Of the two of us, only you claim to know know Bill!'s delusions. What's
your excuse?
If there is no attachment to a position, there is no disagreement, there
are only apparent differences in expression.
KG
On 9/5/2012 11:39 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
Kristopher,
You keep making excuses for Bill!'s delusions!
Disagreement is not "a form of suffering" unless you are attached to it...
Edgar
On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
Comfortably stuck in cause and effect, you ignore the sledgehammer!
It appears to me that Bill! is not denying food is required to
maintain a body, that forms appear to maintain forms (no independent
origination) - he is denying this assumption of "have to" - this
neediness that goes with it. You don't need to live, and ultimately
won't (impermanence). When hungry, eat if you are able. When this is
perceived as need (AKA - lack), suffering will arise over your
ability to do so, over thoughts of death. Your needs, your sense of
lack, your suffering.
Disagreement itself, a form of suffering. Misunderstanding, a form of
recognition. Same.
KG
On 9/5/2012 10:14 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
O, for God's sakes Bill!!!!!
You are certifiable! I've never heard such metaphysical New Age
nonsense and certainly never expected it to come from your lips.....
Enlightened people don't need to eat! Sheesh!
Edgar
On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:38 AM, Bill! wrote:
Edgar (no longer and Merle),
After enlightenment you do not have to eat. You realize food is not
essential. You may choose to eat, but you don't have to.
Illusions do vanish upon realization of Buddha Nature. You may
choose to bring them back or they may reappear without your choice.
But after realizing Buddha Nature you know that all dualistic
thought is fundamentally illusion (not real).
...Bill!
