Interesting Perspective

[Guest guest]

" Detachment " is not the understanding that the sages are talking

about. The difference between a balloon getting bigger and bigger

and the bursting of the balloon altogether.

 

***********

 

Sudden awakening: detaching from the nonsensical notion

that there is a balloon or ever was one.

 

Gradual awakening: Dragging a fantasy balloon around cultivating

notions about balloons and what should be done about them

 

*********************

 

Faithe: This message did not have the same impact on me, Joyce.

 

What I understood is that there is a tendency to " gulp " up everything expressed

by the sages. The more that one gulps, the more one " knows " and becomes " full of

oneself " , with all this knowledge.

 

The " attachment " is to that which has been learned and is now labeled as

understanding and knowledge. The more reading and understanding of the words

emitted by the sages infers that one actually believes that " more knowledge "

leads to detachment; the message is hinting that the reverse is true.

 

It is when the balloon (self) bursts and all this " knowledge " dissipates, that

detachment " is " . Can attachment and detachment reside concurrently?

 

The attachment, itself, is the hanging on to the words of the sages, and calling

it " knowledge " , and seeking more and more words to understand, which ultimately

increases the attachment.

 

After reading the message, I was left with the question, does no attachment

infer detachment? Is " detachment " preferable to " attachment " ? If so, why? In the

end, does it boil down to having an attachment to detachment?

 

That is my take on this " interesting perspective " offered.