With regard to the line CR writes: "To have higher consciousness and transcend earthly time" Einstein is relevant. One may not be conscious of time but the possiblility of not being in time is nil, unless one believes consciousness exists in a non-physical realm.
One can escape earthly time, as Einstein's relativity described, by moving at unearthly speeds. A space-traveller moving at great speeds will age more slowly than his counterparts on earth, and his thought processes, i.e., his consciousness, will operate more slowly as well. All aspects of humanness, thoughts and bodily processes, exist in a different time from earth's. Whether this can be considered "transcending earthly time" is questionable. Einstein stated unequivocally that there is no absolute time, so when one speaks of transcending time the word must be qualified as to what relative time is being transcended. There are as many times as there are speeds. Diana
From: Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Eliot's Indic Studies
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:58:31 -0800
Conscious focus on something, eliminates focus on the surroundingprocesses, otherwise one would be aware only of the chaos of all thepassing processes and surrounding grounds. There would be no figure.I'm not sure that there is a diffference between common consciousnerssand so-called higher consciousness. They may have qualitative variety, butstructurally I think they are the same.Obviously consciousness can be developed, as can bodily operations.A highly developed consciousness has greater capacity and functionality.Still I am very suspicious of any kind of elitism attached to so-calledhigher consciousness. Hesse's SIDDHARTHA shows the faults of so-calledhigher consciousness."As my conception of ahimsa went on maturing, I became more vigilant
about my thought and speech. The lines in the Anthem:
Scatter her enemies
And make them fall;
Confound their policies,
Frustrate their knavish tricks
particularly jarred upon my sentiments of Ahimsa."
M.K. Gandhi; The Story of My Experiments With Truth; 1927.A muscle, whether highly developed or not, is still basically a muscle.A child's perception of something in the world has a purity and directnessthat, I think, no amount of developpment can achieve. It is very noticeablethat children spend little time in time. :)Cheers,Peter----- Original Message -----From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">cr mittalSent: Monday, December 11, 2006 6:59 AMSubject: Re: Eliot's Indic StudiesInteresting. It applies both ways :1. To have ordinary consciousness and be oblivious ofthe timeless time -- your interpretation of Eliot's line.2. To have higher consciousness and transcend earthly time.Thanks.~ CR
Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:I think the ordinary, every day, garden variety ofconsciousness iswhat Eliot is referring to. To be aware of something is to be outside time.P.----- Original Message -----From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">cr mittalSent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 7:51 PMSubject: Re: Eliot's Indic StudiesPeter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:But to be conscious is not to be in time.//P.Let me reflect, Peter.1. "To be conscious" here implies to be in an enlightened state of mind(an enlightened state of consciousness).2. Such a state of mind transcends the limitations of time.Therefore, one who attains and lives by such an enlightened state ofmind -- like Buddha, for instance -- lives in a perspective of timethat is "timeless".Hence it would be axiomatic, I suppose, to say that"to be conscious is not to be in time".Is that what TSE meant?~ CR
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.15/581 - Release Date: 12/9/2006 3:41 PM