What the hell is Enlightenment!?

[Gerry Seymour]

When you talk about relationships, don't know. I don't think enlightenment is the right term. I mean, reading your description above sounds like familiarity, trust and commitment. But all of these are contingent upon reciprocal trust and commitment.

You're describing a feeling of enlightenment, but that isn't the same. It's like the feeling of safety vs actually being safe.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It sounds like you're referring to a single relationship, though. I'm speaking of someone who has those qualities across all their relationships.

And I am referring to more than a feeling. It's a pervasive ability, across an entire area, to take what you already understand and use that to understand what should not be readily understandable.

You know what, I'm going to drop this line. I'm not even making sense to myself anymore, Steve. This is one of those topics I just don't communicate well in asynchronous space.

 

[Flying Crane]

Emotions are measurable by the subject's experience.
We all know that emotions are the result of brain chemicals and the dynamic network of your brain. Developing a brain scan to determine relative levels of love for your partner vs your parents vs your kids vs your dog is very possible. Just have to find a way to make it relative to numbers.
Same could be done for Hate, Joy, Beauty, Disgust...
Got another?

No, you cannot accurately measure these things numerically, even if you are measuring brain chemical secretions. Way too many variables that could change the measurement from one moment to the next, even if the underlying emotion does not change.

You keep looking for ways to assign a numerical value to things that have no business being measured in that way.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Emotions are measurable by the subject's experience.
We all know that emotions are the result of brain chemicals and the dynamic network of your brain. Developing a brain scan to determine relative levels of love for your partner vs your parents vs your kids vs your dog is very possible. Just have to find a way to make it relative to numbers.
Same could be done for Hate, Joy, Beauty, Disgust...
Got another?

Actually, no. Thus far, we have found measurable elements of emotion, but two people can experience deep love and produce different levels of those things we measure. The experience is not measurable, because each person experiences it differently. Beauty is equally unmeasurable, if you include all that we find "beautiful". And the experience of it can be measured only in spikes (waves, transmitters, etc.), which will not show when there's a lasting experience of beauty.

None of those can be reduced to numbers.

 

[Steve]

It sounds like you're referring to a single relationship, though. I'm speaking of someone who has those qualities across all their relationships.

And I am referring to more than a feeling. It's a pervasive ability, across an entire area, to take what you already understand and use that to understand what should not be readily understandable.

You know what, I'm going to drop this line. I'm not even making sense to myself anymore, Steve. This is one of those topics I just don't communicate well in asynchronous space.

No problem. Just one last comment. I did focus on one relationship. My rationale is that if you can't manage it with one, you can't with many. If tha makes sense.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[TieXiongJi]

Actually, no. Thus far, we have found measurable elements of emotion, but two people can experience deep love and produce different levels of those things we measure. The experience is not measurable, because each person experiences it differently. Beauty is equally unmeasurable, if you include all that we find "beautiful". And the experience of it can be measured only in spikes (waves, transmitters, etc.), which will not show when there's a lasting experience of beauty.

None of those can be reduced to numbers.

Never forget the brilliant revelation by Einstein, "Everything is Relative."
All measurements are relative to something.
Love is measurable when you yourself compare the severity relative to all of the people in your life. There is 1 person that you love the least and 1 person you love the most. Set Least to 0, Most to 1, then everything in between is now measurable.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Take it internally and you will recognize how a single art piece is the least beautiful and another is the most beautiful, then measure everything else in between by those two references.
Objectively measurable only comes after gathering enough samples to a single template which references everything relative to those measurements. Then we can create the Beauty equation just like Netwton solved the Gravity equation by making it relative to objects and the Earth. 9.81...m/s^2 is an average, not a real number as gravity is completely relative to the objects being modeled.

 

[TieXiongJi]

See? You are trying to force something that may not be forceable. That is your first mistake.

You want to measure enlightenment. It is not measureable.
You want enlightenment to conform to some quick and easy talking points. It doesn't.

You mentioned climate change and Trump in an earlier post. Ok, this is not a forum where debating politics is allowed so I won't do that. However, I will simply ask you, have you noticed how politicians try to sway public opinion with highly charged talking points? What is wrong with that, is that the issues are always far too complex to reduce them to easy talking points. Trying to do so ignores that complexity and results in a very seriously misleading message. It becomes a blatant lie.

I am not questioning your intentions, but simply point out that you may be kind of doing the same thing. You want to nail something down here, but the issue is too nuanced and complex to be nailed down. This isn't something that can be summed up with easy talking points.

The fact that you are trying to do so tells me that your very approach and the assumptions you make on how to examine this, are simply wrong.

This has to do with a state of mind interacting with ones perceived and actual reality of life, flavored by life experiences, education, desires, lack of desires, etc. there is no mathematical equation that can describe this. But I feel like that is what you are looking for.

I don't need to measure Enlightenment. I just want to understand it.
I can't understand Love without recognizing my mother vs an ant. I love my mother and the ant. I experience heavy emotional resistance just thinking about hurting her, but I experience little resistance when the ant is in my kitchen; the ant always loses.

Maybe we won't agree and that is just fine. I would never force someone to continue a conversation they do not wish to continue.

I say it is measurable, you say it isn't. Nothing wrong in that.

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't need to measure Enlightenment. I just want to understand it.
I can't understand Love without recognizing my mother vs an ant. I love my mother and the ant. I experience heavy emotional resistance just thinking about hurting her, but I experience little resistance when the ant is in my kitchen; the ant always loses.

Maybe we won't agree and that is just fine. I would never force someone to continue a conversation they do not wish to continue.

I say it is measurable, you say it isn't. Nothing wrong in that.

You say you don't need to measure it, but you also say it is measureable. Would you elaborate on your message a bit?

 

[oaktree]

Hi Steve just wanted to address your question about achieving enlightenment in one's lifetime, from a Buddhist perspective yes one can achieve this. In different schools there is disagreement about levels of obtainment one can reach in one's lifetime in regards to samadhi and each doctrine of course says their sect has the highest form of samadhi leading to enlightenment.

 

[TieXiongJi]

You say you don't need to measure it, but you also say it is measureable. Would you elaborate on your message a bit?

My goal is understand this concept of 'enlightenment'. I can easily claim that I already understand it with my initial definition. Instead of simply agreeing with myself and telling everyone, "I get it and can explain it", I prefer to provide my answer and let others tell me their answer so I could possibly understand why they define it in their way.
But as soon as one says, "It is ineffable and talking about it is pointless", I am forced to end the conversation.
It could be measurable or not, but if no one knows what it is or can't provide at least a measurable path (similar to debating the efficacy of Alcoholics Anonymous vs other anti-addiction programs), then what is there to talk about?

I am glad that Hoshin1600 told us his path; Zen Buddhism. Now I have one answer about a measurable path.

If you feel you achieved enlightenment now or in the past, I want to hear your story and how you got from Not Enlightened to Enlightened.

 

[TieXiongJi]

Hi Steve just wanted to address your question about achieving enlightenment in one's lifetime, from a Buddhist perspective yes one can achieve this. In different schools there is disagreement about levels of obtainment one can reach in one's lifetime in regards to samadhi and each doctrine of course says their sect has the highest form of samadhi leading to enlightenment.

Is the doctrine difference akin to Christian sects which say everyone else is wrong and going to Hell?

 

[oaktree]

Is the doctrine difference akin to Christian sects which say everyone else is wrong and going to Hell?

I have not heard any sects say that about each other. Most priests and monks understand that Dharma is Dharma just different means.

 

[TieXiongJi]

I have not heard any sects say that about each other. Most priests and monks understand that Dharma is Dharma just different means.

I am glad they are not so fervently sure about their own position to confidently talk down to others. It is possible they have a better understanding of Enlightenment than the Westboro Baptists...

 

[oaktree]

I am glad they are not so fervently sure about their own position to confidently talk down to others. It is possible they have a better understanding of Enlightenment than the Westboro Baptists...

It is considered an offense to say something bad about someone who has taken vows. Just like the saying "if you see the Buddha kill him" is considered one of the five cardinal sins in Buddhism to commit if you shed blood from a Buddha.

 

[Steve]

I am glad they are not so fervently sure about their own position to confidently talk down to others. It is possible they have a better understanding of Enlightenment than the Westboro Baptists...

Do you think the Westboro Baptists are reasonable representatives of Christians at large? Why bring them up?

I have to be honest. I've read many posts now from you and from others. My frank perception here is that you are a guy who just learned something you think is groovy. And you're trying to explain it to others before you really understand it yourself. You're trying to hide the superficial nature of your understanding through doublespeak. And you kind of seem like you think you're smarter than the gang here. Now, chances are you're smarter than me. I'm just an average guy who's been around long enough to learn a thing or two. But some of the guys here are friggin smart.

So, my recommendation to you is to presume you don't know what you're talking about, ask some questions. And instead of trying to dazzle us all with your brilliance, actually participate in an honest conversation. I think it's clear from the responses that there are some people here interested in the subject, but (and I may be wrong), I don't think I'm the only one who doubts both your depth of understanding AND your sincerity in this discussion.

I don't know whether the above is a 1 or a 0. Let's call it .78... closer to 1 than not.

 

[Flying Crane]

Never forget the brilliant revelation by Einstein, "Everything is Relative."
All measurements are relative to something.
Love is measurable when you yourself compare the severity relative to all of the people in your life. There is 1 person that you love the least and 1 person you love the most. Set Least to 0, Most to 1, then everything in between is now measurable.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Take it internally and you will recognize how a single art piece is the least beautiful and another is the most beautiful, then measure everything else in between by those two references.
Objectively measurable only comes after gathering enough samples to a single template which references everything relative to those measurements. Then we can create the Beauty equation just like Netwton solved the Gravity equation by making it relative to objects and the Earth. 9.81...m/s^2 is an average, not a real number as gravity is completely relative to the objects being modeled.

There is no beauty equation. Maybe that comment was tongue-in-cheek, but no amount of data collection will yield a trustworthy Beauty Equation.

 

[TieXiongJi]

Do you think the Westboro Baptists are reasonable representatives of Christians at large? Why bring them up?

I have to be honest. I've read many posts now from you and from others. My frank perception here is that you are a guy who just learned something you think is groovy. And you're trying to explain it to others before you really understand it yourself. You're trying to hide the superficial nature of your understanding through doublespeak. And you kind of seem like you think you're smarter than the gang here. Now, chances are you're smarter than me. I'm just an average guy who's been around long enough to learn a thing or two. But some of the guys here are friggin smart.

So, my recommendation to you is to presume you don't know what you're talking about, ask some questions. And instead of trying to dazzle us all with your brilliance, actually participate in an honest conversation. I think it's clear from the responses that there are some people here interested in the subject, but (and I may be wrong), I don't think I'm the only one who doubts both your depth of understanding AND your sincerity in this discussion.

I don't know whether the above is a 1 or a 0. Let's call it .78... closer to 1 than not.

Thanks for the honesty.
I have had this problem with my IRL friends. While speaking to them in person, they feel I am talking down to them. It couldn't be further from the truth. I just want a straight forward answer about these ideas. Giving me wishy-washy descriptions of how the concept is ineffable or too difficult to express just makes me push harder because there is an answer in your head when I ask, "What is Enlightenment?"
Indefinite answers are useless when describing Gravity. They are useless when describing Money. They are useless when describing Love. Poetry can beautiful and truthful, but if I don't get a true answer, I have to push harder or walk away.

I am sorry if I offended anyone. I am not coming at this with a definite answer. I am simply laying out my current answer, allowing others to comment on it while inviting their alternative answers.

 

[TieXiongJi]

Do you think the Westboro Baptists are reasonable representatives of Christians at large? Why bring them up?

I have to be honest. I've read many posts now from you and from others. My frank perception here is that you are a guy who just learned something you think is groovy. And you're trying to explain it to others before you really understand it yourself. You're trying to hide the superficial nature of your understanding through doublespeak. And you kind of seem like you think you're smarter than the gang here. Now, chances are you're smarter than me. I'm just an average guy who's been around long enough to learn a thing or two. But some of the guys here are friggin smart.

So, my recommendation to you is to presume you don't know what you're talking about, ask some questions. And instead of trying to dazzle us all with your brilliance, actually participate in an honest conversation. I think it's clear from the responses that there are some people here interested in the subject, but (and I may be wrong), I don't think I'm the only one who doubts both your depth of understanding AND your sincerity in this discussion.

I don't know whether the above is a 1 or a 0. Let's call it .78... closer to 1 than not.

And of course the Westboro Baptists are not the best representative of Christianity IMO, but they believe they are 100% correct and everyone else is wrong. I aim to never think this way. I know everything is indefinite and we can only know as far as we can actually prove, and even that can be questioned.

 

[Flying Crane]

And of course the Westboro Baptists are not the best representative of Christianity IMO, but they believe they are 100% correct and everyone else is wrong. I aim to never think this way. I know everything is indefinite and we can only know as far as we can actually prove, and even that can be questioned.

I would say the westboro baptists have a lot in common with the Catholics.

 

[Flying Crane]

Thanks for the honesty.
I have had this problem with my IRL friends. While speaking to them in person, they feel I am talking down to them. It couldn't be further from the truth. I just want a straight forward answer about these ideas. Giving me wishy-washy descriptions of how the concept is ineffable or too difficult to express just makes me push harder because there is an answer in your head when I ask, "What is Enlightenment?"
Indefinite answers are useless when describing Gravity. They are useless when describing Money. They are useless when describing Love. Poetry can beautiful and truthful, but if I don't get a true answer, I have to push harder or walk away.

I am sorry if I offended anyone. I am not coming at this with a definite answer. I am simply laying out my current answer, allowing others to comment on it while inviting their alternative answers.

I don't think these are wishy-washy answers. I think this is a subject without clear and concrete answers. That is not the same thing.

 

[TieXiongJi]

I don't think these are wishy-washy answers. I think this is a subject without clear and concrete answers. That is not the same thing.

Nothing wrong with that, but we must end the conversation if we are at impasse and can't find where we agree.
We can't start the conversation until we understand our mutual starting position. We must start from agreement or we talk past each other.