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
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
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 A
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 r
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
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
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 statement
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 m
---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 rep
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 den
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 addressin
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, F
13 matches
Mail list logo
