It occurs to me that in these two paragraphs intended to diss Patanjali, there are two sentences, one in each paragraph, that inadvertently exemplify what he meant by "experience is painful."
Can anybody identify them? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: <snip> > This was 1960. Global pollution had not at that point > obscured the skies. So I'd go out there in the middle > of the night, lie down on my back, and just gaze at the > stars. *Millions* of stars. Back then, as seen from > North Africa, there was not a patch of sky bigger than > the little fingernail on my hand held out at arm's > length that didn't contain stars; the sky was *all* > stars. And it was majestic. Gazing at it uplifted me > and left me with nothing but an appreciation of how > incredibly *beautiful* life was, and how fulfilling. > Patanjali would have me believe that this experience > was "painful." I think Patanjali was full of shit. > > Cut to last night. After a short rain that cleared the > air of the atmospheric haze so normal at this time of > year, I walked out to the lake near my house, spread > out a blanket, lay down on my back, and gazed at the > stars again. And they were majestic, even though I > could only see about a tenth of the stars I used to > see in Morocco. Gazing at the sky uplifted me again > and left me with nothing but an appreciation of how > incredibly *beautiful* life is, and STILL is. I'd be > hard-pressed to describe this experience as "painful," > too.
