Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
On 2/11/2014 10:39 AM, Share Long wrote: > Dreams are real in their own context. But they are delusions in a > larger context. > Dreams are real while we are dreaming, but unreal in the absolute sense. Dreams are not illusions in the sense of not being real because we do have dreams. The magic tricks of the magician seem unreal but they are tricks, not unreal tricks - there is a real sleight of hand. Something that is unreal is something that cannot be. > > Do you think that's what Robin meant about his enlightenment? > According to Robin's biography, "The First Three Years of Enlightenment" at the time Robin got enlightened he believed in MMY's seven states typology and followed the Shankara Advaita. We don't know exactly what he believes now - Robin is a deep couple of guys.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
On 2/11/2014 7:08 AM, Share Long wrote: > ontological union between God and human is not possible. > When Robin experienced enlightenment he said that he floated in a kind of absolute "bliss" - he was able to witness his body move, as his "individuality" carried out its natural actions, but the individual Robin was gone - he had reached CC. According to MMY, if pure consciousness stays awake while everything else sleeps, then one knows one is in cosmic consciousness.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
Thanks Richard, I understand this. Using dreams is a good way to explain it. Dreams are real in their own context. But they are delusions in a larger context. Do you think that's what Robin meant about his enlightenment? On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 10:34 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote: On 2/11/2014 9:19 AM, Share Long wrote: > this sounds contradictory to me. How can something be genuine and > delusionary at the same time? > According to Robin, most people are in a dream state and mistake it for the real. What you have to do according to Robin is wake up from the dream. The Adi Shankaracharya explained this very well using analogies like the rope-sanke. The dream state is like a delusion or an illusion. Dreams and illusions are real, while they last, but not real in the absolute sense. An illusion or a dream is real in the sense that it is presented to us. At first that seems to be contradictory, but when you think about it, dreams are as real as any other state - dreams are not real, yet they are not unreal either. In the waking state you can run and jump and consult with your friends. You can also run and jump in your dreams and consult with your friends. In fact, there's nothing that can be done in the waking state that you cannot also do in a dream state. It's like a zen koan: At night, you see a thief. In the light of day, you realize it was just a fence pole.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
On 2/11/2014 9:19 AM, Share Long wrote: > this sounds contradictory to me. How can something be genuine and > delusionary at the same time? > According to Robin, most people are in a dream state and mistake it for the real. What you have to do according to Robin is wake up from the dream. The Adi Shankaracharya explained this very well using analogies like the rope-sanke. The dream state is like a delusion or an illusion. Dreams and illusions are real, while they last, but not real in the absolute sense. An illusion or a dream is real in the sense that it is presented to us. At first that seems to be contradictory, but when you think about it, dreams are as real as any other state - dreams are not real, yet they are not unreal either. In the waking state you can run and jump and consult with your friends. You can also run and jump in your dreams and consult with your friends. In fact, there's nothing that can be done in the waking state that you cannot also do in a dream state. It's like a zen koan: At night, you see a thief. In the light of day, you realize it was just a fence pole.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
As I said: Once you figure it out, get back to me. It shouldn't be that difficult, even for you. << Judy, this sounds contradictory to me. How can something be genuine and delusionary at the same time? >> Judy wrote: Enlightenment reached by Eastern systems is, according to Robin, the real, genuine state of enlightenment. ... It imposes a delusionary experience of oneself, of the world, and of one's relationship to God. On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 9:03 AM, "authfriend@..." wrote: As I've already told you, Share, it really doesn't help just to repeat your misunderstanding over and over. You have never bothered to engage with what Ann and I have told you. I'll try it one more time: Enlightenment reached by Eastern systems is, according to Robin, the real, genuine state of enlightenment. Got that? But genuine enlightenment itself is not what it's cracked up to be: It imposes a delusionary experience of oneself, of the world, and of one's relationship to God. Now, read those two sentences over and over until it dawns on you where your misunderstanding lies. I'm not interested in hearing from you again on this until you can show you understand Robin's position correctly (whether you agree with it or not). << Judy, here is what I understand: you used the phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Robin. Then you said that Robin said that enlightenment reached via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. Are these statements accurate? >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 11:25 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You're repeating his (or my or Ann's) words out of context and without understanding, Share. You're not really trying to understand; you just want to find a way to bash him. << Judy, later Robin said that his state of enlightenment was actually, to use Ann's words, a state of delusion. I'm merely repeating what he himself has said. Or what you and Ann have said that he said. >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:45 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
Judy, this sounds contradictory to me. How can something be genuine and delusionary at the same time? Judy wrote: Enlightenment reached by Eastern systems is, according to Robin, the real, genuine state of enlightenment. ... It imposes a delusionary experience of oneself, of the world, and of one's relationship to God. On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 9:03 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: As I've already told you, Share, it really doesn't help just to repeat your misunderstanding over and over. You have never bothered to engage with what Ann and I have told you. I'll try it one more time: Enlightenment reached by Eastern systems is, according to Robin, the real, genuine state of enlightenment. Got that? But genuine enlightenment itself is not what it's cracked up to be: It imposes a delusionary experience of oneself, of the world, and of one's relationship to God. Now, read those two sentences over and over until it dawns on you where your misunderstanding lies. I'm not interested in hearing from you again on this until you can show you understand Robin's position correctly (whether you agree with it or not). << Judy, here is what I understand: you used the phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Robin. Then you said that Robin said that enlightenment reached via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. Are these statements accurate? >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 11:25 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You're repeating his (or my or Ann's) words out of context and without understanding, Share. You're not really trying to understand; you just want to find a way to bash him. << Judy, later Robin said that his state of enlightenment was actually, to use Ann's words, a state of delusion. I'm merely repeating what he himself has said. Or what you and Ann have said that he said. >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:45 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
As I've already told you, Share, it really doesn't help just to repeat your misunderstanding over and over. You have never bothered to engage with what Ann and I have told you. I'll try it one more time: Enlightenment reached by Eastern systems is, according to Robin, the real, genuine state of enlightenment. Got that? But genuine enlightenment itself is not what it's cracked up to be: It imposes a delusionary experience of oneself, of the world, and of one's relationship to God. Now, read those two sentences over and over until it dawns on you where your misunderstanding lies. I'm not interested in hearing from you again on this until you can show you understand Robin's position correctly (whether you agree with it or not). << Judy, here is what I understand: you used the phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Robin. Then you said that Robin said that enlightenment reached via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. Are these statements accurate? >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 11:25 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: You're repeating his (or my or Ann's) words out of context and without understanding, Share. You're not really trying to understand; you just want to find a way to bash him. << Judy, later Robin said that his state of enlightenment was actually, to use Ann's words, a state of delusion. I'm merely repeating what he himself has said. Or what you and Ann have said that he said. >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:45 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
Judy, here is what I understand: you used the phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Robin. Then you said that Robin said that enlightenment reached via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. Are these statements accurate? On Monday, February 10, 2014 11:25 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: You're repeating his (or my or Ann's) words out of context and without understanding, Share. You're not really trying to understand; you just want to find a way to bash him. << Judy, later Robin said that his state of enlightenment was actually, to use Ann's words, a state of delusion. I'm merely repeating what he himself has said. Or what you and Ann have said that he said. >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:45 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
You're repeating his (or my or Ann's) words out of context and without understanding, Share. You're not really trying to understand; you just want to find a way to bash him. << Judy, later Robin said that his state of enlightenment was actually, to use Ann's words, a state of delusion. I'm merely repeating what he himself has said. Or what you and Ann have said that he said. >> On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:45 PM, "authfriend@..." wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. Judy, while I really appreciate your persistence and tireless efforts to clue Share in on this there are one of two things going on: 1) She is either incapable of grasping the concept we are attempting to help her understand or 2) She is unwilling to grasp it. Either way, she will never, never give it up. But I do have a tip for the third race - bet on the mule wearing blinkers to win. Odds are 10-1. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
Judy, later Robin said that his state of enlightenment was actually, to use Ann's words, a state of delusion. I'm merely repeating what he himself has said. Or what you and Ann have said that he said. On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:45 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
Of course you denigrated Robin. Robin claimed he had been enlightened, and you're insisting he wasn't. I've explained why your "logic" is, to say the least, faulty several times, as has Ann. It really doesn't help your case that you keep repeating your misunderstanding without ever addressing what we've been telling you. << Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. >> Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Statistics
Judy, I did not denigrate Robin. I called your phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment inaccurate because you said that Robin said that enlightenment, including his, via Eastern systems is a delusion because ontological union between God and human is not possible. On Monday, February 10, 2014 3:18 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" wrote: Xeno doesn't read the posts he counts here. If he did, he'd realize that most of Barry's posts were thoroughly dishonest attacks on me or Robin; and that in addition to refuting Barry's dishonesty, a substantial number of my posts were dealing with a discussion our Stevie can't seem to let go of in which he is quite idiotically trying to insist Robin and I were deliberately trying to "fool" people with our irony exchange; plus a bunch from Share attempting to denigrate Robin via her misunderstanding of his views on enlightenment. (Although the two posts he claims had the same title, did not.) << Posts from 1 February 2014 to 10 February 2014 4:00pm EST authfriend 143 replies, 4 original posts (although 2 had the same title) turquoiseb 53 replies, 16 original posts >>
