Guest guest Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 In a message dated 1/7/2006 1:48:52 AM Pacific Standard Time, ADHHUB writes: > What I meant is that the state of being to which you refer is an experience > > rather than a knowing. L.E: I really disagree with this statement, that an experience is different from knowing. And from that, I disagree with all that follows. We can't both be right, can we? Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Nisargadatta , epston@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 1:48:52 AM Pacific Standard Time, ADHHUB@A... > writes: > > > What I meant is that the state of being to which you refer is an experience > > > > rather than a knowing. > > L.E: I really disagree with this statement, that an experience is different > from knowing. > And from that, I disagree with all that follows. > We can't both be right, can we? > > Larry One cannot make a valid statement about BEING. Only the personal experiencER can know only his personal experience as a personal experience of BEING and not BEING " Itself. " BEING transcends experience as well as knowing, which makes it impossible for the UNtranscended ego to make any valid statement about it at all - even the statement, " BEING transcends experience as well as knowing. " " Silver " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.