It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Serdgiam
reply to post by InTheLight
I am not sure I understand, would you mind explaining it a bit more?
What is available to the monk that is not available to you or me? I could see it maybe being an "easier" environment in some ways, but beyond that I am not sure I see any real obstacles other than what we choose to put in the way.edit on 22-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by InTheLight
The life of a monk is devoted to poverty, prayer, reflection and is basically uncluttered with the struggles and obligations most of us find ourselves having to face every day. Not to mention that alot of people have to deal with all manner of physical, emotional, addiction, and psychological problems - these cannot easily be put aside or ignored.
Originally posted by Serdgiam
Originally posted by InTheLight
The life of a monk is devoted to poverty, prayer, reflection and is basically uncluttered with the struggles and obligations most of us find ourselves having to face every day. Not to mention that alot of people have to deal with all manner of physical, emotional, addiction, and psychological problems - these cannot easily be put aside or ignored.
I understand the life of a monk.
Why is a monk not susceptible to physical, emotional, addiction, and psychological problems?
I agree that they are not easily put aside or ignored. In my mind, that would be about the worst thing we can do. I much prefer acceptance, then growth. The monk will have to handle these exact same issues though, just in a slightly different manifestation. They exist in the same universe as all of us, and it would seem that everything that is available to "them" is also available to "us."
For me, I made many excuses as to why I personally could not achieve such things continuously. As it turns out, I was completely wrong. Wasnt the first time, and it certainly wont be the last!edit on 22-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by InTheLight
I believe a monk is less susceptible to these problems because they lack most of the stressors. So, what is available to them, yes, is also available to us. The only difference is that their main purpose is to focus on the path of prayer, enlightenment and the enjoying the luxury of spending most of their time on contemplation.
Originally posted by Serdgiam
Originally posted by InTheLight
I believe a monk is less susceptible to these problems because they lack most of the stressors. So, what is available to them, yes, is also available to us. The only difference is that their main purpose is to focus on the path of prayer, enlightenment and the enjoying the luxury of spending most of their time on contemplation.
I see where my confusion is brought in! Thanks for sticking through it with me
I see prayer, meditation, enlightenment, contemplation, and Ill throw mindfulness in there, to be a continuous process. Not necessarily one that is to be done under the "perfect" circumstances, as all circumstances are seen as technically perfect in this regard. When things are made more difficult, even if its only in our own perspective, it just puts us into a position where we have to learn and grow.
Thank you for the enlightening conversation..
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth.
Originally posted by InTheLight
Well, I was thinking about this John Locke quote:
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth.
But, he would be putting people in possession of his truth, not 'the truth'. Again, this is the question, is there one, or 'the truth', or is there only individual perception?
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Originally posted by InTheLight
Well, I was thinking about this John Locke quote:
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth.
But, he would be putting people in possession of his truth, not 'the truth'. Again, this is the question, is there one, or 'the truth', or is there only individual perception?
John Locke is not saying that he or anyone can put anyone in possession of truth. In the quote he is not claiming that he knows the truth or can put another in possession of it..
So no it would not be 'his truth'.edit on 24-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by InTheLight
But that doesn't mean the thread should stop.
Consider this, an idea is like a genie in a bottle, once released, it has the power to change the world.
I often consider this to the field on which the battle between good and evil is fought.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by InTheLight
I would say 5,000 years of pursuit of the wrong thing.
Is it about followers or doers?
Originally posted by InTheLight
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Originally posted by InTheLight
Well, I was thinking about this John Locke quote:
It is one thing to show a man that he is in an error, and another to put him in possession of the truth.
But, he would be putting people in possession of his truth, not 'the truth'. Again, this is the question, is there one, or 'the truth', or is there only individual perception?
John Locke is not saying that he or anyone can put anyone in possession of truth. In the quote he is not claiming that he knows the truth or can put another in possession of it..
So no it would not be 'his truth'.edit on 24-2-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
If he wanted to make it clear he should added "their" truth. The way is reads is "the truth", so this would allude to there being only one truth. It's a quote open to interpretation.
Originally posted by InTheLight
reply to post by poet1b
Interesting. So, could it be mused that vanity with enlightenment is a natural occurrence with the Eastern self-proclaimed enlightenment finders that have followers; after all they have had a lot more experience at this than Westerners - 5,000 years more experience) of enlightenment.
Whereas the inexperienced Western seekers (who suggest they don't know how to find it, they will never find it, or they will never attain complete enlightenment) cannot be vain about that which they cannot attain in any degree, or at all?
So, perhaps we should use the Eastern model as that which is correct, in that, vanity always comes with the attainment of enlightment, which will attract followers to him/her due to their vanity/confidence/claim to enlightenment.
Riddle me that.