--- In [email protected], nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "george_deforest" 
> <george.deforest@> wrote:
> >
> > Maharishi's Apaurusheya Bhasya has made clear to the world for 
> > the first time in the history of mankind that the sequence of 
> > the Vedic expressions is of an absolute significance. Only as 
> > such, the Veda can be understood as the blueprint of Creation, 
> > or as Maharishi formulated it in 1992, the Constitution of the 
> > Universe, containing the structuring dynamics of all the Laws 
> > of Nature that govern all evolutionary processes in the ever 
> > expanding universe.
> > 
> > source: http://www.selfrealisation.net/VedicAstrology/instrman.htm
> 
> Aparusheya Bhasya, thats right, forgot that one. Only a Maha 
> Rishi could see the missing verse. Maharishi said he would 
> write a commentary to the Brahma Sutras, if time allows.

So...a "Maha Rishi" cognizing the "missing verse."

Is that sorta like Benjamin Creme talking about
the "space brothers" or Maitreya, or is it more like 
Lou talking about how the space aliens were going
to descend on Israel this last summer and take
all the "chosen people" away to a new home in the
sky, or is it more like somebody channeling some 
supposedly-wise dead thing or being from some
other plane?

Just checking, because as far as I can tell they
all have exactly the same two elements in common.
First, they are completely unverifiable...nothing
but "He/she said such-and-such." Second, they 
depend *entirely* on the level of FAITH that the
follower or believer brings to the table. If the
follower is *used to* suspending disbelief and
treating everything said by the teacher as if it's
Cosmic Truth, well...they're going to do so again
when he claims to have "cognized the missing verse
from the Vedas." Or when he claims to be in commun-
ication with space aliens or some mysterious world
savior, none of who ever seem to show up in real
life. Or when he/she says that he/she is in channel-
ing some high being from somewhere.

In other words, what you're talking about is FAITH.
If you've got it, and are used to suspending your
discriminative faculties and just believing what 
you are told to believe, no problemo. If, on the
other hand, you'd kinda like a little objective
something to *back up* these extraordinary claims,
you're shit out of luck.

But, as we all know, anyone who *would* like to have
a little objective evidence to back up extraordinary
subjective claims is often characterized by you guys
who work purely on FAITH as "less evolved" than you
are. You are "more evolved" than we are, and can see 
the "truth" of the situation where we -- deluded, lost
souls that we are -- cannot. Did I paraphrase your 
many posts to this effect here on FFL correctly, 
Nablus?  :-)

Bottom line is that you have chosen to believe the
things that you believe. Very few of them have any-
thing to do with any kind of measurement of reality.
It is your *right* to believe in these things if you 
want to, and it is even your right to try to convince 
others that they are real, or "truth."

But it is *our* right to laugh at you when you try,
and to remind you every so often that you might 
benefit from realizing that you're talkin' crazy shit.
You may *believe* in the crazy shit firmly, and you 
may consider those who *don't* believe in the crazy 
shit to be beneath you or less evolved than you are. 

But we low-born, lost, semi-skeptics outnumber you, 
and as far as I can tell, we also tend to have a lot 
more fun in our lives than you have in yours. So you 
can get as serious as you want to get, and you can
look down on us all you want from your elevated, more
evolved level, and we're *still* going to laugh at you.
In fact, the more serious and the more elitist you
get, the more we're going to laugh at you.

Someday you might consider joining us, and learning
to laugh at yourselves...



Reply via email to