Dan Rowden wrote:Kunga,
Tell me what enlightenment is in one paragraph.
I can see that as a real possibility. There are many male types who would get a major ego boost out of something like Quinn's Exposition. I don't find myself entirely in agreement with it myself, but for the purposes of this thread I was simply discussing Exposition. My own personal view isn't too far off, and I think just rephrases a lot of it in as neutral terms as I can get, which may or may not be as effective. Its hard to say about these things.Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Assuming that by "you" above, you mean "biological females" then what you are saying is only true to females, and entirely misses the advantage that David gives to biological females in his Woman essay - though I don't know whether to call it an unfair advantage considering that biological men do have a head start to enlightenment, whether it is a biological head start or a cultural advantage due to pervasive sociological differences in how males and females are treated from the time of birth.
Yes, the angrier one gets, the more of Quinn's femininity is highlighted, but that is rather obvious. What is more subtle is that the more smug that biological males feel on reading this material, the more feminine he actually is - but smugness is not a red flag waving like anger or pain is. A hurt or angry female will be more prodded to think about it in different ways until she understands it than a man is prodded by a seeming ego boost - which is what an unconscious male could get from Quinn's essay on Woman.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Kunga,
Tell me how you got from "When you realize the non-dual nature of everything...it's emptiness . (that everything is connected and dependant on everything else for it's existence" to "i really don't know." Please tell me something more detailed than that you just "realized" that you don't know.
There's your paragraph of definition, Dan.Kunga wrote: If i was truly Enlightened i would be clarivoyant,telepathic,be able to walk on water, walk through walls, speed walk, know everything,(i would be able to recall my past lives too), able to cut up my body and give it to others in need without being harmed,if i was Enlightened, i would know that too. . . Enlightened people know what to say and how to say it effectively as to benifit all beings.
Kunga wrote:If you think you know [enlightenment] ...you don't.
The head suddenly starts spinning .....Kunga wrote: if i was Enlightened, i would know that too.
Ah, it's stop spinning now.Kunga wrote:but then realized i really don't know.
Hold on, it's spinning again .....Kunga wrote: If i was truly Enlightened i would be clarivoyant,telepathic,be able to walk on water, walk through walls, speed walk, know everything,(i would be able to recall my past lives too), able to cut up my body and give it to others in need without being harmed,
That's right. If a woman can somehow pull against the drag of her own feminine nothingness and start to think deeply in a sustained, consistent manner such that she begins to inwardly connect with the ultimate truth directly and consciously - leaving all the gurus, books, support groups, women's networks, social rewards and emotional games far behind - she can finally say in truth that she has a masculine consciousness.Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Just to be absolutely clear for the readers, especially because of your recent extended sabbatical, you do not mean that masculinity is only to be found in biological males just as femininity is not necessarily tied to only biological females - though the propensity for these characteristics is tied to the gender-associated terms, right?David Quinn wrote:This relates to the point I make about how "femininity" and "unconsciousness" shouldn't be regarded as equivalent terms. A feminine person is unconscious in an entirely different way to that of the ignorant masculine person. The latter is unconscious because of fears, emotional attachments and mental blocks, while the former's unconsciousness derives from an inherent lack of capacity.
David Quinn wrote: to think deeply in a sustained, consistent manner such that she begins to inwardly connect with the ultimate truth directly and consciously - leaving all the gurus, books, support groups, women's networks, social rewards and emotional games far behind - she can finally say in truth that she has a masculine consciousness.
You call this consistent?Kunga wrote:Long before i started reading and had a teacher, i thought deeply and consistently
Kunga wrote:Dan Rowden wrote:Kunga,
Tell me what enlightenment is in one paragraph.
If you think you know...you don't. i typed out a paragraph...but then realized i really don't know.
What i typed was related to this : When you realize the non-dual nature of everything...it's emptiness . (that everything is connected and dependant on everything else for it's existence.)
Kunga wrote:If i was truly Enlightened i would be clarivoyant,telepathic,be able to walk on water, walk through walls, speed walk, know everything,(i would be able to recall my past lives too), able to cut up my body and give it to others in need without being harmed
Consistently inconsistent...lolElizabeth Isabelle wrote:You call this consistent?
The sutta is obviously fraudulent. Many of them are. Uninspired, buddhism-by-numbers, written by people who imitate the Buddha without having any real understanding.Kunga wrote:In this Sutta Buddha speaks of hundreds of his female discipes attaining Enlightenment & talks about the super-normal powers...
Maha-Vacchagotta Sutta
http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pit ... ta-e1.html
What do you think?David...are you Enlightened ?
Oh, you didn't have to have worked so hard to demonstrate that :) This post is more than enough in and of itself. There is officially no further reason to take anything you say seriously. I suggest you spend more time working on those delusions rather than trying to argue with people.Kunga wrote:Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Kunga,
Tell me how you got from "When you realize the non-dual nature of everything...it's emptiness . (that everything is connected and dependant on everything else for it's existence" to "i really don't know." Please tell me something more detailed than that you just "realized" that you don't know.
Because that's what i THINK it is...i'm not sure. It just makes perfect sense to me. But again, i don't think i'm Enlightened. That's exactly where i am right now. If i was truly Enlightened i would be clarivoyant,telepathic,be able to walk on water, walk through walls, speed walk, know everything,(i would be able to recall my past lives too), able to cut up my body and give it to others in need without being harmed,if i was Enlightened, i would know that too. But i'm not. Enlightened people know what to say and how to say it effectively as to benifit all beings. All i'm capable of doing is arrogantly showing ya'll how deluded i am.
David Quinn wrote:What do you think?
i'm not arguing, i'm trying to decipher the truth ...you call it arguing because i'm a female, if i was a man you would think i was debating....i am passionate about getting to the bottom of things. i know i've shaken you guys up a lot because of my inquisitiveness. i sense there is a power struggle here....lolDan Rowden wrote:Oh, you didn't have to have worked so hard to demonstrate that :) This post is more than enough in and of itself. There is officially no further reason to take anything you say seriously. I suggest you spend more time working on those delusions rather than trying to argue with people.
Dan Rowden wrote:One necessarily knows if enlightenment is present - if it really is. That is basically true of necessity and definition. However, it is easy enough to be deluded about it, as many people have been.
See, there you go, flashing your tits! How predictable. I would have said you were "arguing" whatever your gender. Arguing/debating - same same. Hell, I didn't even know till a couple of days ago that you were female.Kunga wrote:i'm not arguing, i'm trying to decipher the truth ...you call it arguing because i'm a female, if i was a man you would think i was debating....i am passionate about getting to the bottom of things. i know i've shaken you guys up a lot because of my inquisitiveness. i sense there is a power struggle here....lolDan Rowden wrote:Oh, you didn't have to have worked so hard to demonstrate that :) This post is more than enough in and of itself. There is officially no further reason to take anything you say seriously. I suggest you spend more time working on those delusions rather than trying to argue with people.
I fail to see any real significance in that.at least i can admit i'm not Enlightened.
The question does not entail a simple yes or no. That's the whole point. A simple "yes" would not really be a fully accurate answer.Kunga wrote:Dan Rowden wrote:One necessarily knows if enlightenment is present - if it really is. That is basically true of necessity and definition. However, it is easy enough to be deluded about it, as many people have been.
Just a simple yes or no .
This question was for David.
The problem is, if I admit that I am, then it will be said that I am arrogant and delusional. Some people will even quote the popular mantra that "the truly enlightened would never say that they are enlightened".Kunga wrote:i don't know. i asked you the question, you seem to know a lot, don't you know whether your Enlightened or not ?David Quinn wrote:What do you think?
Buddha admitted he was Enlightened .
Can you admit that ?
How do you know this David? Have you ever gotten carried away with supernatural powers? If not, have you ever had reason to believe other people had such powers?David Quinn wrote: As for "supernatural powers", the Buddha warned his followers on numerous occasions not to pursue them. Not only is it a distraction from the all-important task of becoming enlightened, but the ego can easily get boosted and unbalanced by such an increase of its powers, often to the point of no return.
David Quinn wrote:The problem is, if I admit that I am, then it will be said that I am arrogant and delusional. Some people will even quote the popular mantra that "the truly enlightened would never say that they are enlightened".Kunga wrote:i don't know. i asked you the question, you seem to know a lot, don't you know whether your Enlightened or not ?David Quinn wrote:What do you think?
Buddha admitted he was Enlightened .
Can you admit that ?
And if I say that I'm not, then people will rightly say that I'm not in a position to speak authoritatively on the subject of enlightenment.
I've answered yes to this question many times in the past, but nowadays I'd rather just speak the truth with conviction and authority and let people make up their own minds.
-
This is a discussion form...shit happens right ? Really tho, i know i get defensive, and the TRUTH doesn't need to be defended, it can stand on it's own....but i see so many LIES that i feel the TRUTH needs to be exposed....and that's what i'm trying to do...find the truth hidden under all the lies. i'll admit if i'm delusional....and i probably really don't understand Davids essay on WOMAN ...but i'm REALLY trying to....HONESTLY. But it's really hard when your emotions get in the way, and he intensionally pushes the buttons here, triggering off an emotional response. The emotional response of a man that falls for this philosophy is probebly equal to a woman's, only the woman experiences anger and the man experiences happiness.Dan Rowden wrote:Arguing/debating - same same. Hell, I didn't even know till a couple of days ago that you were female.
Dan Rowden wrote:I can accept the sincerity of your motives up to a point - that point being where you actually let your emotions make you feel you have an understanding that you really don't, which causes you to argue without cause or real substance. That's a trap we all have to watch out for.
When we get upset over concepts, the first thing we should really do is ask why we have become upset, rather than take our response as some sort of sign that there's something automatically wrong with the concepts in question. Emotion is never an argument; it's always just a response.
