Elizabeth,
True, but a sage may come and go at will, and consider or reconsider at will.
No. A true sage is enlightened, and doesn't play mind games such as coming or going and considering or reconsidering.
I always do. This could all be a figment of my imagination, I could be a figment of someone else's imagination... "anything is possible" can be taken a lot of ways.
The fact that you question the truth of things shows that you're seeking. A sage doesn't seek, because they've found the truth. If you haven't found the truth, then why do you talk about what a sage does or doesn't do. You have no frame of reference...you're just guessing.
Because the consideration that one may never step back into the game once one is enlightened is a delusion.
No, it's not. It's a fact. If enlightenment is the dispelling of delusion and ignorance, then a person will have no game to step back into because the game is illusory.
Think about it before responding please.
Have you ever gotten caught up in a movie and really experienced that movie by laughing or allowing the movie to elicit some kind of emotional response? Well most people have, even though they sat down for the movie and knew that it was "only a movie" - a work of fiction. Maybe that person had to go to the bathroom and left a few moments, but got caught back up in the movie when returning. Did they forget it was a movie when they were toileting? No, but they went back anyway. The person may have even seen the movie again and still enjoyed it every time they saw it. If they had not chosen to suspend their objectivity (to an extent, "forgetting" that they were just watching a movie when they were watching), they would not have experienced the emotions.
These are games that the sage doesn't play.
If the emotions were unpleasant during the movie, they could remember that it was "just a movie" - thus stepping back. They did not mourn beyond the period of the movie when a main character died, nor were they traumatized by a movie murder in the same way they would have had the murder occurred in front of them in the parking lot because it was a different level of "reality."
These are games, too, which disappear for the sage.
The clarifying phrase can be removed without changing the grammatical structure, thus:
"The fun factor disappears for the enlightened."
and the clarifying phrase extrapolated into its own sentance while interpreting "versus":
"The not fun factor does not disappear for the enlightened."
That is the grammatical translation, but the meaning is illogical.
Oh, good you pointed that miscommunication out. I think that I meant fun and not-fun disappear. I didn't meant that when you become enlightened nothing is fun.
I accept your right to consider whatever you choose, but the above pretense is like saying that a person who is not caught up in cars would not notice if one ran over his dog.
This makes no sense.
I feel that it is a fair exchange to consider other people's viewpoints and share my viewpoints, and I beleive that it is expecially valuable when the viewpoints differ in certain aspects.
Reasonable.
If a person is too irrational, it isn't worth much of an exchange.
It may have come across in my "tone" towards you, that I consider you irrational. The reason why I continue to type back and forth to you is that I'm trying to understand why you're irrational...just so you're clear about what I think of you and why we're still discussing things.
If the person is rational in most areas but we have a difference of opinion in one area, then it is worth exploring the possibility that this perosn has a valid and rational viewpoint. There have been many times that I have been wrong (although the occasions are fewer between, as they should be for anyone who learns over time) and it is a good thing when I learn something new or unlearn something that I had wrong.
This is a good way to be.
To me, "enlightened" does not mean having to know everything or to be perpetually perfect, it means being versed in certain key points such as continual expansion of awareness, perpetual learning, and non-solidification of considerations.
Then you're wrong. Don't make up definitions for things that already have definitions.
I will admit that I frequently suck at getting the particulars of my sense of humor across, especially when I use sarcasm in type.
So then don't use sarcasm. I have a thing I use for when I have to teach someone something. Have you ever heard of the K.I.S.S. idea? "Keep it simple stupid"? Well I like M.I.S.S..."Make it stupid, smartass". That means always talk to someone at their level, which you should assume is the lowest level of intelligence. If you're a smart person, you will find a way to communicate complicated points in a very simple fashion.
So make it stupid, Elizabeth. Don't try to talk over people's heads, because you'll be ignored by people..and when someone actually reads what you wrote, they will assume you're stupid for trying to be so smart.
I have made it obvious that I am not at the level that the "stupid and weak misogyny presented here" heralds, so I felt that I had enough latitude to use sarcastic humor to point out the obvious errors when such all-encompassing words such as all, no, none, or every are used.
I think you've made it obvious that you fit into the category of woman, judging from the posts I've seen from you. And me saying this is not a challenge. I'm not trying to get something out of you...I really just think you don't have the capacity for thought. You and all of the other females here are all the same. And I don't even believe that all women are unconscious...it's mainly just the ones that come to this forum that seem unconscious to me. I know quite a few other level headed females in "real life" outside of the internet.
I suspect it takes a pretty unconscious person to want to stay at this forum and defend themselves against the indirect attacks of the resident "sages".
It is not self-defense but accuracy defense. There is a fine line between not talking down to people and not talking over their heads, and I am still learning how to walk (or should I say talk) that line.
That's just a mind game you're playing with yourself. You think people have a hard time understanding you because you're smart? I think it's because your thoughts are too unclear. When I read your posts in depth I find nothing intelligent. All I see is the same thing I see from all of the other women that come to this forum...you all just fake it.
I hope no one takes that as a challenge to become more philosophical. I really don't mean it as such...I'm just being honest with you...which is probably impossible for you to process.
Enlightened people, or at least the ones closest to it, are honest people. With themselves first and foremost. It's obvious to see when someone lies to themselves. It seems to me like you do it constantly.
Anyway..I'm having kind of a shitty day..and it probably showed through. I'm sure my comments will just sluff off of you, though, Elizabeth.
