Guest guest Posted June 27, 2006 Report Share Posted June 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > > > > > > > > >SW Toombaru is right, people are (not " is " ) suffering. > (Alternatively, > > > > the ideation or identification, " people, " IS a projection of > one's > > > > suffering.) > > > > > > > > Unless, of course, one is not suffering. In which case, there > is no > > > > projection, no " people " as separate, all is at ease, all is one: > > > > " people " is just a wave of delight in a sea of serenity. > > > > > > > > LxL > > > > ~*~ > > > > > > > > > >W: Hmm, Sky, > > > > > > That sounds a bit pompous. Is your usual life stile Epicurean ? > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > SW:Why does it sound pompous to you? Yes, my usual life style, these > > days, they may change, who knows?, IS Epicurean. > > > > Wouldn't you want yours to be Epicurean, if you could manage it? > > After all, a good artist is an Epicurean, isn't s/he? > > > > Or are you just teasing me, making fun of those who would say what > you > > said, but seriously? (God spare me from seriousity!) > > > > ;-)) > > > > LxL > > ~*~ > > > > W: Surely I was teasing you a bit. > > Nice that you still have a God to save you from seriousity. I am a > fierce atheist and so I have to stand my seriousity alone, sniff, > sniff. > > Werner > > P: Hi Werner, > First, let me clear your brain from the grammatical fuzz deposited > there by the wooly one. There is no such word as " seriosity, " > the right noun is, " seriousness. " > > With that cleared out of the way, let me congratulate you > for finding the perfect word to describe Sky- " pompous. " > Yes, he has the pomposity, and self congratulatory > grandiosity of those who had their first insights. So, > let's comb the wool of his shaggy self- glorifying post: > > > > > SW: Toombaru is right, people are (not " is " ) suffering. > > (Alternatively, the ideation or identification, " people, " > > IS a projection of one's suffering.) > > P: Notice, how wooly and simplistic that statement is. It > says that the concept, " people " depends on suffering, > that only people who suffers see people. It implies that > when one is happy others disappear. Nothing could be > farthest from the truth: It's the sense of an " I " that disappears > with happiness or bliss. > > > > > > > > > >SW: Unless, of course, one is not suffering. In which case, there > is no > > > projection, no " people " as separate, all is at ease, all > is one: > > > > " people " is just a wave of delight in a sea of serenity. > > P: Here it comes again, that awful stench of pseudo enlightenment. > " I'm happy, at easy, so serene, bathed in delight, " he says. > Notice, how in every post he blows his own horn, as if he > needed to convince himself of his own bliss. > > Ah, yes, Peter! Now we get it! Literally! Awesome! Love Ya & Gassho! ~*~ 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.