To: K-list
Recieved: 2004/05/08 17:28
Subject: RE: [K-list] I don't know about Kundalini anymore
From: Djamelbensmaia
On 2004/05/08 17:28, Djamelbensmaia posted thus to the K-list:
hi yall,
according to Ranbir Singh <ranbirATnahal.freeserve.co.uk>:
> Sorry I wasn't taking a pot-shot at Kimberly,
I know you weren't.
> She was the one that hit closest to the mark in the first place,
> If you look closely I was agreeing,
I noticed that, but it still doesn't mean you were necessarily conveying the same message;
take two people, have them utter the exact same words, and put opposite expressions on their
faces, chances are the message will be quite different; its a question of style I guess.. I resonate
much more, to say the least, with "ego wants to be special", "cruel jokes" pulled on him, and
"minus-you
attaining enlightenment", than with the "it's what you feel in your heart that counts", 'I'll be
happy for ever if I do this", "lets just all
stop thinking", and since whatever you may believe, you're a smart person, and you own a brain
already, use it then!! And cut the , please! It's hopeless Ranbir!
>
> To love something,
> You don't need to see it
> Or believe in it,
> You don't need any knowledge of it
> You just need love,
This is simply false; try this: imagine a woman: you don't know her name, you've never seen her
face nor the rest of her body, you've never heard her talk, you have no idea how she thinks, if
she's mean or nice, smart or stupid, how old she is (she could be a hundred years old or a foetus),
and in fact, you don't even know if she's really a woman or not: she could be a man, or maybe
another species; maybe even an xtreterrestrial or a rock, a twig or even nothing at all, maybe
something truely ugly. By hypothesis, you're clueless.
Now: try loving this being.
Conclusion: you necessarily need to have some knowledge - I didn't say _perfect_ knowledge -
of the object of your love, in order to love it. This might seem to be a trivial issue, but it's in fact a
crucial point;
for philosophical theory, as well as every day, down to earth, life. Love and compassion are
inseparable of true knowledge and understanding. Any other approach is not only stupid, but
also dangerous, and bound to fail.
As for loving something you don't believe exists, any one can see this is absurd.
> Anything else separates you from love
> And you love the separation,
> Not love,
I understand what you're trying to say, but separation ain't all that bad you know; it just has a
bad case history..
> You're probably saying the same thing as me,
..yeah?
> Just in a different way,
Oh.
> As Kimberly was,
> That's what I was trying to get at with details,
> They distract me at least from the truth,
> I don't like getting distracted it gets me confused,
> And I lose track of my feelings/my heart.
> Much better for me just to feel.
You sound like you need to be hospitalized.. Take some vacation or something:)
>
> It was nice letter you wrote,
> And I liked it :)
Glad you liked it; I had some time to spare and was determined to flame you, but I guess I'm a
sweet guy *blush*, and not so prone to ad hominem attacks after all; I just hate seeing reason -
she is the mother of all buddhas you know-being devaluated or mistreated, makes me angry,
especially on this list, I'm sure you understand.
regards,
Djamel
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.