Well, I'm not as much concerned about how we want to label something (as long as it's coherent and consistent), than I am with the actual ideals themselves. If we're speaking about ideals of Absolute Truth, Ultimate Reality, and The Infinite then you either know them or you don't. Logically, opinion and subjectivity are irrelevant, there's just know two ways about it. Again, the dynamic is the same thing as the equation 2+2=4, there is simply no other answer to that equation other than the number 4. And anyone who knows the correct answer, "the enlightened individual", would necessarily hold the same answer as another "enlightened individual". If two individuals disagree on the answer, then one of them is not enlightened, or neither of them are.Tharan wrote:Nick,
I appreciate your opinion. But would you mind if we do a little mind experiment? Can you do me a favor, and give a name to a new color of reflected light? This color is not a combination of any previously known colors nor is it an obvious result of the known electromagentic spectrum. But it is "real" nonetheless. Can you give this existential form a name for me?
In the same manner that this request is impossible to imagine, it is equally nonsensical to name it or take it seriously. The exact same argument can be given to the terms "perfect" and "infinite." They are wholly unreachable and not actual forms, in much the same way the Platonic forms relate to the Aristotelian labeled objects.
One may label reproduceable facts, such as the First Law of Consciousness; Identity and Differentiation (A=A), the consistency of Cause and Effect, or the Nature of human existence as (the alleviation of) suffering, as Absolute Truths, and that is certainly your personal right to do so. But it does not mean that I must also do so. And whether I do or do not, is entirely immaterial to the "truth" of those forms. It is merely a linguistic trick, in much the same the term "enlightenment" is used.
I agree each individual will have their own unique experiences, assign unique values to certain things, and have their own unique and abstract perception of the world around them. Still the Absolute Truth remains, you can ignore it, but it remain there, unchanging, for infinite. Some may come to know it, some may not. The point of the journey would not be to simply improve, but to reach a point where one gains this timeless knowledge (enlightenment). If you are only satisfied with improvement, then the prize at the end of the road will never be yours. This kind of relates to your's and Ryan's conversation about UG Krish. He became satisfied when he reached a certain point along the path, but the ultimate prize was not meant to be, for him. You can say satisfaction can be most dangerous when one is a ways down the path, but still short of the ultimate prize.Tharan wrote:With all this being said, the subjective journey, the relativity of language and sociability, whether or not Individual X calls himself enlightened is entirely outside the sphere of the personal, subjective journey. The history of peoples traverses the actual to the abstract (and often back again), as do the development of some individuals. They are mirrored. But they are mirrored internally in each of us, subjectively. One may choose to elevate the words of someone who claims enlightenment or disparage the words of that same person. But it is a personal, subjective choice relating to our experiences and the values we draw from them and how this interacts with the words we are hearing from Individual X.
There is only understanding. It should improve over time. That is the point of the journey.
