Dawnrazor.co.uk

Like the ants we the human succomb to the emanations released by our similar ones... so says this article unfortunately in French.
http://www.ledevoir.com/societe/science-et-technologie/111357/l-odeur-de-l-amour

it suits my point about true enlightenment not being possible in a mortal existance. so much of our perception that affects the way we feel and think is chemical, biological and unconcious. So how can we realy know our own minds or if we are realy aware and in control of our thoughts and actions? and to what extent?
We all work on instinct, like it or not.

Hehe: http://translate.google.com/translate?u ... =&ie=UTF-8
So it would be better to wash less and stop using perfumes when looking for a partner.

That's true. Experiments with Magnetic Resonance Imaging have shown that the human brain already makes decisions a few seconds before we consciously make our decision.
That what we call consciousness is just a small part of our brain, most of the stuff is done automatically.
(Why is this? Because our brain already sucks up a huge amount of energy and hence it has to do stuff efficient. Our consciousness on the other hand is a way to save energy. Instead of doing a lot of trial and error, we can just sit down and think things through.)

On the other hand, it will be hard to divide the mind and the body. Patients with brain injuries show interesting changes in behaviour and preferences. Eg. shifting from Rock music to Jazz, from gentle to aggressive, and so on.
Can we divide mind and body? Seems unlikely.

Other interesting observation on how the mind and the body relate: In the experiment an artificial hand was placed in sight of the subject on a table, it's real hand out of sight below the table. Both hands were stroked for a while, then a hammer went down on the upper hand. The subject felt a physical pain.
Also experiences with artificial hands, legs, etc. show that our brains accept prostheses as parts of our body just by looking at them.
Can we divide mind and body? Seems so...

For years now people tried to create artificial intelligence (AI) with computers and failed. Nowadays they believe, that intelligence can't exist without a body, (which can be regarded as an interface to the world,) and there's more AI research being done in the field of robotics than in systems which just operate on language.
Can we divide... the heck! We don't have enough data to answer that today.

But there's one thing I believe. Even if it would be possible to free the human mind from its mortal existence (divide mind and body), it would fail to grok the universe. Because it wasn't designed being able to do that.

There's also another thing I believe in: I don't care for pheromones. I just have to look at any body part of a woman to make it my fetish. And that one day they'll create an Artificial Intelligence which will be able to explain a woman's mind to me in terms simple enough for a man to understand.

Alto the translations on the Internet are not very fluent they have the merit to exist. I hadn't tried Google translator yet. Thanks for adding it.

About (true) enlightenment, I see it rather like a skill to develop with keeping an open faithful mind (ouverture d'esprit) so that not to lose it.
At first it comes by surprise, if it happens in similar situations we may try to recreate the same conditions then expect it to happen again. Many people have tried to find a method to it. Religions is the nest for this turn of things. Yet they generally fail to it
The effect of surprise seems to me an important part of it, like the gifts someone can make to someone else, like the way a child looks.

"when I'm gone with you discover all of Earth surprises "

"So much of our perception that affects the way we feel and think is chemical, biological and unconcious. So how can we realy know our own minds or if we are realy aware and in control of our thoughts and actions? and to what extent?"

I believe that we put our own limits/boundaries How do we know our own minds ? It requires at least two persons for that.
Do we need to know if we are realy aware and in control of our thoughts and actions and what for?

"We all work on instinct, like it or not."

When we don't like what our instincts (mostly because of the others) we can go against them.. or do otherwise for our relationships.

Since making a baby is not something wanted in the first place very often, cleanliness stays a safer way than dirt, especially because smells can be a reason to run away fast from possible partner. As for perfumes unless it really melts well with the skin it is not necessary to use one. All it does is hide the original fragrance of the individual.

excelent post Markandre13!

thats some very interesting stuff. I like the concept of the body as an 'interface' to world. Unfortunately it is a very inefficiant and limited one.

I will say one very important factor for social interation, man, woman, mammals of a high social order in general, is the frequent need for reasurence. And in each sex it takes different forms. for males- it pertains to what they do, for females - more to what they are.

@Ngie -I like what you said about enlightenment as a skill to develope, cultivating it or seeking it as a practice can be of help at least, but who are we to trust as the teacher? Others of our own kind? Isn't this then a case of the blind leading the blind??
And I'm not sure what you mean by needing two? needing an outside opinion ? I've read about sociology and how people guage others responses as a mirror for their own behavior, I think that much is true.

This is neither the time nor the place to even briefly address the issue, but your point contradicts the basic belief of some 500 milion Buddhists (as well as parallel convictions of a probably quite substantial number of people coming from other "religious" traditions) who would not only heartily disagree with you, but also point to those still living people whom they consider to have fully realized their Buddha nature.

Evidently staying on the outside of all such traditions, are you really entitled to judge whether their most central belief is ultimately correct or incorect? I most certainly don't believe in the existence (or even the relevance of speculating on the existence) of any God or other "transcendental" ueber-being or super-force - but I don't think I've got any right to assert that the core belief of, say, theist Christianity is rubbish, fullstop . . . There's a difference between declaring the general impossibility or the ultimate uselessness of some such conviction and expressing one's private, and concerned with one's private life, beliefs - the difference which may be the sine qua non of real religious tolerance.



Your not being able to trust anyone (or not having found anyone worthy of your trust) does not in the least mean there is no one to trust.

I'm sorry if I've so terribly offended you and your beliefs squishy.

why is it not the time and the place? This section of the forum was created for this wasn't it? I'm interested in these subjects and your point of view and would be glad to hear them. If this is an argument about enlightenment, enlighten me When you talk about achieve the 'budda nature' what is the definition of that?

My whole intent was to say that no one as of yet has substantially shown evidence of what we truly are and why we are here. Its all personal beliefs and speculations. Most people assume there is a spirit or soul, many believe in things like reincarnation. But we don't really know the truth about these things. Only our own assumed truths based on our perception and 'interface'. Like most physics even , its based on mathematics and theory, but its still mostly just theory. And some argue yet that everything is just thought and theory, so what is reality, and who is to decide? I myself believe there is a spiritual world, but I am not so arrogant to say that I may be totally wrong and we are just a product of an elaborate arrangement of matter only. And who is to tell us what is true if none of us are outside the limits the same perception and mortality?


I did hopefully point out that its possible to obtain a higher level of experience and 'enlightenment' (or perhaps I would rather use 'awareness' )with in these confines. I'm sure the people studying buddhism are those who have. I certainly credit anyone for trying. I don't know a lot about buddhism, but there are things about it I do agree with from what I've read, but others I don't I'm afraid.

There are different interpretations of the word enlightenment. Hence before discussing it it's important to define it.
Which btw. reminds me of the philosophy student who wanted to discuss some of his theories with a mathematics student. The math guy broke it all down into definitions till there was nothing left to discuss. The philosopher had been enlightened but was also slightly depressed now as he's been put out of work.
Poor guy, I still fell a bit ashamed about it.
Some religions, especially the institutionalized ones, strike me as way to blur things. They're more about politics.
And sometimes religion just makes people believe that they're a the good ones and thus they don't even start to think about all the bad stuff they're doing.

Which reminds me of:

• Dunning-Kruger effect
• Cognitive Dissonance
• Monty Python's Déjà Vu Sketch

So in general the mind is not be trusted. But when one knows that and has some training to use that knowledge, one might be able to get along with it.

But then the mind isn't all crap. Eg. one can solve problems by focusing on 'em for a while and a few minutes, hours or a day later, the subconsciousness will ring a bell and pop up with a nice solution. An open mind is required for this to work.

Without ouverture d'esprit, the mind will always stay way behind its potential. And to achieve this kind of enlightenment everybody has to find her/his own way I guess. Asking questions and thinking is a good way to start. An old lady once told me, that the brain is like a muscle which needs to be trained. But! Recent research concluded that doing crosswords just trains the brain for doing crosswords!
Oh! It certainly helps to focus or to start a new train of thought. I recently got a copy of The Sisterhood's "Gift" and especially the song "Finland Red, Egypt White" gave me something to think about... where was I?It's hard to see the outside of a house when you're inside it. Another person passing by might indeed be helpfull:
"Hey! What does the house I live in look like?"
"It looks like shite!"
"Whew! Thanks a alot! Up yours!"
Well, yes, a minimum two people.
Yes. And the "need" here is "human curiosity". And Neuroscience is making big steps forward since they're using computers to examine the data or to even simulate neurons. It will also put Psychology and Psychoanalysis on a sound basis.Instincts are important and not to be ignored. But in our modern society they sometimes come up with the wrong message. So before shouting at your next man or even giving him a free face massage, on 2nd thought, a kind word might also be a good idea. You can still beat him up to pulp if he refuses to listen.As with all things, a healthy balance must be found.
“You are going to women? Do not forget to wash!”
And thus resulting in offspring like weebleswooble.

It's good enough for that!

But isn't the point of Buddhism to become enlightened by withdrawing from live/the mortal existence as much as possible? If you look at baba's comment in this light, he does not contradict, but support Buddhism!

You haven't ofended me, and nothing terrible's happened, baba



Yup, but it's got nothing to do with FotN, I'm afraid - and I doubt many people will be interested in following that sort of digression. Besides, such topics are very sticky and require great care - and care requires time, which I presently don't have, alas.



This I most certainly cannot do



I'm referring to the doctrine of Buddha-dhatu or Tathagatagarbha. I won't even try defining it but, to put it very crudely, the idea (prevalent in all Mahayana) is that every sentient being either has the potential ("seed") of becoming a Buddha or, according to non-gradual traditions, already is a Buddha (an awakened being) - they just don't know it yet.

You get "enlightened" (or get to know you've always been so), i. e., realize your Buddha nature and become a realized Buddha, when you've let the "seed" sprout and fully grow - or, in case of non-gradualists, when you know beyond all doubt directly, experientially and existentially that it's always been fully grown.

"Know" is a tricky tricky tricky word here, of course.



I don't have many quarrels with what you're saying. Would say more, but don't have the time



It most certainly isn't, unless you're referring to Theravada - in which case I don't know enough to tell if you're correct or incorrect. (Incidentally, it's Theravadins who reject the doctrine of Buddha-nature.) However, Theravada practitioners make up less than 10% of all Buddhists, and the beliefs of the remaining 90% would make them into anything but quietistic escapists, world denialists or life-abhorring freaks

I suppose your right , I'm really much too content with being a mere beast and prefer finding shiney beach peebles too a hapless persuit of the philosophers stone

thanks for your time, and the info provided.
Sorry I didn't mean to impose.

I think the biggest conflict in this discussion is that we have very different definitions of the term 'enlightenment'.

Oh but if "the stone of the philosophers" is "a common, dis-esteemed stoned, rejected by the builders, under our noses, concealed by the obvious light of every day", to quote a twentieth century adept of the Opus, then playing with your shiny pebbles on the beach you may well be quite an alchemist yourself.



You didn't impose a bit.



That may very well be so. Enlightenment in Buddhism is a pretty down-to-earth business, so to speak.

«Enlightenment in Buddhism is a pretty down-to-earth business, so to speak. » (Squishy)  = > We all come down?

Apologize Squishy for giving you too much extra work, sincerely. That was completely rubbish. We can PM each other or find other places if we want to go on indeed.

So enough noogying and time for a beer !
A votre santé!
(Cheers all.)

Me an alchemist?

well in my pebble I do see all the universe, its billions of gallaxies to its tiniest particles, the whole of the history of earth, its life, past and future, and myself as the universe looking in on itself saying "I AM"



as far as enightenment being 'down to earth' perhaps our difinitions aren't that different after all. I will just have to look into that more. My time is limited too I'm afraid. But then so is everythign's... or is it?