--- In [email protected], anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Becuase *someone* has/had to create that OS and that *someone* is me. > (or you..)
===== But why must that be so? Akasha does self-inquiry by which he determines that the whole human mind/body mechanism can take care of itself and its interactions with the world without there having to be an entity known as the owner of it, or identified with as the owner. Is the concept of an overarching localized owner something learned? Is it a false lesson learned? Or could it be true, and still needs to be learned? Or did we know it all along, innately, because, after all, no other possibility exists? On what basis is one to decide? If the daily experience is that "I exist as a localized entity," then how can such a mind contemplate its own non-existence as an I, doer, knower, etc; except to wander in imagination based on the structure of experience that includes a supposed I, doer etc. If, on the other hand, the daily experience is that "there is no I" doing anything. Things just happen, as they should. There never has been a pilot, though I thought at one time that there was. Then how could such a one capitulate to statements like "but there has to be someone who ..." Are these kinds of disagreements semantic only? conceptual only? Or just due to fundamentally different experiences? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
