On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:03:51 -0700 (PDT), Renli
<oliver.richman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On May 5, 9:59 pm, Ali <lal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 May 2008 17:01:12 -0700 (PDT), Awaken21
>>
>> <lukecar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >On May 3, 11:06 am, Renli <oliver.rich...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> On May 3, 11:00 am, Robert Epstein <vze25...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Those are a lot of tests to pass! :)
>>
>> There's really only one.
>>
>> >> Especially considering that the long and short of it is, that it is
>> >> not possible to discern with 100% accuracy if someone is enlightened
>> >> or not if you are not enlightened yourself.
>>
>> >Even if you are it might not be possible.
>>
>> That's silly.
>>
>> >The master decides weather
>> >or not reveal himself, other masters know that much.
>>
>> I don't think so. The master is bound to appear by the readiness of
>> the seeker. Kind of like a court summons. The master does not turn his
>> light on or off, either. It's a constant...in my experience.
>
>Sure, but "bound" to appear? Can you elaborate on what binds him? Is
>it really a binding of this sort?
>
>-
You're asking if the master isn't really free? What's to elaborate?
He is bound the same way as the mother is bound to nurse the crying
baby. How many metaphors do you want?
|
