Right, but the Batgap forum has been useful to expose "them". But right from square one I'm still trying to figure out: The Awakened: "I'm Enlightened and my individuality has dissolved" ...So my question is: how is an interview possible without an individual: at least a body/mind talking, or somebody posting the statement.? If there's no individual can we assume that the person in her entirety has vanished: "poof" - no longer to exist; and a phoney surrogate is masquerading as the Awakened One? Could the imposter be Jim Carrey, or perhaps John Malkovich? ... Sorry, but this vanishing of the individuality crap doesn't make sense. Not even the Dalai Lama makes such statements.
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <fest...@...> wrote: > > > > I second that. Well said. I also find myself agreeing with Turq and even Vaj. > The surprising thing is that such things have to be said at all. Given the > episode with Ravi and now the suicide of one of the BATGAP "high fliers," it > seems to me that the BATGAP enterprise and the Wednesday night satsangs have > been thoroughly discredited. Who would want to listen to a word these people > say? > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" <j_alexander_stanley@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > > > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote: > > > > > > > > The very same thing is what jumped out for me. As I see it, > > > > from the perspective of "Waking Down Brand Second Birth > > > > Awakening", having awoken to my ocean nature makes being a > > > > wave/drop a WHOLE lot more fun and easier to deal with. Like > > > > Adyashanti describes it, it's a very peaceful, quiet freedom. > > > > For me, it's such a huge relief that I can't comprehend > > > > someone thinking it's not good enough. > > > > > > Similarly, I cannot conceive of anyone clinging to > > > and glorifying the Maharishi-promoted idea that the > > > ultimate goal of life -- having realized "200% of > > > life" (transcendent and relative coexisting peace- > > > fully in enlightenment) -- is to at that point die > > > and go back to 100% (transcendent only), as if that > > > were an admirable or a worthy goal, much less the > > > "highest goal in life." > > > > I guess I never got the full memo, because mine stopped at 200%. I didn't > > get the part glorifying death of the body. > > > > > I think that a lot of my inability to conceive of > > > such a belief system is the same thing that gives > > > me pause with Buddha's supposed First Noble Truth, > > > that "Life is suffering." Life is *not* suffering > > > for me. Never has been. Hope that it never will be. > > > Unlike many, I was *never* drawn to meditation and > > > the spiritual path because I felt that my current > > > life was "suffering" or didn't work. I felt that > > > my life was pretty cool; I was merely looking for > > > ways to make it cooler. > > > > I do understand the concept of "life is suffering" because I did spend > > decades in egoic aversion to how the I/me story shows up and egoic grasping > > for fulfillment in the relative world. Which is not to say that there is no > > longer *any* aversion/grasping going on; it's just no longer the governing > > force. I do still experience a certain degree of suffering when I allow > > myself to get caught up in a polarity, like I'm doing with the issue of > > Dan's suicide. I think what he did was a horrible, cruel, ignoble, selfish > > act... a giant "Fuck You!" to the whole community, and because of that, I > > find these new age hagiographies of him offensive. > > >
