GENIUS FORUMS

For me personally I must admit that I have selfish reasons, as all reasons are. I've always been interested in the ultimate nature of reality as some kind of curiosity. But they say that curiosity killed the cat. I've always hated this notion because it's basically telling children "don't ask so many questions" mainly because the adults don't know the answer. The lesser heard second half of this proverb is that "satisfaction brought him back". Applying this to the ego and enlightenment one could say that enlightenment is the death and that the ego is what revived him.

To expand upon my personal reasons I once wanted to be a dictator of some kind or at least someone with a lot of power and influence and preferably with a lot of money to enable my good deeds. Maybe a religious leader of some kind or a famous talk show celebrity. I wanted to be any of those things because I always felt that I wasn't being heard and that I had good messages to spread about being righteous, just and noble. I thought that I needed to know everything possibly relevant not only to attain such a position but to make sure that I would make good decisions when I did.

However I've long since given up those dreams and lost my meaning in life. My interests in philosophy still persist though but I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's in order to attain and make good decisions in my life in general. But the way that many people especially on this forum present wisdom it's totally useless in the practical world and soul devouring to boot.

So I must ask, why do YOU search for enlightenment?
Is it simply because you want to be emotionless?
Is it simply because you want to be "intellectually superior" to people? (I think that describes at least one person here who will remain unnamed)
Is it simply because you want to gain fame like Jesus, Buddha and Socrates?

What's the reason behind your search?

There's nothing worth watching on TV.

Orenholt wrote:I've long since given up those dreams and lost my meaning in life.

How exactly did you know that you were righteous, just, and noble? Is the state of complacency, apathy, nihilism, and fatalism you seem to be in now a life-saving break or retreat or safehaven or sanctuary from a past that was leading you somewhere destructive, or is it just a darker and deeper hole?

My interests in philosophy still persist though but I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's in order to attain and make good decisions in my life in general.

That's a good place to start. Most people's lives are chaotic, disorganized, dysfunctional, and quite mad!

But the way that many people especially on this forum present wisdom it's totally useless in the practical world and soul devouring to boot.

On the contrary, becoming wise is the most practical thing to do, and the most beneficial and healing to one's soul.

So I must ask, why do YOU search for enlightenment? Is it simply because you want to be emotionless?

Enlightenment is not merely an emotion-less state. If that were the case, then a person in a coma would be a veritable sage, a person numbed by drugs an august master!

Is it simply because you want to be "intellectually superior" to people? (I think that describes at least one person here who will remain unnamed)

Gah, I can't keep hiding it guyths! I just can't get enough of being sthuperior *flicks wrist*!

Is it simply because you want to gain fame like Jesus, Buddha and Socrates?

Horde of minions congregating in my name, thinking of me, praying to me, killing each other -- for me! -- yes, yes, this is in my heart of hearts, this here is what I want the most: to be a god-man! Mwuahahahaha! I rule!

What's the reason behind your search?

Dissatisfaction with the falseness of society and of myself, attraction to sanity.....

I think there is a "Enlightenment" seed planted in all of us.....if the right conditions are there, it will grow.
We all have "Buddha Nature".

Getoriks wrote:

Orenholt wrote:I've long since given up those dreams and lost my meaning in life.

How exactly did you know that you were righteous, just, and noble? Is the state of complacency, apathy, nihilism, and fatalism you seem to be in now a life-saving break or retreat or safehaven or sanctuary from a past that was leading you somewhere destructive, or is it just a darker and deeper hole?

A noble person knows they are noble the same way a wise person knows they are wise.
I'm not sure that I was always right but at least I always tried to be and searched for more evidence on what the conclusive answers "should" be.
And this is just a darker deeper hole though.
The pressure of becoming a dictator is hard. Every move is calculated then scrutinized by myself and everyone else but at least I felt moved to change things instead of being a blob of fatalistic complacency.

Imagine a raccoon stuck in a small metal cage and people on the outside poking it with electric cattle prods. Then imagine the raccoon finally having it's cage opened and leaping out of the cage onto the face of the prodders and becoming free of that torture but still seeing thousands of other raccoons in boxes. But the original raccoon doesn't care because the cage opener said "you have to choose them or me" and foolishly the raccoon hesitantly chooses the other raccoons because humans it knows are mostly bad and this makes the cage opener angry and then he abandons the raccoon. Then the raccoon realizes that the cage opener was the only one who'd ever made IT truly happy so it gives up on the other raccoons being tortured. That is a picture of my life.

But the way that many people especially on this forum present wisdom it's totally useless in the practical world and soul devouring to boot.

On the contrary, becoming wise is the most practical thing to do, and the most beneficial and healing to one's soul.

If it's so "healing" why is it called spiritual DEATH?

Is it simply because you want to be "intellectually superior" to people? (I think that describes at least one person here who will remain unnamed)

Gah, I can't keep hiding it guyths! I just can't get enough of being sthuperior *flicks wrist*!

You know I'm not talking about you. >:(

What's the reason behind your search?

Dissatisfaction with the falseness of society and of myself, attraction to sanity.....

I'm not sure that you will find cures to your maladies in philosophy.

Kunga wrote:I think there is a "Enlightenment" seed planted in all of us.....if the right conditions are there, it will grow.
We all have "Buddha Nature".

I would agree for the most part but why do you want to make it grow?

Orenholt wrote:

Kunga wrote:I think there is a "Enlightenment" seed planted in all of us.....if the right conditions are there, it will grow.
We all have "Buddha Nature".

I would agree for the most part but why do you want to make it grow?

So I can climb up into the clouds and get that goose that lays golden eggs......... :)

Sorry...that just popped into my head...i guess thinking about a plant growing....lol
so after analyzing my answer....i guess it's to be able to help others.....others that are suffering...
But as I am still suffering...i know i haven't quite grown enough ....my head is in the clouds though :)

Lol, it's alright Kunga. Maybe helping others IS that golden goose for you. ;)

Orenholt wrote:

Getoriks wrote:

Orenholt wrote: But the way that many people especially on this forum present wisdom it's totally useless in the practical world and soul devouring to boot.

On the contrary, becoming wise is the most practical thing to do, and the most beneficial and healing to one's soul.

If it's so "healing" why is it called spiritual DEATH?

HOLY FUCKING CRAP!

Getoriks just explained the whole spiritual death thing to me and now that I know what it really is and why it's called that I have to say that calling it "dying before you die" is the dumbest thing ever! If it should be called anything it should be called "awakening to your true self" or something like that. Calling it "death" because you think that all is revealed in the afterlife is just plain silly. There's no reason to think there's ANYTHING after death.

Somehow I get the feeling you didn't get the explanation.

Dan Rowden wrote:Somehow I get the feeling you didn't get the explanation.

Well this is the source we were discussing:
http://www.hermes-press.com/plato_index.htm

Well, that's all perfectly reasonable till they get to the part about leaving the physical body and living in spirit. Unless that's meant to be metaphorical, it's silly.

Dan Rowden wrote:Well, that's all perfectly reasonable till they get to the part about leaving the physical body and in living in spirit. Unless that's meant to be metaphorical, it's silly.

If you had a OBE, or NDE you might think differently .
Anyways...the philosophers must have experienced these things, so you think they were delusional philosophers ?

http://near-death.com/experiences/evidence12.html

Yes, they were delusional to a degree. Then again, they were speculating in a scientific vacuum, so it's somewhat understandable.

The bio-physics of "NDEs" are not a total mystery. They can be reproduced by stimulating parts of the temporal lobe, for example. Test pilots and astronauts also have these kinds of experiences under certain circumstances.

Does that prove it's false ? Just because it can be simulated by other stimulants/experiments, doesn't prove it is false. It only proves it is a phenomena that can be manipulated....

No-one has to prove it is false. The burden of proof lies with people who want to make claims about consciousness surviving death. NDEs don't represent meaningful evidence for it now that we know the brain functions in this way anyhow.

Dan Rowden wrote:Well, that's all perfectly reasonable till they get to the part about leaving the physical body and living in spirit. Unless that's meant to be metaphorical, it's silly.

I'm pretty sure it was metaphorical.

In that case I don't have any real problem with it. It simply means dying in the ego (as I define it, not as you are) and being reborn without it. No biggie.

Dan Rowden wrote:In that case I don't have any real problem with it. It simply means dying in the ego (as I define it, not as you are) and being reborn without it. No biggie.

Pretty much.

Dan Rowden wrote:No-one has to prove it is false. The burden of proof lies with people who want to make claims about consciousness surviving death. NDEs don't represent meaningful evidence for it now that we know the brain functions in this way anyhow.

Yes..we have natural reserves of DMT [or something], that probebly accounts for the vivid hallucinations, etc...but there is still an element that cannot be explained away I think.....like in this experience the doctor had [watch video]:


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/11/ ... brain.html


There is so much we have yet to learn about the brain & consciousness. Science has hardly made a dent.

Eben Alexander? Really? Girls in peasant dresses? Really? All his case shows is that people who have NDEs tend to lose their friggin' minds.

did you watch the whole video ? what about the part where the women he saw [the guide], turned out to be [looked exactly like] the sister he never met/saw. being skeptical is good....but overlooking things that could be true deserves consideration and further investigation....you can't just shut the door on things you don't know , simply because you've decided it isn't logical or reasonable........you do that too much Dan....you have a hardened mind !!! lol [hard-headed ?]

oh you might like this :

http://forteansquirrel.wordpress.com/20 ... tists-say/

Alexander's interpretations/inferences etc regarding his experiences are essentially unscientific. Therefore, they don't mean anything. What he should say is no more than "I experienced this shit and I have no idea what it means". Instead he wrote a book and sold it to silly people.

Dan Rowden wrote:Alexander's interpretations/inferences etc regarding his experiences are essentially unscientific. Therefore, they don't mean anything. What he should say is no more than "I experienced this shit and I have no idea what it means". Instead he wrote a book and sold it to silly people.

Unscientific....comming from a Harvard Grad/Neuroscientist. He wrote the book to make a laughing stock of himself probebly eh ?


Back to the OP of this thread.....can you prove scientifically if you are Enlightened or that Enlightenment even exists ?

[Or can science prove scientifically that someone is Enlightened ? ]