The Vanity of Enlightenment

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

Have you taken any pictures with your telescope? Then how do we know you have done it? How do we know it isn't just an ordinary telescope?

You're just slinging that word around because you don't appreciate getting caught in your own web.

I think you might be missing the point of the telescope metaphor.

Case closed!

Originally posted by BlueMule


People wonder, 'how do I become enlightened'?

I wonder, what do you mean by the word "I"?

Do you mean your ego-self? The ego-self is not the entire human psyche. But its what people think they are.

Enlightenment involves transcending the ego-self. But the ego-self can't transcend itself. Paradox.

Very profound, this just opened a lot of doors to understanding for me!

Originally posted by Serdgiam
It is in realizing the entire mountain range, with its peaks and valleys, and timberlines, and ecosystems that we find this so-called "enlightenment." My mountaintop alone does not make up but a percentage of the whole. But, it is whole in and of itself.

Is it? Oh, how vain that you think you know where to find this so-called "enlightenment".

Case Closed!

Do you feel you have anything to learn from anyone here or other mountaintops? No need to blow smoke either, as we both know there is the "acceptable" answer for this. I would be much more interested in your honesty though.

Sure, although I don't believe in learning. I believe everyone already knows everything. It's just a matter of re-membering.

To be human is to have my I stuck to the iPiece.

Denying my vanity delivers a big bag of vanity to my front door.

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by Serdgiam
It is in realizing the entire mountain range, with its peaks and valleys, and timberlines, and ecosystems that we find this so-called "enlightenment." My mountaintop alone does not make up but a percentage of the whole. But, it is whole in and of itself.

Is it? Oh, how vain that you think you know where to find this so-called "enlightenment".

Case Closed!

Wait, there was a case on this? I never said I wasnt vain. In fact, that very point has been addressed by myself in this very thread already!

I am sharing the view from my mountain top. No more, no less. You may claim it as wrong. In fact, I encourage that very thing. "I" have much, much more to learn and experience. I call it "growth."

And, just as a polite reminder, you have also claimed to find such things from your own mountaintop, no?

Sure, although I don't believe in learning. I believe everyone already knows everything. It's just a matter of re-membering.

Thank you for your honesty. My toes are sore though, so Ill have to take a break.

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion
To be human is to have your I stuck to the iPiece.

Denying one's vanity delivers a big bag of vanity to their front door.

Its amazing how that works.

At one point, I thought that paradoxes were pointing directly to contradictions, and were a method of falsification. At another point further down the road, I felt that paradoxes were simply showing a hard limit on our own limited perspective.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by Serdgiam
It is in realizing the entire mountain range, with its peaks and valleys, and timberlines, and ecosystems that we find this so-called "enlightenment." My mountaintop alone does not make up but a percentage of the whole. But, it is whole in and of itself.

Is it? Oh, how vain that you think you know where to find this so-called "enlightenment".

Case Closed!

Wait, there was a case on this?

I never said I wasnt vain. In fact, that very point has been addressed by myself in this very thread already!

I am sharing the view from my mountain top. No more, no less. You may claim it as wrong. In fact, I encourage that very thing. "I" have much, much more to learn and experience. I call it "growth."

Oh, how humble that you think "you" have more to learn.

Humble and vain, wow how remarkable you are!

And so sharing. And encouraging! Why, you must be enlightened!

And, just as a polite reminder, you have also claimed to find such things from your own mountaintop, no?

And so polite too! Wow!

Is there any stereotypical characteristic of so-called "enlightened" people that you don't conform to when it suits you?

Yes I have made claims about enlightenment. But since they are derived from transpersonal experience and scholarship, they are not claims rooted in the flowery choices of a hallucinatory ego-self (like yours), but in the experiences of altered states of mystical consciousness and comparative scholarship.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion
To be human is to have your I stuck to the iPiece.

Denying one's vanity delivers a big bag of vanity to their front door.

Its amazing how that works.

At one point, I thought that paradoxes were pointing directly to contradictions, and were a method of falsification. At another point further down the road, I felt that paradoxes were simply showing a hard limit on our own limited perspective.

edit on 15-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

Then there's synergy.

Vainglory; From the original eight sins, was a sin devoid of pride.

"The poem is structured around a comparison of two basic opposites of human conduct; on the one hand, the proud man, who “is the devil's child, enwreathed in flesh” and, on the other hand, the virtuous man, characterised as "God’s own son"."

Originally posted by Serdgiam
Its amazing how that works.

At one point, I thought that paradoxes were pointing directly to contradictions, and were a method of falsification. At another point further down the road, I felt that paradoxes were simply showing a hard limit on our own limited perspective.

Edited my post after seeing it in your mirror.

Paradoxes are quite pretty sometimes though... which makes it bittersweet to watch them go.

Originally posted by Serdgiam
Love it! Do you feel that part of a human (being a template, or form itself) is beyond being ego?

I see no reason to believe there isn't some yin to that yang, but any understanding of that will be contained within an ego on some level, so for where "I am" at the moment the feeling only resolves into "buh".

Originally posted by Serdgiam
I believe that we are more than human, just perceiving things through our current form for whatever reason (if any!). But, all.. production and results of the human body are strictly material.

What do I believe that "more" is? Hard to say, since it would come from the human mind. I suspect it has something to do with magnetism residing outside of space-time. Perhaps a totally different discussion, perhaps not.

Well I had an experience this morning that might relate. I'm writing the experience as it was *felt*... but if someone takes this as me making a scientific claim then they are distorting. Disclaimer complete.

"We" the "now" as perceived by humans... are "being" the boundary between Time and Space. Space is the Potential. Time is the Awareness. "Now" as we experience it is Awareness and Potential meeting to catalyze a tangible experience. "We" are the meeting of time and space (though they are never actually separate).

It felt like what it would be to realize I was "being" the halocline while also being vaguely but tangibly aware of the reality of the rest of the water continuing above and below.

Originally posted by BlueMule
Is there any stereotypical characteristic of enlightened people that you don't conform to when it suits you?

Considering I feel that everyone is enlightened and just choose to see it differently, there is no stereotypical characteristic of an enlightened person.

To state what I said before, enlightenment is only relevant to the perceiving system (ego). It exists in the same way as leprechauns. After many years, I found that what I thought was so special, was only looked at in that way to preserve the current paradox and state of my ego (which will persist as long as this body lives). In other words, to my perspective it looked like this: "When nothing is special, everything can be."

When I stopped looking through my telescope at a very small portion of the sky was when I truly saw how many stars were there to be perceived. Then, at another point further down the road, I saw that even that was limited by my current rope. So, I started to reside in the process instead of what the process was yielding at any given moment.

Different strokes for different folks, and all that.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by BlueMule
Is there any stereotypical characteristic of enlightened people that you don't conform to when it suits you?

Considering I feel that everyone is enlightened and just choose to see it differently, there is no stereotypical characteristic of an enlightened person.

I think you mean of a "so-called "enlightened" person".

Your center of identity is rooted in your ego-self. That's why you think so-called "enlightenment" is about feeling and choice.

When someone undergoes ego-death and rebirth, their center of identity begins to shift from the ego-self, which is really just a cosmic hallucination, to the deep center of the human psyche. That shift is enlightenment. In Jungian terms that psychic center is the archetype of wholeness or the Self. In Hindu terms it's Atman. In Christian terms it's Christ. In Buddhist terms it's The One Mind.

"All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind (consciousness), besides which nothing exists." -Huang Po

The process of going from identifying with the ego-self, which is only the surface of the psyche, to identifying with the center of the psyche is in Jungian terms called the individuation process. It's basically what esoteric mysticism is all about. As opposed to exoteric orthodox religion.

Originally posted by Serdgiam
Considering I feel that everyone is enlightened and just choose to see it differently, there is no stereotypical characteristic of an enlightened person.

If you were forced to... ... what label would you use to describe a person who operates from such a perspective (this and that) relative to those who operate from the dividing perspective (this or that)?

Originally posted by BlueMule
I think you mean "so-called "enlightened" persons".

Nope, oddly enough, I did in fact mean what I said. It seems there is quite a bit of projection in your posts. As if your mountain top is the only one. Perhaps it is, to you. I wouldnt begrudge you such beliefs if thats the case!

That's why you think enlightenment is about feeling and choice.

Hmm, I do? I didnt know that. If that is how I think, it seems in direct contradiction to how I said I think on it though. If it is about feeling and choice, then not everyone would be enlightened. Only those with the right feelings and choices. I feel that regardless of how it is viewed by the individual, they are a part of the process that they search for. As is inherent to "looking" for something, it is perceived to not be in hand. This was the only context that I found meaning to the term enlightenment. The "specialness" that I ascribed was only relevant to me because I was denying "What Is" all along. It was nothing of note, except in keeping me from growing as I had "attained the highest state." I still chopped wood and carried water. After years of this, I began to oscillate once again, instead of just going in circles (hope you catch onto that reference Ergo!)

Many times, you suggest you know how and why others think they way they do. Where does that come from?

That is enlightenment.

So, it is "that" and very specifically NOT "this" in your perspective?

The process of going from identifying with the ego-self, which is only the surface of the psyche, to identifying with the center of the psyche is in Jungian terms called the individuation process. It's basically what esoteric mysticism is all about. As opposed to exoteric religion.

As I said, it is not the results of the process that I found stability, but in the process itself. I also found that the amount of tricks that can occur are so incredibly deep, for lack of better words. You are aware of these so-called "traps," right?

Either way, this seems like every conversation I had at every "New Age" thing I went to many years ago. There is a reason I stopped going. I will leave you be, but you are free to have the last word..

reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion


They give meaning to each other

I have a tendency to wax verbose on many things, but I think I can leave it at that. For now...

edit: OK, OK, I lied. I wouldnt start describing one as more enlightened, awake, or anything like that. However, I do suspect (please refer to your own disclaimer, not making a scientific claim!), that it has an effect on the magnetic field surrounding the person. In one perspective, where it is "this or that" solely, it may create a less stable field as it does not account for the totality of the duality that is experienced. In the other, it is possible a more solid foundation is laid to be built and grown upon. No right or wrong or anything. We may just find that progression based on partial foundations can crack and crumble after a while. And yet, in that, we learn and grow that much more.

reply to post by Serdgiam





"This and that" naturally refuses to be forced to create or use a wedge...

EDIT: Understood. Red is definitely not blue, green is definitely not rough, cold is definitely not up, and nothing is "more" anything than the other. They just "are" in their relativeness to each other.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by BlueMule
I think you mean "so-called "enlightened" persons".

Nope, oddly enough, I did in fact mean what I said.

Ah. Well when you call enlightenment so-called "enlightenment" in one post and enlightenment in another, it's hard to know what you really mean. Maybe there is too much vanity in your posts?

reply to post by ErgoTheConclusion


You are far too much fun to talk with. Its almost... magnetic. (inside joke)

HA! Sometimes it just comes out. The fingers just type the terrible pun as I watch on in horror.

reply to post by Serdgiam

A friend of mine sent an email today about how the asteroid going by was supposedly worth $195 billion. He said "imagine how much wealth is out there in the universe".

I replied with "I think there is infinite wealth out there... so I predict hyperinflation in the universe's future".

At first he didn't get it... so when it was explained for him he said his face was shifting red.

It's a good day for 'em!

recent posters have bombarded this thread with useless bickering.

How could one be enlightened when he just worried about what is or who is not and why. I have found these posts disgusting as it is so far from enlightening. This thread is a den of mockers who care more about justifying themselves than about the truth.

reply to post by BlueMule

In the same way your more abstract views on the non-dual nature of reality are frequently misunderstood by others and considered "nonsense" or "paradoxical" but you know they aren't... I think this is a case where you might be finding yourself on the other side of the fence.