The Vanity of Enlightenment

page: 14
34
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Hi guys, have been following this thread since it started, and one of the things that strikes me is that the written word can be so open to interpretation.

This is one of the things I love about the English language, a sentence when spoken can be taken many ways due to inflection/ intonation etc, but can fall short when written down, which can lead to misunderstanding and clashes, which in itself isn't a bad thing because it gives us an opportunity to work on our ego and be mindful. It can be frustrating when you are trying to get a point across.

Possibly going to sound daft here, but isn't perfection subjective, unless were talking about some kind of "universal perfection" in which case wouldn't anything and everything be perfection because it is part of the universe/ creation?

Enjoying the thread, don't get to talk or listen about this stuff much so thank you all.

Edit. yup sounds daft. especially when I think of rape and murder, but I'm sure there is something in it.

edit on 13-2-2013 by siriussam because: Daftness




posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 



But therein lies a paradox, for one who understands everything must also know—and hopefully admit—that no one can truly understand everything.


Your paradox can be solved by abandoning "thought". A big step towards enlightenment is discovering the true nature of things.

And it is actually quite easy to spot an enlightened being


1. Right View
2. Right Intention
3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

And no, I won't debate the subjectivity of "right"


www.thebigview.com...
edit on 13-2-2013 by AllIsOne because: added link



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by AllIsOne
 
I'm not an expert those points but I believe that it's certain way of thinking that is considered right. That you have to face every thought with a certain method to weed out the useless things that might mislead another person despite your good intentions or talk that doesn't benefit the person you talk to. A way of reasoning to goodness.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


I use the word enlightenment loosely, but I don't really think of it as enlightenment. I'd much prefer to call it zen, because that word comes much closer to what I feel. An externalized zen, focused outward instead of inward, a unity of the universe and the mind. But it still comes from within.

It's like a lighthouse - the beacon is cast from your mind onto the universe, illuminating it. From there, you either pay attention or you ignore it. As in, turning off the light. Most people have the light turned off. All they care about is their immediate vicinity and whatever whispers they hear in the wind. Some people are more curious, or more desperate, so they turn that light on and see what they can.

Maybe that will make more sense to ATS.



No one likes to read that s##t; and the enlightened ones usually shy away from too much logic, rationality and sound arguments.


Everything I have posted on this thread has been a conclusion arrived at by a process of logic, rationality, and sound arguments. To do otherwise is to make s**t up. That's not what I'm here for.
edit on 13-2-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by AllIsOne
 



Your paradox can be solved by abandoning "thought". A big step towards enlightenment is discovering the true nature of things.

And it is actually quite easy to spot an enlightened being

1. Right View
2. Right Intention
3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

And no, I won't debate the subjectivity of "right"

www.thebigview.com...


That's not solving a paradox. That's running away from a paradox, and abandoning a part of oneself in the process. That is entirely unnecessary.

The true nature of the universe doesn't deal in paradoxes and contradictions. Things can only be what they are. The Law of Non-Contradiction has always stood firm. Paradoxes and contradictions arise in the realm of language and ideas only. So when an idea is paradoxical or contradictory, it is likely a concept that is ambiguous or completely superficial, and the product of a less-than-thorough mind—hence the modern usage of enlightenment.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 




Everything I have posted on this thread has been a conclusion arrived at by a process of logic, rationality, and sound arguments. To do otherwise is to make s**t up. That's not what I'm here for.


I would have to agree. I didn't see any wavering or running from the arguments on your part. I wasn't implying that you were.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wang Tang
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


Buddha justified leaving his wife and child to go on a spiritual journey for Enlightenment because he wanted to save them from their superficial lives in the endless circle of life. He wanted to prove that he could break samsara, the circle of life, and lead others to reach Enlightenment.

Yes there is self interest involved in that he wants a complete understanding of the world. There is self interest in the fact that he wants to save his wife and child from a meaningless life.

The question is, is this self interest bad? I will agree that there is self interest involved in pursuing Enlightenment, but again there is self interest involved in everything. In this case I cannot not penalize someone for pursuing Enlightenment out of self interest because it is impossible to pursue it with no self interest.

I am on this forum to "deny ignorance." Is there self interest involved? Absolutely. I dislike ignorant people, and I dislike being ignorant, so I come here to "deny ignorance." Does the fact that there is self interest involved take away from the nobleness of the pursuit of knowledge and understanding? I say not.


Well said.

I have never met a Shaman nor self-proclaimed enlightened nor highly educated person who ever said they know everything, actually it was contrary to that, in that, they lent themselves to be open to new learning experiences.

There are many wise quotes from people long dead, that have been on the same path, one in particular, "the more I learn, the less I know".

What does enlightenment mean to you; isn't it all perspective.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by InTheLight

What does enlightenment mean to you; isn't it all perspective.


It is a shift in perspective. It is seeing from a different place.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by InTheLight

What does enlightenment mean to you; isn't it all perspective.


It is a shift in perspective. It is seeing from a different place.


Yes, that explains it well for me. Seeing, understanding, perceiving on an individual basis from a different place; using different senses.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by AllIsOne
 



Your paradox can be solved by abandoning "thought". A big step towards enlightenment is discovering the true nature of things.

And it is actually quite easy to spot an enlightened being

1. Right View
2. Right Intention
3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

And no, I won't debate the subjectivity of "right"

www.thebigview.com...


That's not solving a paradox. That's running away from a paradox, and abandoning a part of oneself in the process. That is entirely unnecessary.


You seem to be fixed on your own definition and idea what enlightenment is. You declare that it is "entirely unnecessary to give up thought". Maybe by doing exactly that you will find more of "oneself" than you could ever imagine. But since you already "know" what is right, you will be stuck in your own self-created paradox. I see a big circular flaw in your logic.



The true nature of the universe doesn't deal in paradoxes and contradictions. Things can only be what they are.
The Law of Non-Contradiction has always stood firm. Paradoxes and contradictions arise in the realm of language and ideas only. So when an idea is paradoxical or contradictory, it is likely a concept that is ambiguous or completely superficial, and the product of a less-than-thorough mind—hence the modern usage of enlightenment.


You totally lost me here. So for example you have solved the paradox of the photon in physics? How can something be a wave and a particle at the same time? I guess all the great minds in physics are less-than-thorough?



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by InTheLight

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by InTheLight

What does enlightenment mean to you; isn't it all perspective.


It is a shift in perspective. It is seeing from a different place.


Yes, that explains it well for me. Seeing, understanding, perceiving on an individual basis from a different place; using different senses.


Coming to the senses - which can only happen presently. Seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and smelling. Being completely here and now.

Being aware of what is arising presently including thought and all sensation and just seeing it all just happen.
Be the witness.

This is a remarkable talk by Alan Watts on 'Being completely here and now'
youtu.be...



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Konoyaro
reply to post by AllIsOne
 
I'm not an expert those points but I believe that it's certain way of thinking that is considered right. That you have to face every thought with a certain method to weed out the useless things that might mislead another person despite your good intentions or talk that doesn't benefit the person you talk to. A way of reasoning to goodness.



Yep, all of the above and a bag of chips :-)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


Pardon me, but I'm going to take a brief respite from this thread now that the loonies are here to muddle up your good work. Hopefully, you'll be able to extricate the gold from the garbage after they've exhausted their reserves of nonsensical babbling. It was good to exchange ideas with you, I'd like to do it again sometime.


Thanks again!
edit on 13-2-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by AllIsOne
 



You seem to be fixed on your own definition and idea what enlightenment is. You declare that it is "entirely unnecessary to give up thought". Maybe by doing exactly that you will find more of "oneself" than you could ever imagine. But since you already "know" what is right, you will be stuck in your own self-created paradox. I see a big circular flaw in your logic.


I don't claim to know anything. I'm merely following the arguments where they take me. Besides, I tried this methodology for many years, I found only abstractions of myself, while the real me was sitting there trying to do away with his thoughts.

I give up thought every night—it's called sleeping. If that's how you wish to go through life, no one is stopping you. But living life asleep seems a drastic measure to take.

If you see a flaw in my logic, and you can show me with logic, you will convince me.



You totally lost me here. So for example you have solved the paradox of the photon in physics? How can something be a wave and a particle at the same time? I guess all the great minds in physics are less-than-thorough?


You cannot solve paradoxes. In logic, a photon is neither a wave nor a particle, it is a photon, which happens to be doing what a photon does. We can merely describe it as acting as if it was a wave and a particle. That doesn't mean it is a wave or a particle, because it is still nonetheless a photon. It appears like a wave or particle. It acts like a wave or particle. But it isn't a wave or particle. It is a photon. No paradox here.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


Well, here we have some intelligent discussion going on.


I give up thought every night—it's called sleeping. If that's how you wish to go through life, no one is stopping you. But living life asleep seems a drastic measure to take.


A quick moment to toss my 2 cents in change at that. Sleeping tends to bring me more peace than being awake. It's not practical, but it's more healthy than other methods of soothing reality's burn.


You cannot solve paradoxes. In logic, a photon is neither a wave nor a particle, it is a photon, which happens to be doing what a photon does. We can merely describe it as acting as if it was a wave and a particle. That doesn't mean it is a wave or a particle, because it is still nonetheless a photon. It appears like a wave or particle. It acts like a wave or particle. But it isn't a wave or particle. It is a photon. No paradox here.


If something exhibits two opposing natures at the same time, then its behavior is paradoxical. However, it does imply that there is an underlying connection that bridges the gap between the two natures. This suggests that, at some level, the two sides are not so distinct as to be mutually exclusive. Such a consideration opens the door to rather interesting ideas considering the interaction and relation of particles and waves.

In relation to the actual topic, this reflects that perhaps opposites are designed for collaboration rather than conflict. Our observance of such is limited by our scope, but the future may reveal a more widely encompassing business than two sides eternally at odds with one another. Think about two waves of water slamming into each other, versus two waves of water that chase each other in a circle. A vortex is created, reminiscent of the vortices seen in the Torus model of the universe - a result of two opposing forces cooperating to create an eternal motion that eventually leads to one end result no matter where you approach from. These philosophies that I am developing have interesting reflections on the physics observed in the known universe, as well as theoretical models of phenomena not yet substantiated.

Take that as you will. I'm just thinking out loud here.

edit on 13-2-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Oh logic... you sassy sly sundering seductress.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion
 


I do believe that's fear, my friend. Fear is the sly seductress that whispers in your ear and reminds you of everything that can go wrong, eventually leading you to commit the unthinkable before abandoning your bed in lieu of desperate fools while you face the consequences of your impulses.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 

Forgive them logic... they know not what they do.

Here's some logic for the cheap seats.
- Have you ever believed something was logical that you later believed was illogical?
- Have you ever believed something was illogical that you later believed was logical?

If you say no to both of those, you're either lying or a program and you can just continue on with your big bad self.


A logical being could never believe something illogical.
You once believed something illogical.
Ergo... You are an illogical being.

Can an illogical being trust its own logic?

You were always being illogical and here is the gotcha... you just didn't know it.

You had reasons for believing what you did but that is absolutely not the same as logic and to conflate the two is to be disingenuous and seduced by your own belief system.

When your belief system changes, that which you consider "reasonable" changes and you are then able to go back and re-logic everything to justify your new belief system with things you now consider reasonable. Yet those things were always there but rejected by your previous belief system that labelled them "illogical". They didn't change, you did.

There may be things that cause you to question your belief system that you then credit with being "logical"... but in fact they simply revealed the illogical beliefs you had been holding all along and just didn't recognize.

Belief systems are not mathematics. The logic applied to them is post-hoc, not a priori.

I fully expect to be disagreed with but that's not my problem, that's your belief system.

Namaste.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
The path towards good, my personal version

Patience, apathy, charity, humility, forgiveness.

The path towards evil,

Paranoia, indifference, greed, arrogance, hypocrisy.

This is not something you simply choose, life's struggle is to stay on the right path. The good path leads towards advancement, the bad path leads you backwards.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


I'd like to point out that one of the points LesMisanthrope pointed out, that I agree with, is one symptom of vanity in the quest for enlightenment: believing that you know for a fact how to find enlightenment.

There is no formula, no magical recipe, no treasure map where 'X' marks the spot. It is a process of trial and error, where your progress is marked by how much you have lost and learned, where your only sign of whether you've reached your destination is when you've decided it doesn't matter.

The only sure thing is that there is nothing sure about it.





new topics
top topics
 
34
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum