Is Enlightenment metaphorical death? Options

[Laz]

This is a question that started on my introduction post and i thought it needed to be opened up.

Fallen from grace said:
Death? Death is when your have no emotion at all. even if you still bleed. (but thats just my opinion)

Laz said:
I have just been reading up on the ego and how to side step it. Your comment has made me think, it seems that having no ego means having no emotions, and if you are indeed correct  about death then loosing the ego is death?


So i'm thinking several things that i welcome you to comment on:

1) The path to enlightenment is actually a selfish and egotistical journey, rather than an ego-less awakaning.

3) An enlightened person shows a lack of care and respect for others who have not achieved enlightenment, and will not help others with thier path.

2) Gaining enlightenment means loosing your emotions, being loney and unable to relate to anyone. Can be seen as a metaphorical death!

These critisisms are largely based on an extract of a piece of work called "Beyond the fontier of the mind" by Osho.

I did not wholy agree with Osho on many aspects of the piece, most notably the fact that there is only one Ego. I couldn't help but feel that there must be a layering of Egos or a number of personas ontop of the ego.

[synchronox]

Verry astute observations made here.

In my studies it is indicated that the ego is a permanent part of our evolution.  It can not be abandoned, only repressed.  Once repressed it expressed in unconscious ways since to repress is to push down an energy into the unconscious depths that will pop up in some other disguise.  We can observe this live demonstrated by someone who claims to do have dome this impossible deed.  We can then observe the effects and the projection of the ego onto others.
My view is the ego is similar to a lens projection system.  It is the highest yet central organizing principle of our mentation.  It is arranged around preservation of the individual, therefore it is egotistical.
The lens system allows learned programs to shine through depending on outside 'triggers'.
These programs are usually learned survival programs adapted while we are young that allow us to live in a collective society.
The lens system also has an integrative system of its own that 'glues' these programs together.  It frequently fabricates and falsefies answers in order to do this diverse task.
My experience is that there is another larger executive system in the unconsious waiting to make its entrance.  This system will partner with the ego and reorganize the psyche into a new configuration.
If this system is not recognized for what it is, the ego will think that it is someform of God and distort into an inflation.
The pathway to a successful progression to a higher level of consciousness is , of course, through a conscious realiztion of what is going on.  This information comes in a certain type of dream produced by this higher level of awareness.  A dream that can be turned on with conscious determination.
This is all so new as to be circumstancial conjecture and opinion at this stage.  But, this is always true of the new discoveries.  What do you think?

[joe]

QUOTE

So i'm thinking several things that i welcome you to comment on: 1) The path to enlightenment is actually a selfish and egotistical journey, rather than an ego-less awakaning.

'
Yes and no.
The Self and the self are two different states of awareness. Where the Self cannot separate itself from all that is in awareness, the self sees itself as separate. The self sees its ideas and anothers ideas as coming from different places, the Self recognises the thoughts feelings and actions of all perceived objects as intertwined in perfect harmony to create the orchestra of its being, where again the self thinks itself as part of the orchestra. Ego as John mentioned is layered. The Ego is born when consciousness recognises its own awareness.
At the most supreme level, God thinking and becoming aware of self thought initiates Ego. This cosmic ego aware of its Self creates and pushes itself out into creation. All thoughts have with them supporting structure or laws of support to keep them alive so to speak or existing. If these laws didn't exist they would not be. The being of the laws and all the infinite structure that supports and grows with each thought has within it the same omniscient structure as the consciousness that initiated it. Therefore it has the ability to recognise its Self.
That is similar to enlightenment.
When the thought leaves its source and as the thought does not know its beginning or source it is shrouded in separateness or self or ego.
When the enlightened speak of the death of the ego as opposed to physical death of the body it refers to the death of separation from its Self. The whole journey is Self created, both the separation and Self realization. Hence a journey of the Self. Conscious creation

QUOTE

3) An enlightened person shows a lack of care and respect for others who have not achieved enlightenment, and will not help others with thier path.

An enlightened person will not intervene in a path that is on course. The person that is on a particular course that does not at that moment include the ideas of self realization as an idea intertwined with its lesser ideas of illusion in separation cannot be swayed anyway so there is no reason or capability of stopping or changing what is already perfect in its own creation and being. The enlightened cannot step in front of free will, and all ideas born of creation have a beginning and an end so to speak and free will to follow any and all directions between the 2 points metaphorically speaking.
As far as caring goes, the universe is built of Love and the enlightened are that. Love of that nature allows for all conditions for it is the nature of that love or energy to create and support all things.  

QUOTE

2) Gaining enlightenment means loosing your emotions, being loney and unable to relate to anyone. Can be seen as a metaphorical death!

That is the furthest thing from the truth. As long as the enlightened maintain a physical body the natural laws that support the structure of physical properties can not be removed. Only the awareness is removed from the boundaries of physical structure so the mind is not trapped in the body or slave to the physical senses like hatred and fear. The enlightened feel all things but the feelings are objective and subjective to relative properties rather than personal programming or ideas or the Ego. The enlightened feel creation and humanity on a bigger scale where Ego feels only itself and its own programmed responses to known boundaries. metaphorically speaking the death is the death of the ego, the death of personal hell and suffering.

QUOTE

These critisisms are largely based on an extract of a piece of work called "Beyond the fontier of the mind" by Osho.   I did not wholy agree with Osho on many aspects of the piece, most notably the fact that there is only one Ego. I couldn't help but feel that there must be a layering of Egos or a number of personas ontop of the ego

Agreement cannot take place until the actual experience of the Egos death. Until then it is conjecture, to take the experiences maintained from the more limited boundaries that seem true and real in the mind. Without experiencing the One there is no support for its reality other than an idea. The mind used to changing ideas cannot support the idea any longer than it can hold any other thought. IT has to integrate it into awareness first then learn to reflect and see its existence in all other thoughts. IT is there, it never goes away. Like the person that sleeps and dreams of other worlds and returns to itself in the morning upon waking the Self cannot be abandoned other than in thought.
The thought can be held for a lifetime or many lifetimes but sooner or later it always comes back to itself.

[Laz]

Thanks Joe, you have some vauable knowledge. Do you claim to be an enlightened person? As a guess, I would say you're not there yet!

I'll start at the end and work back...

QUOTE

...Without experiencing the One there is no support for its reality other than an idea...

You assume far too much, I base my criticisms on personal experience, rather than on what somebody has told me, or what i have read in a book.

QUOTE

metaphorically speaking the death is the death of the ego, the death of personal hell and suffering.

I agree in the main with what you have said, however you have missed my point, or maybe i didn't put it across well enough...

This smiley is the self ->
This one the Self ->
This one is everyone else ->  :(

The self interacts with the others
<->

The self is subject to hatred, fear, pleasure, all emotions.
The Self however filters this out, sees it for what it really is and is shielded from it so you get this:
<->  :) <->  :D

As you wrote:

QUOTE

the mind is not trapped in the body or slave to the physical senses

While the Self is extremely happy with itself for seeing the games that everyone else plays, it will not take part, there will be a ego present seeing people as beneath it, so it will not be able to relate to the others  () as it has transcended the need for emotion.

As for the lonelyness comment, only long term experience of the self would reveal this.

This reminds me actually of the Cypher problem in the Matrix where he is unhappy with his enlightenment and wants to be plugged back into the matrix and return to a state of not knowing.

With 3) I have a personal problem with this, and tried to express it with a negative statement.
I do not understand why others cannot be helped on their path of enlightenment. It's fine to say that the moment of recognition has to be experienced first hand for true understanding, but why does that stop the enlightend helping the unenlightened from their path to a better one?

Finally for 1), you say:

QUOTE

God thinking and becoming aware of self thought initiates Ego

I am confused as to whether you are supporting my claim that the path to enlightenment is an ego trip or not?

With regard to the layering which i feel to be so, i think that the more we look; the more we will find. There will always be a layer of ego to recognise and bypass. But that is not to say that it is journey not worth making, on the contrary, the more we look, the closer we get to God, whatever that might be.

I have a nice idea that is like looking to see what an atom is made of, and what that in turn is made of (quarks, superstring, membrains, whatever)  

Eventually you will find that the smallest thing you are looking at is the biggest thing that you know of; looking the other way. It feeds back on itself.

So it might be for the ego, the more you remove it the more you will find, and eventually you will find your original self!

[ID]

I completely disagree with the 3 numbered points in the original post, though I can see why someone might think in this way. I think most people understand 'enlightenment' as a state of consciousness, though the path thereto might be fraught with pitfalls like the ones mentioned. Complete loss of ego is obviously impossible, but I like to think the goal is akin to the blurring of a sharp point into a smudge, so that the concept of 'self' as distinct from all else gradually dissolves and leaves behind a feeling of greater integration. Emotions may change in this state, but in my limited experience, it is a gradual trend away from combatism towards amelioration. As for lack of respect for others and unwillingness to help, I can only think that this Osho chappie has met some curiously elitist people who claim enlightenment, either that or he mistakes this for the fact that the desire for enlightenment can only arise from within; the true path begins with seeking. It is not easy to convince others of 'the way' as there are as many ways as people, each must find their own approach.

Perhaps there is something in the Zen way: to reduce ego-centred behaviour does not so much require concentration on doing so, rather a kind of turning away from the goal, coupled with suitable study/meditation.

[Laz]

Hi ID, i like the way you think. Could you perhaps tell me how you would define enlightenment?

[human]

regarding enlightment take the time to visit this site

http://world.std.com/~awolpert/

[seanf]

I tend to consider Buddhist enlightenment as a path to death - the negation of suffering through the negation of desire seems to me the negation of existence, and the Buddhists, trapped in the cycle of samsara (reincarnation and suffering) seek the excape of the secular death - ceasing to exist.

[joe]

QUOTE

Thanks Joe, you have some vauable knowledge. Do you claim to be an enlightened person? As a guess, I would say you're not there yet!

A moot point I'm sure since only consciousness recognises consciousness  

QUOTE

I'll start at the end and work back... joe: Without experiencing the One there is no support for its reality other than an idea...   You assume far too much, I base my criticisms on personal experience, rather than on what somebody has told me, or what i have read in a book.

Well good, I'm glad you can take responsibility for your own judgment

QUOTE

joe:metaphorically speaking the death is the death of the ego, the death of personal hell and suffering.   I agree in the main with what you have said, however you have missed my point, or maybe i didn't put it across well enough... This smiley is the self ->  :)   This one the Self ->  :D This one is everyone else ->  :-[   The self interacts with the others    :( <->   The self is subject to hatred, fear, pleasure, all emotions.   The Self however filters this out, sees it for what it really is and is shielded from it so you get this:  :( <->  :)  <->  :D

I didn't misunderstand you I would say we disagree and to the point of experience.
My illustration would be the self would be-> ???
The Self ->[glow=yellow,glow width, #characters wide] ;D [/glow]
The self can only see-> ;D >:( 8) ??? : :-[ :-X :-/ :-* :'(  The Self only sees The Self ->[glow=yellow,glow width, #characters wide] ;D [/glow]
In order to see thru the eyes of the Self one has to lose the separation and control of the Ego to fully unite with the The Self ->[glow=yellow,glow width, #characters wide] ;D [/glow]

QUOTE

As you wrote: the mind is not trapped in the body or slave to the physical senses   While the Self is extremely happy with itself for seeing the games that everyone else plays, it will not take part, there will be a ego present seeing people as beneath it, so it will not be able to relate to the others  () as it has transcended the need for emotion.

In the terms of enlightenment and the states of consciousness as described by Patanjali there are many stages to the perception and change of perception.
Until fully united with the Self the first stage of Unification results in a layer or film between the two worlds of the Self and the self, in Sanskrit this is called Leshavidya. Here one lives life 200%. With the ego and it's control subdued life begins anew from the perspective of being united with all things and actions. Still aware of the world because of past impressions the perception of ideas change from the perspective of being that or being everything. Here one experiences themselves in what they see.
Further refinement of Union leads to Brahman, the miracle power and immortality. In Brahman there is nothing other than the Self [glow=yellow,glow width #characters wide] ;D [/glow] percieving the Self, [glow=yellow,glow width #characters wide] ;D [/glow] nothing less. All lesser ideas being fabricated from the Self as aspects of the self are no longer less, or more, just pure isness of the Self/Consciousness, or Brahman.

QUOTE

As for the lonelyness comment, only long term experience of the self would reveal this.

Only the perception of something different than the illusion of the self and what it sees as normal can provide contrast to see self defeating and habitual programs. Long term habits don't always cure themselves of themselves without the desire to experience something different.  

QUOTE

This reminds me actually of the Cypher problem in the Matrix where he is unhappy with his enlightenment and wants to be plugged back into the matrix and return to a state of not knowing.

Only from the state of not knowing can someone make a choice like that. The Self is never separate and the enlightened cannot make the choice to go backwards and erase what is known as real. The Movie was a movie and although contained many truths interpretation of certain ideals are always subject to levels of consciousness and experience.

QUOTE

With 3) I have a personal problem with this, and tried to express it with a negative statement.   I do not understand why others cannot be helped on their path of enlightenment. It's fine to say that the moment of recognition has to be experienced first hand for true understanding, but why does that stop the enlightend helping the unenlightened from their path to a better one?

I didn't say they would't I said they would not interfere with free will. There is no enlightened teacher in the world that will stand in a place where they are not wanted say for maybe Christ who was an exception. His role was a bit different.
When the student is ready the teacher will appear. Each person reaches a level of awakening and all of the universe wraps itself around each desire. There are more interested in financial security, sex, drugs and rock and roll than enlightenment.
The world is what you see. If you see a problem you are part of the problem by supporting its reality. The Enlightened see only God in everything and no judgment of wrong to fix. They (the enlightened) as you said about the Self will not interfere or support the vision of separation that the ego maintains as reality.
The Enlightened Teacher serves not as a mechanic to fix a problem but to serve as a source of the Self so that the awakening Ego can see its own reflection of divinity and pure unconditional love and perfection. It stumbles and crawls like a baby at first in its steps to see further while the teacher ruthlessly carves away all ignorance not with prejudice but the pure light of God to expose hidden agendas that the ego can recognise within itself and rise or ascend beyond.

QUOTE

Finally for 1), you say: Quote:God thinking and becoming aware of self thought initiates Ego   I am confused as to whether you are supporting my claim that the path to enlightenment is an ego trip or not?

I support your vision as your vision and I can't change the ability of your perception but I can offer the seed to see more.
I would not say enlightenment is an ego trip. For many false gurus who look for their own recognition and personal glory the Ego can mimick enlightenment to a fine art but to finally rise beyond the delusions of the Ego leaves no trip for the ego to enjoy or survive. It for all intents and purposes as ego is known is dead and no longer maintains any individual point of reference.

QUOTE

With regard to the layering which i feel to be so, i think that the more we look; the more we will find. There will always be a layer of ego to recognise and bypass. But that is not to say that it is journey not worth making, on the contrary, the more we look, the closer we get to God, whatever that might be.

Absolutely

QUOTE

I have a nice idea that is like looking to see what an atom is made of, and what that in turn is made of (quarks, superstring, membrains, whatever)   Eventually you will find that the smallest thing you are looking at is the biggest thing that you know of; looking the other way. It feeds back on itself.   So it might be for the ego, the more you remove it the more you will find, and eventually you will find your original self!

There are simple techniques to draw the mind inward to experience the essence of the Self and all of creation but for all the egos ideas to remain separate and individual it remains an illusion or a trick of the mind and incomprehensible to the mind that keeps looking for some thing as an answer to life and the Self.
This One transcendal isness cannot be contained in any single idea or explaination and always loses itself to perception in the ideas of the lesser thoughts and boundaries of human to physical relationships.
Any Teacher that has experienced it can lead another to it and with all of the attention given to this, all lesser illusions fade away to expose the light of the Self and God. It just takes the willingness to give up everything that one makes real, less real, or more real as the only reality. It takes the willingness to see beyond  limitations and here many fail to see any if even a few.

[Shindak.]

It seems many of you do not speak well of the ego, or mostly see it as something problematic.

I have experienced ego death. I believed I died. I knew it was that because there just comes a point when you stop struggling and let go. When the feeling of flesh crept back into me and everything started rebooting, the first thing Self noticed was how nice and warm feeling felt. Bit by bit my body was pieced back together, all compentents registering, then slowly onto my mind. My first thoughts were of thought itself. Then I remembered my name. Then I remembered my gender. Then what I was (human).
So many daydream images danced behind my closed eyes. I saw what my life was, what had been. Then I saw what was possible, what could be.
I was enthralled in what was my new found sense of amazement and love for life. Not only for life itself but for me - my life. These daydreams and images from my new birth, which I experienced as heavenly gifts (and still hold dear) showed me the importance of what an ego is and why as part of me I should love and cherish it. It is the tool through which I create and identify, what moves and compels me. It is my trusted companion and loyal guide.
I think a nifty part of life is forming our ego to be a stronger person, a more enlightened person, a loving person. I don't think elevated states of mind we can achieve have to include blowing away your ego or sending it to some deep pitt. Because in the end your ego is the one who does the work to help you integrate and understand these experiences and wether or not it all has worth to you and your causes in life. The highest states of perception I have achieved have always included ego, but more as the best tool in my arsenal for making life the great smiley laugh fest it is.

But I have experienced death in an esoteric black death kinda way. There was no white light at the end of my tunnel. Thats cause I was still alive but totally blacked out. If I was properly slain I think the energy of what my consciousness is would expand into everything and go so beyond that the ego loving hippy crap I'm talking about here would never ever matter again, not to mention the concept and mortal annoyance of my puny little ego.

My experience really slapped me in the face. Would I have learned the things I learned another way? Or does life have to ripped from your hands for you to change? Do egos have to go through reboots to break their structure or can the will in our hearts make us see things differently? I just think maybe that higher states of mind and ego readjustments are sortof one and the same. We can achieve a higher state and experience it, but then the ego must be reformed to absorb and emphasize on more of that type of thought and energy. In order to fully USE and create from higher inspiration, the ego has to be on par to swallow this new food. And to integrate wholesomely and naturally.... please refer to cherishing yourself and your ego.

Peace.
Shindak        

[Laz]

Preacher Joe, I'm interested to know what your background is, would you mind telling me/us all what line of work you are in? Is your preacher name a state of mind or a clue to your job?

What kind of study you have done in philosophy?

What experiences of enlightenment you have had?

Based on what you have read of my posts, could you give me one piece of advice?

Thanks

[joe]

Shindak, that is or was a nice exalted experience.

Laz, The preacher name is just a compliant surrender to an angry person who takes offense at certain things about my presence here on this board.
As a Job I teach a group of dedicated explorers of enlightenment, mow the lawn, do carpentry and building maintenance, and a little auto repair on occasion.

My background in philosophy is that all insight leads to the source, as long as one doesn't stop at any one answer to ponder the end of any question you won't stagnate. The one truth includes all truths and no single truth is the one truth, because truths are relative.

I spent several years in the guidance of an amazing man who shared the lineage of the Teaching I carry on.
What he taught I learned and experienced. What I experienced is irrelevant to another because we don't have the same way of experiencing things, only similarities in our perceptions and experiences of enlightenment. There is no one true experience only a resonance that lives within the experience that can be understood by another that has reached the same level of experience.
The one trancendental essence of creation when focused on and experienced resonates like a tuning fork. When one knows it, it can be felt in all of creation and another if it is being enlivened by the others focus.
This awareness is the only thing that is needed to change all of the lesser underlying programs that create limitation and boundaries. This awareness breaks the barriers down automatically as it expands the awareness and the mind into the Self.
The tradition I follow does not require any beliefs and it has its roots in Eastern as well as western philosophies.
It very much has its roots in the teaching of the Vedas or the Blue prints of creation as it translates.
Interpretation of these blueprints is easily cognised when the awareness becomes familiar with this one transcendant isness.

My only advice is that if you are really interested in the study of the self as a full time proposition rather than a part time interest mixed in with the illusions of ego and separation is to commit to the discipline to bring you to Self realization by using the tools that have been tried and to find a teacher that can guide you to what you want.
IF you are true to the course these things will appear at the level of desire that you maintain and will be self/Self evident.
[img]http://www.artfinale.com/store/img/FMF96-t.jpg[/img]
This picture is representative of the creation of Man and Mans ability to equal himself to God by simply reaching up to meet God at his level. All man has to do is lift the one finger to meet God halfway.
All who ask shall recieve. With the guidance of one who has risen above the levels of suffering one can find the widom and vision to see the answers to any desire.

[synchronox]

Joe,
You are expressing a thought over and over again.  A single thought.  Your demeanor and conduct in no way reflects this thought.  you are fooling yourself.  A delusion that you have reached some plane of existance that carries you away from what is intolerable, I would imagine.
Let your actions speak as well as this thought.  Be tolerant.  Be kind.  Be respectful.  You are posting much more than anyone else.  Lower your bandwidth.  If you are one with everyone, act like it.  Do you think you are in the realm of Satan?  Are you looking for someone to rail at?  There are very many true injustices in this world.
Why would you want to jawbone this board, if you had something real and operational?  Go take your energies to a place that perhaps your can do some good in the name of God.  To demonstrate your limited abilities here is to name you and what you are about.

[Shawn]

[br]

[img]http://brainmeta.com/Genesis.jpg[/img]

[br]
Here is the cosmic version of 'the Creation' I used to have as a poster on my dormroom wall as an undergrad.  I used to interpret it as Man's searching to know the Father (or Creator, or Source), but I think you have to grow up without a father to really appreciate this  (Isaac Newton comes to mind here).  

[joe]

QUOTE

[br] [img]http://brainmeta.com/Genesis.jpg[/img] [br] Here is the cosmic version of 'the Creation' I used to have as a poster on my dormroom wall as an undergrad.  I used to interpret it as Man's searching to know the Father (or Creator, or Source), but I think you have to grow up without a father to really appreciate this  (Isaac Newton comes to mind here). ÂÂ

Hi shawn I wrote a response to your post but seems John censored it again. C'est la Vie.
I liked your print.

[synchronox]

Joe,
As long as you are going to post long rambling posts about the same point or harsh critical or combative posts or spam the site, I will continue to remove them.  If you cannot control yourself then I shall.  I find it distatsteful to remove anyone's posts.  But, if the child continues to soil, then the application of a diaper must be insisted upon.

[joe]

QUOTE

Joe, As long as you are going to post long rambling posts about the same point or harsh critical or combative posts or spam the site, I will continue to remove them.  If you cannot control yourself then I shall.  I find it distatsteful to remove anyone's posts.  But, if the child continues to soil, then the application of a diaper must be insisted upon.

If you don't like the food then try a different restaurant rather than trying to convince others it doesn't taste good.

[synchronox]

Joe,
This is not a restaurant that specialises in spam.  Yours is.

However, while this is going on, I think we can examine this as a work to instruct.  The sign of the narscissist is not to be able to countenance any other viewpoint but his/her own.  Let us examine this.
One view point uttered over and over in infinite detail.
A superior attittude.
A complete disregard of others and their views.
A belief in one's contact with a Supreme Being.
A belief that one's opinions are the only truths.
Combative.
Unreasonable.
That thought transcends reality.
Vague, intuitive reasoning.
A belief that no one else belongs or has any space.
(Of course, the statement:  "Human....what a concept" is
purfume on the rose.)
This is caused by gazing at one's reflection for too long in the pool.
This is what I believe this behavior seems to indicate.
I have seen it in others with the afflction.

Does the shoe fit?

[joe]

QUOTE

Joe, This is not a restaurant that specialises in spam.  Yours is. However, while this is going on, I think we can examine this as a work to instruct.  The sign of the narscissist is not to be able to countenance any other viewpoint but his/her own.  Let us examine this. One view point uttered over and over in infinite detail. A superior attittude.

Who's viewpoint, mine or yours?

QUOTE

A complete disregard of others and their views.

 By whos determination? Certainly not mine.

QUOTE

A belief in one's contact with a Supreme Being.

Not a belief an experience and a stable one at that.

QUOTE

A belief that one's opinions are the only truths.

That'd be your interpretation again.

QUOTE

Combative.

I do seem to meet you where you meet me, don't I?

QUOTE

Unreasonable.

objection, this is purely speculative based on the interpretation of the accusing party

QUOTE

That thought transcends reality.

No thought is a reflection of the beliefs in reality also the foundation of perceptions of reality.

QUOTE

Vague, intuitive reasoning. A belief that no one else belongs or has any space. (Of course, the statement:  "Human....what a concept" is purfume on the rose.)

Purely interpretation on your part

QUOTE

This is caused by gazing at one's reflection for too long in the pool.

that's an interesting metaphor perhaps you should partake of a little gazing yourself to recognise what reflection is and how deep it goes

QUOTE

This is what I believe this behavior seems to indicate. I have seen it in others with the afflction.

Oh good then as long as we can accept that it is just a belief, and your belief we can assume that your beliefs will change and you may be cured of the delusion of all your sadness and frustration.

QUOTE

Does the shoe fit?

Are you asking me if this fits you or me?
If you ask me for me I would say you project a lot.
But if you ask me if it fits you I would say pretty close if not a perfect fit.

[synchronox]

Joe,
I was already here, it was you that appeared second.  Your rearrangement of position is clever, but not that clever.
What is all this gaining you?  Attention?  That is my guess.  Notice, I say guess or believe, I do not have your super perceptive powers of knowing what troubles others.
Joe, I tire of this.  It is the stuff of teen agers.
I do not object to your material, just your way of presenting it.  Once or twice said is enough.  Stop fighting or taking more than your share.  Be respectful of others as you would have them do unto you.  Or is this, in particular, not part of your philosophy?
This sounds like basic instruction for a child.
Last, I am not a family member if this is your game, you will not bully me out of my position.  This is important for you to know.  I know that you are projecting something onto me from your past.  If you wish to discuss this, maybe you should instead of this very illustrative substitute behavior.   Are your devotees monitoring this exchange?  Maybe you could have them overwhelm the site to make your point.

[Dan]

QUOTE

Are your devotees monitoring this exchange? ÂÂ

my guess is that this is a major motivation for Joey to stick around here.  If he looks anything less than omniscient, their faith in him could falter.  This faith is the 'magic' of devotional lineages such as he is propagating, without which the devotees would likely diverge leaving the 'master' unadmired and emotionally unstable.  

8)

[joe]

So much guesswork and such a way to live a life.

You guys seem kinda paranoid.

[synchronox]

Dan,
No, this puppy would never risk reputation in front of anyone that was a neophyte.  Perhaps one or two henchmen, but not the noviate, if any.
He is trolling.  That is my belief,  His way is usually gained by waving the Almighty in front of people.  He does not know how to exit gracefully.  He is angry because nobody cowered or genuflected in his presence.
Right Joe?  You get a lot of questions you don't answer.
I struck out the last line about self abuse, out of consideration for others.  Or was this too revealing about our relationship?

[joe]

 Sheesh...................

[img]http://www.willrich.supanet.com/simpsons/10.gif[/img]

[Nyarlathotep]

Okay, as you can see, I am a guest on this site.  I've only posted once so far, and have not even gotten around to replying to the developments in the thread I have participated in.  I was happily reading this thread, and more happily reading Joe's posts.  Much of what he says resonates with me; not all, but much.  On the various message boards I have either lurked on or participated in, I have encountered many people whose demeanor is similar to Joe's.  Oftentimes, these people are radical self-actualizers; they know a lot, they know they know a lot, they post at a feverish rate compared to others, and they do not feel the need to project a "I'm okay; You're okay" attitude at all times.  We will never get anywhere if the net semantic content of our posts is simply "You are very astute.  Aren't I astute for recognizing that you are astute?".  Due to my experience with these individuals, I have learned how to deal with them personally.  I no longer feel threatened by them.  Instead, I find myself more and more looking forward to their contributions, because a great deal of valuable insights can be gleaned from them.  I would guess that not everyone is equipped to reach this understanding.  I don't want to start any fights, but I would guess that Synchronox is not equipped to deal with Joe.  Why is it a bad thing if Joe is posting more than everybody else?  Doesn't it just set a better example?  Rather than ask Joe to lower his bandwidth, why not ask everybody else to raise theirs?  Isn't that better?  As far as redundant posts go; redundant answers are necessitated by redundant questions.  I hope my outsider's view is helpful in some way, those I suspect the feud between Joe and Synchronox will continue despite anything I say.

Clive Giffin
As bright as I am, this light is not my own.

[joe]

Well said.

question: is there a significance to your name?

[synchronox]

Clive.
As I have repeatedly said, I do not object to Joe's content of his posting.  Just to his obsessive ranting.
There are people that are just beginning.  Their's may be a tentative voice without a resonance to someone else's pursuasioon.  I see the job of moderator as a moderating force.  Everyone should be heard on a board with equality.  This in spite of your quite funny solution of every one else turning up to Joe's volume.
It is a matter of coloration.  Joe was painting each conversation and topic with his own color with an energy that was not moderate.  Your solution would not require a moderator and the board could soon be turned over to him.  This is what makes dictators, the inability to hear other's points of view.
Fortunately I solved the problem.  I do not need him or people like him to give me guidance over and over again.
I shall leave you to his music.  No offense.

[joe]

What's really amusing is your idea that others are incapable of making their own choices or conclusions about my posts and that you needed to intervene.
The Christian church did the same thing when they shoved their definition of God down the throats of others and started the crusades, and also during the witch hunts in salem. The Nazis made similar assumptions about the Jews because they didn't like what they thought about them.
Mankind still struggles with prejudice and fear when they feel they are, or can be threatened by anothers words or point of view.
What comes around goes around when one projects onto others what they need to do because they are incapable of thinking for themselves.
As a moderator you gave no credit to others for their ability to think or reason. Youre excuses took your ideas to extreme and never kept the subject in the moment. Always the ideas of what I was doing to everybody else when it was you that was having the feelings, and trying to justify your actions by dragging the idea of others backing you up.
Wars start over less.
This being a society split between the rules of a republic and the majority vote of a democracy, you as a moderator took it upon yourself to make a decision not based on the opinions of others or any standards set in free forum expression initiated by its creator, but yourself and 2 other disgruntled people.
I think you are finding out that the world is a little bigger than you think it is and although you feel responsible for the feelings of others may need to get in touch with the broader reality of others to see what they really want before making assumptions.
What you took care of was to express your own inability to cope with the world and what is in it.
Lets hope that you can move beyond this. I know you can do it, it is just a matter of choice.

[synchronox]

With Joe exhibiting what I just talked about I rest my case.
_________________________________
Joe, it is a full turn around.
It is your aggression that started this.  Out of respect for Shawn, I stepped away from the moderation task.
I could not be in the middle.
My measured response is one of timing.
I shall occasionally look in to see how things are faring.
Please go ahead with your egotistical demonstration of how to take over a board.
I shall busy myself with the reality of learning other tunes.  (whistles here and then laughs softly, realizing the futility of talking with someone that has an outlook of "humans........what a concept." , as he saunters away).
How many judgements do you count in the above post from someone that says:  "I never judge".  How many people live inside you that you are not even aware of?

[joe]

blah.