Enlightenment

Originally posted by whodey
But what if one thinks one is swimming when in reality they are not?

Then they're deluded.

Originally posted by vistesd
Then they're deluded.

Indeed.

Originally posted by whodey
Indeed.

And if you realize you're deluded, then you're not... 😉

EDIT: We were posting past one another; see my post on the 1st page just before you asked that question.

EDIT 2: And this is the problem with some popular conceptions of so-called "enlightenment": it's quite possible for a person to be "enlightened" with regard to some things, but deluded in others.

Originally posted by whodey
Biblically there is some truth in what you say.

Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much grief, and he that increases knowledge increases sorrows."

... so it might not be in the interests of some to acknowledge truth?

Originally posted by whodey
Congradulations. Now would you like to share?

Yes.
First you must accomplish by meditation that there are no absolute truths and that it's ultimately impossible to make an affirmation about anything.
Then you'll understand you are nothing more than the environment around you.
Then you'll realize how special you are for meeting a set of conditions to lower environment's entropy around you.
Everything makes sense, you'll understand questions like "who am I" or "Why am I here" are irrelevant for your existence.
It's not about "enlightenment"... it's more about clarity like duecer and visted posted.
About God... God is not a being. God is the Universe, all minds put together. It's the whole of circumstances, or you can call it luck or why a coin decides to flip head or tails.

Originally posted by vistesd
And if you realize you're deluded, then you're not... 😉

EDIT: We were posting past one another; see my post on the 1st page just before you asked that question.

EDIT 2: And this is the problem with some popular conceptions of so-called "enlightenment": it's quite possible for a person to be "enlightened" with regard to some things, but deluded in others.

My point was that the concept of being deluded is based soley upon ones perception. The question then must be asked, what of ones perception? Is it always accurate? Have we at times thought we were right but in reality were deluded? Conversely, have we at times thought we were deluded but later found out we were right?

Originally posted by snowinscotland
... so it might not be in the interests of some to acknowledge truth?

I think that knowledge/truth should be sought. I do not believe that the writer of Ecclesiastes was saying not to seek truth, rather, he was saying that knowing to much is burdensome. I think it is in line with another scripture in Ecclesiastes 7:29 which says, "This, however, you must know; I find that God made man simple, man's complex problems are of his own devising." In other words, if you want to live happy, keep it simple stupid. I believe the term is "beautifal simplicity". Christ said that if one knows the truth the truth can set you free. He later claimed to be the source of all truth, hence, Christ can set us free. Add any additional "gobbledygook" at your own peril. 😉

Originally posted by serigado
About God... God is not a being. God is the Universe, all minds put together. It's the whole of circumstances, or you can call it luck or why a coin decides to flip head or tails.[/b]

So really you could say that I am not a seperate being as well. Perhaps I am just part of this universal oneness as you call it? If so, why do we disagree? How can there be such division in a universe that is "one" with itself?

Originally posted by whodey
So really you could say that I am not a seperate being as well. Perhaps I am just part of this universal oneness as you call it? If so, why do we disagree? How can there be such division in a universe that is "one" with itself?

No. All minds are individual. There isn't a "universal oneness" like you think. I was only trying to fit God in my vision of the universe. Maybe it was easier to say there are 6.5 billion gods.
There is division because there is diversity. Diversity and heterogeneity are essential to evolution (not the darwinistic one, i'm talking generally).
The more I study the more I know it's like this.

Originally posted by serigado
No. All minds are individual. There isn't a "universal oneness" like you think. I was only trying to fit God in my vision of the universe. Maybe it was easier to say there are 6.5 billion gods.
There is division because there is diversity. Diversity and heterogeneity are essential to evolution (not the darwinistic one, i'm talking generally).
The more I study the more I know it's like this.

There are 6.5 million gods? Interesting. The Bible even indicates that we are "gods" unto ourselves.

So you are saying that the universe is diverse EXCEPT for the concept of a God who is an individual as well?

Originally posted by whodey
There are 6.5 million gods? Interesting. The Bible even indicates that we are "gods" unto ourselves.

So you are saying that the universe is diverse EXCEPT for the concept of a God who is an individual as well?

God is whatever someone wants. It's simply what you can't understand or what has no reason.
The Universe has no God in the sense of a creator or referee. Forget the "god is all minds put together" part. It was a figure of speech for saying god lives in our imagination. It's simply the response for what we don't understand (or have the capacity to understand).
If you look with attention, the religious God is the answer for all of men's desires/fears:
- the answer for the creation of matter
- the why
- the need to be something more than mortals
- the fear of a limited life
- the need for a ultimate and unquestionable moral

Doesn't it sound a bit phony and men created? Now looks very obsolete. Fortunately we start to have the knowledge to transcend ourselves and banish all the religions that were needed in those harsh times.

Originally posted by whodey
My point was that the concept of being deluded is based soley upon ones perception. The question then must be asked, what of ones perception? Is it always accurate? Have we at times thought we were right but in reality were deluded? Conversely, have we at times thought we were deluded but later found out we were right?

You’re still in thinking-mind, thinking thoughts about whether or not all your thoughts could be delusive and how you would know. The answer for thinking-mind is that then you can’t know anything at all, and so there’s nothing that can be said. And likely you would find yourself surreally dysfunctional.

Neither one’s perceptions nor one’s thoughts may always be accurate—but if they were generally inaccurate, in terms of a general disjunct from the phenomenal world, we would likely not survive as a species. We clearly do not need to know everything in order to survive (or thrive), and I see no reason to assume that we are the singular species for whom the grammar of our consciousness exhausts the syntax of the cosmos. There is likely always to be mystery.

I’m saying, get to that clarity before thinking-mind, spend some time there; and you will realize the nature of that—which is the ground for thinking-mind. Then—and only then—ask what are the implications of that being deluded as well. Then, of course, you will be thinking again...

Originally posted by serigado
Yes.
First you must accomplish by meditation that there are no absolute truths and that it's ultimately impossible to make an affirmation about anything.
Then you'll understand you are nothing more than the environment around you.
Then you'll realize how special you are for meeting a set of conditions to lower environment's entropy around you.
Everythin ircumstances, or you can call it luck or why a coin decides to flip head or tails.

First you must accomplish by meditation that there are no absolute truths and that it's ultimately impossible to make an affirmation about anything.

I would say that the experience of clarity we’re talking about is prior to thought/conceptualization, and is ultimately ineffable in that all attempts to describe it are back in thinking-mind, making concepts. Even the word “clarity” ought to be taken as indicative.

That is why Zennists employ koans. Such as, “What you’re looking for is what you’re looking with: how can you find that?” And that is intended strictly as a koan.

...questions like "who am I" or "Why am I here" are irrelevant for your existence.

I would say that the question “Who am I?” drops away, as the “answer” (?!) is not a thought.

Then you'll understand you are nothing more than the environment around you.

tat tvam asi. Nevertheless, I prefer to say that I am of the environment around me: everything is intimately entangled, and the diverse many-ness is manifestation in and of the whole. And all those individual manifestations are transient, as are we.

The “one” is just that whole: the all-without-another, the totality that has no edge (scottishinnz, a biologist, came up with that last expression; I thought that you, as a physicist, might like it).

All of this is, of course, talk in the domain of thinking-mind... 🙂

Originally posted by vistesd
I’m saying, get to that clarity before thinking-mind, spend some time there; and you will realize the nature of that—which is the ground for thinking-mind. Then—and only then—ask what are the implications of that being deluded as well. Then, of course, you will be thinking again...[/b]

But Visted, when I get into my "non-thinking" mind I turn into an atheist. 😛

Originally posted by whodey
This post is in response to accusations in other posts of people not being "enlightened" or blind to the truth. So this thread is about which of us are enlightened and which are not. So have at it, who here considers themselves enlightened? Why or why not?

I am enlightened to Gods word and i follow it to the best of my ability!!!