--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wgm4u" <wg...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > <snippus interruptus> > > It should be obvious to anyone who has spent some > > time here that we do not all live in the same reality. > > The frequency -- and the *vehemence* -- of the never- > > ending arguments about what "Reality" is should clue > > us in to the fact that we are all seeing different > > realities. > > > > One poster lives in a reality in which many of his > > fellow posters work for the CIA or the Dalai Lama, > > and are paid to spread lies about Maharishi, TM, > > Benny Hill (or Creme...I can never keep those two > > straight), crop circles and Space Brothers. And we > > get the feeling that what really pisses him off the > > most about this reality he perceives around him is > > that these CIA-Buddhists make more money than he does. > > > > Another poster lives in a reality in which he *knows* > > what is Right and Wrong and *knows* What God Wants > > because he read it in the "Vedic literature." For him > > those books define reality, even though they rarely > > describe anything that would be considered Reality > > by anyone else. Yet another poster lives in a reality > > in which women are perpetual victims, and the only > > acceptable response to this is that everyone should > > feel as perpetually bummed out about this as she does. > > > > At least one poster, recently returned from a hiatus, > > lives in a reality populated by butterflies and feel- > > good things. Another lives in a reality that is about > > to dissolve into civil war and chaos. Still another > > lives in a reality in which everyone lies but herself, > > and anyone who doesn't agree that she's Right about > > everything has just misread what she wrote. In her > > reality everything would be better if everyone except > > her just read and reread her posts enough times to > > realize how REEEAALLY REEEAALLY STOOOPID > > they are and how smart she is. > > > > And, for each of these posters, these perceptions of > > the world around them isn't just their reality, it's > > Reality. They are often willing to argue for hours (or > > in some cases for years) with those who live in a > > different reality, trying to convince or insult or > > browbeat them into "signing on" to *their* reality > > AS "Reality." > > > > And the fascinating thing is that the "Reality" of FFL > > is a lot like what Gertrude Stein said about her home > > town of Oakland, "There is no there there." > > > > There is no Reality here. There is only the collision > > of different realities, and the hologrammic image that > > appears as a result of their interaction. No one's > > individual reality "wins," even though many claim > > to have "won." The battles *that* they've "won" are > > as illusory as the realities they're trying to impose > > on others. > > > > There is no "there" there in Oakland. And there is no > > "Reality" here on Fairfield Life, no matter who claims > > to know what that Reality is. > > > > Just my opinion. Or reality. Whatever. > > Sounds like you're describing *Mithya* a Sanskrit > word meaning false, etc. Though the realities may > seem different they are only different from one's > own perspective, the overriding 'hologram' is defined > and manifested from the Ved or as MMY puts it "the > blueprint of creation".
While I applaud and thank you for following up so gently and non-confrontationally, Billy, I do have to ask whether you understand that what you just did is to follow up on my rap about FFL being a place where conflicting realities (small "r") claim to know what Reality (capital "R") is by claiming to know what Reality is yourself. :-) IMO your cited "definition" of Reality isn't one. It's just a theory. You happen to believe in the theory because it comes from someone whom you consider an "authority." And it might have been that person's reality (small "r"), but 1) it isn't really yours unless you share those perceptions 24/7 (as opposed to never having had the perceptions and just believing them *because* of the person's supposed "auth- ority"), and 2) it isn't necessarily anyone else's Reality (big "R"), even if the authority perceived it that way. It's just another View. Another reality, small "r." Suggesting that this person's reality is Reality is to suggest that there is only *One* Reality. And sorry, but I'm not buyin' that one...
