|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 17, 2023 22:09:13 GMT -5
Talking about interesting (controversial) quotes: - Science
- The scientific method is incommensurate with the means for obtaining higher knowledge. Science is in fact a hindrance on the path of self-knowledge. It is one of the pUrvapakSha-s [principal objection] that Vedanta must confront and demolish before the truth of Vedanta is seen. Chittaranjan Naik (Ref. 314)
It is necessary briefly to mention the place of science in any investigation into non-duality. This can be very brief – it doesn’t have one. Nevertheless, some modern writers have latched on to theoretical physics and its sometimes surprising postulates and discoveries as somehow validating the claims of Advaita. This is understandable in respect of such theories as Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, which shows that the observer is inextricably linked with the observed at the level of sub-atomic particles.
However, the point must always be borne in mind that science is a method of the phenomenal world of duality. There is invariably a subject studying an object, whether this is a supposed external, physical object or a subtle, internal concept. The non-dual truth is not available for objective research by definition. Thus it is that science can only ever find out more and more about mithyA and never anything about satyam, as was discussed above."
--- Dennis Waite's "Back to the truth: 5000 years of Advaita
|
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Sept 18, 2023 6:38:49 GMT -5
Don't know if I'd label myself an ND person. Don't know about differences. I'd say almost everyone agrees the ego or individual self is illusory. There's some debate about whether it stays somewhat intact after SR. I mean we still play the roles. Nurse Ratched and Nurse Ito still traipse around. Maybe not as malignantly. I don't know and won't find out listening to this discussion. For me, if ego still makes an appearance, ego is still in control. Ego is the fulcrum. Archimedes said if he had a lever long enough and a place to put it, he could move the Earth. Archimedes was a very smart guy. The positions need to change. Ego is that which needs to be moved. So needed, is a new lever, and a new fulcrum. Just look out over the earth, look at the headlines every day, Ukraine, Russia. That's ego. The dude that killed his girlfriend in front of her kids, and escaped jail, and eluded the police for 13 days, that's ego. And none of us are out-from-under the thumb of ego, to one extent or another. Ego is very illusive, very good at hiding. If certain pressure were applied, ego would show up, ego is reactionary. Patience is not endless. I'll just stop there... Control. The ego thinks it is. There's a difference between wanting peace and being at peace. As they say "wonders never cease." Neither do horrors. Can we mitigate them? Sure. Should we do everything in our power to stop them? Yes. The yin and yang. The cosmic dance goes on. For some strange reason, the movie Zardoz popped in my head. "Kill me. No, kill me first." I wonder if that inspired Python's "spank me" scene at the convent. I love that one. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 10:00:11 GMT -5
Can there be a "mind" without thought? Is the mind a product of thought or vice versa? Ramana used the term "mind" and "ego" interchangeably. He talked of destroying the mind, but as a concession to the seeker's intellect, because he said if you look for the mind, you will not find it. In traditional advaita Brahman is the source of Maya, but it is not Maya. The faith in the concept of a mind or a person is what sustains the delusion of a something engaging other things when we are no-thing. But talking this stuff is just window dressing. Y'all gots to purify! Hahahaha. I don't know two people here, two ND people, who see things in the same way, everybody has a slightly different view, or a more than slightly different view. Why would that be? There is only one set of facts in the actuality of what occurs. So for some reason there is not a seeing clearly what actually is. What's the reason for the differences, the distortions in fact? Ego. That seems pretty obvious. There is a glitch in the Matrix, the whole picture. SR or TR seems to be seeing through the illusion of a separate self. But then all these people who have seen through this illusion, say it's OK to continue living through the distorting lens of self. See how that does make sense to sdp? It's all good because even ego is a part of All That Is. See how that doesn't work for sdp? Bingo on this, and it is significant, and I don't think many people know this, that Brahman formed Maya. There is a similar idea from the Christian mystics, that God lives in a cloud of unknowing. And on this, it seems suspect that what can eliminate the distortions, is preached against, as irrelevant, or is preached as not necessary. Explain that one to me. (No, don't, you can't). Been considering a thread: Let's not go to the circus, but say we did. (And old girlfriends used to use this regularly, let's not do _______ (something), but say we did). And Jesus told a story. There were these two guys, one said he would go work in the field, but didn't. The other said he wasn't going to go, but ended up going. ....And there is the good ole standby: If it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, it's statistically probably a duck. And there's even Forest Forest Gump: Stupid is as stupid does. Respectfully, this is simply not the case. As far as this is concerned: And on this, it seems suspect that what can eliminate the distortions, is preached against, as irrelevant, or is preached as not necessary. Explain that one to me. (No, don't, you can't). Again, with respect: "relative perfection", in the "context of not-two", is an "oxymoron". Sometimes the logical mind can be useful in addressing a pointer, as long as it is used as a tool. The quotes are because "not-two", cannot be objectified. "Perfection", when speaking of "not-two", cannot be objectified. Conversely - and this might seem ironic or even perverse to your ear - I'm not saying that some people who point aren't clearer than others, and that's related to those relative distortions. I don't exempt myself from Elmer Fudd-dom when it comes to myself, in relative, personal terms, which is, after all, the entire point of the thread to begin with!  That said, even though "sages" can recognize a pointing when they encounter it, one seekers "clear sage" is not necessarily all that clear to another seeker, and the reason for that should be obvious, even in relative, thinking terms. Are you at all interested in expressing why? Now this: There is only one set of facts in the actuality of what occurs. ... is quite clearly planting a stiff foot with intellect. Intellect, spinning in isolation, will only ever find the confusion of paradox in any of this. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 10:08:23 GMT -5
For me, if ego still makes an appearance, ego is still in control. Ego is the fulcrum. Archimedes said if he had a lever long enough and a place to put it, he could move the Earth. Archimedes was a very smart guy. The positions need to change. Ego is that which needs to be moved. So needed, is a new lever, and a new fulcrum. Just look out over the earth, look at the headlines every day, Ukraine, Russia. That's ego. The dude that killed his girlfriend in front of her kids, and escaped jail, and eluded the police for 13 days, that's ego. And none of us are out-from-under the thumb of ego, to one extent or another. Ego is very illusive, very good at hiding. If certain pressure were applied, ego would show up, ego is reactionary. Patience is not endless. I'll just stop there... Control. The ego thinks it is. There's a difference between wanting peace and being at peace. As they say "wonders never cease." Neither do horrors. Can we mitigate them? Sure. Should we do everything in our power to stop them? Yes. The yin and yang. The cosmic dance goes on. For some strange reason, the movie Zardoz popped in my head. "Kill me. No, kill me first." I wonder if that inspired Python's "spank me" scene at the convent. I love that one. Charllote Rampling was hot when she was young. All those dudes. Standing there comatose ... (** shakes head sadly **) |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 10:09:17 GMT -5
What I mean by ego is simply the I principle. That which identifies as I. You may recall me in the past talking about manonasa which is destruction of the mind after SR. I got a lot of objections about this because destruction of the mind implies you turn into some kind of zombie. These were the words Ramana Maharshi used. He explicitly said the the mind is destroyed after realization. But what does it mean. Well I'll tell you exactly what it is. Before manonasa you would say MY mind. After manonasa you no longer think this is MY mind. Yet individuality as ego still appears. But it has been liberated from the notion that it is somehow separate or different from what is not ego. That's why it's ego that gets enlightened because from then on there is no interest in such a topic. There is only Life. Yes, the iPrinciple! iCan’t remember what book it was. iThink one of WWW’s books, where he actually called the iPrinciple the root of all evil. iAgree. People think destroying their iPod, iPhone, iMac, iPad will do the trick, but they forget the most iMportant obstacle– the iPrinciple! That has to be annihilated, iRreversibly! Or else, the next day, they will find themselves back at the iStore again. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 10:33:22 GMT -5
Talking about interesting (controversial) quotes: - Science
- The scientific method is incommensurate with the means for obtaining higher knowledge. Science is in fact a hindrance on the path of self-knowledge. It is one of the pUrvapakSha-s [principal objection] that Vedanta must confront and demolish before the truth of Vedanta is seen. Chittaranjan Naik (Ref. 314)
It is necessary briefly to mention the place of science in any investigation into non-duality. This can be very brief – it doesn’t have one. Nevertheless, some modern writers have latched on to theoretical physics and its sometimes surprising postulates and discoveries as somehow validating the claims of Advaita. This is understandable in respect of such theories as Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, which shows that the observer is inextricably linked with the observed at the level of sub-atomic particles.
However, the point must always be borne in mind that science is a method of the phenomenal world of duality. There is invariably a subject studying an object, whether this is a supposed external, physical object or a subtle, internal concept. The non-dual truth is not available for objective research by definition. Thus it is that science can only ever find out more and more about mithyA and never anything about satyam, as was discussed above."
--- Dennis Waite's "Back to the truth: 5000 years of Advaita
Are you familiar with the Advaita Vedanta approach of "neti-neti"? It's sort of amusing to me that this widely recognized and respected teacher misses the opportunity so presented. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 10:41:14 GMT -5
Here there is a "controversial" Ramana quote: - "Bhagavan: Everything is predetermined." Chapter II, From Theory to Practice, "The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi in His Own Words", edited by Arthur Osborne, 6th Edition 1993
Here there's the context: - Chapter II
From Theory to Practice
"As was shown in the previous chapter, the theory that the Maharshi taught was intended only to serve as a basis for practice. However, the demand for practice brought in another branch of theory, that of free-will or predestination, since people were not lacking who asked why they should make any effort if everything was predestined, or if all men returned to their Source in any case.
A visitor from Bengal saiD: Shankara says that we are all free, not bound, and that we shall all return to God from whom we came, like sparks from a fire. If that is so, why should we not commit all sorts of sins?
Bhagavan's reply showed him that that cannot be the point of view of the ego.
B: It is true that we are not bound. That is to say, the real Self has no bondage. And it is true that you will eventually return to your Source. But meanwhile, if you commit sins as you call them, you have to face the consequences. You cannot escape them. If a man beats you, can you say: 'I am free. I am not affected by the beating and feel no pain. Let him continue beating'? If you can really feel that, then you can do what you like, but what is the use of just saying in words that you are free?
Bhagavan did sometimes make pronouncements which seemed superficially like affirmations of complete predestination. When he left home in his youth, already established in Self-realisation, his mother sought and at last found him. He was maintaining silence at that time; therefore, on her request to return home with her, he wrote out his reply instead of replying verbally:
The Ordainer controls the fate of souls in accordance with their prarabdha karma (destiny to be worked out in this life, resulting from the balance sheet of actions in past lives). Whatever is destined not to happen will not happen, try as you may. Whatever is destined to happen will happen, do what you may to prevent it. This is certain. The best course, therefore, is to remain silent.
He sometimes also made such statements to devotees.
All the activities that the body is to go through are determined when it first comes into existence. It does not rest with you to accept or reject them. The only freedom you have is to turn your mind inward and renounces activities there.
With reference to Bhagavan's reply to Mrs. Desai on the evening of January 3, 1946, I asked him: Are only the important events in a man's life, such as his main occupation or profession, predetermined, or are trifling acts also, such as taking a cup of water or moving from one part of the room to another?
B: Everything is predetermined.
I: Then what responsibility, what free will has man?
B: Why does the body come into existence? It is designed for the various things that are marked out for it in this life.... As for freedom, a man is always free not to identify himself with the body and not to be affected by the pleasures and pains consequent on its activities.
Actually, however, the question of free will or predestination does not arise at all from the point of view of non-duality. It is as though a group of people who had never heard of radio were to stand round a wireless set arguing whether the man in the box has to sing what the transmitting station tells him to or whether he can change parts of the songs. The answer is that there is no man in the box and therefore the question does not arise. Similarly, the answer to the question of whether the ego has free will or not is that there is no ego and therefore the question does not arise. Therefore Bhagavan's usual response to the question would be to bid the questioner find out who it is that has free will or predestination.
D: Has man any free will or is everything in his life predetermined?
The same question as above, but the answer differs according to the needs of the questioner. In fact, if one does not bear in mind what has just been said about the unreality of the ego it seems to be quite contradictory.
B: Free will exists together with the individuality. As long as the individuality lasts, so long is there free will. All the scriptures are based on this fact and advise directing the free will in the right channel.
Is this really a contradiction of the reply given earlier? No, because, according to Bhagavan's teaching, individuality has only an illusory existence. So long as one imagines that one has a separate individuality, so long does one also imagine its free will. The two exist together inevitably. The problem of predestination and free will has always plagued philosophers and theologians and will always continue to do so, because it is insoluble on the plane of duality, that is on the supposition of one being who is the Creator and a lot of other, separate omnipotent and omniscient - he does not know what will happen, because it depends on what they decide; and he cannot control all happenings because they have the power to change them. On the other hand, if he is omniscient and omnipotent he has the fore-knowledge of all that will happen and controls everything, and therefore they can have no power of decision, that is to say no free will. But on the level of advaita or non-duality the problem fades out and ceases to exist. In truth the ego has no free will, because there is no ego; but on the level of apparent reality the ego consists of free will - it is the illusion of free will that creates the illusion of the ego. That is what Bhagavan meant by saying that "as long as the individuality lasts, so long is there free will.'' The next sentence in his answer turns the questioner away from the theory of practice.
Find out who it is who has free will or predestination and abide in that state. Then both are transcended. That is the only purpose in discussing these questions. To whom do such questions present themselves? Discover that and be at peace."
He also said that "free will and destiny are ever evident". This is a simple matter of existential context. For as long as a man or woman goes through life responding to stimuli based on conditioning, they are bound. Their actions are predictable. The intellect can make a matter-of-degree of this, and in relative, material terms, that is insightful, and even useful. In existential terms, not so much. In existential terms, it's black, and white. In relative terms, freedom from conditioning is a shadow of the freedom diaper guy pointed to. A hint. In relative, material terms, exploring conditioning is a bottomless, fractal whirlpool. Not to say it's not worthwhile, it is. But as an end in and of itself, it is an endless futility. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Sept 18, 2023 11:59:14 GMT -5
Control. The ego thinks it is. There's a difference between wanting peace and being at peace. As they say "wonders never cease." Neither do horrors. Can we mitigate them? Sure. Should we do everything in our power to stop them? Yes. The yin and yang. The cosmic dance goes on. For some strange reason, the movie Zardoz popped in my head. "Kill me. No, kill me first." I wonder if that inspired Python's "spank me" scene at the convent. I love that one. Charllote Rampling was hot when she was young. All those dudes. Standing there comatose ... (** shakes head sadly **) I think the impulse to save the world can be quite destructive and ill-fated. I've been watching videos about the YPG women in Syria during the Battle of Kobane and after. Quite fascinating. The ISIL dudes were horrified. I don't understand why being shot by a dude is any different than being shot by a woman. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 12:46:11 GMT -5
Charllote Rampling was hot when she was young. All those dudes. Standing there comatose ... (** shakes head sadly **) I think the impulse to save the world can be quite destructive and ill-fated. I've been watching videos about the YPG women in Syria during the Battle of Kobane and after. Quite fascinating. The ISIL dudes were horrified. I don't understand why being shot by a dude is any different than being shot by a woman. Some of us have had the old patriarchy reactions diluted by our parents or other influences. This is a funny read for me, because my first exposure to the Roman Empire was watching I Cladius with my mom (it's all about Livia, and her conflict with Agrippina). .. so for me, what the interviewee says is way off the mark. From my read of the culture my parents were ahead of that curve. They had a McGovern bumper sticker over the wall of our kitchen sink (no dummies, too smart to put it on their car). To my eye this trend accelerated to the point where it has long since over corrected. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Sept 18, 2023 14:29:41 GMT -5
I think the impulse to save the world can be quite destructive and ill-fated. I've been watching videos about the YPG women in Syria during the Battle of Kobane and after. Quite fascinating. The ISIL dudes were horrified. I don't understand why being shot by a dude is any different than being shot by a woman. Some of us have had the old patriarchy reactions diluted by our parents or other influences. This is a funny read for me, because my first exposure to the Roman Empire was watching I Cladius with my mom (it's all about Livia, and her conflict with Agrippina). .. so for me, what the interviewee says is way off the mark. From my read of the culture my parents were ahead of that curve. They had a McGovern bumper sticker over the wall of our kitchen sink (no dummies, too smart to put it on their car). To my eye this trend accelerated to the point where it has long since over corrected. Never a fan of McGovern though he was a badass dude. 35 combat missions in a B-24. I'm not worked up about feminists. Everything ebbs and flows. Seems folks are worked up about stupid things. If a teacher refuses to call a kid a "they," they're damaging his or her sense of self or if a teacher mentions that some folks are attracted to the same sex, they're indoctrinating the kids. Seems folks are looking for reasons to get riled. It's working. It's become a dark comedy. Those ladies in the YPG are badass. Better watch your step. Are there any feminist militias in the US? Stockpile your ammo, dude. The end is nigh. Always wanted to use that word in a sentence. Jesus is coming. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 18, 2023 14:41:37 GMT -5
Some of us have had the old patriarchy reactions diluted by our parents or other influences. This is a funny read for me, because my first exposure to the Roman Empire was watching I Cladius with my mom (it's all about Livia, and her conflict with Agrippina). .. so for me, what the interviewee says is way off the mark. From my read of the culture my parents were ahead of that curve. They had a McGovern bumper sticker over the wall of our kitchen sink (no dummies, too smart to put it on their car). To my eye this trend accelerated to the point where it has long since over corrected. Never a fan of McGovern though he was a badass dude. 35 combat missions in a B-24. I'm not worked up about feminists. Everything ebbs and flows. Seems folks are worked up about stupid things. If a teacher refuses to call a kid a "they," they're damaging his or her sense of self or if a teacher mentions that some folks are attracted to the same sex, they're indoctrinating the kids. Seems folks are looking for reasons to get riled. It's working. It's become a dark comedy. Those ladies in the YPG are badass. Better watch your step. Are there any feminist militias in the US? Stockpile your ammo, dude. The end is nigh. Always wanted to use that word in a sentence. Jesus is coming.  ... ( .. and: no doubt! ..) |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 18, 2023 18:21:21 GMT -5
I don't know two people here, two ND people, who see things in the same way, everybody has a slightly different view, or a more than slightly different view. Why would that be? There is only one set of facts in the actuality of what occurs. So for some reason there is not a seeing clearly what actually is. What's the reason for the differences, the distortions in fact? Ego. That seems pretty obvious. There is a glitch in the Matrix, the whole picture. SR or TR seems to be seeing through the illusion of a separate self. But then all these people who have seen through this illusion, say it's OK to continue living through the distorting lens of self. See how that does make sense to sdp? It's all good because even ego is a part of All That Is. See how that doesn't work for sdp? Bingo on this, and it is significant, and I don't think many people know this, that Brahman formed Maya. There is a similar idea from the Christian mystics, that God lives in a cloud of unknowing. And on this, it seems suspect that what can eliminate the distortions, is preached against, as irrelevant, or is preached as not necessary. Explain that one to me. (No, don't, you can't). Been considering a thread: Let's not go to the circus, but say we did. (And old girlfriends used to use this regularly, let's not do _______ (something), but say we did). And Jesus told a story. There were these two guys, one said he would go work in the field, but didn't. The other said he wasn't going to go, but ended up going. ....And there is the good ole standby: If it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, it's statistically probably a duck. And there's even Forest Forest Gump: Stupid is as stupid does. Respectfully, this is simply not the case. As far as this is concerned: And on this, it seems suspect that what can eliminate the distortions, is preached against, as irrelevant, or is preached as not necessary. Explain that one to me. (No, don't, you can't). Again, with respect: "relative perfection", in the "context of not-two", is an "oxymoron". Sometimes the logical mind can be useful in addressing a pointer, as long as it is used as a tool. The quotes are because "not-two", cannot be objectified. "Perfection", when speaking of "not-two", cannot be objectified. Conversely - and this might seem ironic or even perverse to your ear - I'm not saying that some people who point aren't clearer than others, and that's related to those relative distortions. I don't exempt myself from Elmer Fudd-dom when it comes to myself, in relative, personal terms, which is, after all, the entire point of the thread to begin with! That said, even though "sages" can recognize a pointing when they encounter it, one seekers "clear sage" is not necessarily all that clear to another seeker, and the reason for that should be obvious, even in relative, thinking terms. Are you at all interested in expressing why? Now this: There is only one set of facts in the actuality of what occurs. ... is quite clearly planting a stiff foot with intellect. Intellect, spinning in isolation, will only ever find the confusion of paradox in any of this. Yes. Glad you responded because I'm on a mountain-climbing trip and this laptop is too small to respond to anything at length. The initial statement is simply not true. Mindtalk can continue, but there is never a return to the idea that one is a SVP after there is a realization that all there is is THIS and that everyone and everything is THIS. I was hiking with my daughter and son-in-law today. A few years ago he did not know what we were talking about when we discussed ND. Curious, he began reading (TPON, etc) and watching videos, and about six months ago he woke up. All of his past negative ideation, worries, fears, etc vanished after he discovered THIS. He's free and he knows it. Today he was saying that now he just lives his life moment to moment and deals with whatever arises without any ideas that things should be different than they are. Nothing complex and life is now simple. Ideas no longer create psychological havoc, and he loves to tell people on ND zoom meetings, "Those are just ideas; what you are is THIS, so don't get lost in believing nonsense." It changed his whole outlook on life. Pretty amazing! |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 19, 2023 4:32:43 GMT -5
Respectfully, this is simply not the case. As far as this is concerned: Again, with respect: "relative perfection", in the "context of not-two", is an "oxymoron". Sometimes the logical mind can be useful in addressing a pointer, as long as it is used as a tool. The quotes are because "not-two", cannot be objectified. "Perfection", when speaking of "not-two", cannot be objectified. Conversely - and this might seem ironic or even perverse to your ear - I'm not saying that some people who point aren't clearer than others, and that's related to those relative distortions. I don't exempt myself from Elmer Fudd-dom when it comes to myself, in relative, personal terms, which is, after all, the entire point of the thread to begin with! That said, even though "sages" can recognize a pointing when they encounter it, one seekers "clear sage" is not necessarily all that clear to another seeker, and the reason for that should be obvious, even in relative, thinking terms. Are you at all interested in expressing why? Now this: ... is quite clearly planting a stiff foot with intellect. Intellect, spinning in isolation, will only ever find the confusion of paradox in any of this. Yes. Glad you responded because I'm on a mountain-climbing trip and this laptop is too small to respond to anything at length. The initial statement is simply not true. Mindtalk can continue, but there is never a return to the idea that one is a SVP after there is a realization that all there is is THIS and that everyone and everything is THIS. I was hiking with my daughter and son-in-law today. A few years ago he did not know what we were talking about when we discussed ND. Curious, he began reading (TPON, etc) and watching videos, and about six months ago he woke up. All of his past negative ideation, worries, fears, etc vanished after he discovered THIS. He's free and he knows it. Today he was saying that now he just lives his life moment to moment and deals with whatever arises without any ideas that things should be different than they are. Nothing complex and life is now simple. Ideas no longer create psychological havoc, and he loves to tell people on ND zoom meetings, "Those are just ideas; what you are is THIS, so don't get lost in believing nonsense." It changed his whole outlook on life. Pretty amazing! Good to hear, hope the climb went well! |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 19, 2023 9:43:29 GMT -5
Yes. Glad you responded because I'm on a mountain-climbing trip and this laptop is too small to respond to anything at length. The initial statement is simply not true. Mindtalk can continue, but there is never a return to the idea that one is a SVP after there is a realization that all there is is THIS and that everyone and everything is THIS. I was hiking with my daughter and son-in-law today. A few years ago he did not know what we were talking about when we discussed ND. Curious, he began reading (TPON, etc) and watching videos, and about six months ago he woke up. All of his past negative ideation, worries, fears, etc vanished after he discovered THIS. He's free and he knows it. Today he was saying that now he just lives his life moment to moment and deals with whatever arises without any ideas that things should be different than they are. Nothing complex and life is now simple. Ideas no longer create psychological havoc, and he loves to tell people on ND zoom meetings, "Those are just ideas; what you are is THIS, so don't get lost in believing nonsense." It changed his whole outlook on life. Pretty amazing! Good to hear, hope the climb went well! Acclimatization takes a lot longer at this age! Haha. They were nice enough to wait for me periodically as I gulped water and gasped for breath while climbing Mt. Sanitas in Boulder. Thursday we plan to climb Mt. Evans (recently re-named Mt. Blue Sky) following the same trail that my Air Force buddy and I almost got killed on in 1967. Hopefully this time there won't be a lightning storm and freak blizzard. |
|
That said, even though "sages" can recognize a pointing when they encounter it, one seekers "clear sage" is not necessarily all that clear to another seeker, and the reason for that should be obvious, even in relative, thinking terms. Are you at all interested in expressing why?
... ( .. and: no doubt! ..)