I agree. Of course the obvious question that appears is how to grow to be able to fathom the depth of their meaning.

Nick...

as always you know which carrot to dangle in front of my nose

You said...
"The objective quality that is felt by us as beauty can also be relative in the quality of its objective wholeness. Beauty can be a measure of quality our corrupt ego is incapable of discriminating within."

Exactly oh Aries male, which is why any experience of beauty can be acceptable at face value, but not as the finality. To do so, even if it is of the high quality you talk about, makes it a stumbling block, another ego addiction.
Appreciate and let go for what is, further until there is no further, until THAT which cannot be made to lend itself to ego purposes, in which the ego, in IT's presence recognises itself for the sham ( tho useable sham) it is. So again, there is back to that non clinging, until that which cannot be clung to, and ends all clinging, is uncovered.

This has profound meaning "The lower dominant parts of our collective psych must try put it into a horizontal mechanical context. A developed human being IMO would be able to experience both directions and unify them..The horizontal plane is the domain of knowledge while the vertical plane is the domain of "being" As we are, we are so far out of balance that we are unable to have any balance and the value of beauty more often than not must become secularized into oblivion."

What you have described here is the crucifiction ( as you probably already know)
Jesus hung in the center of the two, and when there was nothing left to do he gave up the final thing required to transcend them both, he gave up Jesus.

i don't know about a 7th heaven Nick. in my years of meditation i certainly had many experiences, and in the initiated tradition of my yoga system experienced what i call the "sourced" illumination. That is, my source of being was the divine. And yes, it was very beautiful, without going into detail. Stayed there for years ya know. Gave it up and moved further. Which in retrospect is no movement at all.

The silence SW talks about can be attributeless. However, ( and i am looking for the right words here) there is something which can very poorly be called relaxation. ( Language is conceptual, so limited) And yes, anyone reading this will nod and not be too impressed. But i aim to tell you, even in the moments we sleep, or lay on a hillock and watch cloudes go by, there is a terrible tension always present in our being, not noticable because of the degrees of contrast between tensions and tensions in relative reality.....and this conceptualess silence exhibits none of that tension which is conspicuouse because by it's absence.

i may have not answered your question about 7th heaven but will leave with this thought which you may appreciate and subtly applies to your question....the Absolute is never not Absolute
spacelessness. ( offered to you by a blown out and reconstituted mind)

Chippingaway

Just to let you know, I'm still at war with mayonnaise.

You are not Christian but understand the Crucifixion and Resurrection IMO much more realistically than most claiming to be Christian. As our knowledge becomes part of a higher perspective along the vertical line of being, we are closer to re-birth.

You refer to the ego but do you believe it is necessary for us now as an aspect of universal purpose. I've come to believe that man's objective purpose is in the unification of levels of reality within ourselves and the world. In this way our being can nourish the earth in ways organic life cannot.

Is it our ego that is the problem or its corruption? Does an uncorrupted ego serve or hinder transcendence?

In the Buddhist tradition, the Bodhisattva would have to have a pure ego to connect his inner world with the external world. Beauty, it seems, would be a different experience and not serve as a barrier since attachment had become outgrown. Am I missing something with this question of the pure ego vs, the corrupt ego?

I know what you mean by relaxation. I once had an experience by accident with complete relaxation and learned from it that I never am relaxed. From this experience I think I understand a bit about what you refer to.

Simone's power of attention must have been on the same level as the greats. Your meditations may have allowed you to experience what she refers to. It is beyond me other than for short intervals. She raises also this idea that pure prayer comes from an inner reality our personality is unaware of.


How many have the ability to retain this quality of attention when necessary to experience reality in the raw and not become attached to it? I may be wrong but I think the dominant experience of beauty would have to be abandoned to retain this quality. Beauty may lead to it but must surrender itself. which I believe you were indicating Watcha think?

Nick....

something i forgot to add to the thought of Jesus and the cross.

Jesus cricufiction took place on Golgotha. Somewhere in my memory i recalled something about 'skull' and had enough of an inspired intuition to ask a bible scholar friend of mine look up the interpretation of the word Golgotha.He told me his information had it as " the place of the skull"....Bingo! Facinating no?

Re mayo,

Will respond to your post tomorrow.

Nick...

not a christian, not an anything tho i can think in most terms. And i find the narrative about Jesus facinating because i think it is an esoteric work taken at face value where there is deep and hidden blueprint for illumination. Am slowly putting the pieces together. To give you a sip...

in the esoteric tradition of the signs of approaching illumination in meditation, all are present in the narrative of Jesus birth but in reverse order.Incidently his mother's name contains the first two sounds "MA" as in maya, and matter. so was Buddha's mother's name. Wish i had access to some linguist because i think Ma is a root word.

On to the subject at hand, and my response will be extremely mayo-less

i don't believe there is a universal purpose. i haven't found it so.

"Is it our ego that is the problem or its corruption? Does an uncorrupted ego serve or hinder transcendence?"

Ego is the problem in terms of it's nature. It's a structure with no inherent reality of it's own while the basic truth of our being has no modifications, ego is nothing but modification based on poorly percieved, and then poorly judged evidence it calls 'reality'
There is no such animal as an uncorrupted ego as ego by it's nature of individuality IS a corruption. Even a noble ego. ( If anyone reading this has an unpleasant reaction to the word 'corruption" that's an ego response and a great oppertunity to examine why.)

However, transcendance is possible only within the present reality where we deal with ego. And a noble ego has a better chance at realising this i think because it already is thinking in terms of other then self.

You said.."How many have the ability to retain this quality of attention when necessary to experience reality in the raw and not become attached to it? I may be wrong but I think the dominant experience of beauty would have to be abandoned to retain this quality. Beauty may lead to it but must surrender itself. which I believe you were indicating Watcha think?"

Thinking beauty itself must be sacrificed is very perceptive of you.

Ultimately it matters not the quality of one's attention tho it may in the beginning, in transcendance that which is ultimate is the perciever and the attention of ego/mind/body is subversiant in that it is percieved as...get this my friend i think you will like it.....an automaton, a puppet.

That which is transcendant is not only conceptuless, ungraspable by the mind but is itself without concept, pure luminouse naked awareness.

Once transcendance is realised "one" is free to do as one will. Ego will never be the same, it's a transparent robe, useful, but not overly important, and if one thinks a purpose might be entertaining then one chooses a purpose instead of being chosen by it. You see, this is detachment that is not practiced, it is detachment by nature of being. ( the best way i can put it for now)

Thoughts?

chippingaway....very nice post...

I appreciate what you said about maya and Mary and the essential mother which also seems to pertain to yin and yang.

Maya defined:


Hmmm.....maya - mayo. Why those sneaky SOBs

You raise the question of why just "I" is insufficient and "I Am" or the connection between "I" the ineffable source and "Am," Creation came into existence. I see the functioning of creation as somehow serving "I'

It makes sense to me that consciousness within the universe connects levels of reality and keep the universe in adjustment. If the universe ran smoothly, it wouldn't serve its purpose so the adverse results of accidental mechanical interactions can be minimized through consciousness that connects levels of reality. You may enjoy the first chapter of Jacob Needleman's "A Sense of the Cosmos" recorded here

Welcome to rawpaint.com

The idea of the conscious universe answers a lot of questions for me for example why man is here to begin with. If freedom from the human condition is possible, what made it appear to begin with if not some sort of corruption of human purpose? It is hard to believe that universal suffering was some accident of imagination. So the question of purpose remains. open for me.

I've learned, which makes sense to me, that Man on earth asleep in Plato's cave serves the same purpose as the rest of organic life which is the transformation of substances through our life processes. Taken together, organic life on earth is a living machine that eats itself and regenerates to serve its purpose of transforming substances. This is horizontal mechanical purpose. Conscious purpose is vertical to it and connects levels of reality. This makes so much sense to me that I keep the question of universal purpose and a conscious universe open.

Ultimately it matters not the quality of one's attention tho it may in the beginning, in transcendance that which is ultimate is the perciever and the attention of ego/mind/body is subversiant in that it is percieved as...get this my friend i think you will like it.....an automaton, a puppet.

That which is transcendant is not only conceptuless, ungraspable by the mind but is itself without concept, pure luminouse naked awareness.

Once transcendance is realised "one" is free to do as one will. Ego will never be the same, it's a transparent robe, useful, but not overly important, and if one thinks a purpose might be entertaining then one chooses a purpose instead of being chosen by it. You see, this is detachment that is not practiced, it is detachment by nature of being. ( the best way i can put it for now)

I think we agree here since as I understand it, the balanced uncorrupt ego that connects our inner world with the external world allows us to feel emotionally that it all has a higher vertical origin that we are connected to and are drawn to it. The corrupt ego experiences through subjective distortion and without this awareness of higher origin, remains attached to distortion.

Simone wrote something interesting that relates to this corruption:


It never ceases to amaze me how a person who was once a brilliant atheist and Communist comes to see such things in their early thirties. How many theologians even understand this? The corrupt ego turns everything upside down so the sacred becomes captured by and devolved by the secular resulting is so much fanatical and secular BS.

The beautiful light of Lucifer is the beauty of concepts we can escape into and holds us in imagination. Of course their reality is found in the context of impartial conscious worldly experience which is easier said than done.. Though they are true, our acquired limitations in front of their meaning due to the corrupt ego denies their essential value. "I love mankind; it is people I can't.stand."

Jesus insisted on washing the feet of the disciples and said the rest of you is clean. The esoteric meaning of feet is that which touches the ground or the ego.

Sendy...

thank you.

Nick....

Your mayo Maya remark made me laugh.

i will grant you that there are probably other structured parts of the universe that are not percievable to our limited senses, there is what is commonly called the astral and some others.
But, including the WHOLE caboodle it boils down to two simple questions, what am i, and how did i happen?

"what am i, and how did i happen?" Could be an interesting thread including differentiating between who and what. If you want to start it, I'll contribute.