|
Home > Archive > Yoga > April 2006 > Enlightenment is neither voltage nor virtue!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Enlightenment is neither voltage nor virtue!
|
|
| omjaroo 2006-04-10, 11:29 am |
| Enlightenment is knowing there is God...
What in the world is all the discussion about? :-)
Jared
o
^
| |
| eputkonen@gmail.com 2006-04-10, 11:29 am |
| What does "knowing there is God" mean?
It is vague and can be interpretted many ways due to the sentence
construction.
~ Eric Putkonen
| |
|
| Hey Jared,
DRINK BAADE,
GUZEL LOVE,
IF YOU HAVE AKLI SUURUN...
WORLD THERE IS IMIS OR THERE ISN`T WHAT UMURUM!
This ( HALF TURKISH HALF ENGLISH ) simply states that
DRINK VODKA or WHISKY
LOVE ALL THE BEAUTIES AROUND,
IF YOU HAVE A PIECE OF MIND,
IF THERE IS A WORLD OR THERE IS NOT,
WHO CARES!!!
==========
ENLIGHTENMENT to me means to be aware of the WHOLENESS...
SO there is or there isn`t has nothing to do with
enlightenment...Unless we feel or we are aware of the existence...
With respect,
Puma
| |
| Dave K 2006-04-10, 11:29 am |
|
eputkonen@gmail.com wrote:
> What does "knowing there is God" mean?
>
> It is vague and can be interpretted many ways due to the sentence
> construction.
>
> ~ Eric Putkonen
Yes, he didn't say "A god" which I find very interesting. If he said
"knowing there is a God" I would have interpreted it to mean only the
theistically inclined could be enlightened, which would be frightfully
dogmatic.
But "knowing there is God" to me speaks more metaphorically for some
reason. I think vagueness is good here. 
-DaveK
| |
| LawsonE 2006-04-11, 11:33 am |
|
"omjaroo" <omjaroo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144659801.045565.320870@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Enlightenment is knowing there is God...
>
> What in the world is all the discussion about? :-)
>
So an atheist has to change his beliefs in order to become enlightened, or
becoming enlightened will automatically change THAT specific belief?
So much for the tradition that there is no way for an unenlightened person
to tell if another is enlightened or not...
| |
| Dave K 2006-04-11, 11:33 am |
|
LawsonE wrote:
> "omjaroo" <omjaroo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1144659801.045565.320870@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> So an atheist has to change his beliefs in order to become enlightened, or
> becoming enlightened will automatically change THAT specific belief?
God is a metaphor. The atheist can experience it but call it something
else, or nothing. (IMO)
> So much for the tradition that there is no way for an unenlightened person
> to tell if another is enlightened or not...
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-11, 11:33 am |
| BIG difference between:
"knowing there is God"
and:
"knowing there is A God"
We're not talking about a supreme being/s, we're talking about Brahman.
Brahman is Unity or, to put it another way:
"God is EVERYTHING"
(as opposed to 'God is IN everything")
Discussing it is pointless because it's beyond the capacity
for language. Either you KNOW it or you DON'T...
If you don't, discussion is pointless,
if you do, discussion is unnecessary.
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-11, 11:33 am |
| Howdy Dave!
A metaphor OR
a perception OR
an interpretation OR
traditional dogma passed on from generation to generation.
| |
| LawsonE 2006-04-11, 1:26 pm |
|
"Dave K" <dkotschess@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144759214.810573.241570@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> LawsonE wrote:
>
> God is a metaphor. The atheist can experience it but call it something
> else, or nothing. (IMO)
My opinion also. However, does omjaroo believe that?
>
>
| |
| Dave K 2006-04-11, 1:26 pm |
|
LawsonE wrote:
> "Dave K" <dkotschess@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1144759214.810573.241570@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> My opinion also. However, does omjaroo believe that?
I don't know, but Omjaroo does not strike me as a dogmatist, in
general.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
| |
| omjaroo 2006-04-13, 1:22 am |
| Dave,
Well said! I like it...
Thanks,
Jared
| |
| omjaroo 2006-04-13, 1:22 am |
| Agreed :-)
Jared
| |
| omjaroo 2006-04-13, 1:22 am |
| Hi,
>So an atheist has to change his beliefs in order to become enlightened, or
>becoming enlightened will automatically change THAT specific belief
I thought howdydave's comments were particularly germane to this
question.
I would add I used the word "knowing" not believing. Knowing something
implies there is reality underpinning the knowledge and believing
something that there is a supposed (but unknown) or hoped for reality.
I can only believe (or hope) something until I know it and then I can
never return to believing it. So enlightenment is a not change from one
belief to another. It is a change of state from believing to knowing.
>So much for the tradition that there is no way for an unenlightened person
>to tell if another is enlightened or not...
Again I believe (note the word :-) that howdydaves comments are apropos
here.
However, because I don't understand your first question as stated, this
statement doesn't make sense to me. Would you be so kind as to explain
what you mean by it.
Jared
| |
| LawsonE 2006-04-13, 1:22 am |
|
"omjaroo" <omjaroo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144884339.967818.55290@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I thought howdydave's comments were particularly germane to this
> question.
>
> I would add I used the word "knowing" not believing. Knowing something
> implies there is reality underpinning the knowledge and believing
> something that there is a supposed (but unknown) or hoped for reality.
> I can only believe (or hope) something until I know it and then I can
> never return to believing it. So enlightenment is a not change from one
> belief to another. It is a change of state from believing to knowing.
>
>
> Again I believe (note the word :-) that howdydaves comments are apropos
> here.
>
> However, because I don't understand your first question as stated, this
> statement doesn't make sense to me. Would you be so kind as to explain
> what you mean by it.
I think that howdydave's explanation was quite good: in my words, the
atheist may never change his beliefs about the non-existence of God because
his definition of God and beliefs about same aren't challanged by whatever
he perceives when he becomes enlightened, even if someone else calls it
"knowing God."
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-13, 1:23 pm |
| Howdy!
Sounds like we're talking about the standard
"Snake in the rope" illustration.
The athiest never perceived a snake in the
firstplace -- s/he perceived the rope to be
something altogether different (maybe a
branch.)
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-20, 1:23 am |
| Howdy!
Just took a peek at:
Enlightenment is voltage, not virtue.
and it's still going strong (55 posts at this time.)
Reminds me of a Gilbert & Sullivan operetta...
Full of words signifying NOTHING!!!
Dave
| |
| omjaroo 2006-04-20, 1:23 am |
| You noticed :-)
Was it Shakespeare you were thinking of?
"Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no
more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying
nothing." Macbeth Quote (Act V, Scene V).
Jared
o
^
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-20, 1:23 am |
| Nope...
I was thinking more along the lines of "Modern Major General"
A song sung by a man who knows about everything in the
world except for the very basics of his profession.
n.b.: last 2 verses!
==========
I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
>From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical;
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem I'm teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.
I'm very good at integral and differential calculus;
I know the scientific names of beings animalculous:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
I know our mythic history, King Arthur's and Sir Caradoc's;
I answer hard acrostics, I've a pretty taste for paradox,
I quote in elegiacs all the crimes of Heliogabalus,
In conics I can floor peculiarities parabolous;
I can tell undoubted Raphaels from Gerard Dows and Zoffanies,
I know the croaking chorus from the Frogs of Aristophanes!
Then I can hum a fugue of which I've heard the music's din afore,
And whistle all the airs from that infernal nonsense Pinafore.
Then I can write a washing bill in Babylonic cuneiform,
And tell you ev'ry detail of Caractacus's uniform:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
In fact, when I know what is meant by "mamelon" and "ravelin",
When I can tell at sight a Mauser rifle from a javelin,
When such affairs as sorties and surprises I'm more wary at,
And when I know precisely what is meant by "commissariat",
When I have learnt what progress has been made in modern gunnery,
When I know more of tactics than a novice in a nunnery--
In short, when I've a smattering of elemental strategy,
You'll say a better Major-General has never sat a gee.
For my military knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,
Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century;
But still, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
==========
Dave
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-20, 1:23 am |
| Nope...
I was thinking more along the lines of "Modern Major General"
from "The Pirates of Penzance"
(A song sung by a man who knows about everything in the
world except for the very basics of his profession.)
n.b.: last 2 verses!
==========
I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
>From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical;
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem I'm teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.
I'm very good at integral and differential calculus;
I know the scientific names of beings animalculous:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
I know our mythic history, King Arthur's and Sir Caradoc's;
I answer hard acrostics, I've a pretty taste for paradox,
I quote in elegiacs all the crimes of Heliogabalus,
In conics I can floor peculiarities parabolous;
I can tell undoubted Raphaels from Gerard Dows and Zoffanies,
I know the croaking chorus from the Frogs of Aristophanes!
Then I can hum a fugue of which I've heard the music's din afore,
And whistle all the airs from that infernal nonsense Pinafore.
Then I can write a washing bill in Babylonic cuneiform,
And tell you ev'ry detail of Caractacus's uniform:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
In fact, when I know what is meant by "mamelon" and "ravelin",
When I can tell at sight a Mauser rifle from a javelin,
When such affairs as sorties and surprises I'm more wary at,
And when I know precisely what is meant by "commissariat",
When I have learnt what progress has been made in modern gunnery,
When I know more of tactics than a novice in a nunnery--
In short, when I've a smattering of elemental strategy,
You'll say a better Major-General has never sat a gee.
For my military knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,
Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century;
But still, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
==========
Dave
| |
| howdydave 2006-04-20, 1:23 am |
| Nope...
I was thinking more along the lines of "Modern Major General"
from "The Pirates of Penzance"
(A song sung by a man who knows about everything in the
world except for the very basics of his profession.)
n.b.: last 2 verses!
==========
I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
>From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical.
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem I'm teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.
I'm very good at integral and differential calculus;
I know the scientific names of beings animalculous:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
I know our mythic history, King Arthur's and Sir Caradoc's;
I answer hard acrostics, I've a pretty taste for paradox,
I quote in elegiacs all the crimes of Heliogabalus,
In conics I can floor peculiarities parabolous;
I can tell undoubted Raphaels from Gerard Dows and Zoffanies,
I know the croaking chorus from the Frogs of Aristophanes!
Then I can hum a fugue of which I've heard the music's din afore,
And whistle all the airs from that infernal nonsense Pinafore.
Then I can write a washing bill in Babylonic cuneiform,
And tell you ev'ry detail of Caractacus's uniform:
In short, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
In fact, when I know what is meant by "mamelon" and "ravelin",
When I can tell at sight a Mauser rifle from a javelin,
When such affairs as sorties and surprises I'm more wary at,
And when I know precisely what is meant by "commissariat",
When I have learnt what progress has been made in modern gunnery,
When I know more of tactics than a novice in a nunnery--
In short, when I've a smattering of elemental strategy,
You'll say a better Major-General has never sat a gee.
For my military knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,
Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century;
But still, in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I am the very model of a modern Major-General.
==========
Dave
|
| |
|
|