--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <rorygoff@> 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, I don't really see the people on FFL lined up into the  
> > > camps two you described, Turq, and I am not trying to heal 
> > > Judy. I see nothing in Judy that needs fixing, any more 
> > > than I see anything in you that needs fixing. I didn't find 
> > > when I tried to point out her a-priori enlightenment, that 
> > > she just "got mad." Rather, she showed me rich and lovely 
> > > multisensory layers of a particle-self of mine that had 
> > > *not* been loved before -- including constriction,  stagnation, 
> > > suffocation, deep shame, and finally, beneath it all, Love. 
> > > That's how the process usually works for me -- I introduce a 
> > > Truth, process the bodymind's objections, and discover a 
> > > deeper and richer synthesis as all my particles come to 
> > > Understand and be Understood in a whole new light.
> > > 
> > > That's my *only* "goal" in communicating with anyone here -- 
> > > to find more of my unloved and underappreciated particles and 
> > > to Understand and Love them, and thereby to be Understood and 
> > > Loved -- to expand, to grow in simplicity, while simultaneously 
> > > becoming more rich and subtle and nuanced and complex. It's 
> > > fun -- generally delightful and immensely rewarding. 
> > > 
> > > I do this because for me there is no real difference between 
> > > a small self and a large Self. Loving the small self is feeding 
> > > oblations to the large Self, expanding the influence of the 
> > > large Self, helping the Immense and the infinitesimal to 
> > > appreciate each other as two sides of the same coin. Being 
> > > Shiva, utterly free, includes adoring Shakti -- every particle 
> > > of Creation -- as Shiva's bodymind, the perfect Lover.
> > > 
> > > Whether any of this has *any* bearing on what *you guys* go 
> > > through, "out there, outside of me" -- if there *is* an "out 
> > > there, outside of me" -- is of no real import to me; it's not 
> > > my business; it can't be my business. Shalom Shanti Shanti! :-)
> > 
> > Well said.
> 
> Are you familiar with the expression, "The courage of your 
> convictions." Just curious how you reconcile apparently not 
> having any.:-)

I'm not sure who you are speaking to here.

If to me, I see no problem with anything Rory said.
It's just as valid a way of seeing things as was
mine. And far more poetic. I repeat my earlier 
"review" -- Well said.  

If to Rory, that's not my business -- is of no real
import to me.  :-)



Reply via email to