Guest guest Posted January 21, 2000 Report Share Posted January 21, 2000 >Xan: All forms appear within and as >expressions of Self. <Dharma: DK says that, looking up from a plane/level of consciousness, the higher plane appears to be spirit. But looking down from a plane, the lower plane appears to be a body. In my experience this seems to be so. So from the point of view of whatever plane a man is identified with, is really living on, everything higher seems to be spirit. But from the highest, the entire manifested creation is the body/bodies of the All. Even Goddess Shakti is a body or incarnation... some say the first... the first emanation. ~ Yes. And this variable "point of view" seems to support the idea of an "individual soul" or ray of consciousness, perhaps, existing simutaneously in many planes or dimensions. As Jesus said, "My father's house has many mansions (dimensions)." >The physical brain and DNA are structures which hold memory >in the carnal form. More subtle bodies also have structures of memory which >account for continuity of themes through serial incarnations. > >What is surprising to me is not that these more subtle energy forms exist, >but that the veils of mind in "this world" most often serve to block human >awareness of a greater subtlety of life forms and memory beyond the material >dimension. Not to mention, of course, the rarity of awareness of the eternal >silent foundation from which all these appearances arise. >After his mescaline experiences as the "guinea pig" of some psychiatrists, Aldous Huxley wrote in _The Doors of Perception_ that the physical brain blocks the perception of much of what exists... and that that is necessary for us to exist as humans. Abstraction... _not seeing_ most of what is, in order that we _can_ be aware of this limited part of the world where we live as human. You may remember Jerry's posts about the woman who suddenly lost all sense of ego, of any "I." It seemed to me that she had probably had a stroke that destroyed that part of the brain function that is involved in the separative function of being aware as ego, as an "I." ~ Let me quote Tony's post, which agrees with my experience: "A great number of unenlightened souls, remain virtually unconscious between incarnations." This would indicate that not all blocks in perception are dependent upon the brain, and conversely that not all sudden dissolutions of separative awareness are either. >P.S. And if I'm not making any sense, blame the flu bug... I've got a little relapse. Going back to bed... ~ You make good sense to me. Hope you feel better soon. love xan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2000 Report Share Posted January 22, 2000 Hi Xanma, >>Xan: All forms appear within and as >>expressions of Self. > ><Dharma: DK says that, looking up from a plane/level of consciousness, the >higher >plane appears to be spirit. But looking down from a plane, the lower >plane appears to be a body. In my experience this seems to be so. So from >the point of view of whatever plane a man is identified with, is really >living on, everything higher seems to be spirit. But from the highest, the >entire manifested creation is the body/bodies of the All. Even Goddess >Shakti is a body or incarnation... some say the first... the first >emanation. > >~ Yes. And this variable "point of view" seems to support >the idea of an "individual soul" or ray of consciousness, perhaps, >existing simutaneously in many planes or dimensions. One great jewel, many rays of light shining out from all its facets... >As Jesus said, "My father's house has many mansions (dimensions)." and down through all the dimensions/planes/states of consciousness. >>The physical brain and DNA are structures which hold memory >>in the carnal form. More subtle bodies also have structures of memory which >>account for continuity of themes through serial incarnations. >> >>What is surprising to me is not that these more subtle energy forms exist, >>but that the veils of mind in "this world" most often serve to block human >>awareness of a greater subtlety of life forms and memory beyond the material >>dimension. Not to mention, of course, the rarity of awareness of the eternal >>silent foundation from which all these appearances arise. > >>After his mescaline experiences as the "guinea pig" of some psychiatrists, >Aldous Huxley wrote in _The Doors of Perception_ that the physical brain >blocks the perception of much of what exists... and that that is necessary >for us to exist as humans. Abstraction... _not seeing_ most of what is, >in order that we _can_ be aware of this limited part of the world where we >live as human. You may remember Jerry's posts about the woman who suddenly >lost all sense of ego, of any "I." It seemed to me that she had probably >had a stroke that destroyed that part of the brain function that is >involved in the separative function of being aware as ego, as an "I." > >~ Let me quote Tony's post, which agrees with my experience: >"A great number of unenlightened souls, remain >virtually unconscious between incarnations." I don't know... Edgar Cayce said that we have other experiences in between incarnations here... he called them "sojourns" and referred to them as being on other planets,. though he said he didn't mean that we were actually born physically on other planets... This sort of discussion looks a little different when you consider that all of our past lives and future lives are taking place simultaneously... it's just easier to think about them in linear fashion. >This would indicate that not all blocks in perception >are dependent upon the brain, and conversely that not >all sudden dissolutions of separative awareness are either. Whatever you think happens between incarnations, you can't argue from that to anything meaningful about the nature of perception in incarnation. It doesn't follow... or if you think it follows, then its validity depends entirely on whether the first statement is true or not. Pretty iffy. ) However... What does he mean by "dependent"? Without a brain, there wouldn't be any perception to be blocked! Or any blocks in perception! )) Not perception of the planes of human beings, anyway... "Not all" means "maybe some, but certainly not all." If he means that some blocks come from the action or inaction of the brain and some don't, okay. And if he means that some sudden dissolutions of separative awareness arise mainly or solely from the action or inaction of the brain and others don't, okay. I didn't say otherwise. >>P.S. And if I'm not making any sense, blame the flu bug... I've got a >little relapse. Going back to bed... > >~ You make good sense to me. >Hope you feel better soon. Thanks, I'm feeling fine today... a little healing from a friend. Love, Dharma 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.