That's because I'm suggesting there's a whole other world, as it were, of which you appear unaware.
In this experience, I have disappeared, I have no reason to believe that when this body dies I will exist at all as something individual. I see no usefulness in some 300 billion separate entities floating around randomly in an afterlife. I simply don't think existence is this stupid, and my ego doesn't insist on my eternal existence as something distinct.
That still does not say whether whatever 'it' might be is attainable by sheer effort, in which case it lies within the possibility of human nature and is strictly cosmological, or whether there is a dependency on something greater, 'outside' the created order, in which case it transcends the cosmological.
This all seems entirely of mind, imagination insisting something else exists. I do not believe there is anything like God as a personality, it is the whole. The void is simply the highest form of consciousness, which is our true nature.
Because grace comes from the other side of the void, as it were...
This suggests the void is intelligent and is choosing who to bless and who not to bless with grace.
Here you go with the judgements again ... I would say you are detemining the experience according to the sensations it produces, bliss, for example, or one-ness ... whereas I am saying the Christian Mystical Tradition focus not on the sensation or the sensible, but on being as such. Being and knowing.
As does every tradition, I am saying that if you never pursue it, it never happens. You have to be open to it, you must provide the space for it to happen.
This is not judgement, this is my own experience and the experience of at least hundreds of other mystics.
To us, these planes are constructs, an artifice not without usefulness but tends towards rigidity. I rather view it as a more organic process, so the person is not level this or level that, but rather moves in a single medium, sometimes high, sometimes low, sometimes occupying apparently simultaneous positions ... I do accept we all tend to create artificial markers, but when these become barriers, I think they lose their usefulness.
They are observed levels of consciousness, obviously there is nothing like a sign post "Approaching 6th Body, Next Left" or anything. We are not in disagreement here, I am simply trying to bring in other traditions so maybe your opinions will be less rigid.
Really? Then everyone's labouring toward something about which they have no idea? I doubt that. Eckhart, for example, seems to know it quite well?
Doubt all you want, it is the case. Eckhart doesn't describe the 7th body, he describes nothing but a kensho or satori. We can tell because he still clings, his descriptions are just like mine, and we can see he has tried to make sense of it. He has not entered the void, too much of his words try to glorify Christ.
Does it? To me it explains why anything exists at all, rather than just accepting that it does ...
Everything exists from the oneness, from that state, they have been manifested in this plane and thus is now three dimensional. Nothing in this plane exists otherwise...
The way of it is unique, I think, although Jodoshin comes close, I suppose.
It is not even unique in this way, only the stories can be called unique. It is the most common form of yoga - bhakti - almost every tradition in the world utilizes this method. It means a love tradition, few do not use this method, and few of these types of traditions are particularly fruitful. It is because this method maintains duality, and few become so complete in their love of the object to lose the subject. It is beautiful that this has happened for you, but for me other methods are more fruitful just by observing those who have reached.
Lunitik, from the very first you have assumed a position of superiority and been quite disparaging about every experience other than your own ... if you really want to engage in interfaith dialogue, I suggest you have a lot of baggage to divest yourself of first. For someone who claims no ego, you certainly seem to evidence one in full flow.
You are incorrect, I speak with a level of authority because I know what I say is truth, but I do not claim superiority at all. I am unwilling to waiver on what I know, but I do not claim it is only available to one tradition, in fact I say that every tradition known to man can deliver.
I do not make comparisons at all, because I understand that all is one.
