--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > <snip> > > > > > Thought experiment: An electronic forum like this > > > > > dealing with realization in which MMY participated. > > > > > Would it be possible for him to discuss realization > > > > > meaningfully with those who haven't yet achieved it? > > > > > > > > Meaningfully from whose point of view? > > > > > > Whose point of view were you talking about above? > > > > The point of view of those considering themselves to be in > > ignorance. If that is what you mean, I would say offhand (again, > > judging only from my own experience) that *no* concept of > > realization could come close to being meaningful, in the sense of > > being particularly accurate or useful from the vantage point of > > ignorance. > > So you don't think any of MMY's teaching about > the nature of realization is accurate or useful > from the vantage point of ignorance?
No, I don't, particularly. Rather, at a certain point it appears to allow one to more or less happily remain in ignorance, locked into a conceptual framework of other-than-now and a belief in fully automatic, painless, effortless, mythical enlightenment "by-and-by," measuring oneself by our ideas of criteria set by others, not by those actual criteria honestly set by oneself. In other words, seen from one vantage point it appears to be truly magnificent at keeping many people asleep. While the description of the states of consciousness is stunningly beautiful, even this at best is a conceptual fairy-tale :-) Wait, > scratch "accurate," since we know that's > impossible. But something doesn't have to be > 100 percent accurate to be useful. Yes, true. And again, I can really only go by my own experience, and speak from my own experience -- *not* dictate to you what is right for you :-) > I think you know what point I'm trying to make > here, Rory. Yes, it would seem you feel happy and content with MMY's formulations and unhappy with or wounded by some of ours. That is of course your prerogative, and I am indeed sorry you are suffering. As I said, suffering sucks. If you truly want to emerge from the suffering, I respectfully suggest you won't get much relief by asking us to change (because we know by now we aren't particularly good at changing for others), but rather more by taking a closer look at the mechanics of the suffering itself, and short-circuiting it. Again, I suggest: Byron Katie's "Loving What Is." And if you don't wish to change, that's OK too, as far as I am concerned at least. I love you as you are, perfect in this moment :-) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
