--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sandiego108" <sandiego108@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> 
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter 
<drpetersutphen@> 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I've had it up to my seventh chakra with this rant
> > > > > over the last several decades, "Invincibility,
> > > > > invincibility" what a pile of vedic cow droppings. Its
> > > > > just so silly. first, wtf does it even mean?
> > > > > Invincibility of will, of desire, of intent? The
> > > > > inevitability of a space-time experience?
> > > > 
> > > > "in the vicinity of this, violent tendencies are 
eliminated..."
> > > 
> > > I don't recognize the quote. Were those Tat
> > > Wala Baba's last words?
> > 
> > Nope- the Dalai Lama (I figured one snarky comment deserved 
> > another...)
> 
> Ok, snarkfest over, please present me even one
> example from history of Patanjali's claim being
> true. Even one.
> 
> Might I suggest Gandhi? Or Jesus? Or Tat Wala Baba?
> Or Krishna overlooking the battlefield on which an
> enormous shitload of violent tendencies was about
> to go down? If Patanjali was correct, why would 
> this (dare I say it) somewhat violent battle be
> taking place in the vicinity of the personification
> of yoga?

Someone said once that the battle described is within conciousness, 
not literal. I agree.

> For that matter, if Patanjali's view is correct,
> why are the Mahabharata and the Vedas an endless
> succession of stories about beings wanting to do 
> violent harm to the supposedly enlightened? 
> 
> I'll wait...
>
Experience is the best teacher I've yet found. I don't agree with 
anything anyone says about conciousness unless I have verified it 
through my personal experience. Patanjali's view works for me. It is 
none of my business whether it works for you, or whether or not you 
agree with it.

Reply via email to