--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "matrixmonitor"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --Right, but TALKING (or posting stuff on the internet) about
> Enlightenment is another "story". The Neo-Advaitins are saying their
> story is superior to the stories of others.
> Buddhism has an absolute conti
---(below - particles are mutually inclusive, the universe within a
grain of sand); and aspect of HOLOGRAPHY, the concept of which seems
to have originated with Zhiyi, of the Tien Tai School of Buddhism, 6-
th century. The holographic concept (although not using that word)
achieved a greater exp
--Right, but TALKING (or posting stuff on the internet) about
Enlightenment is another "story". The Neo-Advaitins are saying their
story is superior to the stories of others.
Buddhism has an absolute continuum of existence, and doesn't get
into such infantile games.
- In FairfieldLife@yahoog
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> > I(t) might be even more fun if you also admit that *I* am also an
> > infinitesimal particle of You; it works both ways :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> That can't be. That overstrai
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote:
>
> > When I was asked the same question that you asked Jim and Rory, I have
> > thought, what I would answer from my own very limited perspective of
> > being on
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When I was asked the same question that you asked Jim and Rory, I have
> thought, what I would answer from my own very limited perspective of
> being only an infinitesimal particle of Rory, which I am sure I am,
I might
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > Sure doesn't sound *anything* like moodmaking to me. :-)
> >
> > No doubt :-) But then,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just as a question, given Maharishi's descriptions
> of enlightenment and what it is, *why* does this
> "particle" of you still feel discomfort and suffer-
> ing? Isn't it free of stress and beyond such things
> if you
Turq said to Rory: "Now let me get this straight. Someone says
something, and that causes part of you to feel discomfort, which you
perceive as suffering. So you do "the work" until the discomfort goes
away and you're feeling blissful, in the "paradisical state of radiant
Being," the way things *s
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > Now let me get this straight. Someone says something,
> > and that causes part of you to feel discomfort,
>
> reveals a particle which I hadn't noticed bef
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now let me get this straight. Someone says something,
> and that causes part of you to feel discomfort,
reveals a particle which I hadn't noticed before :-)
which
> you perceive as suffering.
Which *it* perceives as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jul 26, 2007, at 10:23 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > And while you're at it, you might ask yourself why
> > your fantasy that someone else thinks they're great
> > and you're not provokes in you such a powerfully
> > defensi
On Jul 26, 2007, at 10:23 AM, authfriend wrote:
And while you're at it, you might ask yourself why
your fantasy that someone else thinks they're great
and you're not provokes in you such a powerfully
defensive reaction.
And while you're at it, you might want to ask yourself why you have
to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> > > > I said, "essentially a waste of time *unless* they're areas
> > > > you're personall
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't, and have no desire to, "prove" anything to
> you about the truth or falseness of your own projected
> fantasies. I can only point out the *nature* of those
> fantasies. This latest one deconstructs to, "You are
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The bottom line of your posts, Jim, is that we have
> to accept you as *you see yourself*, and that's that.
> It's basically how Maharishi comes across as well.
>
> Not gonna happen...
>
Except that my entire post was
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> > > I said, "essentially a waste of time *unless* they're areas
> > > you're personally feeling particular pain and suffering in,"
> > > the object being
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> >
> > I said, "essentially a waste of time *unless* they're areas
you're
> > personally feeling particular pain and suffering in," the object
> > being to realize one's eternal liberation from bondage and
suffering.
> > If you'r
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think some here, perhaps Rory and Jim, have expressed something of
> that sort. I do know that when you are dreaming, its hard to accept
> that you are dreaming -- but assume you are awake. Though sometimes in
> the d
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > >
> > > Was in a rush before; want to add a couple things:
> > >
> > > --- In Fairf
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mathatbrahman"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > ---Nope I disagree. The questions below are legitimate, of
> > interes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mathatbrahman"
> wrote:
> >
> > ---Nope I disagree. The questions below are legitimate, of
> interest,
> > and potentially of value; but obviously not to Neo-Advaitins who
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff"
wrote:
>
> >
> > No; m
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mathatbrahman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---Nope I disagree. The questions below are legitimate, of
interest,
> and potentially of value; but obviously not to Neo-Advaitins who
> believe that nothing exists anyway.
I said, "essentially a waste of ti
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
>
> No; much like Jim, I'd suggest these are essentially a waste of time
For you or for
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > Good question Are you not interested?
> >
> > Seriously, there are many seekers on the path, like the
> > poster who asked me if I think I am or
---Nope I disagree. The questions below are legitimate, of interest,
and potentially of value; but obviously not to Neo-Advaitins who
believe that nothing exists anyway. As for Buddhists, Sakyamuni
Buddha stated that there's not enough time to investigate natural
laws and also do one's Spiritu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > > You're
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that
> > > what new.morning was getting at
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> wrote:
> > that sort. I do know that when you are dreaming, its hard to accept
> > that you are dreaming -- but assume you are awake. Though
> sometimes in
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > Good question Are you not interested?
> >
> > Seriously, there are many seekers on the path, like the poster
who
> > asked me if I think I am
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that
> > what new.morning was getting at is whether you or
> > anyone who considers themselves enlightened are
>
On Jul 25, 2007, at 9:09 PM, new.morning wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, new.morning wrote:
>
> > Can you absolutely know that it's true?
>
>
> I hate to bring up what seems obvious to me, but there are objective
>
---to a certain extent, your're right, Vaj; except that there's an
infinite variation in the possible Siddhis, and then one would have
to judge which of them is a criterion: certainly, being able to
communicate with lobsters would be on top of the list, for sure!
At the very least, Siddhis se
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, new.morning wrote:
>
> > Can you absolutely know that it's true?
>
>
> I hate to bring up what seems obvious to me, but there are objective
> ways to test states of enlightenment which hav
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > > You're en
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Good question Are you not interested?
>
> Seriously, there are many seekers on the path, like the poster who
> asked me if I think I am or am not enlightened,
I assume you man me. Or perhaps Barry. Perhaps bot
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > > You're
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > > that you might not be. Did
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > > that you might not be. Di
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Quick comment at the bottom:
>
> **
> Curtis, your last comment (last sentence, immediately above) re
> the "friendly connection" represents for me, too, the "best" of FFL.
> Whenever people here are willing to
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > that you might not be. Did I get that right, Jim?
> >
> You are missing what I and many others have
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 25, 2007, at 5:20 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> >
> > > > I'm just sayin' that there is a big "red flag"
> > > > raised for me when someone believes one of their
> > > > "stories" so completely
> > >
> > > And Jim was j
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> > wrote:
> > > Can you imagine that you are only imagining that you are
> > > enlightened if th
On Jul 25, 2007, at 5:20 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > I'm just sayin' that there is a big "red flag"
> > raised for me when someone believes one of their
> > "stories" so completely
>
> And Jim was just sayin' that the nature of
> enlightenment is such that it falls outside the
> category of "sto
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> > wrote:
> > >
> > I don't know where to start with your plethora of rhetorical
> > question
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > > wrote:
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> wrote:
> >
> I don't know where to start with your plethora of rhetorical
> questions.
They are interesting questions, IMO. But I like to play with
perspectiv
On Jul 25, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Alex Stanley wrote:
> So if he's going by what Vaj says in this case,
> I guess it's just another one of those
> contradictions that show how spiritually
> advanced he is.
How did Self-Realization come to be associated with the ability to
perform spiritual parlor t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> > > >
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
wrote:
> > >
> > > Was in a rush before; want to add a couple things:
> > >
> > > --- In Fai
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > > that you might not be. D
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > Was in a rush before; want to add a couple things:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> >
> > > *Without a doubt*, the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > that you might not be. Did I get that right, Jim?
> >
> You are missing what I and many others hav
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that
> what new.morning was getting at is whether you or
> anyone who considers themselves enlightened are
> willing to "do the work" on your assumption that
> you're enlightene
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > Was in a rush before; want to add a couple things:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> >
> > > *Without a doubt*, thes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of the paradoxes of the TM system is that anyone claiming to
have
> reached the goal was always viewed with great suspicion when I was
> involved. I can imagine the rash of S-- you would have gotten for
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Was in a rush before; want to add a couple things:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> > *Without a doubt*, these people's enlightenment was
> > self-evident to them. There was no questi
Was in a rush before; want to add a couple things:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *Without a doubt*, these people's enlightenment was
> self-evident to them. There was no question in their
> minds that it existed. But did it?
I have no idea. Do you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Yet when Jim refuses to even *consider* examining
> his enlightenment, even if it's just theoretical
> and for fun, you defend him and claim that I'm
> accusing him of something. H. :-)
Why don't we just leave it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > > You're e
On Jul 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, new.morning wrote:
Can you absolutely know that it's true?
I hate to bring up what seems obvious to me, but there are objective
ways to test states of enlightenment which have been used
successfully for thousands of years. These are simple tests. If you
cl
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > > that you might not be. Di
Good question Are you not interested?
Seriously, there are many seekers on the path, like the poster who
asked me if I think I am or am not enlightened, who want to believe
that we can achieve an enlightened state permanently, theoretically,
maybe, possibly, almost, according to these factors
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > > that you might not be.
---Thanks, true, but why are you talking about it?
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > that you might not be. Did I get that right, J
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> > that you might not be. Did I get that right, Jim?
> >
> You are missing what I and many others hav
Quick comment at the bottom:
**
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Rory: "As I said when I first met you here, I am completely willing
to
> be "unenlightened" with you in your world, if you are willing to
> be "enlightened" with me in mine --
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're enlightened, and you refuse to even *think*
> that you might not be. Did I get that right, Jim?
>
You are missing what I and many others have already said again and
again here. Enlightenment is not experienced on
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> > > > An yet, someone also said (Saint Byron perhaps) that if you
> > > > can't
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
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
Rory: "As I said when I first met you here, I am completely willing to
be "unenlightened" with you in your world, if you are willing to
be "enlightened" with me in mine -- will that do? Can we be
both "ordinary" and "special" simultaneously together? I will if you
will. Actually, I will even if you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Curtis for your quick response, and especially for not taking
> offense in any way. That really speaks for you.
It was easy not to be offended since your post had some interesting
points for me to think about. It
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
On Jul 24, 2007, at 10:39 PM, new.morning wrote:
> This is a common theme in neo-advaitin "realizers", the inability to
> present a correct View (drsti) regarding the "two
truths" (satyadvaya).
>
Being THE correct view, I am sure all realized ones agree on it.
:-) If only.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Just one short comment to this: For me it is a wonderful refreshment
> to FFL, and for me personally, that you and Jim are saying what you
> do. Since the two of you started saying what you say this place has
> m
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "matrixmonitor"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > ---the people you mention - living in cages. They should
> pra
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" wrote:
> > > >
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" wrote:
> > >
> > > ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> > > only "think"
Thanks Curtis for your quick response, and especially for not taking
offense in any way. That really speaks for you.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for taking the time to respond in detail. I think you have
> brought out some very go
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
> wrote:
> >
> > Me: I have been enjoying lurking I have been thinking something
> about
> > how you write that I would like to run by you Rory. I think yo
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "matrixmonitor"
> wrote:
> >
> > ---the people you mention - living in cages. They should
practice
> TM
> > regularly and buy all the CD's & DVD's relating to Ramana
Mah
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't view the ego in the way you seem to be using it and
> >
--Right - a Chinese box! In the movie "1408" the character nears the
end of his horror story 1 hour in an apartment that becomes alive but
a living Hell; and on several occasions, he thinks he's out of the
apt, but it's only another delusion.
Finally, he "really" comes out of the Hellish apt t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB
wrote:
> > > The question is, "How is doing 'the work,' Byron Katie-
> > > style, *not* fraught with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" wrote:
> >
> > ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> > only "think" the apartment is real, but really be living inside Mae
> > West's head?
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity wrote:
> I feel pity for those who haven't experienced this, but
> > I can't look down on them, nor do I think that Rory indicated
this in
> > any way. I see him as a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" wrote:
> > >
> > > ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> > > only "think"
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" wrote:
> > I am recommending that one be aware of where the criticism is
coming
> > from -- that one place attention on the core expectations behind
the
> > criticisms, and thereby to discover the illusory and projective
> > nature of one's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" wrote:
> >
> > ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> > only "think" the apartment is real, but really be living inside
Mae
> > West's head?
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
wrote:
> > "Do you feel all perception and cognition (in
> > > the mundane sense) are projecti
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> only "think" the apartment is real, but really be living inside Mae
> West's head?
>
> http://www.planetperplex.com/en/item203
>
> Or, Jim, you were fortun
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I feel pity for those who haven't experienced this, but
> I can't look down on them, nor do I think that Rory indicated this in
> any way. I see him as a completely humble spiritual practitionar, who
> is far beyond me.
Jes
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 3:38 PM, yifuxero wrote:
>
> > ---Below: Rory says suffering has no objective reality. True, but
> > irrelevant in terms of the actions that may be required to offset
the
> > suffering. The proposed re
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> only "think" the apartment is real, but really be living inside Mae
> West's head?
>
> http://www.planetperplex.com/en/item203
>
> Or, Jim, you were fortun
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning wrote:
> "Do you feel all perception and cognition (in
> > the mundane sense) are projection?"
>
> Now, try expressing all that you have pondered and answered as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sinhlnx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ---Consider an apartment as a type of cage. Could a person
> only "think" the apartment is real, but really be living inside Mae
> West's head?
Some time ago, and periodically, I "consider" that we are all living
in K
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Me: I have been enjoying lurking I have been thinking something
about
> how you write that I would like to run by you Rory. I think you are
> using language that very carefully does separate you from the per
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> OTOH my current understanding of moodmaking is in no way
> condemnatory, as all the states of consciousness look much like moods
> to me. From where I stand, we have a choice as to our primary "mood"
> or "frequenc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > The question is, "How is doing 'the work,' Byron Katie-
> > style, *not* fraught with addictive pain?" It seems to
> > me that what Rory describes above is
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
