reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum
Thank you for a fine response, one that can take us places as well, which is in my opinion, the definition of an enlightening conversation.
I never for one second took ANY of your questions to be rhetorical. As a matter of fact, I am sure that I and we will be able to touch on some of
that material, and create some occasions for further discussion, as soon as I post my other thread.
I thought they were thorough and honest, and it seemed as a set I would have prepared for any grilling myself. I believe they will lead us
somewhere, as a fine representation of all the holes of the "usually left out" themes of anything "mystical" and the sort.
Coming to the meditation business, I see now that we have a slight problem of semantics, depending on what you mean.
The Mind=thinker is the one we DO NOT want in the middle of awareness of any kind, in the sense that the Thinker should be the PERSON.
(I know we delve now into seemingly arbitrary terms, but since these themes are still not taught in schools, we have to strive to find some common
ground from all the "new agish" mumble.)
Continuing, Mind= perceiver is a TOOL of the Thinker, of the Personality as it experiences and creates experience. That is the Mind that is trained,
quieted, directed into different realms and levels of "matter" and not.
That Mind, is therefore a Part of the Personality, and not the Personality.
For example, as you think, where are you?
Is that you between the ears and behind the eyes?
Is that you the one you hear think right there
To put it clearly, the Mind there is PERCEIVING thought, not creating it. THIS is the mind I am talking about.
Once you TRAIN and learn to operate the Mind (going to the football-sports analogy I used) is that you can get to perceive the "other", that might
interest us here.
The reason why this may seem counter-intuitive and arbitrary is because we are used to EQUALING the two, to the point where in modern science, pretty
would like to show a brain and say: "There's Bob" and not just Bob's brain.
Just to say that, from some points of view, the subtle and exquisite differences of the vast array of details that make each one of us up, are still
approached rather bluntly.
Our PROCESSES do NOT equal OURSELVES in a strict sense; this is the crux of the matter.
These are fine and useful differences to put to our USE, to incorporate newer and more sophisticated functions where there were non previously, or non
Understanding these processes in this fashion, and putting things to work in harmony and with clear roles and eliminating the static, is that you
then get to experience what you term the "Spiritual" and the "Mystical", as soon as we send willingly and deliberately our Mind to PERCEIVE
Understanding the geography of such other realms and possible places where we can "reach" with our mind, is another discussion, but at least we
start from a common base.
These are NOT things that happen mysteriously and with "no explanation".
This is a concept that I have never accepted, and one that I touched on at the beginning.
This is why, as you can very well begin to see, I am very even "mechanical" and "matter of factician" in some ways while I go about approaching
the, again, "Mystical".
Any given experience is not for one bit less wondrous or void of meaning for these reasons, quite the contrary.
To be able to perceive some things in an informed, respectful, and rigorous manner makes the experience all the more meaningful and fills me with awe,
at least this is my experience.
Sunsets happen at a specific point in the horizon, at a predictable hour.
Going to find one and enjoying it on purpose does not make it one bit less spectacular and beautiful.
The fact that I went to MEET it, only makes my smile wider.
For these reasons, is that I think that some of this might be useful to SOMEBODY.
We can, or rather, pretty surely discuss this some more in the future I am sure, hopefully for the sakes of making some more steps in the right
direction, or at the very least, away from the less fruitful ones.