The point

[Prashant Sharma]

On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Greg Goode wrote:

> At 12:04 PM 10/29/97 -0500, Prashant Sharma wrote:
> >"enlightenment", if he was the same Siddhartha as before "enlightenment"?
> >        I think that "enlightenement" is a purely physical process at the
> >organic level.  It is NOT a mental process at all.  That is why it is not
> >an experience but "something else".
>
> Agree about enlightenment not being mental.  But disagree about it being
> physical or organic.  If all phenomena, physical, mental, psychic, etheric,
> astral, etc. are only appearances in absolute eternal consciousness, then
> how can this consciousness itself be reduced to a process in the brain?
> This is physical reductionism.  How can that be real?
>
> --Greg
>
        What I wanted to say was that "it" has to have a profound
physiological impact at the very basic level. I am not implying (at least
such was not my intention, and I take the opportunity to apologize for
this misstatement) that you can "rewire" the brain and be enlightened.
But what I am saying is that it isnot a mental experience rather
"something else" which has profound physiological impact.
Comments awaited!

Regards,
Prashant.