On Nov 13, 2005, at 10:57 PM, Peter wrote:
Bliss is a relative phenomenon and has nothing to do
with pure consciousness. Bliss is, actually, quite
stupid.
Transcendental bliss is inseparable. It is not a relative phenom
unless the pranas haven't entered, dissolved and abided in the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wmurphy77 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No, you would not remember pure transcendence unless
the mind was
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 11/13/05 9:57 PM, Peter at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 11/13/05 9:57 PM, Peter at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wmurphy77 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wmurphy77 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk
[EMAIL
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 13, 2005, at 10:57 PM, Peter wrote:
Bliss is a relative phenomenon and has nothing to do
with pure consciousness. Bliss is, actually, quite
stupid.
Transcendental bliss is inseparable. It is not a relative
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No, you would not remember pure transcendence unless
the mind was functioning along with that transcendence
and that would be CC.
What do you think the *infusion* of *Being* is, if not bliss?
Transcendence is no mantra,
--- wmurphy77 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No, you would not remember pure transcendence
unless
the mind was functioning along with that
transcendence
and that would be CC.
What do you think the *infusion* of
Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bliss is, actually, quite stupid.
Well, I was talking to Bliss the other day and it said Peter was
stupid. :)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 11/13/05 9:57 PM, Peter at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Absolutely not. Pure Bliss is not happiness. Happiness
is a relative phenomenon. To equate Being with
relative happiness is just the terrified mind taking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wmurphy77 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No, you would not remember pure transcendence unless
the mind was functioning along with that transcendence
and that would be CC.
What do you
12 matches
Mail list logo
