Before enlightenment

I FEEL LIKE A WILD MAN TONIGHT SO HERE IT IS, AGAIN

WAKE UP

BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do we believe that the universe will bestow “enlightenment” or “salvation” on anyone in our wonderful modern world of mass communication and technology where we can watch children get slaughtered or starve to death on CNN while we are in our warm or air-conditioned homes having our supper, while the kids are in the den playing 300$ dollar computer games. Then we go to the Ashram, Buddhist Temple, Mosque, Synagogue or Church and pray to God for enlightenment or salvation or some kind of mundane desire we wish god to bestow on us. Rarely, do we, who are at a relative degree of comfort need the desperate help we know many of our people around the world need. WHILE OUR KNOWN BROTHERS AND SISTERS ARE BEING TORTURED TO DEATH, STARVED TO DEATH, WORKED TO DEATH, SCREWED TO DEATH BEFORE OUR EYES. Do we who call on God or seek enlightenment honestly believe he hears our prayers when we as a race are in a position to eliminate this suffering, whether it is caused by god or man, of our people all over the world?

If we who are comfortable, with warm homes, big TV sets, computers, video games for our kids, going to the movies every Saturday, pray to our god every day for something, what do we think the enslaved 9 year old Indian child who is forced to work 15 hours a day, or the African child in the Sudan or Mali who is a slave on a cocoa plantation, the starving peasants in Haiti or the child or adult sex slave in Bosnia, Senegal, or Myanmar are praying for. Who is answering their prayers? 

In ancient times or only as far back as 100 or 200 years ago the world was not homogeneous like today because of technology and mass communication, and could not know as we intimately do today of the horrors that exist in our world. So today there is not much excuse for allowing the evils and horrors that humans or nature does to our less fortunate people.

Instead we build weapons of mass destruction worth zillions of dollars and spend billions to arm our children in huge armies of mass murder and we think we are civilized?

IF IT WERENT SO PITIFUL IT WOULD BE FUNNY

And as for my dear mystical brothers and sisters who are seeking nearness of god or enlightenment : due you honestly believe the universe will let any of us in the realm of beauty when we sit by and let universal ugliness and suffering on a grand scale exist without us making a sincere effort in eradicating these known worldwide horrors. These horrors are not happening in another world, they are happening in this world 24 hours a day to real flesh and blood human beings, whose souls are in a pain we can not conceive of, and we want enlightenment or salvation! Enlightenment or salvation to do what? Relieve suffering; we don't need enlightenment or salvation to do that, because that is enlightenment and salvation. And if you can't see that, then “enlightenment or salvation will do you no good.

Enlightenment is to wake up to the fundamental reality of our obligation to our people who are suffering and we have the capacity to help them, and we don't. If we don't see this basic duty, then what in the world is there to be enlightened about or saved from? Are we not blind if we can't see the obvious devil before our eyes?

 I am not talking about merely giving money to an organization none of us really know what in the world they are doing with the money (this is of course good to do, and should be commended) but I am talking to us all as a race and trying to convey the reality that whatever we are doing, it is not enough.

These extreme problems I talk about are not the only problems in our globe, the less severe social, economic and health problems certainly should be dealt with by “civilized” people, but the neglect and apathy of the extreme horrors is to me a worldwide or universe wide scandal of apocalyptic proportions. As if other beings in the universe are looking down on us in awe or horror at what we “civilized” caring people are not doing for ourselves. Of course I don't really care what other kinds of beings think about us, we should I believe care about what we think about ourselves and I think that if we contemplate our response to our human or inhuman condition, I think we will come up wanting in judging ourselves.

I am not just laying this at the doorstep of the so-called religious people, but all of us, believers of any stripe, and non-believers, agnostics, whatever, we all must wake up to our basic duty to our fellow human being we are not living up to. We must wake up soon before it is too late.

SO AS AN ORDINARY PERSON I CALL ON ALL BELIEVERS, NON BELIEVERS, LEFT WING, RIGHT WING, ALL RACES, CREEDS, POLITICAL PARTIES AND PEOPLE OF GOOD NATURE AND BAD NATURE TO DEMAND OF THE UN, OUR PARTICULAR GOVERNMENTS, THE RICH, INFLUENTIAL, OUR RELIGIOUS LEADERS, AND WE ORDINARY PEOPLE OR JUST ALL OF US, TO MOVE TO ERADICATE THE PAIN, SUFFERING AND HORRORS THAT OUR UNFORTUNATE PEOPLE ACROSS THIS PLANET UNECCASSARILY LIVE OR DIE THROUGH.

I CALL UPON THE WORLD WIDE SPIRITIAL LEADERS, POLITICAL LEADERS, ECONOMIC INDUSTRIAL LEADERS, THE VERY WEALTHY MEN AND WOMAN OF INFLUENCE, ORDINARY PEOPLE, BELEIVERS IN A HIGHER POWER, OR DISBELIEVERS, WHATEVER, TO COME TOGETHER AND PUT ASIDE ARE DIFFRENCES OF NATIONALITY, CREED, POLITICAL BELIEFS AND TACKLE THESE KNOWN HORRORS NOW, WITHOUT DELAY ON A SCALE OF AN INTERNATIONAL WAR ON THE HORRORS BEING INFLICTED ON OUR PEOPLE THAT HAS BEEN NEGLECTED IN THIS MODERN SCIENTIFIC HIGH-TECH WORLD WHERE MANY OF US LIVE IN A COMFORT UNLIKE ANYTHING THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN, BUT YET SIDE BY SIDE, IN DARK DESOLATE PLACES IN ASIA, AFRICA, HAITI, SOUTH AMERICA, EASTERN EUROPE AND EVEN PARTS OF NORTH AMERICA,(THE WEALTHIEST SOCIETY IN HISTORY) DO MILLIONS OF HUMAN BEINGS LIVE IN ABJECT, HORRENDEOUS POVERTY, DISEASE, SLAVERY, SEX SLAVERY, WARS, POLITICAL OPPRESION, GENOCIDAL CONDITIONS, AND WE SUPPOSINGLY THE MOST ADVANCED CIVILIZED SOCIETY IN HISTORY DO NOTHING.

WE SEND OUR BEAUTIFUL YOUNG MEN AND WOMAN OFF TO WARS OF DEATH AND DESTRUCTION TO ADD TO THE GLOBAL GRIEF

WE BICKER ABOUT OUR NATIONAL DIFFERENCES, AND DIFFERENCES IN WHAT WE CALL GOD, OR DON'T CALL GOD, OR WHAT COLOR WE ARE, OR OUR NATIONAL PRIDE.

CAN WE ALL NOT SEE THE OBVIOUS THAT WE ARE ONE RACE…THE HUMAN RACE…AND WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IN A GOD OR NOT…THERE IS SOMETHING…SOMETHING…THAT IS MYSTEIOUS, IN GOD, OR JUST IN NATURE…THAT DEMANDS THAT WE ELIMINATE WITH LOVE, THESE HORRIBLE CONDITIONS OF OUR FELLOW HUMANS.

.

SOMEWHERE, RIGHT NOW WHILE YOU ARE READING THIS IN A LONELY DARK CORNER IN A DESOLATE GOD FORESAKEN PLACE WHERE NOBODY HAS EVER HEARD OF, OR NOBODY CARES TO VISIT, A SMALL INOCENT CHILD OR YOUNG ADULT, OR OLD ADULT, ONE OF OUR PRECIOUS FELLOWS CRIES IN DESPERATION FOR HELP; AND NO HELP EVER COMES, BECAUSE WE OF THE WORLD WHO COULD HELP AND DELIVER THAT PERSON FROM DOOM REFUSE TO HELP.

WE SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED!

I think as a race, we are falling

Conscious capitalism is not even a band aid

.

.

Re: Before enlightenment

This planet is soaked in blood and anguish.

Much of it done in our name, here in the stolen riches of modern civilization.

Beings have been dying in pain on this planet for three billion years.

And we are only as smart as we are, because of the deaths of a trillion beings.

Your concern is shared by many, but it's hard to see how talking about it that way will help.

Religion has always been used to justify slaughtering the tribe in the next valley, and to assuage the guilt that accompanies taking their stuff.

I doubt religion will have any answers to our current situation, except to recommend more slaughter.

Re: Before enlightenment

never lead a rant with All caps and large spaces… less people will read it… 

Re: Before enlightenment

Ha ha ha, Josef, that's certainly true!

Zak does raise an interesting question - which is, does “enlightenment” and all this stuff have any solutions for the horrible things that humans do to each other?

I would have to say that “enlightenment” does not.

Religion and spirituality both claim to have answers, but, on a practical level, those answers don't seem to work all that well. However, answers that work poorly are better than bo answers at all.

Now, what I call “self-development”, which basically boils down to the effects that happen when individuals and groups of individuals train their “ego”, mind, brain, and body, and educate themselves well, has more possibilities.

In fact, when religion works, I think it works because of the “self-development” training that is part of religious training.

—

Now, “compassion” is a really interesting subject. Compassion is a really powerful element in almost all enlightenment states. But, I think compassion is more complex than most people think.

Re: Before enlightenment

Yeah but everybody has to develop not just some of us, while the others mis-develop.

That's the key to my spiritual cosmological theory [THE THEORY OF THE ELLIPSE] is that we have as a specious [mis-developed] into something that inclines us to this negativity.

Re developing out of it is difficult, time consuming and rare.

Metaphysics [true religion] has been created to re- develop us.

Of course it hasn't worked to well for many reasons.

One is that humans have mutilated the paths given to them, ironically because of the mis-developed condition they are in!

Catch  22

Re: Before enlightenment

It's a sweet theory, and of course it's correct, the more self-development, the less horror.

And if more people were given the oppurtunity to self-develop, the world would be a much better place.

But it will never happen, Zak.

The theory is based on a basic misunderstanding of humans.

Re: Before enlightenment

Hey BiIl,
Yes it is a sweet theory, and it's happening all over the world.  When you read some of the awakened teachers in the US today like Leonard Jacobson, Adyashanti, or Eckhart Tolle, they will all tell you that they're seeing people awaken by the hundreds.

To separate enlightenment from “self development” however is a mistake.   Enlightenment, or Awakening, IS Self development.  The development of the Soul.  All people also have the opportunity to engage in it.. although not many do, unless they have a pain-body that propels them toward it for relief, or they're old souls who have had higher consciousness in previous incarnations.

To address the beginning of this whole thread.. Enlightenment isn't a lie.  It is still definitely “chop wood carry water” after a Spiritual Awakening or two.. but it's the most profound life changing event that you could possibly imagine.  The big difference is that after “enlightenment” happens, your identification with your mind and stories can no longer happen because you now know Who you Are.. and deep Presence and quiet mind become your home, unless you choose to engage in thought of course.  :-)
John

Re: Before enlightenment

Hi John,

Well, I can reasonably hope to be alive for another 30 years, perhaps more, if the distribution favors me, so perhaps we'll see something in that space of time that isn't like that which we've seen in the past.

That would be a nice surprise, and I love the possibility that the unexpected might happen.

I do seperate “enlightenment” from self-development, and I think it's very important to do so.

Self-development is ultimately much more important than “enlightenment”.

Has it occured to you that you and I are using language differently?

You, of course, are within the main and dominant american cultural streams of language, with your talk of souls, pain-bodies, and reincarnation.

I would not ordinarily employ such words, unless I must, in order to communicate with  humans who still do.

There's no question that your presentation would be more popular than mine, in any randomly chosen group of 100 north american humans.

What do you think of Zak's presentation? Do you hope for something similar?

Re: Before enlightenment

Hi John 

Post

John I apologize for you misunderstanding me.

I am a student of enlightenment, and all the spiritual systems. And accept and believe in them.

My diatribe was one of the spirit, not the letter of truth, that's why I used hyperbole, in putting ills at all of our feet.

Certainly Development is related to enlightenment, in that psychological healthy development is a big help in the pursuit of enlightenmet.

But the soul in one form is mis-developed [that's why we have religion and metaphysics] that's why “evil” exists. People don't like to deal with that, but I have no choice in reminding them of this.

They the “evolutionary enlightenment” people may view it as immaturity, rather than a form of mis-development as I view it. I view it that way because I think the soul went through a literal structural[ albeit temporary] corruption that has made humans  inclined to doing the negative things some of us do 

In my studies I have found though once the aspect of mis-development is erased than the soul is already sublime, and perfect,  and enlightenment ensues consequently.Though there is an “expansion” of the soul that has to do with what it evolves to after enlightenment. That is a form of development, but it is divine development in a sense.

So essentially I am saying that there is development in the human being as a human being, but also there is the affair of the corruption of our soul that has to be rectified. That is not the exact same development as a physical, mental, spiritual human being, though it is related, of course.

Re: Before enlightenment

Language is freekin' fascinating.

At some point it would be interesting to take the time to explain to each other what we mean by “development” and “self-development”.

Zak, you're a true romantic. ;-} It's a lovely storyline. Could you explain the cultural origins of these themes to me sometime?

Re: Before enlightenment

One of Ken Wilber's critics pointed out to him that there is not only development but also mis-development.

Maybe all these post modernist who think so much of themselves, and believe they are developing, are in fact mis-developing!

Myself included!

Actually romanticism, is one of my”mis- developments”

The new paradigm I seek is the modern hierophant; the modern alchemist; the mystic scientist, the master of the soul, who is master of himself, and understands why.

The sage, who knows, that he knows.

I believe that is needed by evolution.

As for development and self development:. anything alive has to develop to its functional perfection, or it can develop to optimal perfection. That one I would say entails self development, because nothing in nature necessarily is going to optimally perfect us, without our impute, in my opinion.

But the greater question is what are you developing, and why?

For instance there is a dog over there, in good health, then what else do you want to develop in him? A bigger penis, a louder bark, shaggier hair, you see what I mean, the same analogy can be applied to human ” development”

What proves I believe my theory of mis-development is the reality that WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING MIS-DEVELOPMENT WE CANT DEAL WITH DEVELOPMENT ON A CERTAIN LEVEL. IT WOULD NOT HAVE ANY PERSPECTIVE OR FOCUS.

Wilber says the whole ball of wax is the what he calls LOD'S, states, and stages,developing optimally.

I really don't think that equals enlightenment, at all. It reminds me of the Nietze superman, not an enlightened sage.

Remember my theory of enlightenment has to do with correcting the degree of mis-development we have evolved to, that's why it is always associated with religion and metaphysics. This is so because something in us has to be rectified, or purified, in relationship to a condition we had relative to this condition of insanity, murder, and slaughter, we have evolved to[ I am using hyperbole here, but not much] then genuine development will occur naturally, through enlightenment, once the souls imbalance is rectified.

Remember this also, concerning all this post modern development obsession.

The sages never said we were totally mis-developed, indeed there is much of us that is developing normally, despite my idea of what I call metaphorically The Ellipse [broken soul- imperfect circle]

You see Bill my philosophy revolves around developing what is most important, not development in itself.

Re: Before enlightenment

That doesn't tell me much about the cultural roots of the ideas, Zak. All ideas have at least some origin in other ideas, and in the thinkers who came before us. Where did you get this idea of mis-development?

If a person were to develop properly, according to your idea, what specifically would the practices be that would lead to correct development?

Re: Before enlightenment

When I was a kid to a teenager I experienced repeadedly

As Above so Below

You see this with your whole being, not just your inner eye


As an adult I reaped what was sown in me as a child


What was sown was divine science

There is nothing cultural about Gnosis

Re: Before enlightenment

Well, we can debate the fascinating question of wether or not there's anything cultural about gnosis at some future time - tho I can't help but note the cultural roots of the word you chose - gnosis.

But if you want to make the dizzying claim of no cultural roots, I'll let you.

But what about the practices? How does one correct “mis-development”?
 

Re: Before enlightenment

Oh you want to know where I was born?

One of our inner city cauldrons

In the wilderness of North America.

New-Ark NJ

Home of the riots of 67.

You don't want to know the details, I assure you!

I would say mis-development is difficult in one lifetime to erase

But what I am now, and what I was growing up in the above place, are very different

But that was a gift to me, to go from a lover of vice to a lover of knowledge.

I would say mis-development could be corrected by the traditional metaphysical practices of the self struggle. But as Idries Shah pointed out to much concentration on the self struggle is not all good. Then one in my opinion should back off and just try to be a decent human being. When an opportunity presents itself one could return to the self- struggle, with the hope of finally doing that alchemy of the heart that erases the bad fruits of mis- development.

Re: Before enlightenment

I'm not communicating the concept that I want to talk about effectively, so let me try to explain what I mean.

The idea of the “culture-stream” (and two attendant ideas, the cultureform and the bioform) is kinda central to my ideas about enlightenment, so it bears a little explanation.

“Culture” is everything humans make, including ideas, words, knowledge and information, and naturally all the stuff, clothes, houses, cities, all of it.

Words, in particular, are culture. They are one of the most important kinds of culture, because they are a kind of meta-culture - the way culture is transmitted and transmits thru space and time.

And ideas and words are intertwined - ideas are transmitted from human to human mostly thru words.

So, when you use the word “gnosis”, I think, okay, ancient greek, this is an idea that was first put in this form 3000 years ago, and this idea of gnosis - direct and personal knowledge - has mostly been graeco-roman and european - but the important thing about it is that it's a western culture word, it represents thinking in the western style.
 
So, what I was asking is where the idea of “mis-development” came from? It doesn't seem quite like any of the major streams of islam or sufism. It reminds me of certain schools of christianity.

If you invented it entirely on your own, you were probably influenced by some kind of tradition or book or thinker, do you have any thoughts on who might have influenced you?

Re: Before enlightenment

First of all there are a few words in Sufism that are synonymous with Gnostic: Marifa, Arif for example. I use the word Gnostic because western people are familiar with it. I don't like using foreign spiritual technical terms on people, unless I am describing the technical jargon of the tradition.

The culture of all metaphysics has mis-development as its center of concern

Mis-development is very common in western psychology as well:  Freudian, Jung, Pavlov, and western religious lore, Jud, Chr, and Islam, as well as Buddhism, and all religions in fact.

That's all religion and metaphysics is about is correcting mis-development, and getting people back into a stream of healthy development. Though metaphysics goes a step further and tries to acquire the balanced state , but also the advanced ” enlightenment” stage.

Mis-development began with the fall of man, and then has evolved to what I call: balanced corruption.

 Of course the spiritual technical term I label this based on my cosmology, is Ellipse [imperfect circle] as opposed to the [Perfect Circle] that we had in primordial times.

This is far beyond a theory of “original sin” of Christianity or Buddha's “Dukkha” or Islam's doctrine of “being inclined to sin”, although similar but in my cosmology I finish the knowledge by describing the actual physical[ structural] elements of the soul that created this mis-development, or is the source of it, as well as the cosmic science that entails the destruction of mis-development.

I literally describe the numerical elements of the “Ellipse” what there names are, as well the numerical elements of the “Perfect circle” as well as the elements on it.

One more thing:

I prove conclusively that “Hell” has its origins in Paradise

In other words the ellipse is the perfect circle corrupted!

So to sum up, I do concede the general idea is from metaphysics, but the particulars of the minute science are from gnosis.

My goal is to create a system [outside of the impotent religions] that can deal directly with this inner corruption [ mis-development(ellipse)] for religion and metaphysics has failed in my view to correct this situation.

Re: Before enlightenment

Now, “compassion” is a really interesting subject. Compassion is a really powerful element in almost all enlightenment states. But, I think compassion is more complex than most people think.

Agreed. Any thoughts on empathy?

I think empathy is the 'key'.

mu

(I tried to post this directly under Bill's comments, but it wound up at the very bottom of the discussion)

Re: Before enlightenment

You believe empathy could be the key ? mu ?

Well -as a bit of an empath -I would have to
agree that it is necessary.

Re: Before enlightenment

environsand said Today, 3:30 AM:

You believe empathy could be the key ? mu ?

Well -as a bit of an empath -I would have to
agree that it is necessary.

Guess I could have been more specific and said “empathy is the key to what ails humanity” (my idealistic slip is showing). Rather than specifically as part of 'attaining enlightenment'.

Re: Before enlightenment

Well, that kinda raises the question of what empathy really is - how does it work, and why does it work?

But yep, I'd say empathy is important.

I was thinking more along the lines of ethics, tho, when I said that about compassion.

If you feel deep compassion with other entities, let's say thru the means of empathy, it raises some very interesting ethical questions.

For instance, it's typical to believe that enlightenment means that the enlightened person is obligated to help others experience enlightenment.

But is that really the compassionate thing to do? Is it compassionate to lead others to enlightenment, when you have reason to believe that it could be overwhelming for them?

Re: Before enlightenment

For instance, it's typical to believe that enlightenment means that the enlightened person is obligated to help others experience enlightenment.

It probably is. I don't feel that way. I don't think there is any obligation attached to 'enlightenment'. And certainly no obligation (or desire for that matter) to lead anybody anywhere. There may be the sense of  wanting to share it out of love or because it is so frickin beautiful or amazing or whatever, but at the same time, you can't and you know it  - well, not in any way that I know of  yet.

But is that really the compassionate thing to do? Is it compassionate to lead others to enlightenment, when you have reason to believe that it could be overwhelming for them?

Good point.
 
As far as my comment about empathy being the key. I don't have a definition of what I mean by empathy - only the experience of what I would call empathy. It may not be.

It might be close to this one: ” the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner”

I know there could be a debate about whether or not it really humanly possible to truly empathize because of individual perception, projection, no need to empathize 'cuz Me/You is all the same' and so on.  But intuitively, I have always felt this to be a very important aspect of changing the world, or anything for that matter. Not  so much as an action, but as a state of being/seeing. Ack, words suck.

You guys have a very interesting dialog going over on Bill's original question board.

mu

Re: Before enlightenment

I know there could be a debate about whether or not it really humanly possible to truly empathize because of individual perception, projection, no need to empathize 'cuz Me/You is all the same' and so on.  But intuitively, I have always felt this to be a very important aspect of changing the world, or anything for that matter. Not  so much as an action, but as a state of being/seeing.

I agree completely. This is part of what I meant when I said to Zak that I thought that self-development (and by that I mean self-development training stuff, meditation, visualization, self-study, and that stuff) is more likely to do good for the world than enlightenment.

People can become more empathic, it's not that hard to develop, but as a culture and a civilization we don't emphasize that kind of education and skill.

You mention “not so much as an action”, but I tend to see empathy as a kind of action. Yes, lot's of people have natural abilities to imagine themselves the way the sense another person imagines themself, and to feel a kind of mirroring of another person's feelings in their body. But, I think most people can learn to empathize better, and the naturally skilled can become almost telepathic, their ability to empathise is so accurate.

So, I'd like to get across the ideal that a person doesn't have to be empathic (to be born empathic) that they can become empathic. Thru training. I'm big on the idea of training.

(note - I might have misunderstood what you meant by “being, not action”, so correct me if I'm wrong.)

 You guys have a very interesting dialog going over on Bill's original question board.

Which one is that?

Re: Before enlightenment

Bill,

So, I'd like to get across the ideal that a person doesn't have to be empathic (to be born empathic) that they can become empathic. Thru training. I'm big on the idea of training.

Sounds good to me. And I agree we don't emphasize that kind of training. Maybe because there is an idea or assumption it (empathy) is something one is born with. But, I'm all for the training route if it works.


 You guys have a very interesting dialog going over on Bill's original question board.

Which one is that?

Enlightenment or Wisdom. Seems like I've been following that one for ages!

Thanks for the comments. Always enlightening. :-)
mu

Re: Before enlightenment

Y'know -I sort of think enlightenment
is mainly pertaining to honesty -
and that is where so many trip up.
You know -the one's that sort of “wander”
on and off the path all the time?
Because to reach the light -you have to go
through the dark -and too many
get stuck there because it is too hard for
them to acknowledge their sins and the things
they have done to hurt others,especially if those
things were pre-meditated.
But they must accept their guilt to themselves
and then learn to forgive themsleves -to feel
sorry for themsleves for what they once were.
To love themsleves -not with a false sense of ego-
but with the love feel for acknowledging your
body as an actual living breathing human being
and feel the awesome just in that -at first.
And then love and understanding of other's will
come and the more one feels the light the more
beautiful a thing it is to love and grow and nuture
together , all of us .

Re: Before enlightenment

Y'know -I sort of think enlightenment
is mainly pertaining to honesty -
and that is where so many trip up.

“Honesty” is an important part of the way I look at enlightenment too.

Most of the rest of the stuff you were talking about is pretty modern. I figure I'm more of a traditionalist when it comes to such things.

It would surely be interesting to see a manifestion like what you are describing. Sounds a bit like mdma. I do think it would be wonderful and wise if people were to behave more empathically to each other, especially in a planetwide way. Heck, any way at all, but it's a lot easier to be empathic with neighbors than with strangers from other cultures, and it's the latter we need as the planet gets filled up with people.

Re: Before enlightenment

Sometimes it can be easier to care for others -
because love can hurt and neighbours can be cruel.
In my case , because our neighbour know's my husband/ex 's
family -he actually lied and covered up the domestic violence that
he well knew was going on.
Same to be said of all other neighbour's within earshot.
But I was the “stranger” -even after 20 years and his family
had lived here all their lives.
Amazing how you can be crucified and how people
can live with themsleves is beyond me.
And yet-I have to care for them -they are my neighbours.

Re: Before enlightenment

I hear that. That's one of the funny things about life. Those close to you are those that are most likely to lead you to pain.

Being a living organism is that way.

Re: Before enlightenment

Thanks Bill -for undertanding and being someone
when i was hurting.

But i wonder why -it does seem inhumane and
alien to our nature -
or is it all just “dog eat dog” !

And it's okay -i have my moments but never lose sight
of the good in us -which i'm sure is inherrent -unless
damaged.

Re: Before enlightenment

But i wonder why -it does seem inhumane and
alien to our nature -
or is it all just “dog eat dog” !

You're saying “dog eat dog” like that's an inherently bad thing - but dogs are just animals, much like you and I.

People are mostly unconscious, and driven by forces from biology and culture - it's kind of a “they know not what they do” kind of process.

And our culture is especially screwed up right now - we're in the middle of the biggest human population explosion of all time, everybody is all riled up, and desperate to get theirs before the party's over. Crowding makes animals mean.

That's why it would be nice if there was more empathy - but for now, the people with naturally high empathy abilities are likely to go thru some bad times.

I know I have. ;-}

Re: Before enlightenment

Hey big Bill,
I see you are back.

By the way I read you telling the Integral Zaadz pod that if they wanted more posts they aught to get off the snob, elite routine.

Watch yourself over there Bill you might not last long with your independent thinking

Matter of fact I am sure they are sorry they let you in the joint in the first place!

Re: Before enlightenment

…they are sorry they let you in the joint in the first place!

Ha ha ha, well, I don't think I've violated the culture anywhere near that level yet - but it was interesting to see that nobody was interested in that question.

The dominant brand has the luxury of not having to concern itself with the feelings of weaker brands. (I mean “brand” in the marketing sense, as in “branding” and “brand name”,)

Group culture is a very powerful effect, every human is seeking both personal identity and group identity, and I've long been fascinated at the way groups of people work, and hopw exclusive language works. I don't begrudge people a little identity.

I read your latest article at integral world. Maybe it was because it was the second of two parts, but it was a little hard to follow. I know you are writing a critique, but your word choices are a little severe - “narrow minded literalist” and the like. I felt like you were trying to tell me, as the reader, how to feel about the issues you were discussing, rather than showing me the different ways one could feel, about, for instance, the roles of the mythic in society and the individual's growth process.

I know it might seem presumptive to comment on how one experienced another's writing, but, you're a writer, and I'm a writer, if I can't give you a bit of feedback on your writing, who can?

Re: Before enlightenment

Bill you are a true independent thinker. You will learn much at the I-I pod.

I did also; I was a year on the Integral Naked forum.

I really grew to like those people; my post to you was partly  tongue in cheek,
Though I truly[ as you know now have problems with Wilber] though I wish him the best.

As for the essay I guess you are talking about “Myth of the given”

I have to learn to be calmer and clearer, certainly, I agree

Thanks for the objective criticism.

I am truly a fiery writer, in fact person as well in some regard, one of my misdevelopements!

Though the first part of the essay I believe the points were irrefutable, about Wilber's comments on traditional metaphysics.

Re: Before enlightenment

And our culture is especially screwed up right now - we're in the middle of the biggest human population explosion of all time, everybody is all riled up, and desperate to get theirs before the party's over. Crowding makes animals mean.

That's why it would be nice if there was more empathy - but for now, the people with naturally high empathy abilities are likely to go thru some bad times.

I know I have. ;-}

Here here!      (Hm, not sure I've used that phrase before and not even sure what it means other than “Right on!”)

Interesting take on the population boom and overcrowding. Something to ponder for sure.

mu