I have a question regarding becoming, or perhaps more accurately, being, fully aware, awake, or enlightened-whichever term will suffice. Would not being fully awake create more suffering for an individual as opposed to eliminating that suffering?? Because if you were fully awake and saw everything as it is as opposed as what it appears to be would you not suffer more.
Becoming aware......
- Thread starter Centaurus1
- Start date
kmguru
Staff member
My understanding is that "suffering" is an emotional state where as "enlightenment", "awareness or whatever you want to call it is pure Wisdom. (Information -> Knowledge -> Wisdom). Whether a wise person suffers - I do not know, you have to find one and ask....I am not there yet....
D
Divine_Key
Guest
In some cases, the best answer to your question is 'yes'.
Knowing everything that went on would crush you.
for example the first time you found out that father christmas didnt exist, or when you found out about a rape case, did it not make you sick?
Ignorance is bliss...
Knowing everything that went on would crush you.
for example the first time you found out that father christmas didnt exist, or when you found out about a rape case, did it not make you sick?
Ignorance is bliss...
Hmmmm.......... paradox.
So you become enlightened when the illusion disappears from your conscious state-which is that with which you are aware. In other words you see everything as it is-in reality because there is no illusion-and not as what it necessarily appears to be. Can you see things as they are even if the illusion still exists?? What I'm wondering is-from the Buddhist's perspective-as a self-professed unenlightened individual would I be incapable of seeing anything as it was or is because of the illusion??
Hypothetically, when the illusion disappears, the individual becomes enlightened thus eliminating that individuals suffering. And in that very enlightenment that individual sees the suffering of other individuals because of the enlightenment. Logically, I think if I were to see other people suffer-to the extent in which they do, that would then therefore make me suffer due to concern for those suffering. I suppose not all people would think like that nevertheless I do as an individual. How is this logically reconcilable??
Hypothetically, when the illusion disappears, the individual becomes enlightened thus eliminating that individuals suffering. And in that very enlightenment that individual sees the suffering of other individuals because of the enlightenment. Logically, I think if I were to see other people suffer-to the extent in which they do, that would then therefore make me suffer due to concern for those suffering. I suppose not all people would think like that nevertheless I do as an individual. How is this logically reconcilable??
to be enlightened i think,implies awareness and acceptance of the
transitory nature of all things.
to be enlightened i think, implies awareness and acceptance of the
permanent nature of all things.
enlightenment means that either negative(suffering) or positive(joy) emotions is just that,an emotion and thus irrelevant.
centaurus, making an assumption that you, after enlightenment would have the same emotions as before is not logical.what would be the point of enlightenment then?
imho of course
transitory nature of all things.
to be enlightened i think, implies awareness and acceptance of the
permanent nature of all things.
enlightenment means that either negative(suffering) or positive(joy) emotions is just that,an emotion and thus irrelevant.
centaurus, making an assumption that you, after enlightenment would have the same emotions as before is not logical.what would be the point of enlightenment then?
imho of course
Last edited:
"to be enlightened i think implies awareness and acceptance of the
transitory nature of things
to be enlightened i think implies awareness and acceptance of the
permanent nature of all things"
You do realize you've made two completely contradictory statements in the same paragraph.
'Everything is temporary and everything is permanent.' How can everything be temporary and permanent at the same time??
"enlightenment means that either negative(suffering) or positive(joy) emotions is just that,an emotion; and thus irrelevant"
So emotions have no pertinent place in the human experience?? If emotions are irrelevant may I ask why His Holiness The Dalai Lama wrote a book entitled The Art of HAPPINESS: A Handbook For Living??
"centaurus, making an assumption that you after enlightenment would have the same emotions as before is not logical.what would be the point of enlightenment then"
So emotions change when you become enlightened?? In what manner do emotions change once one becomes enlightened??
transitory nature of things
to be enlightened i think implies awareness and acceptance of the
permanent nature of all things"
You do realize you've made two completely contradictory statements in the same paragraph.
'Everything is temporary and everything is permanent.' How can everything be temporary and permanent at the same time??
"enlightenment means that either negative(suffering) or positive(joy) emotions is just that,an emotion; and thus irrelevant"
So emotions have no pertinent place in the human experience?? If emotions are irrelevant may I ask why His Holiness The Dalai Lama wrote a book entitled The Art of HAPPINESS: A Handbook For Living??
"centaurus, making an assumption that you after enlightenment would have the same emotions as before is not logical.what would be the point of enlightenment then"
So emotions change when you become enlightened?? In what manner do emotions change once one becomes enlightened??
it is not so much that emotions change after enlightenment but it
is the absence of emotions once in that state of being.after all the goal of self awareness is to free oneself of attachments and the consequent emotions that arise.
conventional logic may serve its purpose when dealing with
mundane matters but when delving into metaphysics it can prove to be inadequate. dichotomies, either/or, this/that imply a finality,
whereas accepting the possibility that two opposing viewpoints
or facts can be true leaves one with a sense of infinite possibilties.
to elaborate further see links below
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mathematics-inconsistent/
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/2952/proof2.html
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~sjblatt/notes/nottrue.html
http://www.idmon.freeserve.co.uk/cation.htm
emotions do have a place in human experience ! it is a source of
revenue for shrinks and drug dealers
enlightenment is not to be taken lightly. it is the pinnacle of human achievement and upon reaching it one trancends humanity
as for the dali lama dude......
if this has not cleared up any remaining doubts please see
here http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~petehip/ZPKLogic.html
is the absence of emotions once in that state of being.after all the goal of self awareness is to free oneself of attachments and the consequent emotions that arise.
conventional logic may serve its purpose when dealing with
mundane matters but when delving into metaphysics it can prove to be inadequate. dichotomies, either/or, this/that imply a finality,
whereas accepting the possibility that two opposing viewpoints
or facts can be true leaves one with a sense of infinite possibilties.
to elaborate further see links below
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mathematics-inconsistent/
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/2952/proof2.html
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~sjblatt/notes/nottrue.html
http://www.idmon.freeserve.co.uk/cation.htm
emotions do have a place in human experience ! it is a source of
revenue for shrinks and drug dealers
enlightenment is not to be taken lightly. it is the pinnacle of human achievement and upon reaching it one trancends humanity
as for the dali lama dude......
if this has not cleared up any remaining doubts please see
here http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~petehip/ZPKLogic.html
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
Quote from spookz
it is not so much that emotions change after enlightenment but it
is the absence of emotions once in that state of being.after all the goal of self awareness is to free oneself of attachments and the consequent emotions that arise.
--------------------------------------------------------
this is a statement from a materialist view point!!!
it is the never ending tunnel of darknes
humans in thier nature are emotional (regardless of the use or ability to switch them on or off)!
so emotion is in its very essence a form of perception!
thus removing it from awareness is like telling a blind man he can not touch anything unless he gets the wrong impression!
have i got the wrong impresion???
please expand???
it is not so much that emotions change after enlightenment but it
is the absence of emotions once in that state of being.after all the goal of self awareness is to free oneself of attachments and the consequent emotions that arise.
--------------------------------------------------------
this is a statement from a materialist view point!!!
it is the never ending tunnel of darknes
humans in thier nature are emotional (regardless of the use or ability to switch them on or off)!
so emotion is in its very essence a form of perception!
thus removing it from awareness is like telling a blind man he can not touch anything unless he gets the wrong impression!
have i got the wrong impresion???
please expand???
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
A MATERIALIST THINKS SELF ACTUALISATION IS A "GOAL" IN ITS
VERY NATURE...
JUST LIKE A BIG BANK ACCOUNT OR
BUILDING THAT HAS JUST BEEN FINNISHED.
THAT IS JUST SOO LIMITING ITS SCARRY!
VERY NATURE...
JUST LIKE A BIG BANK ACCOUNT OR
BUILDING THAT HAS JUST BEEN FINNISHED.
THAT IS JUST SOO LIMITING ITS SCARRY!
"humans in their nature are emotional "
what about it?just because humans have characteristics and attributes doesnt mean they have to be defined by them
perceptions can be made without forming opinions(takes some practice but can be done )
emotions are a result of ones present state of being. i do not see how it can come first
if my statement is from a materialistic point of view, what would be the non-materialistic interpretation of the issues being discussed? (self awareness/emotions)
also there is absolutely no need to yell
i listen i learn
what about it?just because humans have characteristics and attributes doesnt mean they have to be defined by them
perceptions can be made without forming opinions(takes some practice but can be done
)emotions are a result of ones present state of being. i do not see how it can come first
if my statement is from a materialistic point of view, what would be the non-materialistic interpretation of the issues being discussed? (self awareness/emotions)
also there is absolutely no need to yell
i listen i learn
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
ooooopppppssss
caps lock is my friend not my voice
i was using for art sake not to mean shouting
i appologise!
well
where i would go from here would be...
can a human be born and live without emotions???
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
that is the question on which i was founding my thought
on the bassis of materialism not in a
pointing finger but more a defining discriptive manner.
'look at the funny man'!
exclaimed the small child
"which one asks the mother"?
if we were all funny at least we would all be laughing
if i couldnt laugh at myself it might mean i would be crying...
and we know which is prefered
a doctrine taught to me by a great wise owL
caps lock is my friend not my voice
i was using for art sake not to mean shouting
i appologise!
well
where i would go from here would be...
can a human be born and live without emotions???
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
that is the question on which i was founding my thought
on the bassis of materialism not in a
pointing finger but more a defining discriptive manner.
'look at the funny man'!
exclaimed the small child
"which one asks the mother"?
if we were all funny at least we would all be laughing
if i couldnt laugh at myself it might mean i would be crying...
and we know which is prefered
a doctrine taught to me by a great wise owL
Hi KM,
I have been around, seeing if any interesting subjects are being discussed.
Thanks for you concern.
Love
Jan Ardena.
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
heyya all
Jan Ardena...
QUOTE
__________________
God is seated in everyones heart. From Him comes, knowledge and forgetfulness.
-------------------------------------
i am curiouse on the issue of why you refer to god as male
would it not be more likely that god would be of both sexs
thus hermaphadite???
please expand!
in regard to your awareness of this as the nature of the question.
or is it simplicity to describe? as "him" ?
groove on all
Jan Ardena...
QUOTE
__________________
God is seated in everyones heart. From Him comes, knowledge and forgetfulness.
-------------------------------------
i am curiouse on the issue of why you refer to god as male
would it not be more likely that god would be of both sexs
thus hermaphadite???
please expand!
in regard to your awareness of this as the nature of the question.
or is it simplicity to describe? as "him" ?
groove on all