EPTPurposeful ignorance - Page 5
| Blogs > Deleted User 3420 |
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:23 SLTorak.Hobo wrote: Just out of curiosity what religion in particular are you following? Or guidelines? You remind me of a friend who was heavily into Falun Gong and had the same approach. Rebirth is a life after you die, hence it is the same thing as an afterlife - it happens after your first life. Lets not debate names and terms because the end product is the same idea. I think theravadan buddhism is great but these days I don't really feel a need for a label for what I believe That being said I think you would be quite surprised on how much people consider death given we are surrounded by it in every medium. I certainly could be wrong I just go by what I have seen and I know and hear about people who do not confront such issues but rather shy away from it, and then are very afraid when it comes time to die. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
I am sorry, talking to too many people at once. it was someone else who did that. uh... but if u didn't agree with him.. why were you replying to my reply to someone else. I see now that this is why I became confused. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:29 Barrin wrote: If only this thought process didn't exist, I would be a much happier person. "Hmm, they are not expressing what they think, therefore they must not be thinking anything at all." I may never understand how creatures as intelligent as humans can actually come to such misinformed conclusions. So then you are disagreeing that this is how many people live? | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:34 Barrin wrote: No, i am disagreeing that this is how MOST people live. You might be right. But it is probably an issue of what we each consider to be serious contemplation. | ||
|
eLiE
Canada1039 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:35 travis wrote: You might be right. But it is probably an issue of what we each consider to be serious contemplation. and of which we all have different answers to. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:23 travis wrote: I'd like that. Could you explain what you mean by perfect? I believe we are all imperfect as well, even enlightened people. I do not consider enlightenment to have anything to do with perfection, just with acceptance. Oh, I see. I did make that connection but I guess I was wrong to do so. I guess I need to read more of what you believe enlightenment is. edit: Ok, lol, I read a lot more of your answers to some enraged members of TL not understanding your thought patterns and I must say, as afraid as I am to, we are similar. You know how you read TL too much and you start to see those familiar posts that displease your mind, and you may even wish you hadn't read them? And then you notice how it seems to be those same few people that are posting those posts which you find yourself disagreeing with? Well, travis, you were one of those guys for me. :p To find we have so much in common now, it is disturbing, haha edit2: So, by 'perfect,' I do mean perfect. By 'enlightenment,' well, that is a word I would only use when outside of any religious connotations or concepts. I believe no one is perfect, though we should all strive to be, and one can be, not in the physical, but spiritual, when looked upon by God himself, should they accept it - the gift. | ||
|
SLTorak.Hobo
Canada67 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:39 koreasilver wrote: and of which we all have different answers to. absolutely, I never said I wasn't being subjective @barrin: you have no idea how prideful I am. You keep acting like you know a whole hell of a lot about me from my posts. I can understand why I come off as excessively prideful, and it is actually one of my vices. That isn't to say I wouldn't post the exact same way were I just confident, rather than prideful. In reality I am both. Anyways, I would say to you that you are excessively presumptuous, for such a contemplative man. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 13:48 SLTorak.Hobo wrote: What do you believe enlightenment is Travis? You say acceptance but have been pretty vague on your overall view so far. It's not an easy thing to do because if I try to explain it simply most people read the words and think of something else, because language is interpreted subjectively, especially with such an abstract concept. And If try to explain it the complicated way - it is complicated. But I will give it a go anyways, in my own words. The enlightened state would be the state when you accept who you are naturally. What you do and say occurs naturally, without effort. There is no suffering, because pleasure and pain are accepted as is and without judgement - they are non disturbing. There is only awareness of the present moment, right now. The awareness has no attachment to body or ego. This awareness is the basis of consciousness, but exists in unconsciousness as well. | ||
|
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On July 06 2010 12:23 DeathByMonkeys wrote: logic is consistent, having your values denote said things as bad and saying youd rather not bother knowing about them, while they are happenning in the reality you are living in (in your society, commited by people of your species, on the planet you are living on, ...) is contradictory. if you accept these things as bad that means you are in favour of avoiding them (not yourself, but in general). you can only avoid them if you know and want to know about them. its simple.You're never going to abolish all those things and all the pain and suffering in the world. Does my knowing this make me less ignorant than you? Also being in favor of ignorance does not make me in favor of letting these things happen... geez where do you guys get your logic. what makes you not less, but more ignorant than me is that you didnt notice this inconsistency but were arrogant enough to think that your line of thought had no mistakes. On July 06 2010 12:38 Saechiis wrote: thats not what im saying. i spend every second of every day being more aware of things, despising them, despising the people that dont care about these things and thereby letting them happen. all the failures of society/humanity start from the tiniest level of ignorance and built up right to which politicians get into power and all the actions they will perform. every second you dont care about something is more acceptance in society for that thing. i dont fight these things, because i cant. i am in no position of authority, dont have a big sphere of influence, have never happened across one of these things while it was being committed. but what i can do is choose were i am placing my support, which ends i want to further, affecting my close surroundings.Enzym, I don't want to crush your utopian beliefs, but are you saying you spend every second of every day fighting: "rape, torture, murder, genocide, slavery"? Because if you aren't, by you standards you'd be a bad person and a hypocrit. I think that in order for man to be "enlightened", they have to accept that they cannot control everything around them. There is no such thing as a perfect being, but a lot of people suffer because they feel like they have to be one. Instead of trying your whole life to become something that doesn't exist, wouldn't it be better to just enjoy your life while it lasts? Wouldn't you being able to enjoy your life and doing so be a tribute to those who are suffering at the time? or would they be better served with you being miserable because they are? Saying that people don't care when they choose not to worry about things they cannot control, is offensive and not based on truth. its not about being able to create a perfect world at once. its about being consistent, not blind. now, if your values go hand in hand with those things then there is no problem. im no hypocrite just because you didnt read the previous post right. point my towards a double standard i hold, but dont base it on an assumption. then you can call me a hypocrite. otherwise your attempt at insulting me has no base in reality. | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 14:04 Barrin wrote: http://thesaurus.com/browse/pride Pride- Synonyms: "..., self-confidence, ..." Please explain to m precisely what I have "presumed". Really though, in a few days when you've totally cooled off, I want you to come back to this thread. I want you to look VERY closely at exactly what I have and and EXACTLY how I worded them. you wouldn't believe how cool I am right now, actually. cool as a cucumber. It's interesting you think im not. btw, you should try using a dictionary for definitions, not a thesaurus. that's pretty laughable actually. shows how discerning you are. Surely there is an argument happening in this thread. But, is it really me who you're arguing against? Clearly, I am not on your side. But, perhaps, just maybe, that's exactly why I am on your side. You see, all of my posts have been tailor-made to provoke you to ask the question: "but why?" If you are really thinking about it, you will begin to understand that this is precisely what you were after in this post. I guarantee you that the way to "enlightenment" is asking "why?". The real trick is learning how to ask the right questions, and that is where the real trick is in trying to teach someone such philosophies. + Show Spoiler + By the way, this is not "my" philosophy, as anyone familiar with historical philosophers would have already caught on to by now. I would have stopped a while ago if I did not see that you were intelligent and confident enough to understand, eventually. thank you great master I didn't know such things before you posted them | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On July 06 2010 14:03 koreasilver wrote: But how can one be aware and accept who one is naturally without affirming your own self - the self that is of your mind and body. by seeing that you are not actually a mind nor a body but rather a basis for consciousness, and it's through the consciousness(which you are not) that one is tricked into believing that they are a mind, body, or both. You cannot say that you affirm of your "natural self" when you say that your awareness is not attached to your body and ego. The body is just a material thing, the ego is a result of consciousness. The body can exist without ego and act naturally. The awareness can exist in the present moment and experience what is happening while the body acts naturally. To affirm of your own self is to affirm that you exist; you affirm of your own being as a whole, not just some metaphysical concept. That is an incomplete affirmation, and thereof you are not wholly accepting who you are "naturally"; this is not an enlightenment. This is a denial of the self. But you assume the body is part of you. I am saying you are not the body. | ||
| ||
