--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], t3rinity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > Here's a question for you trinity, just for fun. > Above you imply that our involvement with our > own personality is illusory. Cool, take that as > a given, in your belief system. So, in that same > belief system, is the Absolute non-illusory?
Please read also my answer to your other post. To be honest with you: I don't care if the Absolute is illusory or not. I see the thing just from my own side. I am too much overwhelmed by my own not being in charge, than to think exactly about Who is in charge. BTW. The recognition of the illusioriness of my own personality extends to the illusioriness of ANY personality, that is our idea of personality and ownership is simply wrong per se. > That is, does the Absolute really exist? That's a philosophic question. Its like saying: Does existence exist? At this point for me that is a mute discussion. > I'm just trying to take things one step further > than you do. Doesn't seem to be. You clearly understood me wrongly. To me that seems to be a cope out. My point is: we are not personalities, personalities don't run shows. To now say: There is nobody else runnig the show (as the Absolute doesn't exist), therefore it must be me running it, is in my eyes an escape. > You seem to have stopped with the > individual personality having no real existence > and the Absolute being the thing that "really" > runs things. You misunderstood that. I don't imagine the Absolute to be endowed with individuality. And if it is so, then it would be very different then what we understand by it. Any Ego, be it of God or man is an illusion. > I'm suggesting that the Absolute > has no more existence than does individual > personality, and that the entire universe is > illusion, without existence. Whaddyasaytothat? :-) Shall I be honest? Mindfuck. ------------------------ 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/
