On 2/8/2014 12:32 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc.,
that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His
viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly,
immutably Other; there can be no ontological union between human
beings and God.
>
Obviously there is a certain amount of delusion involved if Robin
thought that his enlightenment consisted of his "union with God." Indian
philosophy doesn't have anything to do with "union" with the Purusha -
it's the prakriti that is the delusion and it is always separate from
the Purusha. Everyone who has practiced TM and yoga knows this.
Robin's , and now Judy's, definition of "enlightenment", does not agree
with any Indian system that I know of. Apparently neither one of them is
very well-read in Indian philosophy. In none of the orthodox Six Systems
of Indian philosophy do we find anywhere that enlightenment is
considered a "union with God". So, I wonder where they got this idea? Go
figure.
