08-31-2010, 12:00 AM
Wei Shan Yang wrote:"We get to experience anger and passion and tragedy and good and evil and love and hate, and beautiful music....is there any music in the afterlife? any cigars, steaks, wine, sex? THAT's what we're here for...is enlightenment the denial of all things sensual? if so, I want nothing of it. What if true enlightenment is merely realizing why we're here and accepting it?"
Its the *we* or the *I* that you seem to make concrete. That you perceive a choice or something potentially denied of *you*. That's what I keep coming back to from your posts. You seem as an advocate for sensual pleasure I'm just not clear who your opponent on this is of whom you are responding to. And beyond your focus, how, perhaps you can explain, are these things you speak of enlightened paths (perhaps) as opposed to enlightenment being something else? To me how would any act be any different than another? That is, how would the act of a monk who denies pleasures be different than one who indulges pleasure, as both are just acts experienced via the senses?
Your last line is a beaut, and in a way really illustrates my own notions about the whole process of, let's say, spiritual evolution. That is, to quote the Dhammapada, "We are what we think." If we think, for ourselves, denying ourselves is the way to enlightenment, then that's our "way". On the other hand, if we think enjoying the sensual pleasures of being in human form lead to enlightenment, then that is our "way". The trick is, imo, if there is a trick involved in it, is to ignore critical comment and truly trust in our own perceptions, intuitions and beliefs.
If I have any opponent it is those who seem enamored of power, who see the goal as becoming a respected Nagual, or those who see the state of being enlightened as something above and beyond what is right here in front of our noses.
Its the *we* or the *I* that you seem to make concrete. That you perceive a choice or something potentially denied of *you*. That's what I keep coming back to from your posts. You seem as an advocate for sensual pleasure I'm just not clear who your opponent on this is of whom you are responding to. And beyond your focus, how, perhaps you can explain, are these things you speak of enlightened paths (perhaps) as opposed to enlightenment being something else? To me how would any act be any different than another? That is, how would the act of a monk who denies pleasures be different than one who indulges pleasure, as both are just acts experienced via the senses?
Your last line is a beaut, and in a way really illustrates my own notions about the whole process of, let's say, spiritual evolution. That is, to quote the Dhammapada, "We are what we think." If we think, for ourselves, denying ourselves is the way to enlightenment, then that's our "way". On the other hand, if we think enjoying the sensual pleasures of being in human form lead to enlightenment, then that is our "way". The trick is, imo, if there is a trick involved in it, is to ignore critical comment and truly trust in our own perceptions, intuitions and beliefs.
If I have any opponent it is those who seem enamored of power, who see the goal as becoming a respected Nagual, or those who see the state of being enlightened as something above and beyond what is right here in front of our noses.