Russell Parr

Causality as is appears to consciousness is dualistic, while ultimately, it is infinite. Who told you I lapped it up uncritically?

Oh BS You wouldn't be here if you believed that.

You don't think it.. "it" being what exactly? That there are incorrect thoughts? Ok, good so far. Enlightenment is the awakening of consciousness from delusional thoughts and perspectives. It is the transformation from one way of thinking to another. You don't just give up thought due to enlightenment. But yes, thoughts and emotions aren't enlightenment in the sense that they are different things than enlightenment. Awareness is not enough. If one does not accumulate the adequate wisdom required for enlightenment or doesn't do enough to fully assimilate such wisdom, enlightenment cannot be had or sustained.

@SOUL If there are no incorrect thoughts then how are you to disagree with me?

Those that think incorrectly end up vilifying thought itself.

Because it's in the name. Enlighten - lighten, to overcome darkness, delusion; to gain insight, to enable consciousness to be the crystal clear light it is intended to be. What is delusional - the belief that things and/or the self exist independently from the rest of reality. The ego is delusional. What is real - the Tao, infinite reality, causality.

Ah, yes but while science must be logical or it isn't good science, being logical does not necessarily involve the scientific method. Take math for example, which makes use of abstract symbols instead of empirical data. Philosophy, which is most fundamental of all, is the logical study of the nature of things like existence, identity, and perception. Beliefs and assumptions aren't dropped, but are used in practicality, yet never clung to. A velvet cape? All I got was this shitty vest pin. In what way are the enlightened wrong?

Yes, simply put, enlightenment is the transcendence and overcoming of a delusional perspective of reality.

There is no such thing as irrational phenomena. Only our understanding of phenomena can be irrational. My use of the word infinite is more so in a philosophical context, meaning boundless/limitless, instead of in a numerical sense. For example, "causality is infinite" means that there is no part of reality unaffected by causality, rather than there are an infinite amount of caused things in the universe.

Reality is logical, or else we wouldn't be able to understand it or work with it. Logic is not a set of commandments, but it does indeed command consistency. Consistency is the only way to determine and verify fact. One does not believe in logic, that is unnecessary. Without logic, there is confusion. Paradigm and perspective shifts have entirely to do with causality, and causality is logical. Everything happens for a reason.

Logic and science are not one and the same. Science is systematic, while logic is a quality of thought or systems. Good science is logical. It is true that enlightenment doesn't grant any extra powers or skills, but instead it wipes the lense of consciousness with the cloth of reason, enabling one to perceive reality for what it is.

I am not following. I was implying that insistence for enlightenment is logical, since enlightenment is the transcendence of delusion. Pretty funny. Do you meditate?

Yes, but what you're talking about is reality, not enlightenment. To believe whether your mother loves you or not is not necessarily illogical. Asserting it as an absolute fact would be. Sure we can, let me show you: Everything is causally connected, and our separation from the rest of reality is but an illusion created by our consciousness. It is true, as you allude, that the interconnectivity of all things cannot be scientifically proven. This is because science cannot deal with the entirety of reality, as it relies on empirical evidence. Instead, the absolute truth of oneness must be discerned by pure logic alone.

It is not.

@Prabhaker "Who told you ?" Experience. "What skills ?" One cannot effectively perceive or express the enlightened perspective without regularly practicing proper discernment regarding the nature of reality.

Enlightenment is like riding a bike. After you get it, you've got it. If you ride every day, it becomes as easy as walking. If you drop it for a while, your skills become rusty.

Discernment is not knowing; it is perceiving and distinguishing. Moreover, proper discernment is logical. Nonsense. Having logical knowledge is not "watered down" by logic. Knowledge is either logical or it isn't. Illogical knowledge is false knowledge. What you mean to say is no matter how well you explain yourself, only those capable of understanding will understand. This idea you are promoting is dangerous. It encourages mindlessness; as if the thoughts, words, understanding, and explanations of the enlightened are not perfect expressions of reality.

Would you say that she is enlightened? Or that she merely had an enlightening experience? One may experience samadhi or satori and one time or another, at will or at random, through meditation or 5-meo, yet still remain overall unenlightened. To me, enlightenment is both the understanding and the realization. What she is missing is the understanding, which is why she went to Adyashanti.

@Leo Gura FWIW, I think you're right there.

John, This is mostly good stuff, but then, This is too fantastical for me. I'm not sure how literal you are being here.

I should have chosen my words better. Science can deal with concepts of the infinite, but it cannot prove or validate Absolute truths because it only deals with apparent truths. "Scientific fact" really means apparent fact, because any and all scientific findings are to always remain subject to the possibility of change due to new evidence. Absolute truths are instead purely abstract, and can only be dealt with through logical thought.

Can you provide me an example?

Understanding and trying to understand are not the same thing. If you are trying to understand, then you do not yet understand. If you are trying to realize, you have not realized. If you are trying to become enlightened, then you are not yet enlightened. But you can't understand, realize, or be enlightened without the effort to do or become so. Once the end goal is reached, trying is no longer necessary, and dropped. As long as delusion remains, reflection and effort are necessary. "Logic can't help you." This is why I started this thread. Logic is rather simple, really. It is the means by which validity is determined. Many people don't like logic because the use of can easily expose errors of one's own thinking and habits. Self critique makes them too uncomfortable. So what do they do? Blame logic itself! As far as I can tell, I don't have of an issue with the rest of what you said.

@WelcometoReality Realization happens through understanding. It cannot occur without it.

Science can't recognize enlightenment, because it relies on empiricism. In other words, science can't deal with concepts of the Infinite because it relies on finite evidence. Do you have a list of those hospitals? I need to make sure to avoid them at all costs