enlightenment is not a personal thing.
once it happens, the one who is enlightened will automatically join the
enlightened club.
There is only one such club.
Either you are in or you are automatically a part of the ignorance club.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:35 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am an ignorant idiot who wishes to remain ignorant. That is enlightenment
> for me.
>
> Sent via BlackBerry from Vodafone
> ------------------------------
> *From: * roomsearching <[email protected]>
> *Date: *Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:24:41 +0100
> *To: *<[email protected]>
> *Cc: *Advaita<[email protected]>
> *Subject: *Re: ignorance implies subject and object
>
> Are you saying that you do not agree with Ramana ?
>
> Then why are you interested in Advaita ?
>
> Well, then just admit that you are an ignorant idiot who wishes to remain
> ignorant.
>
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:16 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There are as many selves as you want to imagine. As many as their
>> definitions.
>>
>> Sent via BlackBerry from Vodafone
>> ------------------------------
>> *From: * roomsearching <[email protected]>
>> *Sender: * [email protected]
>> *Date: *Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:09:58 +0100
>> *To: *Advaita-Zen<[email protected]>
>> *Subject: *ignorance implies subject and object
>>
>> Dr. Syed: Sri Bhagavan says that the Heart is the Self. Psychology has
>> it that malice, envy, jealousy and all passions have their seat in the
>> heart. How are these two statements to be reconciled?
>> M.: The whole cosmos is contained in one pinhole in the Heart. These
>> passions are part of the cosmos. They are avidya (ignorance).
>> D.: How did avidya arise?
>> M.: Avidya is like Maya [she who is not is maya (illusion)]. Similarly
>> that which is not is ignorance. Therefore the question does not
>> arise. Nevertheless, the question is asked. Then ask, “Whose is the
>> avidya? Avidya is ignorance. It implies subject and object. Become
>> the subject and there will be no object.
>> D.: What is avidya?
>> M.: Ignorance of Self. Who is ignorant of the Self? The self must be
>> ignorant of Self. Are there two selves?
>>
>
>

Reply via email to