---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <punditster@...> wrote:
On 2/8/2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... 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.
Another person mistaking Judy's explanation of how Robin felt for what Judy
herself believes.
