--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 7:15 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote:
>
> > Vaj writes;snipped
> > Yuganaddha, two-in-one, is a paradox that's difficult to describe in
> > linear words. There will automatically be a disconn
On Jan 13, 2006, at 7:15 PM, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis wrote:Vaj writes;snipped Yuganaddha, two-in-one, is a paradox that's difficult to describe in linear words. There will automatically be a disconnect between written descriptions and the experience itself. It cannot be adequately descri
On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:37 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- Vaj wrote:Vaj wrote:I mean ultimately if you cannot perceive your consort as purevision, i.e. as the Deity, the result is NOT going to beenlightenment.Without breaking any vows I think it's safe to say that since you need to perfect the gener
--- Vaj wrote:
>
> >> Vaj wrote:
> >> I mean ultimately if you cannot perceive your consort as pure
> >> vision, i.e. as the Deity, the result is NOT going to be
> >> enlightenment.
> >>
>
> Without breaking any vows I think it's safe to say that since you
> need to perfect the generation stage
Vaj writes;snipped
Yuganaddha, two-in-one, is a paradox that's difficult to describe in
linear words. There will automatically be a disconnect between written
descriptions and the experience itself. It cannot be adequately
described by words in written or spoken speech.
Tom T:
Is this the same as
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"oxymoronic"
eight morons? I have just counted five so far. :)
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-->
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 1:29 PM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:03 PM, authfriend wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> --- In FairfieldL
On Jan 13, 2006, at 1:29 PM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:03 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:35 AM, authfriend wrote: I don't believe y
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:03 PM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:35 AM, authfriend wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I don't believe
On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:03 PM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:35 AM, authfriend wrote: I don't believe you addressed my question. I have. Distinctions, no matter how fine, cannot be "transcendental," by definition-
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:35 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > I don't believe you addressed my question.
>
> I have.
>
> >
> > Distinctions, no matter how fine, cannot be
> > "transcendental," by definition--unless you're
> > us
On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:35 AM, authfriend wrote:I don't believe you addressed my question.I have. Distinctions, no matter how fine, cannot be "transcendental," by definition--unless you're using a very different definition of the transcendent than any I've ever seen. Jnana is transcendental.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:14 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IME the vows represent a transcendental morality,
> >>>
> >>> What's a "transcendental mora
On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:14 AM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:03 AM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: IME the vows represent a transcendental morality, What's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:03 AM, authfriend wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> IME the vows represent a transcendental morality,
> >>
> >
> > What's a "transcendent
On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:03 AM, authfriend wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: IME the vows represent a transcendental morality, What's a "transcendental morality"? Seems like a contradiction in terms, the transcendent being beyond all distinctions, at leas
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IME the vows represent a transcendental morality,
What's a "transcendental morality"? Seems like a
contradiction in terms, the transcendent being
beyond all distinctions, at least by any definition
I've ever encountered.
th
On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:37 AM, Patrick Gillam wrote:--- Vaj wrote: Vaj wrote: I mean ultimately if you cannot perceive your consort as pure vision, i.e. as the Deity, the result is NOT going to be enlightenment. Without breaking any vows I think it's safe to say that since you need to perfect
--- Vaj wrote:
>
> >> Vaj wrote:
> >> I mean ultimately if you cannot perceive your consort as pure
> >> vision, i.e. as the Deity, the result is NOT going to be
> >> enlightenment.
> >>
>
> Without breaking any vows I think it's safe to say that since you
> need to perfect the generation stage
On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:02 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Welcome to high voltage cause-&-effect. :-) And welcome to being limited by what you choose to believe. :-) IME the vows represent a transcendental morality, that is they refle
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Welcome to high voltage cause-&-effect. :-)
> >
> > And welcome to being limited by what you choose to believe. :-)
>
> IME the vows represent a transcendental morality, that is they
> reflect important elements th
On Jan 13, 2006, at 3:15 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It has nothing to do with rules per se but those activities that will support enlightened activity and realization. The vows are there for a reason, they are not just arbitrar
On Jan 12, 2006, at 9:50 PM, Patrick Gillam wrote: I mean ultimately if you cannot perceive your consort as pure vision, i.e. as the Deity, the result is NOT going to be enlightenment. Vaj, I'm going to have to ask you to elaborate on this a bit. I can see how seeing one's lover as the De
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It has nothing to do with rules per se but those activities that
will
> support enlightened activity and realization. The vows are there
for
> a reason, they are not just arbitrary. We might not like the
gaudy
> sign
--- Vaj wrote:
>
> I mean ultimately if you cannot perceive your consort as pure
> vision, i.e. as the Deity, the result is NOT going to be
> enlightenment.
Vaj, I'm going to have to ask you to elaborate on
this a bit. I can see how seeing one's lover as
the Deity would indicate a lofty lev
On Jan 12, 2006, at 1:18 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:Well the reason there is a controversy has to do with the fact he is a monk and has not disrobed. However...for a yogin in this path if he has mastered the creation stage of meditation to the point where he no longer has impure vision, it's not
On Jan 12, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Alex Stanley wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:One of the primary teachers, Geshe Michael Roach, has d
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > > Well the reason there is a controversy has to do with the fact
> > > he is a monk and has not disrobed.
> > >
> > > However...for a yogin in this path if he has mastered the
> > > creation
> > > stage of medit
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Well the reason there is a controversy has to do with the fact
> > > he is a monk and has not disrobed.
> > >
> > > However...for a yogin in this path if he has mastered the
> > > creation
> > > stage of medita
> > Well the reason there is a controversy has to do with the fact
> > he is a monk and has not disrobed.
> >
> > However...for a yogin in this path if he has mastered the
> > creation
> > stage of meditation to the point where he no longer has impure
> > vision, it's not a problem. It will
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Alex Stanley wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> One of the primary teachers, Geshe Michael Roach, has declared
> >> that he ha
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 12, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Rick Archer wrote:
>
> > on 1/12/06 10:57 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Alex Stanley wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.
On Jan 12, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Rick Archer wrote:on 1/12/06 10:57 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Alex Stanley wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One of the primary teachers, Geshe Michael Roach, has declaredthat he has taken
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightenment University
on 1/12/06 10:57 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Alex Stanley wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the primary teachers, Geshe Michael Roac
On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Alex Stanley wrote:--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One of the primary teachers, Geshe Michael Roach, has declared that he has taken a (sexual) consort. He has also claimed a certain degree of realization. Quelle horreur! Well t
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> One of the primary teachers, Geshe Michael Roach, has declared
> that he has taken a (sexual) consort. He has also claimed a
> certain degree of realization.
Quelle horreur!
Yahoo! Groups Spon
Would they need to seek anything else?If it is what it claims, there would not need to be anymore seeking, as it would contain the entire path. After obtaining stable experiences, they'd be able to teach on their own.On Jan 12, 2006, at 11:01 AM, uvulonicus wrote:perfect for the seeker addicted t
perfect for the seeker addicted to seeking
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "The mission of Diamond Mountain is to provide all of the
conditions,
> inside and outside of us, that we need to actually reach
> enlightenment, ourselves, before the day we di
38 matches
Mail list logo