--- In [email protected], Bronte Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Replying to New Morning's excellent questions (below) on this thread: > > It appears that all these people we hold up as enlightened masters wear the shine off their halos the more we get to know them. I say the reason is our concept of enlightenment. If all that means to us is that the person becomes aware of their universal nature (CC) or even it means he becomes aware of his oneness with all existence (BC), little has been done to change and perfect the ego, or individual consciousness, which many people on FFL are claiming doesn't exist.
Who here has been claiming the ego "doesn't exist"?? <snip> > In reality, that's only part of the journey. The remaining part is for individual consciousness to master the limitations of this dimension, imbibing and expressing universal consciousness in every aspect of one's individual being. This cannot happen if you've gone and annihilated your individual consciousness. Who has suggested enlightenment involves annihilating your individual consciousness?? I'm increasingly coming to think, Bronte, that you're defending your position against a big bunch of straw men.
