Message info
 
To:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com From:seventhray1 Subject:[FairfieldLife] Turiya-tit-for-tat-iya (was Re: Astral Residence Courses) Date:Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:12:08 -0000
 

 


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@ wrote:
> >
> > I see.
>
> I doubt it. :-) As I see it, the whole idea of "proving
> enlightenment" is remarkably like the idea of "proving
> the existence of God." It's a faith-driven initiative,
> of interest only to the faithful.
I think you may be mistaken.  I will speak for myself.  I don't know, or even particularly care if there is such a thing as enlightenment.  But I see changes in my experience which in some cases mirror what has been described as milestones on the path to an awakening.  I am reluctant to use those buzz words, because it is not anything to which I pay close, or really, any, attention.  I don't meditate or practice any kind of spiritual technique.  But I am aware of what is going on in my mind and body, and sometimes  strange stuff happens.  Strange, as in good, or at least unique.

I don't know if there would be phsyiological charactoristics of such a state, but maybe there would be.  Are there not distinct physiological charactoristics of sleeping and dreaming?  We don't know if there would be unique physiological charactoristics of someone who is said to be enlightened, by why not check it out.  Then, if you find some interesting data, you can interpret as you like.  You seem predisposed to dismiss anything unique along those lines as nothing conclusive.   That's fine.

As long as I'm on this rant, I'll relay something I noticed about rudrasha beads, which you also seem quick to dismiss.  I never bought into the bead thing, but one time a friend gave me some large rudrasha beads.  I put them on, and didn't think much about them.  A few days later, I noticed that my usual sexual gnawing energy had abated somewhat.  It was like when you have a headache, and then it goes away, and you don't even notice it went away until sometime later.  It was like that.  

So, I am saying that as our instrumentation of measurement becomes more refined, we may find that there is some actual science behind some of the subjective states or experiences we have. 
> The only people who would be overjoyed by some "scientific
> proof" of enlightenment are people who *already* believe
> it exists. For the many billions on this planet who do not,
> such a "discovery" would not even cause a blip on their
> radar.
Why do you make such a sweeping generalization?  You make it seem like teenagers at a Katy Perry concert waiting for the star to come on stage.  I think most people mature as they continue on a spiritual path, and the notion or goal of "enlightenment"  sort of fades into the background.  That's my take anyway. 
> Who, after all, who has not already been convinced as a
> result of either upbringi ng in an "enlightenment exists"
> culture or as the result of decades of dogma ingestion,
> is going to even CARE if science can prove that such a
> state exists? 
Maybe because the progress we have experienced as a civilization has been to examine our beliefs and see if they hold up to objective verification.  Would that be reason enough?   Couldn't you just as easily ask "why not"
> IF it could be proved to exist, does that make it desirable?
> Can enlightened people be sad? History, and the testimony
> of the Supposedly Enlightened, says Yes. So where's the
> big advantage in being enlightened? Can an enlightened
> person be crazy? Again, history says Yes. 
Something drives people.  Something drives societies.  I believe it is the quest for knowledge.  I don't know where that leads, but some people believe it lea ds to a state of greater awareness, or enlightenment.  Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but it seems to me that there is something innate in humans to try to get to the bottom of things.  If you wish to dismiss thousands of years of personal accounts and literature from different cultures which often discuss the same things about spirituality, please go ahead.  I don't take anything as an authority, but I certainly keep an open mind, and try to see how it stacks up to my own experience. 
> So no, I don't think that science will ever pinpoint the
> exact physiological coorelates of enlightenment. More
> important, however, unlike the True Believers who think
> it would be a Big Deal if they did, I think it would
> make barely a ripple in human history. No one who hadn't
> already bought into the idea would even care.
Of course you realize there is much we didn't think science cou ld verify, but it seems to be doing so.  I don't think society is ever going to take a big interest in this subject of enlightenment.  Most people are preoccupied with other things.  And really, I am not sure who these True Believers are who you think are a little obsessed with the idea.  But the idea has been around for a long time.  Why not try to get to the bottom of it.  
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > How would you go about trying to prove enlightenment?
> > >
> > > I wouldn't.
> > >
> > > > Or do you just discount this notion altogether?
> > >
> > > Yes. Fool's errand.
> > >
> > > Subjective it is, and subjective it will always remain.
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.su ndur@
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > > Even if you found 50 people who could produce the same
> > > > > types of brainwaves, what would you have established?
> > > > > IMO, only that at least 50 people have learned to con-
> > > > > trol their thinking in such a fashion that they can
> > > > > create similar results during crude physiological tests.
> > > > > Again, no connection with either enlightenment or the
> > > > > lack thereof has been established.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > How is this different from someone who engages in a program of
> > physical
> > > > conditioning and then undergoes testing which indicate certain
> > > > parmamters have been a chieved which we have defined as a more
> > healthy
> > > > style of fuctioning?
> > > >
> > > > Is that person "controlling" these parameters? Are the tests
> > "crude".
> > > > What would be a refined test in your opinion?
> > > >
> > > > If you have a thesis that there is state of awareness which has been
> > > > called "enlightenment", then how do you go about quantifying it.
> > Seems
> > > > to me, one way to start would be to measure brainwaves.
> > > >
> > > > How would you go about trying to prove enlightenment? Or do you just
> > > > discount this notion altogether? Science enablesus to assign
> > objective
> > > > criteria and proofs to those areas which previously were entirely
> > > > subjective, last time I checked.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

__._,_.___
To subscribe, send a message to:
FairfieldLife-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
.

__,_._,___