--- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > Now, if this tactics is terribly productive, I don't know, I > > > just know that this particular body/mind organism called > > > Maharishi was drawn to it, that is that the supreme Brahman > > > wanted him to do so... > > > > Here we lost the ability to have a meaningful discussion. > > The moment you postulate some sentient entity that you > > call 'supreme Brahman' and suggest that it has desires > > (wants) of its own, I lose interest. :-) > > Too bad, because you don't even read and cut the sentence > short. Thats because of stereotyped thinking, its so easy > to have those buttons pushed with you...
And you don't get your buttons pushed when someone points out that a core assumption behind your philosophy seems to be, "the Absolute does what it 'wants?'" :-) I was just funnin' with you, dude. *You* are the one who then got uptight and droned on for several paragraphs trying to defend what you'd said and put down what I'd said. T'would seem that *you* are the one with somewhat of an attachment to your concept of the Absolute running everything. Contrary to what you say below, it sounds to me very much as if you're "selling something." Just *look* at the paragraph below. Who is upset and frustrated and somewhat irate here? Hint: it ain't me. *You* are the one who seems to be upset that I don't believe what you believe. I'm not upset with you. > ...and I'm kinda fed up and actually too lazy to > translate something to you; a man of your intelligence > could easily understand - if you just wanted. Once your > buttons are pushed its like talking to a wall - not > meaningful, but also not because of me.As I > have nothing to sell, I don't care for one actually, > why waste energy, end of story. Then, having ranted at me because I wasn't buying what you are selling, you move on to selling it to others: > Okay, for the sake of others who might just catch this > little bit of dialoque: Here I am referring to the Brahman > as the Absolute, and any > of us, including Maharishi just being players, with the Absolute > behind, animating everything. Nowhere I am saying that you have to > imagine Brahman like a decission-making person - thats just your > hook up, and I really don't care about it. My point is that our > involvement > into our own personality is illussionary. As long as you think that > you are 'in charge', you surely have no witnessing, you just gather > experiences for your own satisfaction. Your last phrase above is *exactly* my feeling for what the Absolute is. It has no will, no intent, no plan; it is just gathering experiences. It's *OK* if you believe differently. But you *are* trying to sell what you believe. If you weren't, you wouldn't have gotten so uptight and reactive when I indicated I wasn't interested in buying your idea that the Absolute "wants" things. Just to clarify, trinity, *I don't know*. My intuitive feeling about such ponderous philosophical ponderings is more Buddhist than Hindu. I feel that the Absolute just *is*; it doesn't "want" things. I am unconvinced that it has sentience and an intent of its own. If you feel otherwise, that's just fine with me. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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/
