The largest mass of great innovations in knowledge were from people in their 30's
Dirac and Einstein before 26
32 Edison successfully perfected the incandescent lamp
35 Alfred Wallace - he suddenly intuited the selection theory without realizing that Darwin already had done so
25 Svante August Arrheniu Investigations on the galvanic conductivity of electrolytes
33 William Ramsay published several notable papers on the oxides of nitrogen and followed those up with the discovery of argon, helium, neon, krypton, and xenon. Led to the conclusion by different paths and, at first, without working together
27 Alfred Werner stated, in a paper on mineral compounds, his theory of variable valence, according to which inorganic molecular compounds contain single atoms which act as central nuclei around which are arranged a definite number of other atoms, radicals or other molecules in a simple, spatial, geometric pattern.


Age is, of course, a fever chill
that every physicist must fear.
He’s better dead than living still
when once he’s past his thirtieth year.
— Paul Dirac, 1933 Nobel Laureate in Physics

Philosophy is infinitely recursive. Arguments and proofs are merely
finite structures on which to build perspective. And all build on one
another in a house of cards fashion.

The strikingly obvious is seldom obvious until you look for it.


I'm fond of free-will myself, but my more educated philosopher mates
(staunch atheists, determinists mostly) are fond of having a go at me
over the ironies of free-will, where most of the supporting arguments
are religious in nature or historical context.

Free will resources to expand on the subject:

* http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/V014
* http://forums.philosophyforums.com/thread/21077/1
* http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/
* http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/freewill.htm

Hello

I´m getting confused. What is meant by "self-caused " in this context? (Where is this passage from?)
And how did you leap from "Sapere aude" to free will? (There is no such thing as free will)

Hi AdonisBlue.

I think that Kant believed that thinking for yourself (ie, using your own intelligence) is a choice. It then follows that if a person chooses someone else's understanding of enlightenment in lieu of his own, then this is a self-caused form of immaturity. Kant's assumption of self-causation in this matter might certainly be construed as an argument for free will.

I often begrudgingly acknowledge that free will might be an illusion. However, is every thinking person in agreement about that, such that it can be said with confidence, "There is no such thing as free will"?

OnlyNow got it right. Here's my amplification:

Negligence is self caused. If a person neglects his own potential enlightenment and as a result doesn't have the audacity of his own mind, he has no one to blame but himself.

If your will is not free, what constrains it? Can you see a way to slip those bonds?

I read a discourse titled:"What is Enlightenment?" at this address:
h__p:// brainmeta. com/whatisenlightenment.php
It had no author listed or anyway to respond, so if someone could forward the following reply to the appropriate person/s, as it really needs to be addressed, I would appreciate it. TY in adv...Ron

Hi, I have a few observations concerning your discourse: "What is Enlightenment?"
Most that have realized enlightenment for themselves think of enlightenment as sort of a switch that comes on. It's either on or off, you see it or you don't. Like in Zen, for instance they use Koans and differing means of jarring someone beyond the discerning intellect and into a sudden awareness of the direct experience of things as they are, and while in this state, you're enlightened! So...to me... the use of the terms: "consciousness", or "transcendent experience", are a little misleading. And although through meditation you can gain, or reach, certain levels of "awareness", or "transcendence"('highs'), they in no way should be confused with enlightenment itself, and actually can cause one to confuse these for enlightenment and can keep them from understanding true enlightenment. Buddha and others warned about such traps. For enlightenment is the ability to see things just as they are. I've heard it said, correctly so, that you can only explain what enlightenment is, by telling you what it isn't. When you have an absence of all these things, enlightenment is what's left. Enlightenment by itself is nothing at all. When you say: you're "far beyond Jesus and Buddha", yes, you probably are, but what you don't understand is that they weren't after what you're trying to accomplish. They were enlightenened human beings, and through their ultimate wisdom, were trying to help human kind transcend their self induced suffering. You're after "higher" levels of "experience", and then through no fault of your own, because you don't understand, you've confused your 'experience' for 'enlightenment', and have caused yourself and maybe a few others, who may have read your discourse, to search for these "highs", and may have led them off the true path and down a dead-end. Reminds me or two sayings: "A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing" and " Beware of false prophets" If you're after true enlightenment, and all should be, because it's the ultimate transcendence, then email me and I'll help you. Oh... and btw, I'm not so sure you've reached higher levels of "consciousness" than Buddha, or many others. Before his enlightenment, Buddha was an ascetic for 6 years and supposedly reached extreme levels of awareness, and Bodhidarma faced a wall in a cave for 9 straight years meditating, and there has been and still are monks who do nothing but meditate for their whole lives in caves and makeshift houses only coming out to eat, releive themselves, etc. and have learned such control over mind and body, that we would call" miraculous". You sound young, so if you remove the arrogance and realize there's still much to know, then you will reach the goal sooner. Don't let ego stiffle you. If a sponge is full of self knowledge, then it has no room for true knowledge.

Probably hundreds of posters here have said the same thing, along with dozens of other cliches. Join the club.

With all due respect...you're missing the point. Did you read the original discourse to which I was replying?
I'm sure you hear lot's of redundancies...to the point where you may miss the original intent. I'm not trying to say anything new. It's been said well enough for years now without me adding to it. So....with that in mind, I'll give you a new one for your club wall: "There is already so many wells out there now, why dig a new one?" originally quoted from Kirpal singh, when asked about new religions.

I hope I'm not out of line here, but I'd like to tackle your two part question:
If your will is not free, what constrains it? Ignorance
Can you see a way to slip those bonds? no...without that switch in your head coming on, you're like a leaf in the wind...who knows where you'll end up!

With all interest in understanding this is a forum and the topics are often subjective. Was there a particular person who offended your sense of identity with enlightenment? Perhaps the a link could be placed in one of your posts to expose the criminal act




Melchizedek, Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Zoroaster, Confucious etc. etc. Spoke from the same well yet the human mind often decides it wants to align with a particular flavor that is in accord with the personal experience.
As long as life continues to reflect the evolution of mind and spirit it will continue to reflect the many ways the One well can be seen and where it can be seen in any human experience and at any time and location on earth.

There is no new well. Kirpal Singh isn't being accurately represented by the statement, nor is any complete understanding derived by assuming any meaning is given by the statement without Study of the Self.

Please..I'm not here as an adversary, I'm only here to help. You see, it's when I read the origanal discourse( follow the link I mentioned above) I fealt it could mislead people.
I feel I need to reply to your post, so I'm sorry..but there is no "sense of identity" when in a state of enlightenment. Identity is gone! That's my origanl point. There is no way to transcend...there is not anything to transcend. And I'm sure Mr. Singh was reffering to that as well( no pun intended)...all the wells hold the same water( well...most)....so why dig a new one? If the human mind wants to align itself anywhere, you said: "decides it wants to align with a particular flavor that is in accord with the personal experience". just by the action of "aligning" keeps it at bay. the enlightened mind attaches nowhere. It sees everything anew for the first time. what pesonal experience? The names you mentioned above all have one thing in common. Find out what that is and you've drunk from that same well. And though Introspection is important, I'm not sure of it's relevance here other than having you be aware of where your mind "aligns". So if you have any questions..don't feel we're in a 'king of the hill' battle for "most enlightened", but I can correctly guide you to the realization of enlightenment, and once there, it's you, that will have to work to stay there. It's not too hard though, just have to practice vigorously until the habitual tendencies(conditionings) have been transformed, or have subsided, and then instead of "realizing" enlightenment, you "become" enlightenment. If you're lazy like me...it can take quite awhile. Once there then the words of Kirpal singh, Maharsh Ramani, Jesua, Dogen,etc.,etc. will all sound the same, all pointing to the same "well", if you will?

in the previous posts please excuse any gramatical errors, ty [sic]

Ron, it sounds like you're trying to sell us on the idea that you're enlightened? Or are you trying to stroke your belief?

Your need is dually noted.
But the sense of identity precedes the awareness of the absolute and so the reason for the interpretation of the many as the one. Flavor or personality remains after enlightenment, tho the attachment to need of identity is gone.

The life is an illusion approach, everything being an interpretation of the absolute even enlightenment.
That'd be if there was some place to guide one to or something to transcend? But nevermind your offer is presented in the spirit of your faith in enlightenment and your ability to sell it.
If there is nothing to transcend you cannot become anything. You already are that.
"Thou art that" a shruti
But I beg to differ with you. Defeating the conditioning and the ego is not easy. If it was everyone would already be there. Oh I forgot they already are. As soon as you get there we can all go home...


Nope. Not until you get enlightened and stop mentally masturbating.


By the way the link doesn't work as a link and it doesn't work when I copy and paste it so I still don't know who in particular you are addressing unless it is everyone here. Which would explain a lot.....

Here's the link to the essay to which Ron originally referred:

http://brainmeta.com/whatisenlightenment.php

Quoting from that essay,

"... there is no 'absolute' state of enlightenment, but rather that enlightenment denotes a change in one's state of consciousness, and in particular, with regard to transcendent states of consciousness."

I have heard that about half a miligram of LSD is often sufficient.

Ok then... The claim Shawn made about being beyond Jesus and Buddha was entertaining. I can see why it would bring more Christed beings out of the woodwork.

It is an adolescent essay that is not linked to from the main page, though it may have turned up in a Google search. How my thoughts have changed since then may be interesting to a few, but it would require considerable time and effort to attempt to put into words, and there are no guarantees that the meaning could even be conveyed by words, or that the words would be properly understood; there are more important things to focus on. Yes, there are parts of the essay that are open to misinterpretation and provocation but I believe it points in the right direction by underscoring the untapped potential of conscious awareness of which most are usually only dimly aware of. I have been following this path in my own way, not as a cheerleader or as a mouthpiece, but by working behind the scenes to do what must be done.

Follow the yellow brick road....

I was brought here by me looking for some help regarding some misleading literature that was published on a web page, not in a forum, or I would’ve disregarded,
The ego is such a God damned thing. It's been 30 years since I've eaten meat, so sometimes I forget that others do, until the sudden realization of walking by the meat section of a grocery store, for instance, will awaken me to the way I used to live, and the way that others still do. I sort of get the same feeling of reading some of these posts. It's like reliving puberty. I know some of your egos can't handle this shit! So...NOW...if when reading this, feelings are welling up inside you, learn to get in touch with these feelings by 1st: being aware that they're there, and 2nd: by trying very hard to identify with the cause (and I don't mean ME!), because there lies part of the problem. Don't just watch it as in Vipassana, or one of the insight meditations, but grab hold of it and study it. Get to the root and identify with the cause. You need very much to do this for many reasons. One of the more obvious are: You don't want to be blindly controlled by them. You want to be free to choose what you think, say and do. Being controlled by emotions can be a hell of a roller coaster ride. One of the less obvious, but just as important reasons is that the freedom that comes from the seeing and detaching of these emotions will bring with it clarity and unbiased attachment to that which you choose, and which you will need to advance. I hate to use the word "transcendence", because in a place like this everyone’s ears lifts up and it just becomes more fodder for the spiritual materialists out there to jump on me about, because everyone seems to have their own idea of what it is, and all would be right, as it’s a relative term.
Seems there are 3 reasons for people to be here:
1. Looking for help
2. looking to help
3. The ones who want enough info, so as to put in on their shelf, and say “see, I’ve
Transcended”( spiritual materialism)
1. I have my Laquer bucket
2. The bottom fell out
3. oops, I left mine at home
Seems there’s not much room here for education, so I wish all good luck in your journeys

Oh...btw, here's the link to the original discourse:
http://brainmeta.com/whatisenlightenment.php

Sorry...1 more thing. Thruth can be ultimate and relative, for instance:"The life is an illusion approach, everything being an interpretation of the absolute even enlightenment", et al. That is like preaching to the choir, and does not need to be heard by those that think in 'ulimate' terms, and would do no good to those who think in 'relative' right now, hence the metaphors, analogies, parables, etc. that are used by most( throughout history)who try to get those to understand the ultimate in relative terms. So, I appreciate the fact that you can use these , though I don't understand the need, except that to perhaps undermine me, and that would suggest a cause and effect need with which perhaps you're not aware( see post above). Good luck

So what your saying is what brought you here was your reaction to the post, your emotional state.
You chose to follow your emotions track them down to their source and get in touch with what is behind them.
What is the outcome of this? Did you find some kind of satisfaction with finding fault in something that caused the reaction?
Ya know the ego always tries to find the source of its ire, it gives it the sense of being in control and of being intelligent. It then lives in outward sense control with its radar set in some imaginable future based on the past never fully appreciating the present moment.

Its not really important to follow the emotions to a relative point of reference. If every time you felt something and decided to find out where it came from you would be too busy to enjoy life.
Emotions are like the wind, there is no reason to grab at it, just feel it pass and let it go. You'll feel a lot less stressed and free yourself from the absolute rules you create for yourself and also free God from looking a certain way.


Well there you go, you can't live life freely if you're going to be codependant. Life is hell if you feel you have to live by everyone elses rules.
Perhaps I can lead you to freeing yourself from such boundaries.



Help is always coming to you Ron. Everything that comes to you is a gift.

Shawns post is written for you so you could expose your boundaries around the rules you have created in your own enlightenment.
If you're going to wear a hair shirt and create stress around forcing yourself to be a certain way (referring to the meat thing) then find a way that doesn't force you to do anything. Find a way that you can choose to live in Joy.
As Joseph Cambell said. "Follow your bliss" Find that which expands your awareness permanently and find it through clear desire and commitment through the heart, not the mind in shoulds and shouldn'ts.

Get out of the rut you've created in your judgments of others and especially yourself.

Joe, most of your reply were snafus, so I won't bother, but if someone was to follow you off a cliff, I would tell them(and you too btw) where they were headed, so as to avoid. That's the reason for my original post. It's seems you find comfort in wanting to beleive it's an emotionally fuelled reaction. why? Is it hard for you to think that I may not want some to be misled? You need also to understand without the knowledge of cause and effect then you can never find peace. You said:"Its not really important to follow the emotions to a relative point of reference". Huh? Wha? Damn...you can't be serious! I don't know where to begin. you see...thoughts spring up, and then they lead to other thoughts, that lead to emotions, and more often than not, lead to actions, all behind the scenes, without you knowing, and this dynamic is only realized when watched, and best understood when knowing what caused them( getting at the root). When you train do do that, then, for the first time, YOU choose how you react in any situation. . You become master of your own destiny. you clear away the 'shit' that keeps you from being in the present. But surely you must know that?...it's spirituality 101. Please...don't believe me, try it and believe yourself. It's definately hard to live in the 'present' if you haven't learned to understand this cause and effect dynamic.
There always seems to be someone that enjoys entropy. Rather than look for the harmony in something, they enjoy trying to bring it down. That was not my intent with whomever wrote the discourse to which I was originally replying, but was to point out they were confusing 'enlightenment' with some other 'transcendant experience'. Joe it would seem you enjoy rejecting, just for the sake of rejection. That's the effect. Now find the cause. Good day, Ron

Ron, your (over)reaction is not convincing of anyone who has an understanding of enlightenment, regardless of the logic behind your posts. You should look more deeply into yourself and your patterns of behavior, and ask yourself, why are you trying to convince others of your definition of enlightenment? You should re-examine your belief that you have any understanding of enlightenment given your limited experiences and understanding.

ty for the reply lucid. It could be seen as an 'over reaction' and to that I'm sorry. was not my intent. Could you please elaborate on how my definition (of enlightenment) varies from whos, and what you think IT is. For my understanding and experience is that enlightenment does not really vary, because it's the absense of what its not, and if you in someway differ in opinion, then maybe it's semantics, and I would be interested. TY in adv, Ron

Sorry of my obtuse ways, never claimed , nor wanted to be a teacher, and you can see why I never will be, but it's from personal experience in which I've been trying(unsuccessfully) to relate. I was lucky enough to be in the right place and time to have a glimpse into realization( when I was younger and very much seeking), and in retrospect saw and see some of the pitfalls. One such is undeniable. I know from personal experience, that mistaking transcendant experiences for enlightenment can cause one to suffer and stumble. Another is to think anyone is enlightened, because it can mislead both the person and the act or lack there of. No matter how I think to explain(enlightenment), it comes out not quite right. It's something you strive to become, but can't strive to be or experience. It's an experience that can have sensations with it, but not defined by them. It's an unencumbered, unbiased, undiscerning experience, yet it's not really an experince. It's an experience(for sake...) that can last further and longer and more often, the more you try to get rid of the things that it isn't. and once at that point were you've cleared yourself of these 'tendencies', 'habits', 'conditioniong', and so forth, the closer you get to BEING instead of glympsing this experience. By 'being', I mean you slowly transform, but you stay who you are. It's an experience of ..well...suchness, to be in tune, to not be 'there', but right here. it's a non experience as the term experience would mean, because it doesn't come with any sensations, but can...lol...it can. How you look, feel, and see things change. It's not like "all smiles' and 'walking slow' in 'heaven' type mental images one thinks of. You can frown and yell, but you know your frowning and yelling. The biggest ways you'll be transformed are: no more guessing, sure of everything, understand and know everything from an 'ultimate point, and even the relative point, will be better. I think, perhaps, most of the prophets were just enlightened beings. because of the unattached clarity You'll see things into the future and past, and present like never before. So now you see? It's not an experience you feel like a drug or extra sharp adrenaline induced experience, and really has no higher levels that one can acheive( like in the original discourse). you can be more fully enlightened, but once there ...there's no more. It's probably more of a type of awakening than an experience. discribing it as an experience or as such, can make one easily see how it can be confused with an altered conscience or high or transcendant experience, but nothing is further from the truth. That's my somewhat awkward definition, and it's fairly obvious I'm not used to explaining what it is, or I'd be better at it.. I'm more used to answering questions than lecturing. Perhaps one needs to be experience for oneself to fully understand what I'm trying to relate, and no matter how much shit I spew at you, you need the experience yourself, or it may be meaningless. A Vulcan mind-meld would be better. Now I'm sorry , and lol...you'll all be happy to know I'vereally not the time right now to continue this discussion any longer, as I very much would like to help, but can't afford the time, but would welcome any inqueries if needed please email ( ahimsa1999@yahoo.com )and I will answer at my conv. ty very much...Ron

Ron, this may be purely semantic, but for me, consciousness expansion and enlightenment go hand in hand. No, they are not synonymous but are related. Enlightenment involves stepping outside the box of the human mind; it involves a vast expansion of conscious awareness, a dissolution of dualities, boundaries, conditionings, and personal history, and it also involves a realization of a non-personal identity (depersonalization) which is more fundamental than the shallow personal identities most people mis-identify with. It is about living fully in the Present, without human notions of past and future because the typically human experiences of a separate past, present and future merge into one Presence.

The Universe is a magical place, full of unknowns and danger, yet intimately known and with a 'part' of us indestructible. The comfort we take in the artificial constructs of our mind is not justified, and it deadens many people to the mystery that is all about us and that fills us. The Universe is a magical place, and if we catch ourselves becoming too accustomed or bored with it, then we need to step back and re-evaluate the shallowness of our mental constructs and reflect on how little of the true picture our mental constructs actually convey of the 'world'. Enlightenment is partly about recognizing the falseness and incompleteness of our mental constructs insofar as they are interpreted as accurately representing something else, but I believe is also partly about realizing the unbound potential of conscious awareness, revealing a deeper identity, and recognizing that normal human consciousness is terribly confining. Perhaps if you don't know that you're in a mental prison, it's bearable. It's like growing up in a cage and never even knowing that you could escape. But those who are aware will escape. I do not believe anyone has fully escaped, or if it's even possible in principle to fully escape. Not that I'm advocating escapism in the pejorative sense, but rather the uncaging of the mind and conscious awareness from its human limitations.

Thanks Dianah. I have felt similarly about many of your posts.


Ron, this list leaves out those who have had remarkable experiences and insights, and who desire to engage in dialogue and in exchanging information about experiences and insights with those of similar mind. People often express the same type of experience in different ways, and it is interesting to try to interpret other people's experiences and insights, and to try to relate it to our own, and to try to see things through other people's eyes. It has nothing to do with looking for help, or for acquiring information about transcending that is not related to our own experiences and insights solely for purposes of appearing scholastic or wise.

If you can come here with a reason, I can come here without having a reason. But if you must have a reason, and give me one too then knock yourself out.


Not at all. Is it difficult for you to see the perfection in ones own manifestation of reality and to be a creator in the experiences of growth and spiritual awakening rather than a victim to circimstance?


Carrying around the ideas of cause and effect do not create inner peace, tho they may sometimes create an artificial sense of being in control.


Why?


You don't know where to begin because you struggle to put enlightenment into a defined structure of thinking to self realise. You want to define your own experience and project it onto everyone else. Enlightenment by the book sort of thing.
Ya know Patanjali wrote a book about 4 states of consciousness.
1) Awareness and the experience of the absolute.
2) Perpetual awareness of the absolute.
3) Exalted awareness of the absolute in activity and the manifest.
4) Union or perpetual awareness of the absolute and the manifest.
There is no mention in this book of the way to get there only the signposts to experiences of conscious awareness.
Understanding how neural patterns are created through repetative thoughts can lead to the understanding of a greater use of the mind but once that is achieved it is not necessary to run the mind down the track again to understand its relationship to emotions. The expanded mental awareness can jump the track to greater objectivity in a heartbeat and skip the stress of anal=yzation.


When you become able to witness yourself having a feeling from a greater platform than the emotional body you do not have to become emotional nor close yourself off from being human. The mind can operate at deeper levels of thought when it is anchored in something beyond the identity of self and past impressions.
Its similar to the innocense of a child. A Child who has no relative stucture in reason to have a feeling or an emotion simply has a feeling and moves on without needing to understand why. The typical adult must give the child a reason for having emotions and a reason and a place to find emotions inappropiate. Only then does one grow into the idea of reasoning with emotions.
IF a child were to grow up without the judgment of adult reasoning for emotions they would learn to witness themselves come through the experience without putting labels on it and trying to control it. Sadness would be treated as easily as happiness. Without trying to force one emotion away and replace it with another the mind would be freed to think more clearly without this one thing to carry in daily thought.
Give the mind something more expanded to put its attention on than reason and judgment and it won't get hung up on trying to be something or not be something.

Spirituality 101..Yes I've heard of this approach, the defining of choice and experience of enlightenment at a generic level.

Find the cause for creation and you narrow God into the confines of the ego. You can try but its going to change and change and change again.
I don't really care why you did it, that's for you to cherish. To understand enlightenment one must really have a clear experience of the Self and to do that you would have to find it in all things. Then when working to expand your own awareness of Self rather than to see the world through separation and duality you absorb everything into yourself.
"I am that" Or "I am that I am" A shruti or a statement of truth from the awareness of the absolute.
In order to truly unite the manifest you must take ownership of that which you see as outside of yourself and your sensibility.
The post (which your referred to) in terms of Union of the absolute Self and individual self was created by you, and you wrote about it with the emotional charge of it being outside of your ownership and the ownership of those others who you would wish to warn to avoid any misperception in regards to its definition of enlightenment.

Here's an idea:
It (the post) exists like a puddle of water to you, and you decided you want to stand next to it and make sure no one steps in it. While you are urging others to step around it and be aware of it you aren't noticing those who are watching you stand next to the puddle with complete awareness of you and the puddle.
On another note you are preventing the perfect scenario for one who needs to step in the puddle to serve their evolution.
Some have interest in your interest of the puddle and others may ignore you with the idea that you simply can't comprehend the ability of another to be self aware.

There are always going to be those with good intentions but at what level of awareness do good intentions serve all of humanity? At what level does reason become the REAL reason?

There is a saying, heal the self and you heal the world. In other words when you become enlightened you can guide another from universal mind rather than from the individual mind.

You still struggle with a past experience and your inability to stabilise your own image of enlightenment, and so it becomes important without that stable point of reference to steer everyone else away from any idea you relate to until you can clearly come to terms with it yourself. The boogeyman of false perception looms in your awareness and so you struggle to find a point of measure that will give you some peace.
The emotions are one place that people have a difficult time with because the cannot be controlled without creating stress and sickness in the body. The ego often tries to find ways to protect itself or even define the source of itself in relative terms so it can come back to an idea.

Your elusive trancendental experience is being hilighted and outpictured here as the battle between the ego and the Self is forcing you to let go but you don't want to until you can find everything that can threaten its return.
Could you, sit still, be still and take everything you experience inward and surrender it back to the Self without analyzing it and judging it? Without judging yourself as being complacent and lazy? Could you become enlightened first and then speak of enlightenment rather than projecting it from a place of inconsistancy and self judgment?

You know its only judgment that keeps you from Union.

I think that if you want to be in perfect service to humanity without the stress of any struggle to speak of enlightenment, and to really lead another to enlightenment as you have offered that you would have to get over your doubt and judgment about what enlightenment is. Until then I'd say that your experience will be the perfect reflection to your own struggle to find your place beyond definition as you react to everything that triggers your emotions around your own evolution.

If you truly seek to find understanding to your emotions perhaps you are being shown that there is a greater point of reference than reason, and it is reason alone that keeps you reacting and becoming emotional.

Stop chasing your tail and take a look beyond your present position of reason.

The heart knows no reason....etc. etc. etc.

Ron, I have great respect for people like Joesus because he genuinly seeks enlightenment in his own way, he respects and listens to others viewpoints and contributes to a goal of enlightenment. Ive only known Joesus to genuinly try to help people attain enlightenment, there are many religious people who have alterior motives, but Joesus isnt one of them.

I almost forgot why I stopped frequenting these boards.

There's still hope for you yet..

Maybe you'll lose your mind altogether and become enlightened.

There was this thing that I remember reading about somewhere once upon a time...what was it called...ah yes, socratic wisdom!

But Joesus isnt trying to force you to accept his ideals, socratic wisdom is when a person imposes their view and often charged large sums of money for people to hear their wisdom. They have a militiarian way of imposing their views on others, if you cant take an open discussion and have to starting screaming bloody murder everytime someone has a opinion, then this isnt the place. We argue and debate on BrainMeta constantly, accept it or dont, but dont expect BrainMeta to change. I dont know of anywhere else where people are more free to tell the world what they think.

No, socratic wisdom is a form of intellectual humility that brings with it the flexibility to let go of ego and change one's perspective if the evidence dictates it. As Popper once said, "Our knowledge is finite, while our ignorance is necessarily infinite."

Interacting with opinionated individuals on forum websites is something that I expect and actually desire. If I wanted unadulterated content I could just surf web references like wiki all day. However I do expect that interaction will be quid pro quo, with a premium placed on arriving at mutual understanding. Intellectual dishonesty and rhetoric are anathema to me.

I think we are somehow talking about the same thing yet have developed some sort of misunderstanding. I believe were on the same page.

The agenda. But of course if we don't get it our way there is no other way.
Personally I find that success is often misleading when it is measured by compromise. The You give and I give approach is monitored from a system of personal measure rather than the universal ground of equality in the beginning, middle and end.

People say what they say and people also choose to see themselves and others in whatever light they choose to see them. Setting up conditions due to the preconceived idea of inequality or equality always strains the natural ability to be without codependant tendencies.

Why not just accept that all scenarios are win win. You wouldn't criticize a child who stumbles on thier first attempt to walk would you and what do you really care what you get out of anything? Unless you believe someone has something or will get something you don't have or can't have.
As for the other guy, why not give them the benefit of the doubt that they are getting exactly what they need for their own growth?

In reality anyone who needs to save the world is only afraid they themselves need to be saved.

can some one describe how they might perceive an “enlightened person's� experience of the moment would feel?.........................
ant

Well said.

Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water.

What if saving the world is the only way to save yourself?

I think he was referring to evangelicals saving "souls," not physical salvation. Saving the world from physical destruction is a noble cause.

I agree with Rick, with a minor addition to your comment; Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water reluctantly. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water.

The reason I asked, was only to see if answers not based in proven science but more on feeling were being considered? appears so.........................

ant

Not everyone looks at their life with reluctance prior to the desire for a change. However they often do project that any change will render the past experiences and impressions of reality irrelavant, which is not necessarily the experience and certainly not the case when one grasps the reality of the present moment and understands the meaning of now.

How can you truely understand the meaning of now? One only understands things through perception, but there is a delay between now, and the time it takes you to percieve the now. By the time you percieve the now it is already past.

There is only now....

With out disregard for Flex,

This comment is for Joesus; in the following statement ; "Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water reluctantly. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water."

Choice of word "reluctantly", could be replaced by; joyously, with anticipation, lovingly, jokingly, etc., with out changing the tone of my comments..........................

ant

You're probably right, the tone of your personal experience would have revealed itself regardless of the words.

No Joesus, your wrong.

I'm always wrong... But then, I'm never wrong.