Discussion on Suffering and Enlightenment

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Yeah I get it, acting without acting, dependent machinery, non-action.

Now the conditions that are arising are leading me to speak about five or so topics, are your conditions going to continue to refuse?

When is the topic ever addressed here Dan, I wouldn't mind reading what you have discovered and tuned out on the subject after all these years?

[Dennis Mahar]

is it possible to argue that whatever arises is without perfection.
is it possible for a blade of grass in a lawn to be right/wrong, good/bad.
is it possible for a hair on a head to be out of place.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Such an idea would be a perspective and would only exist conventionally not ultimately, the idea would also arise dependently. How could something not be itself perfectly?

So then, why do you keep ignoring the perfectly placed discussion? I asked you in advance if you were only available for wise speculation, so I could avoid the court room, are you unable to answer questions?

[Dennis Mahar]

you want to plead the case for winning formulas,

a trip down imaginery pathways,

repairing the dream

give us your thoughts if you want.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

You set the path for pleading, you are on the imaginary pathway that all other pathways of conversation are imaginary save for your own. Is there a reason you're exonerated while everyone else is a criminal?

[mwolf]

The topic seems to relate to nirvana or ultimate enlightenment. There are other forms of enlightenment, and as I have achieved one such form, I will comment from that perspective.


I initially didn't even realize that I had achieved a level of enlightenment. Not until nearly a year later and learning of the practices of Buddhism did I come to understand I had achieved a level of enlightenment. Upon discovering this, I immediately realized my path through life had inadvertently been a path which destined me to achieve the enlightenment I achieved.

The nature of my enlightenment is limited to the human experience. I have a complete understanding of the human experience. But to attain that, I had to extract myself from the human experience - observing it, but not influenced by it in my thinking. I did it the only way possible - by deliberately choosing to deprive myself of philosophical influence, and through social isolation.

Did I suffer along the way?

I could not have achieved enlightenment otherwise; for I had to be exposed to what was wrong with society in a very personal way in order to come to understand what was wrong.

[Dennis Mahar]

seeker,

what you are trying to do is engineer a conceptual construction.
like looking for a horse to saddle and ride upon,
horse and rider.
giddyup,
the lone ranger.

killing time?
the psychological pressure of existing temporally 'on death row' in 'a life sentence' gestalts as 'killing time with patsy klein'.
existential crisis.
what to do, what to do, what next.

mwolf,

I could not have achieved enlightenment otherwise; for I had to be exposed to what was wrong with society in a very personal way in order to come to understand what was wrong.

It can't be successfully argued anything is right or wrong.
to oppose that which you like with that which you don't like generates a malady of spirit.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

See you are just making jokes, first it is the imaginary lust for power, now it is psychological pressure and "what to do, what to do", said to someone who really doesn't care and is in no crisis.

The only point you need to keep in mind is that you think you are allowed to contemplate dependent origination all the time, but I'm somehow doing something different or wrong when I ask to contemplate karma, death, etc. You know you are holding on to an idea here that doesn't fit.

An example is a smart guy putting down every idea his friend brings up instantly by explaining how he's thinking about the idea in the wrong way. Am I right or am I right?

"give us your thoughts if you want."

Is also you making a joke. When you stop treating me like a kid or pincho you need to "put in line" who isn't thinking about things correctly and you direly need to correct, then there can be some real conversation, something that goes beyond "Contemplation isn't allowed in ultimate reality".



mwolf

It seems like you are describing your enlightenment as one related to 'revelations' on the structure of society and human drives. Is that right? It is definitely true that it requires suffering to learn from it.


I'm also going to offer to do you a big favor that others might take deprive you of, if you are interested.

[Dennis Mahar]

all we get from you seeker is an advertising campaign about a 'big deal'.

bite the bullet and show your hand.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

You are the only one making any kind of deal, I'm talking, your the one repeating "can't talk about that".

Which really would have been fine if you had just told me in advance, I actually asked you in advance to avoid this remember, are you so incapable of being straight forward?

[Dennis Mahar]

talk about what you like.
WTF you're talking about is in need of opening up.

you run an ad for a 'big deal'

what's the 'big deal'

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Why would I talk to myself?

There is no big deal, you can go and check, I was only asking if you were capable of discussing a few topics, your answer is no, lets leave it at that.

[Dennis Mahar]

Why would I talk to myself?

that's your 'big deal'

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Not willing to talk to myself, serious problem I've got, you seem to be fine with it.

[Dennis Mahar]

a problem isn't a problem

[SeekerOfWisdom]

I agree. A problem isn't a problem, there is no such thing as intelligence, usefulness, a good idea, a set back or progression. There are only two possibilities, assertion of ego, or awareness of self illusion.

None the less, you can't post on a forum without writing, it is a choice what we write about, what differs when that varies? Nothing, a conversation about cats would be just as meaningful.

[mwolf]

It can't be successfully argued anything is right or wrong.
to oppose that which you like with that which you don't like generates a malady of spirit.

It can be argued that a thing is right or wrong. This is actually an essential element of my discovery.

Right and Wrong are moral determinations.
Morality is action as it affects others.
But from the individual perspective, morality is really about what affects the self.
Right and Wrong therefore are relegated to the individual perspective.

This does not make sense of course. It is difficult to resolve because of individual perspective. Only when attaining or taking the universal perspective does this argument make sense. And only from the universal perspective can right and wrong be determined.

Enlightenment is coming to understand right and wrong.


If you have difficulty with the concept of universal perspective; this may help:

Universal Perspective is the recogntion of the self as part of a system; both outward and inward (part of the universe, dependent upon our bodies and its living organisms.) That system incorporates all of existence. From this perspective, right and wrong are benefits and detriments to the self, recognizing that the self is part of and thus equal to the system.

Now imagine if everyone held the same perspective, the same moral reasoning. Universal right and universal wrong would be clearly understood between all. Everyone's perspective would be the same, and it would be the only correct perspective.



On a personal note, I was bullied as a child (and am again these days, sadly). I took it as a sign something was wrong with me, so I vowed to always be right. Enlightenment occured when I realized I had come to understand how to always be right. I just happened to simultaneously discover that everyone else was wrong.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

mwolf

Know what the word 'ego' refers to by any chance? It's related to enlightenment and

"I realized I had come to understand how to always be right. I just happened to simultaneously discover that everyone else was wrong."

is a perfect example.

Do you want that favor I talked about? I will be one of the only people you'll meet that will be helpful and straight forward with you for your own sake, if you are willing. It is a fast forward for you into the truth.

[mwolf]

mwolf

It seems like you are describing your enlightenment as one related to 'revelations' on the structure of society and human drives. Is that right? It is definitely true that it requires suffering to learn from it.


I'm also going to offer to do you a big favor that others might take deprive you of, if you are interested.

No, my enlightenment was the realization of achievement of universal ethics; the realization that my elementary school age goal of always being right had been achieved; and that everyone else was wrong. In short, I realized there was nothing wrong with me, that in fact society was almost completely the opposite of what we humans need.

What happened in my mind was this: I have questions always working in my mind. Among those questions were two I was actively pursuing: why are wolves persecuted, and why are the disabled, which I am, treated the way we are. While watching "Zeitgeist: Moving Forward" I realized that their proposed solution lacked a vital element: moral reasoning, achievement of human potential in that regard - and humans are capable of attaining universal ethics in moral reasoning. I am living proof. And as I am human, and as I have achieved universal ethics, somehow, some way, it is possible for all humans to achieve it.

My mind processed this information so fast that I was overwhelmed. Suddenly hundreds, if not thousands of questions in my mind had been answered by one single answer.

I immediately found peace because of the knowledge that what is wrong with society is no one's fault. There is no one to blame, thus there is no call for hatred or anger. However; my (situation*) changed after I was wrongfully arrested and nearly died during incarceration. I attained a second enlightenment about two months ago, and have found peace again.

It is important to note that I isolate myself from American culture and any non-factual influence. I occasionally study theories, but shy away from philosophy for the most part. What struck me most about the movie was that it stated things I have been saying for years about what precisely is wrong - the symptoms anyway.



I haven't been offered a favor in years. I would almost certainly graciously accept if the favor is offered.



*bug: wouldn't let me write "circ_u_mstances" - put spaces before and after the entry in the tableed that their proposed solution lacked a vital element: moral reasoning, achievement of human potential in that regard - and humans are capable of attaining universal ethics in moral reasoning. I am living proof. And as I am human, and as I have achieved universal ethics, somehow, some way, it is possible for all humans to achieve it.

My mind processed this information so fast that I was overwhelmed. Suddenly hundreds, if not thousands of questions in my mind had been answered by one single answer.

I immediately found peace because of the knowledge that what is wrong with society is no one's fault. There is no one to blame, thus there is no call for hatred or anger. However; my (situation*) changed after I was wrongfully arrested and nearly died during incarceration. I attained a second enlightenment about two months ago, and have found peace again.

It is important to note that I isolate myself from American culture and any non-factual influence. I occasionally study theories, but shy away from philosophy for the most part. What struck me most about the movie was that it stated things I have been saying for years about what precisely is wrong - the symptoms anyway.



I haven't been offered a favor in years. I would almost certainly graciously accept if the favor is offered.



*bug: wouldn't let me write

[mwolf]

It can't be successfully argued anything is right or wrong.
to oppose that which you like with that which you don't like generates a malady of spirit.

It can be argued that a thing is right or wrong. This is actually an essential element of my discovery.

Right and Wrong are moral determinations.
Morality is action as it affects others.
But from the individual perspective, morality is really about what affects the self.
Right and Wrong therefore are relegated to the individual perspective.

This does not make sense of course. It is difficult to resolve because of individual perspective. Only when attaining or taking the universal perspective does this argument make sense. And only from the universal perspective can right and wrong be determined.

Enlightenment is coming to understand right and wrong.


If you have difficulty with the concept of universal perspective; this may help:

Universal Perspective is the recogntion of the self as part of a system; both outward and inward (part of the universe, dependent upon our bodies and its living organisms.) That system incorporates all of existence. From this perspective, right and wrong are benefits and detriments to the self, recognizing that the self is part of and thus equal to the system.

Now imagine if everyone held the same perspective, the same moral reasoning. Universal right and universal wrong would be clearly understood between all. Everyone's perspective would be the same, and it would be the only correct perspective.



On a personal note, I was bullied as a child (and am again these days, sadly). I took it as a sign something was wrong with me, so I vowed to always be right. Enlightenment occured when I realized I had come to understand how to always be right. I just happened to simultaneously discover that everyone else was wrong.

[mwolf]

mwolf

Know what the word 'ego' refers to by any chance? It's related to enlightenment and

"I realized I had come to understand how to always be right. I just happened to simultaneously discover that everyone else was wrong."

is a perfect example.

Do you want that favor I talked about? I will be one of the only people you'll meet that will be helpful and straight forward with you for your own sake, if you are willing. It is a fast forward for you into the truth.

No, I do not want the "favor." Your intent is to mock, but you do so based on a gross misunderstanding. We do not share perspectives. I reason in the universal perspective. I was also speaking of a very specific context; which you did not bother asking about. Your assumption thus came from your perspective. And even in this instance, your perspective-based answer, because it was not from my perspective, was incorrect.

I will offer clarification, despite it not being requested. I am not a very patient person though, so please refrain from judging me from your perspective in the future: To clarify, my being right refers to moral reasoning. That I reason from the universal perspective - a fact because I purposefully set myself on the path to attaining universal perspective by vowing to always be right in response to bullying - means that my actions are not harmful to anyone. They do not wrong anyone. The actions then, are not wrong.

As noted in a prior post, right and wrong are matters of perspective, unless you are referring to the universal perspective.



I mentioned being impatient. Please bear that in mind. I suffered brain damage 8 years before I achieved my first enlightenment. I am on a path, a very arduous path, to finding the means to communicate my knowledge to those who can benefit from it and help bring peace to humanity. You may cry ego, arrogant, nutcase, or whatever you wish. But if you shared my perspective, if your favor was to, say, sit down and listen and seek to discover my perspective; you would not question my words.

In your mind, it is easy for someone to falsely claim what I state. But ask yourself this: what if it is not a false claim? What would you do if you attained what I have? What would you do if you woke up one instant and knew how to bring complete, total, and permanent peace and prosperity to all of mankind? What would you do with the information? Would you share it? Who would you talk to? Now, what if you had suffered brain damage, lost your memories of your life, your ability to keep track of your thoughts, and most importantly, your personality? What if you had no way to sound credible in communication?

And worse, what if the problem was so bad, so profound - that people's perspective had withdrawn to the self and away from the universal perspective so far, that they were incapable of understanding you?

Would you worry about what some immature (from your perspective) not-yet-human says about his perception of your motivations?

[Dennis Mahar]

It can be argued that a thing is right or wrong. This is actually an essential element of my discovery.

right and wrong exist in relation to an affective partiality.
without that affective partiality it cannot be argued successfully they exist from their own side,


so too does your 'Universal Perspective' depend.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

I'm not mocking you at all and you should feel no judgement. Your assumption thus came from your perspective. I was quoting.

You said 'I'm always right and everyone else is wrong'.

I think what you mean by 'universal perspective' is "my perspective". Am I wrong?

You may be aware and non-attached and hence able to 'see things clearly', is that what you are referring to?

[Dan Rowden]

Knock knock
Who's there?
Solipsist.
Solipsist who?
WTF?

[mwolf]

Knock knock
Who's there?
Solipsist.
Solipsist who?
WTF?

Clever and veiled insult is insult nonetheless. And insult comes from emotion, which comes from ego. And ego prevents attainment of enlightenment.

Are you then running a forum about and professing to be trying to achieve enlightenment even while hurling such low-brow/high-brow insults which clearly contradicts your stated mission? Are you aware of the issue this creates for your credibility?

Please understand, I am not trying to insult you. I have no reason to. I am motivated by trying to find a receptive audience, and my experience dictates that people are so caught up in what's wrong that they even the most capable need a reminder of what life is all about once in a while. And sharing knowledge, not insulting those who have more than we do, is what life should be about.