Guest guest Posted March 21, 2000 Report Share Posted March 21, 2000 Hello Roger-ji, Taking the liberty of jumping in here totally uninvited. Pls kick me out if need be, but you ask something fascinating about the witness. About the witness, you say: At 04:00 PM 3/20/00 -0700, Roger Isaacs wrote: >"don't take position as final": When in the state of pure witnessing, there >is no personal "I" to have a position. This witness state is non-varying, >unchanging, untouchable by anything external, independant from all thought, >sense, emotion. Though arises as appropriate, however, the witness is >separate from thought and unstained/uninfluenced by thought. > >Please tell me: when "I" is known as absolutely unchanging & non-varying, >not associated with thought, or emotion, or sense: HOW can this be less than >final? I can think of a few things about the witness as you describe it here, according to this description the witness is not final. But first I should ask, what do you mean by final? Love, --Greg 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.