From: Prof. Gomes (profgomes@geocities.com)
Date: Wed Feb 11 1998 - 13:45:24 MST
Well, IMHO, these are also examples of 'virtual reallity menthal states
special effects'... (just occidentallizing...)
( in a near future will have specific CD's for simulating such effects...)
Gomes.
PS1: religions development is very based on the merchandisings of such
things....
PS2: the comments bellow are scientific and are very good to dismistify
such effects...great analisys !!!!
At 15:32 11/02/98 +0100, you wrote:
>Anders wrote :
>
>> The fifth "rapture" circuit is less well understood, but I think it is
>
>> fairly clear that these states appear so often in the literature (both
>
>> mystical and psychological) that they can be said to be real. They are
>
>> however not well understood, and it is by no means clear that they are
>
>> all due to the same circuit.
>
>> Mystical experiences may be grouped together, but I'm not sure they
>> form useful circuits.
>
>The main problem being that perhaps different experiences are frequently
>confused or wrongly organized in a vertical hierarchy ,although they
>are completely different phenomena. It's interesting to notice that
>Timothy Leary created the circuits theory in the 70's, and simply forgot
>it during the following years (the circuits came back with "Design for
>dying", but, for various reasons, this book is atypical).
>There is apparently a "rapture" experience, which can be summarized by
>the loss of the sensation of body's limits. This can be expressed as an
>"out of the body experience", as a disappearing of the body (yoga), or
>as a fusion between the body and environment. I'm not sure this can be
>categorized as a superior circuit or state of consciousness, but it's
>fun , and gives certainly good results against stress and on body's
>health.
>The metaprogramming experience, that Leary names the sixth circuit could
>be a completely different experience. I find it closer to ethological
>mechanism of "insight", or, even better, to the Gregory Bateson's
>concept "learning III". According Bateson, Learning I is the simple,
>traditional, learning. Learning II (learning to learn) is the process
>that, frequently through "insight", one can build a model of the world
>based on previous experience (the monkey sees banana; the monkey sees
>the rod; suddenly, the monkey has a mystical flash and takes the banana
>with the rod; he just created a new model of the world, where things can
>be used as tools). Leaning III (learning to learn to learn) is a more
>complex experience where one's own model of the world is seen as a
>relative reality, and can therefore be changed. This is the mystical
>crisis, the conversion process, the Zen's satori.
>The two states, the "rapture" and the "satori" are frequently confused
>because the rapture experience can be so shocking that it can lead to a
>mystical crisis, at least on the first time. On the other side, a very
>intense satori, which "deconstructs" one's world model, can lead to a
>state of rapture (because the body's limits are also a psychological
>construction).
>The difference between the rapture and the satori can be an explanation
>of the fundamental difference between hindu and buddhic mysticism. The
>first assumes that the highest rapture state (samadhi) is an expression
>of reality, but buddhists claims that one can only understand reality
>through awakening or crisis, rapture states being just a tool. As it is
>easier to experiment rapture than awakening, the confusion between the
>states began also to invade buddhism, until the "revolt" of the Rinzai
>Zen masters, who chose to abandon the rapture way to awakening to use
>instead a kind of shock therapy through violent or absurd behavior.
>
>Remi
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:35 MST