--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:11 PM, authfriend wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <wgm4u@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > Maybe he really wasn't a yogi. Is that a possibility here?
> > > >
> > > > Yes!
> > >
> > > Be interesting to hear a definition of "yogi"
> > > from both of you.
> > 
> > "CC" type attainment as a minimum--the slightly dualistic  
> > turiyatita--"beyond the forth" being what I'd refer to in a TM-
> style  
> > context.
> > 
> > But there are non-dual and other yogis as well, so it is good to  
> > specify what "style" of yogi you mean when you make some sort of  
> > declaration. It's not a monolithic thing. I'm always glad to 
> specify  
> > if people are sensitive enough to even ask.
> > 
> > Most aren't.
>
> and those that know the truth about this sort of thing aren't 
> either. Go home pretender. This notion that you have of their being 
> a never ending path of signs and symbols and sciences and levels of 
> accomplishment is all designed to mollify the fear of complete 
> dissolution, of your own death. Nothing more. 
> 
> All who talk in these terms seek to keep those listening in bondage, 
> keep them seeking outward for what is each of our spontaneous and 
> wholly owned birthright, that of eternal freedom. Some of the 
> trappings of these rituals of Maya are beautiful, but that doesn't 
> make them liberating. 
> 
> There are just two kinds of existence, 1) bound and segregated, and 
> 2) free and integrated. To make a fundamentalist science as you do 
> of all of these gradations and other things keeps the mind busy so 
> that it can believe in something other than its own naturally 
> available annihilation. Just more fear and idiocy dancing with Maya.

Everything Jim says here boils down to, "I know
the truth, and you don't." 

As far as I know, *that* is Narcissistic Personality 
Disorder, in a nutshell. With a dash of being not
terribly smart or original thrown in.  :-)



Reply via email to