---Right: besides, "permanent Realization" is not equal to Enlightenment. E. is a larger set which includes permanent Realization, but the latter may not necessarily include E. So, one should be careful in the usage of such phrases. Just my opinion. Most of the Neo-Advaitins are "permanently realized" but not Enlightened.
In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sandiego108" <sandiego108@> > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > <snip> My first two questions as your student are: > > > > > > 1. How do you know you're enlightened? > > > > These are excellent questions. In order to answer this > > first one, I have to ask you first, what do you mean > > by "enlightened"? I have written about this state > > experientially many times, but there is a great deal > > of confusion around this term, so I'd like to establish > > meanings first. > > Jim, you were the person who, only a few posts > ago, advised me to go back and read my TM Intro > Lecture notes. I don't have any; I threw away > all of my TM-related books and materials decades > ago. > > What I'm doing here is trying to get you to give > your *own* Intro Lecture. > > YOU are the one who claimed to be enlightened. I > would say that the onus falls on you to define > the term, not me. > > As you have said many times, I am not in a position > to define enlightenment at all, whereas you are. > > So, if you need a definition before you continue > your Intro Lecture, I suggest you present one. > That's what we all had to do when we were giving > Intro Lectures. > > > > 2. Is it possible that you are mistaken? > > Still unanswered. >
