Theos-Talk Archives (April 1999 Message tt00104)

Dear Jerry,

>>...your original arguments to defend the concept of enlightenment in
>> one lifetime, regardless of the practices of previous lifetimes, as
>> being the "only" possibility, and that all other views are wrong-...
>>
> Dear Leon, if you want to denigrate what I say, that is your
> right, but please repeat what I said properly. I never said
> anything like "regardless of the practices of previous lifetimes" which
> would be impossible.

In my dictionary the word denigrate means. "To attack the character or 
reputation of; speak ill of; defame or, to disparage; belittle."   What kind 
of paranoia is it that assumes my statement disagreeing with what I thought 
you said or implied, is an attack on you personally?  Must you always turn 
every disagreement with your self acknowledged "wild" statements of supposed 
facts into a personal attack on your character?  Or, is that just a 
projection of your own methods of argument?  

Actually, I still maintain your concept of "enlightenment in one lifetime" is 
dead wrong...  Since, if enlightenment takes "practices of previous 
lifetimes", as you now apparently admit, then, it's not really "enlightenment 
in ONE lifetime", is it?

LHM


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.