chicka-Dee wrote:it is difficult to know online what someone's background is, their level of knowledge, expertise in a certain area. "Should I trust what this person says? That just doesn't sound quite right to me.." may be some thoughts one might have. If one is not a teacher, but goes around trying to 'teach' others what they, in their opinion, hold to be 'true' or 'right', who is to say that their understanding is any more 'advanced' than those they are attempting to 'teach'?
Peter wrote:christopher::: wrote:I'm starting to realize that communicating with people you don't really know, in public forums, may not always be a good idea.
It's very rarely a good idea, in my opinion. Private conversation with someone you trust is thousands of times better.
christopher::: wrote:. I would not be surprised if some of us are actually very different in 3D.
Dan74 wrote:. There is no "one size fits all" and perhaps we can show some respect for each others paths.
Like chicka-Dee I feel it is a pissing context
Dan74 wrote:There is no "one size fits all" and perhaps we can show some respect for each others paths.
"If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.
Registered users: Alex123, Ben, Bing [Bot], cooran, Coyote, Dan74, dannyj, EmptyShadow, Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], Khalil Bodhi, Kusala, palchi, porpoise, purple planet, robertk, Sylvester, Zenainder