--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater no_reply@ wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote: In his
> > Commentary on the Gita Maharishi explains, "With the constant
practice
> > of meditation, this infusion continues to grow and when it is
full-grown
> > cosmic consciousness will have been attained. Once this state
is
> > attained, to fall from it is impossible." pg 173 from The
> > Science of Being and Art of Living, with my underliningfor emphasis:
> > When this self-consciousness is forever maintained, even when the
mind
> > emerges from the Transcendent and engages in the field of activity,
then
> > self-consciousness attains the status of cosmic consciousness.Â
> > Self-consciousness is then established eternally in the nature of
the
> > mind. pg 249
> > Unless, of course, you make a conscious and concerted Herculean
effort,
> > as Robin evidently did, to overthrow the overwhelming hold of
> > enlightenment on yourself. It appears not everyone wants to stay
under
> > the influence or to be held so firmly by the force of this power
over
> > them. I daresay Robin would still be in UC unless he had taken the
steps
> > he did to counteract that state. You are implying, Share, that his
UC
> > was not real because he is no longer in that state of consciousness.
You
> > see, what you write here is transparent.
>
> Maybe transparent to you Ann (and now to Judy who's chimed in with her
support) but that's just the way you roll or whatever you seem to be
looking for. Whatever is *transparent* to you, what the hell difference
does it make? It seems that a few of you are making a concerted effort
to beat on those with differing viewpoints until they just give up and
no longer post here or at least post less frequently. Is that what
you're trying to do Ann?
>
> Anyway, what you write above *seems* transparent to me but, then
again, maybe that's just the way I roll. Or maybe what you write touches
my heart, but not in a good way, and forces me to respond. BTW, love the
boldface on your entire response...almost as good as underline.
Here Sweetie, just in case you like this better. If you hadn't noticed,
yesterday the formatting of the posts here was wonkified so people were
using all sorts of ways to identify who wrote what in each post. What,
do you think I was using bold to emphasize how important what I say is,
you twit?Funny how you indulge your negative reactions so well. Just a
little touch of anger in your heart and you're off to the races. Now, my
question to you: do you like the bold pink or bold black without the
italics better?
>
>
>
