09-01-2010, 12:01 AM
Gonzo wrote: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.
Ok, this gives me a better view of what you are saying. But I say the key is actually seeing beyond perceptions themselves...alluded to in that other thread where you trumped me with Debbie Reynolds, and I tired to bluff you with Jimmy Page.
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.
Yes, it can become difficult stage to identify with leaders so much so and hence doubt ones own ability to know or realize etc. One way to combat this is dependent arising that shows everything depends on everything, so the idea of leader is obsolete. I don't think I need to go into a long explanation on DA because I already have previously. But basically, if a leader needs followers, the leader is nothing without them and so is dependent upon them as equally. Just as Debbie Reynolds or Jimmy Page needs fans to be Debbie Reynolds or Jimmy Page in the way they are known. A leader is just an organizational vehicle. And such being the case, we've all been that at some time or other. So its best not to make these things concrete. Wisdom, or whatever one would call it flows through all channels. Some people use leader to help them access their higher self, ok that word is not the best but... hopefully one day they see it was their intent that did this rather then any outside force. But to contradict what I just said, paradoxically, it is the outside that is needed for this to occur. And yes for me...no leaders. And the only ones I really endorse that would be this dynamic of a true leader are those who have complete compassion. And I'm not even sure I am referring to organic beings in this case.
Yes, enlightenment in front of our noses, right here, always so. In this mundane. All are. To see it is all.
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.
Ok, this gives me a better view of what you are saying. But I say the key is actually seeing beyond perceptions themselves...alluded to in that other thread where you trumped me with Debbie Reynolds, and I tired to bluff you with Jimmy Page.
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.
Yes, it can become difficult stage to identify with leaders so much so and hence doubt ones own ability to know or realize etc. One way to combat this is dependent arising that shows everything depends on everything, so the idea of leader is obsolete. I don't think I need to go into a long explanation on DA because I already have previously. But basically, if a leader needs followers, the leader is nothing without them and so is dependent upon them as equally. Just as Debbie Reynolds or Jimmy Page needs fans to be Debbie Reynolds or Jimmy Page in the way they are known. A leader is just an organizational vehicle. And such being the case, we've all been that at some time or other. So its best not to make these things concrete. Wisdom, or whatever one would call it flows through all channels. Some people use leader to help them access their higher self, ok that word is not the best but... hopefully one day they see it was their intent that did this rather then any outside force. But to contradict what I just said, paradoxically, it is the outside that is needed for this to occur. And yes for me...no leaders. And the only ones I really endorse that would be this dynamic of a true leader are those who have complete compassion. And I'm not even sure I am referring to organic beings in this case.
Yes, enlightenment in front of our noses, right here, always so. In this mundane. All are. To see it is all.