Naaa Pat, I can't agree with that and I'm betting that you can't either. Of course we own stuff. I mean you would not stand back and do nothing if I come around to your house and started to remove your property under the guise of me being od and taking back from your position what is rightfully mine.
It is a hard line people like you and I must walk my freind. To live in a world full of duality yet realising that this is an illusion, but one so strong that we must treat it as truth. And in truth if you found people in your house taking your stuff, you would call the police. As to who owns your soul. Well you and I have a sense of Self, that is as a seperate entity to the One, and to others of our kind. It may well be true that we don't own our selves, yet we live as if we did, all of our language shows this to be true, so why deny it? On 9 Feb, 13:19, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8 Feb, 17:21, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yeah, I've been mugged before, at knife point. And was happy to hand > > > over all the money I had. Tell me, when you die, can you take your > > > house with you? If not, then you didn't own it. You only possess > > > yourself. And, on a deeper level, even THAT is God's. > > > Here it is Pat, here is the passage which shows exactly what I mean by > > such a strong illusion you may as well claim it truth. > > > Of course when you are dead you no longer exist so even your body is > > not owned by you. Ahhhh but when you are alive, you not only posses > > yourself, you own your Self, and anything that you may possess long > > enough to own. > > > Semantic quibbles, shall we stop it there? > > No. It IS semantic quibbles. Different levels. The 'owning' of > oneself or one's soul is a part of the illusion as well. If the soul > returns to its maker, then whose soul was it? You seem to have missed > out the 'deeper level' aspect of the quote. My statements hold and > they are true; whether or not you 'feel you choose' to differ. My > point is that you don't own ANYTHING. God owns it ALL by virtue of > being it all. That's functional omnipresence. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
