approach. I feel the same about the usage of the word energy. I try not to use this word, probably mostly because I am contrary, but also because it is more often than not poorly defined when used and I am at a loss personally to be more accurate if I were to use it. The question in using the term energy is what kind of energy is it? how is it different from other energy? how is it transfered? and most telling is how do I differentiate energies? This is an objective approach and the last question, how do we differentiate energy, shows that really it is tied into the subjective experience. For me I am trying to use the word excitation as this is something I can qualify to a degree and again it puts the attention back to the subjective. Even though I feel that speaking of the subjective allows me to be more accurate finding accuracy is not an easy task. I think we conceptualize and speak through association and comparison which is an objective approach and as many of you know the ecstatic experience defies comparison to normative experience, so in being accurate one must accept a degree of fundamental inaccuracy. Regardless though for me I do gain a familiarity to different sorts of these experiences even though each experience is unique. So the effort to be accurate as accurate as possible may be useful in this regard. Some how in here I have a sense that I am referring to the two that is one and the one that is two as a fundamental aspect of the subjective inquiry. Does anyone see this as well? Particular, changing and elusive verses absolute, consistent and recognizable. Just a notion that is coming to me. Enough for now, more later- BBTY4TB to you all- Bret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Hello, all! Reading all of these posts I go back to the thought that " your entire universe exists between your ears " . J So I guess we are all " trying to get our universes straight " here! Blessings, J Stephen - John Mathieson Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:13 AM RE: Visions and Excitation Dear Brett Hi Yes lol. I tend to agree The subjective becomes the objective and then the objective becomes the subjective, in this context it seems to be similarities as to between time and space in its effects of, over wise known evolution of consciousness. Where as the spirit itself does not evolve because it is beyond duality and therefore unaffected by it. Though the subjective and objective become excited, then vibrates, due to the incoming awareness or association of spirit. Also; as thoughts become colored by prior experiences of the material world, the objective does as well and can become the subjective. It becomes an on going battle to what is reality yet we can distinguish what is astral and what is material when we remain balanced. Yet outside of k discussions the unbelievers would think we would be mad. SHHH its not for their eyes and ears unless they seek. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra On Behalf Of Bret Arenson Thursday, 20 July 2006 1:41 PM Visions and Excitation Hello Everyone- I have a topic that I keep coming back to in my mind. It is about the experience versus the explanation, that is the subjective approach versus the objective approach. For me I am always curious when one speaks of their visions how this manifests in their experience. Is it in a dream? or in the minds eye? does it appear in a closed eye view? does it appear in the normal field of vision? if so how does it look different than what is seen normally? or does your field of vision get completely replaced by the vision? I think this is just as important as the images that come. One reason for this is an interest in the degrees or manner of ecstatic states. Also I believe the way these visions come and how they feel has certain meaning for an individual in regards to the furthering of their subjective inquiry. The reflection on these experiential elements I think will retain an attention on the individual's subjectivity which is where all the real lessons are learned. How the symbols that are experienced fit into a system of thought, mystical or otherwise, is more of an objective approach, useful but not the same as the subjective approach. I feel the same about the usage of the word energy. I try not to use this word, probably mostly because I am contrary, but also because it is more often than not poorly defined when used and I am at a loss personally to be more accurate if I were to use it. The question in using the term energy is what kind of energy is it? how is it different from other energy? how is it transfered? and most telling is how do I differentiate energies? This is an objective approach and the last question, how do we differentiate energy, shows that really it is tied into the subjective experience. For me I am trying to use the word excitation as this is something I can qualify to a degree and again it puts the attention back to the subjective. Even though I feel that speaking of the subjective allows me to be more accurate finding accuracy is not an easy task. I think we conceptualize and speak through association and comparison which is an objective approach and as many of you know the ecstatic experience defies comparison to normative experience, so in being accurate one must accept a degree of fundamental inaccuracy. Regardless though for me I do gain a familiarity to different sorts of these experiences even though each experience is unique. So the effort to be accurate as accurate as possible may be useful in this regard. Some how in here I have a sense that I am referring to the two that is one and the one that is two as a fundamental aspect of the subjective inquiry. Does anyone see this as well? Particular, changing and elusive verses absolute, consistent and recognizable. Just a notion that is coming to me. Enough for now, more later- BBTY4TB to you all- Bret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 I was drawing a blank on this one, but then it occurred to me as I was answering a post to someone else, that experience is a very strong reinforcer. For example, experience can reinforce doubt and experience can reinforce faith. But experience is a very strong reinforcer, either way, if not the strongest. If we have experienced unpleasant things, then it reinforces our belief in " unpleasant things. " At the same time, it reinforces our doubt that we can create " pleasant things. " If we have experienced premonitions or visions, then it reinforces our belief in premonitions or visions. But whether pleasant or unpleasant, to actually experience is to " know. " So what experiences do we " know " the most? The experiences that have been the most strongly reinforced, it seems to me. To sum up: We need to reinforce the experience of that which we wish to experience (something pleasant.) Since the brain cannot tell the difference between an actual experience and one that we have visualized with feeling and the senses, then either one will work as a reinforcer - an actual experience or an imagined experience. I know this is old news, but a new way of looking at it, for me, anyway. I never really thought about it quite this way before: New keyword - Reinforce! Deb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Might be a stating point in any case Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra On Behalf Of stephen condrey Friday, 21 July 2006 7:58 AM Re: Visions and Excitation Hello, all! Reading all of these posts I go back to the thought that " your entire universe exists between your ears " . J So I guess we are all " trying to get our universes straight " here! Blessings, J Stephen - John Mathieson Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:13 AM RE: Visions and Excitation Dear Brett Hi Yes lol. I tend to agree The subjective becomes the objective and then the objective becomes the subjective, in this context it seems to be similarities as to between time and space in its effects of, over wise known evolution of consciousness. Where as the spirit itself does not evolve because it is beyond duality and therefore unaffected by it. Though the subjective and objective become excited, then vibrates, due to the incoming awareness or association of spirit. Also; as thoughts become colored by prior experiences of the material world, the objective does as well and can become the subjective. It becomes an on going battle to what is reality yet we can distinguish what is astral and what is material when we remain balanced. Yet outside of k discussions the unbelievers would think we would be mad. SHHH its not for their eyes and ears unless they seek. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 [Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 ] On Behalf Of Bret Arenson Thursday, 20 July 2006 1:41 PM Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 Visions and Excitation Hello Everyone- I have a topic that I keep coming back to in my mind. It is about the experience versus the explanation, that is the subjective approach versus the objective approach. For me I am always curious when one speaks of their visions how this manifests in their experience. Is it in a dream? or in the minds eye? does it appear in a closed eye view? does it appear in the normal field of vision? if so how does it look different than what is seen normally? or does your field of vision get completely replaced by the vision? I think this is just as important as the images that come. One reason for this is an interest in the degrees or manner of ecstatic states. Also I believe the way these visions come and how they feel has certain meaning for an individual in regards to the furthering of their subjective inquiry. The reflection on these experiential elements I think will retain an attention on the individual's subjectivity which is where all the real lessons are learned. How the symbols that are experienced fit into a system of thought, mystical or otherwise, is more of an objective approach, useful but not the same as the subjective approach. I feel the same about the usage of the word energy. I try not to use this word, probably mostly because I am contrary, but also because it is more often than not poorly defined when used and I am at a loss personally to be more accurate if I were to use it. The question in using the term energy is what kind of energy is it? how is it different from other energy? how is it transfered? and most telling is how do I differentiate energies? This is an objective approach and the last question, how do we differentiate energy, shows that really it is tied into the subjective experience. For me I am trying to use the word excitation as this is something I can qualify to a degree and again it puts the attention back to the subjective. Even though I feel that speaking of the subjective allows me to be more accurate finding accuracy is not an easy task. I think we conceptualize and speak through association and comparison which is an objective approach and as many of you know the ecstatic experience defies comparison to normative experience, so in being accurate one must accept a degree of fundamental inaccuracy. Regardless though for me I do gain a familiarity to different sorts of these experiences even though each experience is unique. So the effort to be accurate as accurate as possible may be useful in this regard. Some how in here I have a sense that I am referring to the two that is one and the one that is two as a fundamental aspect of the subjective inquiry. Does anyone see this as well? Particular, changing and elusive verses absolute, consistent and recognizable. Just a notion that is coming to me. Enough for now, more later- BBTY4TB to you all- Bret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Dear Stephen The pineal gland belongs to the beginning of perception all the other senses are from that, It was the eyes before we had eyes it was the smell taste touch and hearing it was the only way to communicate. We dissented from its high platen to develop mental understanding of the material structure of the universe There are 7 senses 3 of which are akashic (etheric) in nature going from above down there the other four is air, fire, water then earth. Ascension means to go back to where we once come with new founded knowledge and understanding. What is between the ears is attached to the spinal column is what I liken an antennae, that both sends and receives, the centre below that may be likened to decoding devices though they also have the ability to send and receive but they have there own color of truth. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra On Behalf Of John Mathieson Friday, 21 July 2006 11:12 AM RE: Re: Visions and Excitation Might be a stating point in any case Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 [Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 ] On Behalf Of stephen condrey Friday, 21 July 2006 7:58 AM Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 Re: Visions and Excitation Hello, all! Reading all of these posts I go back to the thought that " your entire universe exists between your ears " . J So I guess we are all " trying to get our universes straight " here! Blessings, J Stephen - John Mathieson Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:13 AM RE: Visions and Excitation Dear Brett Hi Yes lol. I tend to agree The subjective becomes the objective and then the objective becomes the subjective, in this context it seems to be similarities as to between time and space in its effects of, over wise known evolution of consciousness. Where as the spirit itself does not evolve because it is beyond duality and therefore unaffected by it. Though the subjective and objective become excited, then vibrates, due to the incoming awareness or association of spirit. Also; as thoughts become colored by prior experiences of the material world, the objective does as well and can become the subjective. It becomes an on going battle to what is reality yet we can distinguish what is astral and what is material when we remain balanced. Yet outside of k discussions the unbelievers would think we would be mad. SHHH its not for their eyes and ears unless they seek. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com [Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com] On Behalf Of Bret Arenson Thursday, 20 July 2006 1:41 PM Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com Visions and Excitation Hello Everyone- I have a topic that I keep coming back to in my mind. It is about the experience versus the explanation, that is the subjective approach versus the objective approach. For me I am always curious when one speaks of their visions how this manifests in their experience. Is it in a dream? or in the minds eye? does it appear in a closed eye view? does it appear in the normal field of vision? if so how does it look different than what is seen normally? or does your field of vision get completely replaced by the vision? I think this is just as important as the images that come. One reason for this is an interest in the degrees or manner of ecstatic states. Also I believe the way these visions come and how they feel has certain meaning for an individual in regards to the furthering of their subjective inquiry. The reflection on these experiential elements I think will retain an attention on the individual's subjectivity which is where all the real lessons are learned. How the symbols that are experienced fit into a system of thought, mystical or otherwise, is more of an objective approach, useful but not the same as the subjective approach. I feel the same about the usage of the word energy. I try not to use this word, probably mostly because I am contrary, but also because it is more often than not poorly defined when used and I am at a loss personally to be more accurate if I were to use it. The question in using the term energy is what kind of energy is it? how is it different from other energy? how is it transfered? and most telling is how do I differentiate energies? This is an objective approach and the last question, how do we differentiate energy, shows that really it is tied into the subjective experience. For me I am trying to use the word excitation as this is something I can qualify to a degree and again it puts the attention back to the subjective. Even though I feel that speaking of the subjective allows me to be more accurate finding accuracy is not an easy task. I think we conceptualize and speak through association and comparison which is an objective approach and as many of you know the ecstatic experience defies comparison to normative experience, so in being accurate one must accept a degree of fundamental inaccuracy. Regardless though for me I do gain a familiarity to different sorts of these experiences even though each experience is unique. So the effort to be accurate as accurate as possible may be useful in this regard. Some how in here I have a sense that I am referring to the two that is one and the one that is two as a fundamental aspect of the subjective inquiry. Does anyone see this as well? Particular, changing and elusive verses absolute, consistent and recognizable. Just a notion that is coming to me. Enough for now, more later- BBTY4TB to you all- Bret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Thanks, John! Stephen - John Mathieson Thursday, July 20, 2006 9:58 PM RE: Re: Visions and Excitation Dear Stephen The pineal gland belongs to the beginning of perception all the other senses are from that, It was the eyes before we had eyes it was the smell taste touch and hearing it was the only way to communicate. We dissented from its high platen to develop mental understanding of the material structure of the universe There are 7 senses 3 of which are akashic (etheric) in nature going from above down there the other four is air, fire, water then earth. Ascension means to go back to where we once come with new founded knowledge and understanding. What is between the ears is attached to the spinal column is what I liken an antennae, that both sends and receives, the centre below that may be likened to decoding devices though they also have the ability to send and receive but they have there own color of truth. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra On Behalf Of John Mathieson Friday, 21 July 2006 11:12 AM RE: Re: Visions and Excitation Might be a stating point in any case Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 [Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 ] On Behalf Of stephen condrey Friday, 21 July 2006 7:58 AM Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1 Re: Visions and Excitation Hello, all! Reading all of these posts I go back to the thought that " your entire universe exists between your ears " . J So I guess we are all " trying to get our universes straight " here! Blessings, J Stephen - John Mathieson Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:13 AM RE: Visions and Excitation Dear Brett Hi Yes lol. I tend to agree The subjective becomes the objective and then the objective becomes the subjective, in this context it seems to be similarities as to between time and space in its effects of, over wise known evolution of consciousness. Where as the spirit itself does not evolve because it is beyond duality and therefore unaffected by it. Though the subjective and objective become excited, then vibrates, due to the incoming awareness or association of spirit. Also; as thoughts become colored by prior experiences of the material world, the objective does as well and can become the subjective. It becomes an on going battle to what is reality yet we can distinguish what is astral and what is material when we remain balanced. Yet outside of k discussions the unbelievers would think we would be mad. SHHH its not for their eyes and ears unless they seek. Wishing you all well John Mathieson 'Where there is joy, bliss, delight and pleasure of inexpressible variety, where all wishes are fulfilled, there make me immortal.' Rig Veda 9th mandala, 113th sukta, 1st mantra Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com [Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com] On Behalf Of Bret Arenson Thursday, 20 July 2006 1:41 PM Kundalini-Awakening <%40> -Systems-1@gro <-Systems-1%40> ups.com Visions and Excitation Hello Everyone- I have a topic that I keep coming back to in my mind. It is about the experience versus the explanation, that is the subjective approach versus the objective approach. For me I am always curious when one speaks of their visions how this manifests in their experience. Is it in a dream? or in the minds eye? does it appear in a closed eye view? does it appear in the normal field of vision? if so how does it look different than what is seen normally? or does your field of vision get completely replaced by the vision? I think this is just as important as the images that come. One reason for this is an interest in the degrees or manner of ecstatic states. Also I believe the way these visions come and how they feel has certain meaning for an individual in regards to the furthering of their subjective inquiry. The reflection on these experiential elements I think will retain an attention on the individual's subjectivity which is where all the real lessons are learned. How the symbols that are experienced fit into a system of thought, mystical or otherwise, is more of an objective approach, useful but not the same as the subjective approach. I feel the same about the usage of the word energy. I try not to use this word, probably mostly because I am contrary, but also because it is more often than not poorly defined when used and I am at a loss personally to be more accurate if I were to use it. The question in using the term energy is what kind of energy is it? how is it different from other energy? how is it transfered? and most telling is how do I differentiate energies? This is an objective approach and the last question, how do we differentiate energy, shows that really it is tied into the subjective experience. For me I am trying to use the word excitation as this is something I can qualify to a degree and again it puts the attention back to the subjective. Even though I feel that speaking of the subjective allows me to be more accurate finding accuracy is not an easy task. I think we conceptualize and speak through association and comparison which is an objective approach and as many of you know the ecstatic experience defies comparison to normative experience, so in being accurate one must accept a degree of fundamental inaccuracy. Regardless though for me I do gain a familiarity to different sorts of these experiences even though each experience is unique. So the effort to be accurate as accurate as possible may be useful in this regard. Some how in here I have a sense that I am referring to the two that is one and the one that is two as a fundamental aspect of the subjective inquiry. Does anyone see this as well? Particular, changing and elusive verses absolute, consistent and recognizable. Just a notion that is coming to me. Enough for now, more later- BBTY4TB to you all- Bret 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.