XPost: alt.religion.eckankar, alt.meditation.shabda   
   From: gruendemann@worldnet.att.net   
      
   empty room wrote:   
   >   
   > On Sat, 21 May 2005 16:52:00 GMT, "Ken"  wrote:   
   >   
   > >   
   > >"empty room"  wrote ...   
   > >>   
   > >> On 20 May 2005 08:57:39 -0700, "lackpurity"  wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >>>Proclaiming to be a Master, and actually being one are two different   
   > >>>things.  Let's use a little discernment on that.  Many have been   
   > >>>deceived by impostors, no doubt.  That doesn't mean that True Masters   
   > >>>don't exist.   
   > >>   
   > >> This is true. If I should ever happen to come across a True Master,   
   > >> I will not hesitate to make his or her acquaintance and   
   > >> seek their guidance. However, there certainly isn't any shortage   
   > >> of egotistical and self deluded or deliberately deceptive fake masters   
   > >> around; more than one can shake a stick at, in fact. These fake   
   > >> masters are easy to spot, however; if one is paying attention. All   
   > >> one needs to do is watch the actions of these fake masters for a   
   > >> short while and their actions will give them away without fail. The   
   > >> truth reveals itself to those who sincerely seek it. However, if one   
   > >> is blinded by egotistical desire for power, status, exotic experiences,   
   > >> spiritual 'superiority', etc., one will more likely than not end up at the   
   > >> door of a fake master. Such is the way of things. The ego has its   
   > >> function, but we are not our egos.   
   > >   
   > >   
   > >So empty suit, you think that you have the inside track on what   
   > >characteristics mark a Master?  So clear is your insight that you   
   > >believe can define who others should choose to be their teacher?   
   >   
   > No, I did not say that. Why do you wish to distort my words? To be   
   > sure, I said nothing about "teachers".  I was talking about fake masters   
   > and the possibility of existence of "True Masters". I said that it is easy   
   > to spot a *fake* master, if one is paying attention. I have no idea if   
   > there is even such a thing as a "True Master", however; the fake ones   
   > are a dime a dozen, and they are easy to spot by those who are paying   
   > attention as fake masters are invariably living contradictions of their   
   > own words. Those whose actions contradict their own words are   
   > clearly fakes, of that there can be no doubt.   
      
   You appear to draw an absolute line between teachers and masters. Is   
   this the way hair splits in your broad sweeping generalization here?   
   What True Master can you point to in this instance which would shed   
   light on what you're addressing? Obviously if this Master is True...   
   according to your emphasis here, others would readily agree.   
      
   > >You know what hubris is, right?   
   > Yes, and considering your attempts at distorting my words here,   
   > you might due well to consider its meaning.   
      
   What can you offer here other than attempting to establish that you and   
   you alone can determine who a True Master actually is? And where is the   
   example to prove your so called ability to make this distinction? It's   
   your pedestal... just trying to see how far you'll go on this one   
   without getting a nose bleed.    
      
   > empty room - 975th Living Truth Master   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)