________________________________
seventhray1 <steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net>
They have medicines for that.
Do they have anything to mend a broken heart?
I'm worried I may have some trouble getting my landing gear down.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@...> wrote:
>
> *sigh* and it seems in the end I am always only talking to myself...
>
> Good bye, Robin!
>
> :-)
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" rorygoff@ wrote:
> >
> > ...But if you're simply asking me if I am aware of the reverberation of
> > multiple layers of resonant meaning in my responses, then Yes, I am; I pun
> > with frequency and am a great fan of overtones ...
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "RoryGoff" <rorygoff@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > RESPONSE: Rory, I merely meant to say that the objective existence of
> > > > those thoughts (their intrinsic metaphysical innocence as materially
> > > > capable of influencing me) is something other than just your experience
> > > > in sending them my way.
> > > >
> > > > As in the person you are is something more and other than what you can
> > > > know through your own subjectivity. As in: who are you under the aspect
> > > > of eternity? Who are you as God sees you?—the person who created you.
> > > >
> > > > Your thoughts, as I experienced them anyway, tend to make me sense that
> > > > they possess something that you cannot entirely track—they, as it were,
> > > > transcend you, as you know yourself. As you experience even the sending
> > > > of these thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > Am i making any sense here, Rory?
> > > >
> > > > This observation of mine, whether it be true or not, is something quite
> > > > apart from our respective (and differing) religious beliefs. I think
> > > > the reality of a person is something that their internal subjective
> > > > experience cannot entirely catch up with, or become coincident with.
> > > >
> > > > In my experience your subjectivity (regardless of your spiritual
> > > > understanding, experience, and beliefs) exists as an element (created
> > > > by God) that has a certain effect on people. It is my determination
> > > > that the effect that you produce upon me—or the effect of your thoughts
> > > > upon me—is something a little beyond your control. And in the case of
> > > > yourself, what I get coming towards me seems only truly knowable to
> > > > myself. Not necessarily completely known to you. This is what was
> > > > behind my comment.
> > >
> > >
> > > * * Ah, I believe I see what you're getting at, Robin; many thanks for
> > > clarifying. Yes, in one sense, I-as-creature cannot truly fathom or
> > > comprehend That One from whom and in whom I arise; I am at most a tiny
> > > wave atop That One's infinite depths. On the other hand, I am also Us,
> > > also ever and always That One's infinite depths, the utter ecstatic and
> > > dreamless peace of my own death, as it were....
> > >
> > > As to having any control over others' perceptions, how they might
> > > perceive me or anything else -- I have no real control, and so I exert
> > > none. It's really none of my business. As far as I can see, we all of us
> > > deep-down essentially choose to help create our own reality, our own
> > > angel-angle for That One and our own interpretation of what IS, and we
> > > ascribe to "others" of us what parts we all will play for each other in
> > > our various versions of IS.
> > >
> > > Many of us appear to choose not to take any conscious responsibility for
> > > our creation, and decide (consciously or not) to position our conscious-I
> > > a little further into manifestation as a "mere" creature, and that's
> > > perfectly OK with me too. It's really all a matter of degree, and it's
> > > really none of my business, nothing I have or would wish any real control
> > > over. (Though all things being equal, I do tend to nudge Us back to Us
> > > when an "I" tires of all the dramatic weight of I-me-mine.)
> > >
> > > It's an interesting hypothesis -- that the reality of a person is
> > > something that their internal subjective experience cannot entirely catch
> > > up with, or become coincident with -- but it's a hypothesis which I would
> > > have no way of proving or disproving, it seems to me. The bottom line is
> > > always our subjective experience. Even when we experience
> > > That-which-is-greater, or receive corrective feedback from others, it's
> > > all still through our own subjective experience.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, I am of course able to agree with you that
> > > I-as-creature in no way appear to be fully aware in this moment of every
> > > permutation of every creature's subjective experience! Only am I aware of
> > > Us as we all exist in me at this moment... :-)
> > >
> >
>
