Would a TEP be concerned about the enlightenment of others?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Diebert, what happened here???

In my world God does all the speaking. It's therefore the listening that must be perfected.

But in reality God does all the speaking. It's therefore the listening that must be perfected.

Did you just try to perfect what you were saying earlier?

That's a good catch. But aren't you messing with perfecting now?

In my world God does all the speaking. It's therefore the listening that must be perfected.

If God does all the speaking, then who or what listens or perfects it? Could that be God too?

All things have ears. For example: walls.

Then again, things do not really exist. Neither does a speaking God. In the beginning was the word.

[Sapius]

Leyla,

What’s in the name “Istanbul”? I would say the people living there now, a part of them being the legacy that has been left behind.

Yes, I include that too.

The only living truth there is, is wisdom--which is distinct since it moves entirely without rite or ritual.

Yes, I’m aware of that too, hence I find them innocent through reluctant ignorance.

[Sapius]

Diebert,

But aren't you messing with perfecting now?

That depends on what is being perfected.

All things have ears. For example: walls.

I agree.

Then again, things do not really exist.

If you say so; you just ended a very short-lived fight, which did not really exist, nor did its end.

Neither does a speaking God. In the beginning was the word.

I hear it loud and clear, mate :)

[Tharan]

Scott,

I just skimmed this thread and I think your writing quality has improved quite a bit since your sabbatical. You seem to have control of the anger, which is a good thing. Don't intentionally lose it, it is a great motivator, just control it. It will fade on its own as you settle in. And your ideas seem to be solidifying.

Whether or not there really is such a thing as "enlightenment" is ultimately irrelevant. But certain members of this board have achieved something worthy of achieving, on a personal level. They have awakened. In this regard, Unwise is correct. It is all any of us really need to do. You don't have to agree with everything contained in their worldview, but don't disregard them either. They are gift that sometimes bites. Take it for what it is and make it your own.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

But aren't you messing with perfecting now?

That depends on what is being perfected.

You tell me.

Then again, things do not really exist.

If you say so; you just ended a very short-lived fight, which did not really exist, nor did its end.

One could argue about the existence of the participants but the fight just has no end.

[Sapius]

Diebert,

D: But aren't you messing with perfecting now?

S: That depends on what is being perfected.

D: You tell me.

I will, as soon as you tell me what do you mean?

D: Then again, things do not really exist.

S: If you say so; you just ended a very short-lived fight, which did not really exist, nor did its end.

D: One could argue about the existence of the participants but the fight just has no end.

So be it then :) :D

That's true, if by that one means existence; on the other hand, the word ‘end’ cannot be meaningfully applied to existence itself, for there is no ‘start’ to speak of. In other words, one could say that there is no ‘end’ because there is no ‘start’, which effectively cancels out each other, but, for experiences to be happening meaningfully, the canceling out has to necessarily be an infinitely dynamic canceling-out in and of the Now, reflected in and of finite things through as dynamic a consciousness. We could not realize the infinite if it were not for the finite; either by its self means nothing, and existence is not nothing whatsoever for the same reason.

Hence, it really depends on ‘which’ fight you are talking about, or perfecting ‘what’? There are always dual perspectives working at any time, so one has to align their perspectives first, to make any meaningful exchange.

However, I agree that there is no end to fight, but my agreement or disagreement over this statement depends on the alignment of our perspectives. I can only hope that I guessed your perspective correctly and hence agree; only you can tell me otherwise. I’m not God you know. :D

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Diebert,

D: But aren't you messing with perfecting now?

S: That depends on what is being perfected.

D: You tell me.

I will, as soon as you tell me what do you mean?

Me tell you? Whatever.

There are always dual perspectives working at any time, so one has to align their perspectives first, to make any meaningful exchange.

No, just ones own myriad of perspectives should be aligned and meaning starts right there. Exchanges can assist with this but won't contain any meaning.

[Sapius]

No, just ones own myriad of perspectives should be aligned and meaning starts right there. Exchanges can assist with this but won't contain any meaning.

OK then, Diebert; whatever... :)