--- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > <snippity snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you see the difference between "You're trying to > > > > > > > > avoid becoming enlightened" and "I perceive that the > > > > > > > > way you're going about this is getting in the way of > > > > > > > > your enlightenment"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, the first phrasing is about you, and spoken > directly > > to > > > > > you, > > > > > > so > > > > > > > that you are then given the choice to deal with the > issue > > at > > > > > hand, > > > > > > or > > > > > > > not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The second phrasing is about me, and what my perceptions > of > > > you > > > > > > are, > > > > > > > therefore bringing into question the validity of my > > > > perceptions. > > > > > As > > > > > > I > > > > > > > said earlier, while this may be a fascinating topic for > > you, > > > it > > > > > > avoids > > > > > > > the issue at hand; the removal of obstacles to > > enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So the difference to me is clear. You persist in making > > > these > > > > > > semantic > > > > > > > distinctions, which are irrelevant to the topic at hand. > Do > > > I > > > > > > believe > > > > > > > that your motive of becoming enlightened is genuine? As > > > > > Maharishi > > > > > > > says, the prrof is in the pudding. > > > > > > > > > > > > What pudding? > > > > > > > > > > As Maharishi says, The proof is in the pudding. > > > > > > > > What pudding? > > > > > > "The proof [i.e., test] of the pudding is in the eating," > meaning > > we > > > can only know something by actually trying it :-) > > > > Yes, but what pudding? > > I am the pudding; you are the pudding; all this is the pudding, the > pudding alone IS.
PUDDING! 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/
