--- In [email protected], "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@...> wrote: > > Turq's original 4 (or perhaps 3-1/2 or 3 questions). (Some slight > emphasis added) (-: > > > Just for the fun of it, you understand. :-) > > > > 1. [W]hat exactly (in your opinion, of course, and welcomed > > as the opinion it is) was the distinction that Maharishi was > > trying to draw between UC and BC? > > 2. What would you think of a seeker who had enlightenment > > presented to him on a platter and who then rejected it, > > preferring to accept and try to groove with whatever state of > > consciousness life presented to him? > > 3. What if someone got all enlightened and all, and decided to > > do something else? > > 4. Would that be a Good Thing in your opinion, or a Bad Thing? > > > > I'm serious in this, and will try my best not to dump on > > anyone who replies with an opinion. I honestly don't know, > > or don't remember. And it would help me with a writing > > project if I were to know the distinction he was drawing, > > or attempting to draw. Thanks in advance. > > Now, if Turq wanted to know what the distinction is, why would > he be soliciting opinion, and regarding it as merely opinion...
Duh. Because I believe that nothing exists BUT opinion? For question 1, I was just curious as what people who might have heard *Maharishi's* opinion of the distinction between UC and BC thought that distinction was. I hold *none* of these opinions as either "fact" or "truth" or "knowing" or "knowledge." They're ALL just opinion, no matter the source. As it turned out, only two people here seem to have had a clear enough memory of what Maharishi's opinion was on this subject to put it into a clear explanation. Those two people were, interestingly enough, Curtis and Vaj, two people who don't have anything to do with the TMO any more, and don't think that much of Maharishi. That did not prevent them from remembering what he said. For the other questions, I was just curious about what people here might say. I was underwhelmed by the responses, and dropped it as a topic of interest to me. > ...because it is often difficult if not impossible to milk > knowledge from opinion? Speak for yourself. I don't believe that there is anything BUT opinion. Or "knowledge" that is anything BUT opinion. So Vaj and Curtis' opinion is, for me, on exactly the same level as Maharishi's. I certainly don't hold that any opinion he had was anything more than opinion, and that doesn't hamper me with trying to riff on it for my own amusement. Why should I be any more hampered by anyone else's opinion? > Some opinion may appear obviously false, but opinion that > is not obviously false, may still be false. So from what > will Turq acquire the knowledge he seeks, if he is sincere > in wanting to know something? > > All for the fun of it of course. All for the fun of it. I do not delude myself -- as you seem to -- that some opinion is "true" and other opinion "false." It's all opinion. I take each opinion for what it is -- pure opinion -- and then form my own opinions on the basis of other people's, bounced off of opinions I've heard from other sources, my own subjective experience, and my own intuition. That is what we ALL do -- you included -- although some seem to "weight" certain opinions to make it seem as if some of them AREN'T opinion but some kind of "fact" or "truth." I get the impression that you're struggling mightily to draw me into some kind of protracted discussion with you as if you were worthy of my time in doing so. If that is your intent, backtrack to a statement you made earlier and justify it. You said ( paraphrasing from memory, because at this point you don't interest me enough to go look it up :-) that you (or one) could "know" at least one thing. What's that? How would you (or one) claim to "know" the truth or accuracy of that thing? Ball's in your court, Chucko. Explain how someone could "know" something that is based purely on their personal subjective experience, and "know" it on the level of being absolutely certain it is more than just opinion. I'll wait. :-)
