Thanks to those I visited in the US and Canada

[Shardrol]

It's surprising to me that some people here are criticizing Kevin's trip & the posting of his photos from the position that this violates known parameters for the behavior of a sage.

How can there be any limits or constraints on the behavior of a sage? How can anyone claim to understand all the results (internal, external, present, future) of a particular action of a particular sage?

If the enlightened mind is unfettered, then it is unfettered. There is no reason why a Buddha could not eat a ham sandwich, play the trumpet, juggle tennis balls, live on the streets or shop at K-Mart. The fact that some people here have such strenuous objections to Kevin's trip just demonstrates their own narrow-mindedness & poverty of imagination.

[Jamesh]

Dan Rowden: Given that I'm only a few months younger than Kevin I am obligated to suggest your theory sucks :) I think these things can largely be attributed to boredom. Boredom is one of the dangers ever present in brilliant and active minds, of which Kevin is, of course, possessed.

Yeah, perhaps my theory sucks, perhaps even big time, but of course age is a relative thing, so that you may still be 1/2 a dozen years or more behind Kevin in physical age terms. Well except perhaps your liver:) Kevin may simply have been caused to mature younger - perhaps the move from Guernsy to Oz was enough to set the maturity ball rolling earlier, although looked at the quote from his web page below it does sound as if he had more trad genius about him at an earlier age than you.

"I had a girlfriend at the age of ten, and within twelve months I felt that I had exhausted the possibilites of relationships with women."

Still you are right, boredom is one of the main factors. I wonder what sort of relationship testosterone has to boredom. Women are less easily bored doing repetitive things (traditionally at least), so one would think testosterone is playing some sort of role in regards boredom (Kevin is not so old as to have less testosterone than a women 15 or so years his junior, I would imagine).

[Jamesh]

If the enlightened mind is unfettered, then it is unfettered. There is no reason why a Buddha could not eat a ham sandwich, play the trumpet, juggle tennis balls, live on the streets or shop at K-Mart. The fact that some people here have such strenuous objections to Kevin's trip just demonstrates their own narrow-mindedness & poverty of imagination.
Shardrol

Admittedly, I did have that in the back of my mind, but I couldn't fully remember the buddhist saying that related to the circumstances, so I let it go. I've since found the quote, in the following text. My mind of late has felt the need to "go back to chopping wood and carrying water". I don't feel there is anything left of philosophical significance that I need to learn and therefore I have been feeling like going back to "life" as others know it. The things I still need to learn are behavioural not truths of ultimate reality.

There is a Buddhist saying "Before Enlightenment, there is chopping wood and carrying water, after enlightenment there is chopping wood and carrying water."

I believe that for many of us who search for truth and enlightenment, there is a tendency to escape into it. Not so much an escape into enlightenment but into the process of finding it. We are dissatisfied with the status quo and are looking for something else. When we begin the new journey we then become involved in the journey to the exclusion of life that is occurring around us.

Life was never meant to be about escaping and finding enlightenment. We are not here to find our way home. We are simply here to experience all aspects of physical life and in doing so we will find our way home.

Searching for the truth or dedicating our lives to finding enlightenment is just another subtle form of suicide. It is a way of separating ourselves from others that we share the planet with, for all reasons practical or not, we are running away.

Before enlightenment comes chopping wood and carrying water, after enlightenment, comes chopping wood and carrying water. Enlightenment is not an escape from physical reality but can enhance the experience. If you understand how physical life works and its purpose, it simply makes the experience less fearful and perhaps more enjoyable. Seeking to find one's truth or enlightenment is no more mutually exclusive than delving into one's work at the exclusion of one's family and social life. It should not be a substitute but an add-on to it.

I know that as one begins the experience there is a tendency to want to know all there is and get lost in it and as we find some of the nuggets we become drunk with finding the mother load.

I like to equate the journey to learning a new language. As we get closer to speaking it fluently we have a strong desire to speak the new language and use it with others that understand. We start relating less and less in the old language and to people that knew us before. Some of these people will move out of our lives because they don't understand us, and others will try to hold us back because they don't want to be left behind and a few that can see the benefits of change may want to follow and try to catch up. With new skills and learning comes the desire to use them. We gain enlightenment at the expense of old beliefs and understandings and a way of life, unless we can view the old life as a step to the next.

These events are noticeable and completely understandable, we have new toys and we want to play with them, we have new clothes and we want to wear them. However the experience should not be an excuse to drop out of life or it's experiences and close ourselves off from others.

In my experience I have found the trip to be a solitary one. I have locked myself away in my little office at home and spend hours everyday writing. Through this medium I am able to express myself and bring out my thoughts in coherent patterns that paint the new image I have of my model of the world and my relationship to it.

Solitary by nature, I have excluded all others to allow myself the time and peace and quite to do this. Perhaps this is what was needed to bring out the new thoughts and I just may not be at the place that it takes to put them into practical use in interaction with others.

I have effectively alienated myself from others in an attempt to bring some of this stuff into daily practical use. People look at me strangely and may politely listen or some may change the subject very quickly, others are drawn to me and I have developed a teacher-student relationship with them. However in the place that I now dwell, I am alone. I have found also that amongst those that are at an advanced stage of enlightenment, they prefer not to speak of it on a physical level, but opt for subconscious communication with the knowingness that we are all connected and in constant communication with each other. I have learned long ago not to help unless asked. I do however hang out my shingle in this form for those that may come across my sign. I consider these as opportunities for me to further express myself and expand my awareness.

Awareness and enlightenment are really valueless unless they can be experienced. This is the dilemma that the creator found itself in, that is why he created relativity and the corporeal world, so that awareness could be experienced physically. We are a manifestation of the creator experiencing itself physically. [Jamesh: yeah, okay this bit is a wank, but the rest is fine]. This awareness can be likened to knowing that you can fly, but not being able to experience it, it is just a concept, or like knowing how to play music and not having any kind of instrument to play it on.

As one involves themselves in the search for awareness and enlightenment, they are at great risk in loosing a very important social dynamic… involvement with others. Why go to a movie if you have no intentions of watching it? Curious minds may want to know, but is it necessary to live a happy, and fruitful life? I don't believe that it is if one is content to accept everything as it is or is thrown at them. For the explorer, life as we know it is left behind in the quest for new thoughts, new realms, and different ways of life. It is for the sake of the discovery, nothing more and it is a sacrifice for a promise of something better than what one is experiencing now that drives her forward. Awareness if nothing else teaches that when you leave home, you are simply returning to it… a circular path having no beginning and no end.

How can there be any limits or constraints on the behavior of a sage? How can anyone claim to understand all the results (internal, external, present, future) of a particular action of a particular sage?

Comments like this I find distasteful. It would be acceptable if you had of just said "person" instead of "sage".
It implies that the minds of sages transcend all knowledge, which is utter bullshit. Sages never transcend knowledge, they just generally classify what knowledge they come across more rationally than most.

[David Quinn]

It's surprising to me that some people here are criticizing Kevin's trip & the posting of his photos from the position that this violates known parameters for the behavior of a sage.

How can there be any limits or constraints on the behavior of a sage? How can anyone claim to understand all the results (internal, external, present, future) of a particular action of a particular sage?

If the enlightened mind is unfettered, then it is unfettered. There is no reason why a Buddha could not eat a ham sandwich, play the trumpet, juggle tennis balls, live on the streets or shop at K-Mart. The fact that some people here have such strenuous objections to Kevin's trip just demonstrates their own narrow-mindedness & poverty of imagination.

I agree with that in principle, but I'm not so sure that this is what is happening in Kevin's case.

Don't forget than an ordinary egotistical person can do all the things you mentioned without any qualms.

I have my reasons for challenging the manner in which Kevin went on his trip, and his lifestyle in general over the past ten years. But I'm not sure that I want to go into them in public. I haven't decided what to do yet, if anything.

I will say that I think Dan hit it on the head when he mentioned boredom. I think Kevin has a low threshold for boredom. He bores easily, which can be both a strength and a weakness. It can drive a person to be very industrious, which Kevin is, but it can also make him inconsistent, impulsive and constantly looking around for excitement.

-

[Dan Rowden]

Dan Rowden: Given that I'm only a few months younger than Kevin I am obligated to suggest your theory sucks :) I think these things can largely be attributed to boredom. Boredom is one of the dangers ever present in brilliant and active minds, of which Kevin is, of course, possessed.

Yeah, perhaps my theory sucks, perhaps even big time, but of course age is a relative thing, so that you may still be 1/2 a dozen years or more behind Kevin in physical age terms. Well except perhaps your liver:) Kevin may simply have been caused to mature younger - perhaps the move from Guernsy to Oz was enough to set the maturity ball rolling earlier, although looked at the quote from his web page below it does sound as if he had more trad genius about him at an earlier age than you.

Well, let's give Kevin a well-earned break here and speak generically: the average man tends to slide into a sort of androgynous state as he ages (androgyny might not be the exact concept I'm thinking of here, but it'll do). However, I don't think this process matters much in terms of the philosopher who has an understanding of things. That understanding is what drives his ideas and behaviour, and whist certain changes might be taking place, that understanding is already set in place. I would say the only way that hormone associated changes could really effect such a person's behaviour is if they set aside or forget that understanding.

Still you are right, boredom is one of the main factors. I wonder what sort of relationship testosterone has to boredom. Women are less easily bored doing repetitive things (traditionally at least), so one would think testosterone is playing some sort of role in regards boredom[...]

Boredom is a consequence or symptom, if you like, of consciousness. I don't think it is really possible for an unconscious person to get bored.

Entertainment: a way of avoiding boredom.

Boredom: when you don't want to think about life and can't find entertainment.

How long will it take us to learn that boredom is not cast off by "doing things". On the contrary, boredom can only be escaped by doing precisely nothing. If only we could sit quietly in our rooms with our true thoughts; then boredom would find no place to establish.

From Poison.

[Shardrol]

David

You & some others here have spoken about wisdom & enlightenment as if they are states that can be attained, rather than particular experiences in the context of 'ordinary' life. If enlightenment means the lack of all delusion, how is it that delusion could return after having been banished?

If delusion can return this implies that enlightenment is just one of those altered states that you have disdained in the past. If it's a true life-changing realization, it can't go away.


Jamesh

I used the word 'sage' because that is how others here use it. My point was that it makes no sense to discuss a person's activities in terms of what is appropriate or inappropriate for a sage. A sage acts freely from his or her state of wisdom. Or so the story goes.

[Dan Rowden]

How can there be any limits or constraints on the behavior of a sage? How can anyone claim to understand all the results (internal, external, present, future) of a particular action of a particular sage?

If the enlightened mind is unfettered, then it is unfettered. There is no reason why a Buddha could not eat a ham sandwich, play the trumpet, juggle tennis balls, live on the streets or shop at K-Mart.

Rape little children, kill bald people and rob nuns, too? Hell, why not, the sage is bound to have a motive for his behavior that we cannot understand. And whilst there's actually some truth in that, I wonder what a society that adopted that perspective would look like? The place would be overrun by people wearing "sage" t-shirts! Blackwater personnel in Iraq would look tame by comparison! It'd be worse than Shatner saying: "Denny Crane"!

"Why are you beating up that old lady?"

"Sage" [pointing at t-shirt]

"Oh, carry on."

[Kevin Solway]

I think Kevin has a low threshold for boredom. He bores easily

This is certainly a valid criticism, and boredom was definitely one of the factors for my wanting to go travelling for a while.

It's definitely a failing on my part, and something that I need to look at seriously.

If boredom arises it is because of a failure to think perfectly truly.

If enlightenment means the lack of all delusion, how is it that delusion could return after having been banished?

I won't answer for David, but if all delusion is banished from the mind, including the most subtle delusions, then delusion cannot return again (bar a brain transplant or suchlike).

However, it is likely that no person has ever banished all delusions, including the most subtle, from their mind. So, to the degree that delusions, even subtle ones, exist in the mind, the causes remain for delusions to continue.

If a person has only very subtle delusions, those are unlikely to grow into anything dangerous. They are like seed that is sowed in an unsuitable soil. But it's nothing to be complacent about.

Emotions like anger and emotional desire are gross delusions, whereas boredom is at the subtler end of the scale.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I do believe Jamesh his post was probably closest to the target, even if somewhat simplistically stated (well this is the Genius Forum after all). But all the right ingredients are there.

It is the effects of testosterone that produces the drive to be an individual and to seek out wisdom. As males get older they tend to lose their ability to produce testosterone in the quantities of their younger years.

It's more like a complex of chemical and environmental factors combined with the cyclic nature of things but the idea is there.

The tour was partly an outcome of this desire to be young again, and fear of not being able to be adventurous in the future.

Not necessarily any desire but perhaps an unavoidable return. Not necessarily a fear but as stated already: a sense of boredom. Not boredom as sign of delusion but boredom as necessary first indicator one starts outgrowing ones habitat. The definition in Poison of the Heart needs a lot of improving in terms of subtleness. Actually the whole book deserves some matured update or follow-up in my opinion, wisdom is not as stagnant in expression as it suggests. There's this weird attachment possible to what we produced in younger years - we identify with it to the point of not wanting to destroy it with something new or better (or more complete, more balanced, etc)

While some people stimulate the production of testosterone by wallowing in anger or irritation, those who have learnt wisdom tend not to take this path. The anger comes from the ego's resistence to the loss of the power/will that comes from testosterone - the ego wishes one to be as strong as they once were.

That would certainly explain the experimenting of Dan and David lately.

Where a person has broken down the barriers of traditional non-truth and the ownership of "their self" (though this is only ever achieved to a degree), then the loss of this testosterone will result in a move back towards herdly behaviour, rather than anger.

Do you consider it a move back or could it be a return, like some Zarathustra descending from his mountain? There's a subtle difference between falling back and returning.

Kevin will now slowly begin to move into the far more cautious, conservative and simplified mindset of older folk.

There's no need anymore for battling some great enemy, in this way the wise certainly follows the stages of life. But older folk tend to travel a lot more too, in general, depending on health of body, mind and wallet. That's not only because they have more time on their hands, there's more to it, closer to the idea of fruition.

[skipair]

"However, it is likely that no person has ever banished all delusions, including the most subtle, from their mind. So, to the degree that delusions, even subtle ones, exist in the mind, the causes remain for delusions to continue."

So the sage/not sage line is arbitrary. Kev, you're not perfect...welcome to the club.

[Kevin Solway]

So the sage/not sage line is arbitrary.

I wouldn't say that it is "arbitrary". A person has to be very wise indeed to qualify to be called a sage. The main qualification for a sage is to have to have a perfect understanding of reality and an advanced ability to live in accordance with reality. That's not to say that they are perfect.

[skipair]

So the sage/not sage line is arbitrary.

I wouldn't say that it is "arbitrary". A person has to be very wise indeed to qualify to be called a sage. The main qualification for a sage is to have to have a perfect understanding of reality and an advanced ability to live in accordance with reality. That's not to say that they are perfect.

So you would say that the perfect understand of reality would not change to "even more perfect" after getting rid of even more suble ego afflictions? I don't really think there's an actual difference between an intellectual understanding and you're ACTUAL experience in reality...they move together. So to say you have a perfect intellectual, but not perfect ego (but advanced) doesn't really go together.

This whole sage qualification thing smells a bit funny. Only "sages" can affirm other "sages", but given none of us are perfect, in simplistic terms there is still a sliding scale to how mature/wise someone is, so it comes down to one mature guy looking over at another and saying, "yeah, he's pretty mature too...he's a sage".

And if Dan Rowden is a sage, then this whole enlightenment premise is official trash. (If you're gonna dish it Dan, better be willing to take it)

[skipair]

I have my reasons for challenging the manner in which Kevin went on his trip, and his lifestyle in general over the past ten years. But I'm not sure that I want to go into them in public.

Why...might hurt his ego?

[Kevin Solway]

The main qualification for a sage is to have a perfect understanding of reality and an advanced ability to live in accordance with reality. That's not to say that they are perfect.

So you would say that the perfect understand of reality would not change to "even more perfect" after getting rid of even more suble ego afflictions?

That's right. A perfect understanding can't get any better.

It's possible for a person to know perfectly well what is absolutely true but be unable to live perfectly in accordance with that truth.

I don't really think there's an actual difference between an intellectual understanding and you're ACTUAL experience in reality...they move together.

Agreed. When the intellectual knowledge is complete one can't help but have the experience as well.

But even though one may attain the knowledge, the perfect knowledge, it is difficult to keep it perfectly in mind all the time. The mind has a natural tendency to depart from it, and then again return to it. The more advanced one is, the shorter the distance one departs from perfect knowledge, and the sooner and more easily one returns to it.

This whole sage qualification thing smells a bit funny. Only "sages" can affirm other "sages"

Even sages can only guess about whether other people are truly wise or not. They can't be 100% certain because they have to depend on empirical data which is inherently unreliable.

Importantly, a sage cannot be affirmed by another sage, for if a sage doesn't himself, on his own authority, know that he is a sage, then he isn't a sage.

but given none of us are perfect, in simplistic terms there is still a sliding scale to how mature/wise someone is, so it comes down to one mature guy looking over at another and saying, "yeah, he's pretty mature too...he's a sage".

More or less. But the point at which a person has a perfect understanding of the nature of reality is a quantum leap ahead of the person who doesn't have that understanding. It's like the difference between the sky and mud.

And if Dan Rowden is a sage, then this whole enlightenment premise is official trash. (If you're gonna dish it Dan, better be willing to take it)

Personally I wouldn't classify Dan as a sage, although he does have an unusual degree of understanding.

[skipair]

Kevin, its not my intent to come across as disrespectful, because I respect your manner a great deal, but you would of course know I have to question this whole thing very hard.

If you're a sage with the highest intellectual understanding of reality possible, at least for cetain amounts of time, what have you done with you time on this planet that makes it so much more valuable than me? If it is the difference between sky and mud as you claim, where are the results?

I see you've written an unpublished book that probably almost no one has read or will ever read. You post on an internet message board that almost no one reads or will ever read. You've met some people in your lifetime and may have positively influenced them, as well as your readers here...or maybe not. And maybe as a sage you have intent to spread wisdom but ultimately don't care if other people think the same way or not.

So what? I know many good people who have essentially done the same thing. Other than being mild mannered and intellectual in nature I don't see anything too amazing about whatever it is you claim to have accomplished.

[Kevin Solway]

Kevin, its not my intent to come across as disrespectful, because I respect your manner a great deal, but you would of course know I have to question this whole thing very hard.

Understood.

what have you done with you time on this planet that makes it so much more valuable

I think that my fully understanding the ultimate reality, "God", "Buddha", or whatever you want to call it, is of major value. It gives me an understanding of Truth, life and death, the purpose of life, human psychology, etc.

If it is the difference between sky and mud as you claim, where are the results?

The results are in the understanding and in the actions that result from that understanding.

Other than being mild mannered and intellectual in nature I don't see anything too amazing about whatever it is you claim to have accomplished.

I think my understanding of ultimate reality and clear explanation of it is "amazing", so to speak. So vast and powerful it is almost unheard of. Similarly with my understanding and explanation of women and unconsciousness. Likewise, so vast and powerful it is almost unheard of in human history.

I think this can only be appreciated by those who attain that same understanding. And not many are capable of that.

Yes, I've written the book and the website and contribute to a forum that few people read. And I've created radio shows and podcasts that few people listen to. And I've published leaflets that even fewer people read. And I could do much more. I will continue doing what I do, hopefully with fewer self-created distractions, but there are few ears to hear.

When I was in Seattle I met with Joel Thornton, who is a beginning-thinker, and we met up with a old acquaintance of his whom he hasn't met for a long time, and who is also a beginning-thinker. Independently I asked each of them if they had met anyone in Seattle who was a beginning-thinker like themselves. They had met no-one of that type.

So it would seem the time is not ripe just yet.

[skipair]

Kevin, fair enough. My perspective right now is that I think its good you're enthusiastic about what you've done with your time. I know many good people who are also enthusiastic. That you think you've obtained ultimate truth so to speak is facinating to me, but regardless if that is so or not, I suppose I don't see anything about your life that elevates you too much higher than anyone else. I think its a pretty subjective thing you and everyone else has going, not necessarily messurable or categorizable. It's good to use reason, but I think calulated times to relax and have some fun at no one elses expense is pretty healthy too. Crazy how people jumped on you for taking a simple vacation, as if it were all out sinning. Personally, I think its a sin to attempt to be logical all the time....there is a time for being serious, there is a time for having fun. But then, that is my experience, and I'm pretty enthusiastic about it.

[Pye]

It's good to use reason, but I think calulated times to relax and have some fun at no one elses expense is pretty healthy too.

skipair, in case no one is candid enough to tell you, the use of reason/the activity of thinking is of the highest pleasure, the deepest - to those inclined. It may not come with music, colors, jumping, whooping, and giggling the way one usually thinks of "fun" - but if you agree that "fun" is pleasure, then thinking is merely the highest choice of it, the deepest, for those inclined.

Suffering, and the mitgation-of, is everybody's business. As others have pointed out, suffering drives the thinker onward to the cool, green plains of relief, just as your "fun" temporarily does for you.


.

[skipair]

Hi Pye, the distinction I was talking about really was about seriousness. I absolutely have "fun" being serious because I value reason very highly, but I also have fun in lighter ways too, and I see nothing wrong with putting serious reasoning aside form time to time. Thanks for being candid.

[Iolaus]

I agree with shardrol and think you're all a bunch of horses' asses.

So kevin how do you distinguish between enlightenment and sagehood?

[Tomas]

-keebus-
Kevin Solway - Thanks to all those I visited in the US and Canada.

-tomas-
Next time, send me an email an' you can visit California and my neck o' the woods :-)
You'd like the Badlands of North Dakota too, the old stomping grounds of growing up.




-keebus-
Elizabeth Isabelle in Florida, Shardrol in New York, Matt Gregory in Detroit, Greg Shantz in Waterloo, William Miller in Indiana, Irena in Vancouver, and Joel Thornton in Seattle.

-tomas-
Encore! Encore!




-keebus-
It'll take me some time to digest everything that has happened in the last three months.

-tomas-
Yup, some of that Vegas food will do it to ya...




-keebus-
You can find some pictures here:
http://picasaweb.google.com/ksolway001

-tomas-
Since you posted them (some time ago) i've made it about halfway thru..

Their good, Kevin, thanks.



Tomas


.

[Dan Rowden]

I agree with shardrol and think you're all a bunch of horses' asses.

Well, that's to be expected, isn't it? Your disregard for Kevin's philosophical outlook is noted, and also to be expected. What you and others fail to understand, for reasons that are human, all too human, is that the criticisms of Kevin stem from a deep and abiding respect for him and the importance of his life and work. Now, admittedly this may seem like the most back-handed compliment in the history of bank-handed compliments, but there you have it.

[Kevin Solway]

It's good to use reason, but I think calculated times to relax and have some fun at no one elses expense is pretty healthy too.

It is always a problem when a person stops using reason. Negative consequences for other people cannot be avoided.

Flying, for example, creates pollution and noise that impact on other people.

Ideally a person can reason fully and freely all the time, with no need to take a holiday of any kind. But few people are that perfect.

[Carl G]

I don't see how reasoning and holiday are mutually exclusive. Can one do no thinking while traveling? Is traveling sinful if one is a sage? I find the concept absurd.

Possible criticism of a sage can be leveled based on less than sage-like reasons for the travel or less than sage-like incidents along the way.

However, in Kevin's case, despite the seeming oddity of a sage doing yard work for room and board at the home of an Internet acquaintance, who among us knows enough about the circumstance to make this judgment?

[Dan Rowden]

skipair wrote to Kevin,

Other than being mild mannered and intellectual in nature I don't see anything too amazing about whatever it is you claim to have accomplished.

Your problem here is that you're operating, or seem to be, from a basis of rather herdly values and judgments of success. What does it really matter to you how much influence Kevin has had? What does it matter that he has had any at all? These are questions of providence which lie beyond his or anyone's control. In a world as contemptuous or truth and reason as this, the most one can sensibly hope for is to sew some seeds for change. In that Kevin has had what I would suggest is a considerable measure of success. You use the term "hardly anyone". I think that is partly wrong and partly irrelevant. How many people do you need to reach before it stops being "hardly anyone"? And why isn't having been able to deeply effect the lives of a few people not a significant outcome of one's work? Do you measure success by some marketing formula?

Given the subject matter, I would suggest to you that as few as a thousand people is a considerable amount - especially given that one is sewing seeds in rather infertile soil, not attempting to harvest.