--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
wrote:
> > > An yet, someone also said (Saint Byron perhaps) that if you
can't
> > > imagine the opposite of something -- as possibly being true,
then
> > you
> > > are stuck in in that boundary.
> > >
> > > The point of my kidding has been, "Can you imagine yourself as
> > > possibly stuck in a prison that you are unaware of?"
> > >
> > Its easy to imagine anything. If I have my choice I will imagine
> > that I am eternally free.
>
> But of course you don't have that choice. "Your" imagination It is
> only that abstract anthropomorphic "Nature" that imagines what it
> wants and you are only the humble servant. Right?
>
> > I can certainly imagine myself to be in
> > prison, but I choose not to.
>
> But if that abstract anthropomorphic "Nature" imagines you in
prison,
> per its inscrutable and abstract needs, then "you" will imagine you
> are in prison.
>
> Or are you saying you are not the instrument of the Divine and the
> Divine's imagination? I thought you just did in a prior post.
> "Whether we like it or not (lol) we become agents of the Divine."
>
> Can you imagine that you are only imagining that you have the
choice
> to imagine?
>
> Can you imagine that you are not the instrument of the Divine?
>
>
> Can you imagine that you are only imagining that you are
enlightened?
>
> Can you imagine that you are only imagining that you are
enlightened
> if that abstract anthropomorphic "Nature" imagines that you imagine
> that you are enlightened -- but also imagines that actually you
are not?
>
> For all of you imaginations, or natures imaginations, and your
thought
> of enlightenment,
>
> Is it true?
>
> Can you absolutely know that it's true?
>
> How do you react when you think that thought?
>
> Who would you be without the thought?
>
> Can you turn it around?
>
> (Each turnaround is an opportunity to experience the opposite of
your
> original statement and see what you are without your (original)
thought)
>
> Or is (or do you imagine) Byron Katie is only for those "ignirant"
> souls who are not as enlightened as you?
>
I don't know where to start with your plethora of rhetorical
questions. I am perfectly comfortable to let you answer every one of
them by yourself.:-)
