--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "markmeredith2002" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote: > > > > I see that as a battle of two individuals who are locked into > > egoic > > identity, identified with their limited relative existence, one > > believing he is separate from unbounded, eternal Divinity, and the > > other denying the existence of unbounded, eternal Divinity. In the > > state of identity with the plane of ever-changing, uncertain, > > relative > > existence, people tend to seek security in some construct of this > > plane that has the appearance of absoluteness (e.g. science) or > > has > > been arbitrarily declared absolute (e.g., religion). And, to > > maintain > > this pseudo-security, the ego-mind engages in battle, desperately > > trying to recruit others and maintain the illusion of its chosen > > construct's absoluteness and validity above all other constructs. > > I think everyone here has misread Harris's viewpoints, which > might be expected from this type of group. Harris does not > deny the existence of unbounded eternal divinity or anything > else in that realm, he just says you can [not] say with > certainty that it exists, or say it is "Truth" that it exists.
I understand that, mainly, because I agree with him. That was my whole point to Jim recently. I was merely commenting on the fact that in his latest post Harris seems to have degenerated somewhat. His stuff is usually on a much higher level than this. > Harris properly points out the dangers of believing in these > sort of absolute unprovable Truths without realizing that > they're actually just your own belief systems that you own > for whatever reasons, good or bad, but he's not denying > anyone the right to hold their belief system - whereas > religionists have a tendency to want to deny any other > belief system which does not conform to their Truth. I consider myself fortunate to have worked with Fred Lenz (Rama), despite many negatives, because when you were around him the energy field was so strong that it was almost impossible to hold onto *anything* long enough to believe it was "truth." You'd go out into the desert with the dude and have your belief systems (and your notions of what 'reality' is) blown right out of their socks dozens of times a night. So what's to hold onto? Beliefs are things that come and go, just as states of attention come and go. In my opinion, if someone has become attached enough to one particular belief system to believe it's the "truth," let alone to try to convince others that it's the "truth," to me that just means they've been stuck in one state of attention for far too long. One good kick in the metaphysical pants, one radical shift into another state of attention, and chances are that belief system and that notion of "truth" will be sloughed off like so many dead skin cells when they've outlived their usefulness. So I guess I'm kinda agreeing with Alex here. Sullivan may be stuck in his mindset, with its assumptions and beliefs, but IMO so -- at least right now -- is Harris.
