Speaking "from" being or more accurately, Being is
speaking.
--- Ron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ask the same question- are the ones commenting
> here speaking from Being or about it.
> Not that your answer is proof positive of anything,
> I have been with Ones claiming
> enlightenment and i
I ask the same question- are the ones commenting here speaking from Being or
about it.
Not that your answer is proof positive of anything, I have been with Ones
claiming
enlightenment and it wasn't so, yet no way anyone can convince them otherwise
It was explained to me that when one has a gli
Two different definitions of mind is what is causing
this confusion. When Ramana refers to mind I think he
means the "I" thought, the source of the delusion of
individuality. I agree with hyperbolic here. In
Realization the death is of the "I" and "me". There is
just consciousness without any space
--thanks, I have that book; but he's incorrect: the mind doesn't die.
An "I" associated with mind-identification dies. Mind was a medium
by which the message of Sri Lakshmana was conveyed to David Godman.
Therefore, it's very much alive. Also, shortly after Lakshmana
realized the Self, he wen
