Enlightenment An Ultimate Aim? Options

[Shawn]

[to continue a discussion started with Steve Lance]

When your experience grows, and you become a part of all you experience, and there is no clear boundary where you end and others begin, where is there room for an ego? And where do we go when we've outgrown our old egos? Do we create new ones or does something else happen?

Assume for a moment that you've reached the ideal state of enlightenment (some of us may be there already, but nevermind that). You reside in an expanded, godly, egoless state of mind in which you are one with everything you experience. What now? Is this it? Is this really the goal of life you desire?

Perhaps all living things have a will to transcend themselves (which appears exceptionally in man, at times). In such a case, there is no ideal state of enlightenment. In such a case, quality of life is measured in terms of striving and strength to transcend oneself, and the notion of remaining content with a state of enlightened Being is seen as a weakness precisely because the act of Becoming (and striving and transcending oneself) is noticably absent.

Or perhaps it's no coincidence that age is commonly believed to be correlated with 'wisdom', and that the older we get, the more 'mellow' we tend to become. That is, we become more mellow as we age because we become wiser?

There seems to be a flaw with that logic. The point being that we should all strive for enlightening experiences, but not remain content with the enlightenment thereby attained, because in the end, it's all relative.

[Plato]

I wonder if I had related this piece of information that I had gained in my research would have been of benefit here for those who believe in the sngularity?

Liminocentric Structure

If you thought it the pea or some obect so dense, well I have something else to consider when we see the dynamical way things collapse, and are reborn, to become the motivation let's say for a inflationary new universe?

But it's more then that, if one considered Brian Greene's quote.

In fact, in the reciprocal language, these tiny circles are getting ever smaller as time goes by, since as R grows, 1/R shrinks. Now we seem to have really gone off the deep end. How can this possibly be true? How can a six-foot tall human being 'fit' inside such an unbelievably microscopic universe? How can a speck of a universe be physically identical to the great expanse we view in the heavens above? (Greene, The Elegant Universe, pages 248-249).

That statement in bold troubled me for a long time. There is an image I like to show that describes this breakthrough, not saying whether or not this is a type of enlightenment? I really don't know what that means I think.

In this metaphor, when we are seeing the donut as solid object in space, this is like ordinary everyday consciousness. When we see the donut and the hole at its center, this is like a stage of realization in which 'form' is recognized as 'empty'. When we zoom in extremely closely and inspect the 'emptiness' at the center, or zoom out an extreme distance away from the object and the donut seems to disappear and we have only empty space - this is like certain 'objectless' states of awareness that can occur in meditation. But the final goal is not to achieve the undifferentiated state itself; it is to come to the special perspective that allows us to continue to see all three aspects at once - the donut, the whole in the middle, and the space surrounding it - this is like the 'enlightened' state, in this analogy. 10 The innermost and outermost psychological 'space' (which is here a metaphor for 'concentrated attention' and 'diffused attention') are recognized as indeed the same, continuous.

Click on quote.

[Laz]

Plato, did you used to be Psiloman?

[Plato]

Plato, did you used to be Psiloman?

No, that is not I

[Laz]

Oh okay, sorry.

[Plato]

Oh okay, sorry.

Was that a kinder way of asking what kind of drugs I am on?

I am thinking of Arthur Koestler and the experiments of Timothy Leary.

Actually enlightenment is still a deep question for me, and in some ways, I think this had been exploited to be something "mystical" when in fact it might be a very natural thing.

[Laz]

Just thought I recognised the style of writing is all, and you had said that you used to post here under a differnet name ;0)

Actually enlightenment is still a deep question for me, and in some ways, I think this had been exploited to be something "mystical" when in fact it might be a very natural thing.

May i refer you to what Joesus is saying in the theology section.

[code buttons]

May i refer you to what Joesus is saying in the theology section.

Joesus has many posts. So, which threat or post in particular are you trying to point to?

[Laz]

Joesus has many posts. So, which threat or post in particular are you trying to point to?

[old]Harsh words indeed. I guess that any of them will do in that case :0)[/old]

you changed your mind then buttons?

[Plato]

Harsh words indeed. I guess that any of them will do in that case :0)

I am sorry I still do not understand, what you are saying or not saying.

Could you be clearer since I do not know you or who have past through this forum. Am I suppose to know the characters, and what you might have implied by me going there what ever that post was or what harsh means?

Thanks

[Guest]

I am sorry I still do not understand, what you are saying or not saying.

Could you be clearer since I do not know you or who have past through this forum. Am I suppose to know the characters, and what you might have implied by me going there what ever that post was or what harsh means?

Thanks

Sorry Plato, none of that was meant for you. Code Buttons was getting all nasty about Joesus but has since re-edited his post.