Barriers to Enlightenment

What do you mean by "the self organizing principle of life"?

Indeed. So conversation via typing is more challenging than communication in person.

I've never heard FM and AM used as analogies in this way. Is this analogy one of yours, or do other people use it? And what would Phase Modulation represent?

 

I am teasing you.

You have yet to agree to a definition of resonance. I would like it to be now, with you.

But just recently:

N/A 04-27-2011 02:11 PM Nebacanezer exactly

What has happened to... 04-26-2011 10:32 AM junglejack We live in a world of energy exchange*- sad, but true> good post

Do you feel that Gods... 04-25-2011 09:19 AM scratcho With all sincerity,I will say I have never felt what is known as god love--but you have put it succinctly and I think properly ,regarding how one can and should perceive the love of god and how one can relate to that love in a rational manner.

How Close Are We To... 04-23-2011 06:25 AM jmt excellent post

How do you strengthen... 04-23-2011 12:43 AM oxidationofterra spot on brother

Our president 04-22-2011 03:55 AM wa bluska wica cynicism is the last refuge of the bewildered - count me in!

N/A 04-20-2011 08:14 PM Ahmad Rashad That last paragraph really hit. Thankyou for your post's here, not just this thread but overall. Pushed me to think about from different perspectives. Again, thanks.

 

Self organizing is synonymous with, "the flow".
How things actually occur.

There are some cues that are missing in remotely conversing through writing, such as body language or physical apprehension of demeanor. I get around this by not imagining one, (demeanor) for the person I am speaking with, but concentrate on the words and their meaning. I also do not try and project a demeanor for myself to others. To this end, I do not use emoticons in an effort to colorize the discourse.

It is such a form as I described coming from transcendent space. I am unaware of others using those specific terms. I had never considered your question before, but immediately springs to mind the characteristics that all matter shares and that is absorption, reflection, and polarity, although polarity is precisely, direction of spin. Or another way to say it, positive charge, negative charge, or neutral. Phase modulation then, would fit with the polarity slot. I say this however, without a firm definition in my mind of,
phase modulation. I am going to gain one, (firm understanding), straight away.

 

Okay, I got it. With phase modulation there are ambiguity problems, i.e., you may misinterpret the "direction of spin", or the polarity with which the information has affinity. This is along the lines that I was just discussion of not imagining a demeanor for the person I am talking to.

You are adept so far at bringing me out.

 

our desires keep us from knowing our true potential to become enlightened.

 

I always assume the best, but it does appear that neosimian can be a hard audience.
I for one am glad to be present.

Another thing I have come away with is the absolute preciousness of the opportunity to be conscious in such a way. Time is our most precious commodity on earth, and for someone to share their time with you is an honor that no gratitude can match.

 

Can I just ask something:
How many respondents here are actually enlightened?

 

By my criteria, all are.

 

Well I can't speak for everyone else, but I know I'm not.

 

I'd wonder if Descartes were enlightened by the Ego. That was a barrier and a famous one at that. I thought without interceding that thedope believed that the ego just wouldn't exist whether it live in that uncertain dream state or whether it be ascertained by the Knowledge of the External World.

Some more enlightening. Only reason should be enlightening to Descartes. And it would be reasoning about God and the Self and just about damned everything else which..... IS?

 

That knowing is a degree of enlightenment. You light up the world, give it the qualities it represents to you. On a practical level, everything you see is an idea.

 

Interesting. Can you spell out for me, in simple high-school language, how things actually occur? You might start by telling me what you mean by "things" in this context.

Well, this is fun.

Okay, now do spread spectrum!

On an unrelated note, I'd like to hear your attempt to define enlightenment in words a high-schooler could understand. (So, no Sanskrit...)

 

I'm sure their results are valid as they pertain to whatever it was they were measuring. I doubt, though, that they claimed to be measuring thoughts.

You claimed that we can only have one thought at a time. I maintain that we can have more than one at a time.

I don't know what tradition you follow, but perhaps it suggests that you "watch" or "monitor" or "be aware of" your own thoughts. How do you think that could occur in a single-tasking environment?

Since you know all about computers (apparently), let me remind you that the brain does all kinds of parallel stuff akin to pipelining (particularly for sensory processing), and it has two lobes, and it has separate areas (e.g. Wernicke's Area) for preprocessing. Do you think it's all marching to the beat of a single drum? Or should I say: is that how you experience it?

The truth, of course. You were warning me about a peril to my seeing enlightenment. So I figured you knew all about it, since you're apparently an expert.

That's some amazing waffling right there.

Okay, then. If you wish to school me, advise me, help me, fix me, then please indicate that you are far closer to enlightenment than I am. Or to put it another way to give you less wiggle room: that your mind is more clear; that you are more akin to the Buddha than I am. (Geez, no matter how I phrase this question, I know you're smart enough to escape. Anyway, let's continue...)

If, on the other hand, you're just another shlub like myself, who isn't walking around in a state of constant purity (or however you imagine the non-goal of enlightenment studies), then please say so.

I don't have time to work out just how unenlightened you actually are. So let me ask you again: are you Enlightened? Or a shlub like me?

Your move. You can choose honesty or you can choose defense.

 

I will avoid the easy and obvious answers (e.g. "Everybody!") and answer the question you actually wanted answered.

None of us. Not a blessed one.

What did you expect? This is a message forum.

Okay, a few qualifications to my answer.

First, I could be wrong. Perhaps one of the people posting here is so utterly brilliant that it sails over my head. They only appear to be spouting the same kind of rubbish I've heard countless times before.

Second, I would like to distance myself from the idea that enlightenment (as you're using the word) is a single target. My experience with genuinely "enlightened" people shows a vast diversity in the way it is manifested.

Third, there will be some people reading my reply who are already thinking, "Why does Neosimian think he knows what Walsh actually meant when he asked his question?" So, Walsh, perhaps you can tell us if my response comes close to answering what you asked.

 

Well, it was sort of a rhetorical question - only the enlightened could know what it is to be enlightened, and if you're not then you are hardly qualified to tell others what the barriers are. But if it were a real question your answer would be as close to being correct as possible, the answer being 'none'.

 

Thank you, Walsh.

Given that the answer is, "There are no enlightened masters here," does that suggest another question to you?

 

I dropped out of school at the end of 8th grade so I'm not sure I can comply with your simple high school language criteria. By things I mean all events.
I was agreeing with your analogy of "going with the flow". I have heard that same analogy, going with the flow in the context of the following statement.
The current is going to carry you down the river regardless, you can flow with the current or you can struggle against it, the result is the same. Another way to say this is, nothing real can be threatened as nothing unreal exists.

Well for one it requires special receiving equipment. We have no need for concealment except in the following sense; the high bandwidth of spread spectrum improves location accuracy. In translation, we produce a field of viable probability by allowing, (spread spectrum), things to appear, or we do not preclude any possibility of emergence. I hope I am making myself clear as I didn't know I had it in me. Spread spectrum is useful in the particular situation of finding something you want located.

I'll give you an example. My wife was at a new age "spiritual conference", and she met a man there who was good at sensing peoples names. she asked him to demonstrate for her. She had an unusual name so to glean it correctly was even more flattering. He did indeed tell her her name with no hesitation. She asked him how he did it and he said that he opened his mind and did not discount any choice that appeared.

I think your original question, what are the barriers, produces much more useful answers for the following reason; if love is without condition it is beyond what can be taught, having no conditions to teach. We can however, remove the barriers that we have erected against the perception of it.

 

Yes, indeed.

As you have probably noticed, some people will say, "Oh, yeah, what you say about that river 'n' stuff is true. Yup." But in most cases they don't really get it, do they?

The first time I actually saw the truth of this I didn't sleep for four and a half days. That's how profoundly it shook my illusions.

Please write some more about this subject (i.e. how things actually happen).

"I read it off your name badge"?

Do you take this fellow's story at face value? Or do you consider it possible that he was doing a trick? If you consider it genuine, then he could take the Randi Million-Dollar Challenge. I have a couple of contacts that could help him fast-track the process. He could give the money to a worthy charity (HipForums?) if he doesn't want it himself.

Perhaps, but if I don't have a rough idea of what you mean by enlightenment then there will be miscommunication.

 

There is the theory that we plan our lives and execute that plan pretty much, well, as planned. However when we look closer we might see that we are not proceeding according to a plan at all but moving from one adjustment for contingency to another adjustment, over and over we are faced with the unexpected, and what is really comical is that it surprises us again and again.

Why is it that we cannot comprehend as a rule, the transience of condition.
Perhaps because some goods are more durable than we have the patience to anticipate their end. We all act like we are going to take it with us. Then we get upset because whatever condition it was, it didn't endure. All condition is conditional. All conditions are temporary to the extent that someone or something cultivates that condition. That is if you do not support conditions,
conditions expire.

I didn't see the guy, my wife was thoroughly convinced. We can see the patterns of association developing. You ask me about phase modulation and as I was researching it the idea of broad spectrum being useful for pinpointing
location came up, and I thought about "casting a wide net". When I had that thought I was reminded of what that guy said.

I originally started conceiving of frequency modulation as a synonym for purification as an aspect of esoteric christian theory. One thing I wrestled with for a long while was what practical way could I do good and how could I overcome the often petty concerns that I felt prevented from fulfilling good purpose in all endeavors.

I couldn't seem to overcome my propensity for bad behavior and I began to consider myself somewhat broken until I saw something that changed everything for me and that was the realization that behavior flows naturally and consistently, from our state of being. A simple way to describe what I realized is to say we are not human doings, but human beings.

All the while I had been trying to change my behavior and I couldn't figure out why I couldn't, "control myself".

I think to be enlightened is to be part of the discerning mind.
To the extent that we are free from ignorance, prejudice, and superstition, we enjoy enlightenment.