>===== Original Message From moq_discuss@moq.org =====
RICK
I was only suggesting that it meant something closer to 'study' than to
>the notion that we're literally blind to the light. Right now, I think the
>best candidate would be 'recognize'... (reCOGnize)...this would fit with
>notion of the cognitive filtering element.
>> ERIN: I agree but i am having trouble figuring out why we need to have
>this idea and a need distinguish dharmakaya light as a special light.
>
>RICK
>When you plug a bulb into a lamp and turn it on... is the light Dharmakaya?
ERIN:
Are you suggesting that dharmakaya light can only come from an animate
source......what if you were on peyote? maybe the animate/inanimate
differention wouldn't matter. Or I could stare at the lightbulb like Pirsig
says and get the dharmakaya afterglow.
This is why it seems silly to separate light with dharmakaya light why should
it matter who the observer is or whether the observer is on peyote or how long
the observer is looking at the light. IT'S THE SAME LIGHT, it's only the
filters that are changing.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:56 BST