---Right, the false you has died, but the relative you still exists. It's the Rorybody.....as opposed to other bodies, for example the Bushbody, the MMYbody, etc... The remaining questions regarding relativity revolve around the importance given to bodies. One can simply dismiss them (things) as being "notational", implying unimportance; or, they are in a way notational but still important and significant.
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <rorygoff@> wrote: > > > > > > (P.S. It looks as though you've apparently chosen yet again > > > to ignore the main point of the post: the distinction between > > > sattva and purusha, or judging "it's a really, really *good* > > > movie" vs. actually freeing oneself from belief in the movie. > > > While I enjoy sattvic behavior as much as the next guy, judging > > > anyone's behavior as "enlightened" or "not enlightened" would > > > to me fall into the category of judging the quality of the movie.) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > Ah, the light dawns. > > > > Rory and Jim just don't have any *discrimination*. > > In a sense, that's true; I don't haplessly identify with the > discriminator as I did before "dying," as THAT or the "Me" or the > Self is behind discrimination, behind buddhi. > > In another sense, that's quite untrue, as you may recall I > have "discriminated" into your sloppy thinking here on FFL, which > oddly enough appears to be about when you stopped seeing me as a semi- > enlightened "friend" whose experiences you claimed to like to read, > and started seeing me as a "moodmake-y, unconvincing" asshole. > > Of course, I am both, or neither. > > I repeat, "I" can make no claims to enlightenment or ignorance, "I" > can make no claims to anything but having "died", and even that from > some POVs must be untrue, as here I apparently still am. > > As to shakti over the internet -- some get it, some don't. I couldn't > care less either way. I think it's been pointed out many times on FFL > that even the most inveterate "shakti-junkies" *still* manage to > avoid "dying". No great suprise there -- who would purposely trade > all those great kicks for absolute Nothingness? Only those who have > no choice. > > I am only here to (metaphorically) cut off your head, dance on it, > throw your corpse into my fire, consume it utterly, and scatter the > sparks to the breeze, and why would you want that unless you *knew* > just how much suffering your head was causing you? > > I do not wonder how or why you so sedulously manage to ignore me. > > I'll wait. > > *lol* > > > > >
