On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:15 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote:
And what difference is there between
paths to enlightenment? There is
One Reality which is known or not
known. This Reality is all that is.
Well I know some would agree with such an absolute statement. But no,
I don't believe
Are we not confusing the path with the goal here?
There are a gazillion paths. Not all lead somewhere
we'd want to go--all true enough. But One Reality
refers to the transcendent, does it not? If there is
some content in the transcendent that would serve to
distinguish it from some other
On Mar 31, 2008, at 10:02 AM, Angela Mailander wrote:
Are we not confusing the path with the goal here?
There are a gazillion paths. Not all lead somewhere
we'd want to go--all true enough. But One Reality
refers to the transcendent, does it not? If there is
some content in the transcendent
On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:44 AM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:15 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote:
And what difference is there between
paths to enlightenment? There is
One Reality which is known
That was my point precisely. There is NO distinction
in the transcendent. No distinction means no
distinction: No distinguisher and nothing to
distinguish. So if that is the goal, how could it be
different unless it contained some distinguishing
characteristic--which, by definition, it does not
This whole discussion is about semantics--and, as
such, it can go on forever without shedding any light
anywhere.
--- Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Angela Mailander wrote:
So if that is the goal, how could it be different
unless it contained some distinguishing
On Mar 31, 2008, at 2:15 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote:
The only path
that matters is the one you are on.
In the midst of this experience of reality
that we find ourselves in, we seek to
discern value and meaning and purpose,
gravitating towards the teachings and
practices that
On Mar 31, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Angela Mailander wrote:
This whole discussion is about semantics--and, as
such, it can go on forever without shedding any light
anywhere.
Angela, that's always been part of Richard's game.
Due to flooding in the midwest, he was actually spotted recently in
On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:09 PM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
Angela Mailander wrote:
This whole discussion is about semantics--and, as
such, it can go on forever without shedding any light
anywhere.
Vaj wrote:
Angela, that's always been part of Richard's game.
Due to flooding in the midwest,
On Mar 30, 2008, at 4:55 AM, cardemaister wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
from the Hinduism Today website (6 schools of Saivism).:
Gorakshanatha, in Viveka Martanda, gives his view of
samadhi: Samadhi is the name of that state of
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:07 PM, Michael wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not imagining anything about you Michael, I just go by what you
say.
No I think thats hard to do. Words almost always trigger divers
responses according to the associations we
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:24 PM, Michael wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that
we
actually have quite a bit in common. Bhakti type approaches were just
never my cup of tea, that's all.
On
On Mar 30, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Michael wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:24 PM, Michael wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
I actually suspect, based on things you've shared in the past, that
we
On Mar 30, 2008, at 2:07 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote:
Vaj, what distinction is there
between the unenlightened on
any path? Whether the ignorant
adhere to belief in god or to belief
in no god, the problems of injustice
and atrocities are directly attributed
to ignorance. The atheists
On Mar 29, 2008, at 9:36 AM, Michael wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's quite a nice state, since
that type of equanimity sees no distinction or preference, the
polarities that give rise to tensions just simply lost all their
juice. (...)
15 matches
Mail list logo
