--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Llundrub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I do have one counterargument of my own. The windows XP analogy is really great, but where do the bug fixes and upgrades come in? The operating system has automatic updates -- it goes out and gets them itself -- its not like a dog, it doesn't need an owner to walk it on a leash in order to do stuff. The human OS is always learning, upgrading -- so to speak. Its self-adaptive. Even if such fixes sometimes cause larger problems for a bit (after the upgrade, now your accessory drivers don't work.) The main question is still pertenent: why would one claim ownership, even identity with, the OS and/or its upgrades, or the process of upgrading? > I really liked your counterarguments to Irmeli Akasha. I wish you could take it one step further and identify the specifics of the body parts which have to do with what aspects of the world, and their authors, and also, then teach me to take that into my activity. Like for instance the devata of -do as i tell ye- would reside in the index finger, and the devata of -get thee away from me- would reside in the middle. Moreover, it's dissatisfying to me that I do fail so often in my efforts in spite of 25 years of training. Just as does Maharishi seemingly. Is there a devata of failure? I may need your 4 line version here (as well as all your posts.) So that an 8-year old can understand. Best as I can figure out, you are presenting me with the middle finger mudra. I assume it has its own devata, but since you seem to be an ardent adherent of this auspicious pose, perhaps you can share you insights on its devata. Best regards, Tom, I mean Jim, I mean, or whoever. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: akasha_108 > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 10:34 AM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Individuality: Outward Projection vs. Inner Subjective Sense of No Indiv. Do > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Irmeli Mattsson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Irmeli: > > > An I, who observes, makes interpretations, creates plans, acts, > and reacts, and often quite differently than the others. > > > > > > > > > Akasha: > > > Why do you necessarily subjectively equate that which observes, > makes interpretations, creates plans, acts, and reacts, and is > different than other entities with "you"? > > > > > > > Irmeli: > > I think here is a confusion with the concepts. I seem to mean a > > different thing with the individual I than you. For me the I > includes the other entities in me. > > Yes, individuality and be seen as different things (or non things). > > You seem to be aware of something that decides, creates plans, acts, > and reacts. The question is: why does that intellect or any part > claim ownership of those things. Did you create them? Do you know how > they really work -- the physiology or it all? Do you create the > thoughts that come to you? Do you (something other than your > intellect) direct your intellect on the methods and style that it > will decide things? > > If not, why do you claim ownership of such. Why do you claim to be > running the show? > > > > > I think the comparison with computers is a good one. With the I, who > > observes, makes interpretations etc, I mean the operating system of > > the computer. Computers can have many kinds of operating systems, > > but it must have one to be capable of functioning. > > Your operating system seems to be working fine in that things are > getting done, aren't they? Did you create your operating system? Do > you know how it works -- line by line of code? > > If not, what does it have to do with who you are? Windows XP runs the > PC here. But it would be silly to claim "I am Windows XP". > > > > > And it seems that at least we humans can consciously also partly > share our operating systems. My operating system can be strongly > influenced by yours. But it is still an operating system that uses > this physical body as an instrument. > > But did you create the body? If not, why do you claim ownership of it? > > You are right, the operating systems can influence each other. They > can and do provide feedback to each other. This is how they learn and > adapt. That is its nature. > > Some fear that the operating system will shut down and the PC will > stop if they don't claim ownership of either or both. Its kind of a > silly concept when you think about it. > > Some fear that if ther is now owner, no driver, then total > licentuousness will occur -- its an excuse to do anything. Can your > body or mind do anything not inhernet in the operating system and > software? The operating system has learned there are consequences for > actions and seeks to navigate its mission efficiently. Most operating > systems realize that doin any ol' crazy thing isn't a good strategy. > > > > And then there is apparently also a much bigger server to which > these individual computers are connected to. > > Perhaps that larger server is the owner. Why steal ownership from that? > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!' > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
