--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Nelson" <nelsonriddle2001@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > Interestingly, I have *seen* levitation, many times, > > > but I make no assumptions as to whether it can be > > > done physically. I know only what I and hundreds > > > of other people SAW, and that could be explained > > > by having "seen" into a "parallel dimensional" > > > kinda reality in which the levitation was taking > > > place, whereas it wasn't in this physical dimension. > > > That, in fact, is how I've come to consider the > > > experience, because it explains *other* odd exper- > > > iences I had around the Rama guy. > > > > > > It could *also* have been some kind of placebo > > > belief-based experience, although I don't believe > > > in that as an explanation because there was never > > > any suggestion as to what one was "supposed" to see > > > or experience. Or it could be as Vaj has suggested, > > > and some siddhi that allows the person who has > > > mastered it to project a kind of Jedi "These are > > > not the droids you're looking for" brain-fog on > > > people and "make" them see things that aren't really > > > there. I am open to *all* of these possibilities. > > > The only thing I'm not open to is that I and all > > > these hundreds of others didn't experience what > > > we experienced. We did. Now we're stuck with trying > > > to make sense of what they might have been. > > > > snip, > > Isn't lack of understanding of fact the only reason for > > debate. > > Not at all. Personally, I think the only "reason > for debate" is a bad one. That is, "I am trying > to assert than my opinion is 'fact.'" > > Debate is usually a form of EVANGELISM, an > attempt to get others to "buy into" your world > view or belief system. The whole *idea* of debate > in most cases is that there may be *one and only > one* "right answer" to the question, and that one > answer is The One. It's the "final answer," the > "thought-stopper" answer, the "real" answer. > ++ I had thought of the debate as an opportunity to get more information on a subject and so have a more informed opinion.
> I don't believe that there is such a thing as the > "real" answer. To much of anything, let alone > issues of belief and faith and philosophy. The > whole *idea* of debating these things as if one > could "win" the debate makes me LOL. > > > I would think that Turq's observation on levitating, and, > > his being a qualified observer, would make it a fact. > > Do you? > > I wouldn't. I know that I saw it, whatever it was > that I saw. Hundreds of times. Among groups of > hundreds of other people, who also saw the same > things. > > But does that make what we saw a "fact?" I think > not. It only makes what we saw an *experience*, > one that can be interpreted many ways. I should > know...I have interpreted those experiences many > ways myself. Still do. > > I would say that my OPINION about levitation, > having witnessed it, remains just that, an > OPINION. I know that Shemp would probably > agree with me that it's not a fact, except that > he would probably categorize it instead as the > result of cult brainwashing. :-) > > See what I mean about "different strokes for > different folks." YOU might believe my stories, > and lend them enough credence to consider them > "fact." But others, such as Shemp and Ruth, are > under no such obligation. > > Interestingly enough, neither am I. I saw these > things; I experienced them. But the only "fact" > in that sentence is that I experienced them, not > that they happened. > Different people have different internal programs running that enable them to process various inputs in their own way. What is obvious to one, will be nonsense to another etc. I just get a somewhat different conclusion from your observation- probably from a different RAM backup.
