Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00059)

> From: "stevestubbs" <stevestubbs@yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Theos-World re "What is the purpose for our Universe and 
> ourselves?"
> Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 01:24:02 -0000
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Ali Hassan" <ananda_hotai@h...>
> wrote:
> > I think it's more a description of your personal awareness, rather
> than
> > 'getting' it. One of buddhism's prime tenets is "things
> aren't". "It is"
> > also would follow as a false notion, since "It" would refer to
> samsara.
>
> What Buddhism denies is self-nature. Nobody denies consiousness,
> only that consciousness is a phenomenon which is evidence of a
> noumenal self. To the Buddhist consciousness is evidence only of
> itself.
>
> > This is one of the roots of Dzogchen, no?
>
> There are numerous systems which are indebted to majamudra.
>
> > When did Naropa come to this, at
> > the beginning of his sadhana or the end?
>
> Since time had no beginning and the sadhana has no end the question
> is meaningless.
lol!

> > Same with the Buddha. They, the Chan Masters, etc. all came up with
> those
> > seemingly effortless DON'T DO ANYTHING slogans after decades and
> lifetimes
> > of strenuous effort.
>
> So? All we ever said is that it is simple. Nobody ever said it is
> easy.
lol again.

> Besides, Theosophists do not seek enlightemnet anyway. All they do
> is read magazines.
Well, I was wondering about this, but thought it might be impolite of me to 
ask. Is that what Theosophy has come to then?

regards-

Ali

_________________________________________________________________
Get business advice and resources to improve your work life, from bCentral. 
http://special.msn.com/bcentral/loudclear.armx