--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
<snip> To reiterate the point, have a look at the other
> topic I started recently, the one with "Why would
> you believe that..." in the Subject line. There
> have been 58 responses so far. From my point of
> view, the *only* responses in that thread that are
> the least bit argumentative came from you three.
> The other people just presented their ideas and
> *discussed*. You guys argued.
> 
My response to your earlier thread. No argument here:

'The ego-bound mind cannot accept a simple answer that the Self
recognizes the Self. Again, if the ego-bound intellect could just be
confronted with a set of relative criteria, then it could argue and
challenge its way to 'freedom' and safety, yet when faced with
nothing to challenge, it can only challenge the Self. This is why I
have referred to the ego earlier as both cunning and stupid; cunning
in that it will devise brilliant traps for itself, to maintain its
limited existence, and stupid, because from the perspective of the
Self its antics for self preservation are seen as glaringly obvious.

Another reason the small self looks for lists is that in its limited
time/space existence it defines itself through lists; I have been
here and there, I know such and such, I have done this and that, so
it naturally tries to find a similar definition for that which
cannot be defined; non-dual awareness. It is a natural tendency for
the ignorant self, yet one doomed to spectacular failure if the
seeker is hungry enough.'



Reply via email to