--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "brontebaxter8" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > To claim that the ego is only a Me is to perceive only its limited > expression. Such limited expression certainly needs dissolving for > cosmic bliss to occur. But the Me only needs to dissolve into the > I. It was never intended by the Infinite that the I should dissolve > into non-existence.
I really think this all boils down to a matter of semantics. I've never understood that in enlightenment the "I" dissolves into nonexistence; rather, what dissolves into nonsexistence (because it was an illusion to start with) is *identification* with the "I." The "I" is still there, doing its thing, not in any way inhibited by the lack of identification with it. Peter has been doing some excellent posts on this.
