--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> 
> You seem to be taking this very personally, while I simply 
> try to elucitate the principles. For me this is an answer 
> to the thoughts and ideas you bring up, so I see it in an 
> impersonal way.

Excuse me? Go back and look at the first few posts of
yours in this thread. You *started* by lecturing me
about complaining about past spiritual teachers and
teachings. The *clear* implication from you was that
this was not an appropriate thing to do, based on your
belief that none of the things I might be complaining
about were really "done" by anyone anyway; they were
all done by the universe.

Go back and look; I think you'll find that you *started*
by being personal, and then later got into discussions
of a more theoretical nature, once I brought them up.
 
<biggus snippus to>
> > One might ask, given your last sentence, why you
> > keep suggesting that your point of view is "better"
> > or "higher" and that mine is lesser?  :-)
> 
> There is nothing about 'better' or 'higher' in my 
> suggestion. I am simply discussing, I don't know 
> what you do. 

Ahem. Might I quote you from a few posts back in
this very thread (speakers are you, then me, then you):

> > > IOW if you look at it from the ego POV, there are lots of 
> > > mistakes and limitations, if you look from the POV of the 
> > > Self there aren't, everything is perfect. It's just a 
> > > matter from which level you look at things (Knowledge is 
> > > diffferent in different states of consciousness) But its 
> > > of course stupid to look at things from the ego-POV and
> > > pretend its the Self-POV.
> > 
> > It is *your* contention that the ego-POV is lesser
> > than the Self-POV. 
> 
> Sure thats what I said. I said that it is a lesser POV than the
> highest. Yet, at this moment it is more appropriate.

> And I try to do it in a
> logical fashion, while you put up a smokescreen of different
> viewpoints, between which one can choose...

Exactly. It's not a smokescreen; that's how I perceive
the subject we are speaking about. It's all *about*
different points of view, among which one can make 
a choice as to which one to prefer.

> ...the non-choosing just being
> one of them - which is a contradiction in itself. 

But in the Buddhist paradigm a useful contradiction,
a thorn to remove a thorn, so to speak. :-)

> Your arguments are
> simply not consistent, that's all.

Neither is the universe. If you expect it to be,
you've got a lot to learn.  :-)

> > One might also ask, as I have several times (without,
> > I think, a response from you) why -- if you truly
> > believe that the universe runs everything and that
> > no one in it is really "doing" anything -- you keep
> > suggesting that I change my behavior and/or my
> > beliefs?  
> 
> Excuse me, I am not suggesting that you change your beliefs. 

Again, go back and reread the thread. You have suggested
several times that my beliefs are erroneous. At several
points you have suggested that my experiences were made
up. I don't think I've done that with you. I have merely
presented a *different* way of seeing and interpreting
the experience of "not the doer." I'm not invalidating
that experience; I've had it myself. I'm just saying
that there are other ways of *approaching* the experience
than assuming it's a "higher" or "better" way of seeing
things than "am the doer."

> I am simply discussing - if that's not what you want, 
> then what you are doing here?

I'm trying to clue you in to the parts of your
"discussion" in which you seem get your *own* 
buttons pushed, and start making declarations
about the relative "highness" and "lowness" of 
things. You've done it a lot in this thread.

> > If you honestly believe that the universe
> > is doing it all, shouldn't you be taking these
> > complaints directly to the universe instead of
> > the "not doer?"  :-)
> 
> You somehow seem to be under the illussion that you 
> are seperate from the universe. It's like this joke: 
> Someone keeps his backbag on his shoulders in the plane. 
> The stewardess asks him to take it down and put it in 
> the locker. He says, no, I carry it myself, I didn't 
> pay for the overweight.

Nice non-sequitur, but did you notice that you once
again didn't deal with the issue. You declared my
belief (which you incorrectly interpreted to be that
I am separate from the universe) an 'illusion.' But
you failed to deal with the fact that -- if you 
really believe what you claim to believe -- you are
lecturing the universe itself. If you honestly 
believe that I am not the doer of my own actions,
and thinker of my own thoughts, why are you 
criticizing them as illusory?  :-)

> It just shows that you didn't understand the argument. 
> Just like you, I do what I think I want to do. But 
> unlike you, I don't believe that what I think is in 
> my hands. 

I think that's perfectly *fine*, as a belief system.
But it *is* a belief system, a preference, not the
"highest" or the only way that one can view the 
universe and how it works. That has been my point 
all the way through. 

You *prefer* to think of yourself as "not the doer."
I *prefer* to think of myself as "am the doer." Both
are PREFERENCES, neither higher than the other.

> I think what I think, because I can't help thinking 
> that way. BTW. 

And because *it is a perfectly valid way of seeing 
things*, from a certain point of view. You have a 
*choice* as to which point of view to embrace.
You have *made* that choice, by choosing to 
believe that you are "not the doer." (Depsite your
own everyday experience, I might add.) I have made
the same choice, by preferring to believe that I am.
BOTH are true. The choice of which point of view
to focus on is ONLY A PREFERENCE.

<snipping silly pseudoscience>







------------------------ 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/
 



Reply via email to