|
Post by enigma on Oct 26, 2013 18:01:43 GMT -5
Riiiiiight. Hey, stop that, you're scaring me!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 26, 2013 18:12:48 GMT -5
Greetings.. By 'your' definition.. you're an either/or kinda guy, not quite capable of the complete perspective.. you preach 'oneness' but demonstrate the actuality of duality.. Be well.. Of course it's duality. We're talking about experiencing joy and misery. Is there something that isn't dualistic about that? You missed his reference to the "complete perspective"!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 26, 2013 19:38:18 GMT -5
Of course it's duality. We're talking about experiencing joy and misery. Is there something that isn't dualistic about that? You missed his reference to the "complete perspective"! Saw that. I can only assume he's referring to his version of oneness, which is separate peeps working together and being compassionate and such. It's from that perspective that he objects to the notion that the joyous don't see misery. Did you mean that the joyous don't see the suffering in others? If so, I'll agree with Tzu's objection. Edit: Oh, that was Reefs who said that.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Oct 26, 2013 21:30:05 GMT -5
There is a lot of misery. I think everyone can see that.
It is dualistic, and people will continue to envisage definitions for that and then deny that the fable they themselves created is True. Ha 'Truth' wit a capital 'T' is such a fixture for permanence... but nothing is True. I know, as I was told a thousand times by those who deem themselves the authority, that the concept is 'pointing' to the Truth, but I think that's a lie. I think those ones are themselves asking why and seeking and thinking to much and girraffing and all those things, for they are are just people much the same as I am, fully aware of what misery is through their own personal experience of it.
|
|