authfriend: > Life is so much simpler when we have Barry to tell > us what to think... > Turq got mixed up again - nihilism means that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value.
Turq seems to be the nihilist when he asserts that morality, norms, rules, or laws do not inherently exist or that absolute knowledge is possible. Turq dones not seem to be part of the enlightenment tradition, so why was he attempting to become a yogi? > > Just to clarify, my raps about Patanjali this week > > have all been pursuant to a certain theme. That is, > > that there is a certain down side to considering > > someone "enlightened," given the definition of that > > "state" that has been presented to us as "knowers > > of Truth." What seems to happen IMO is the minute > > someone buys into someone present or past as > > "enlightened," they seem to lose their ability > > to examine the things that they say critically. > > They *don't* do this with other people. I, for > > one, am not convinced that imbuing the supposedly- > > enlightened with this much "authority" -- the > > state of their words being considered "Truth," > > and thus immune to critical examination -- is > > a good thing. > > > > Take Patanjali's statement that "all experience > > is painful." *Most* people, no matter how much > > they buy into Hindu nihilism, would not describe > > *every experience they've had in life other than > > transcendence* as "painful." But this guy *wants* > > you to. I think we can assume that Patanjali > > believed in a God of some sort, right? What does > > his declaration that "all experience is painful" > > say about how he *perceives* this God? In his > > view, God created a universe in which *every > > experience* other than the one he prefers is > > "painful." The sound of your child laughing is > > painful. Gazing at a beautiful sunset or a lovely > > flower is painful. That's sure some God that this > > guy imagines. And yet NOBODY NOTICES. > > > > They've bought so heavily into Patanjali being > > "enlightened," *based on nothing more than having > > been told he was*, that they never step back and > > examine the things he had to say from a critical > > perspective, to analyze what they might infer about > > the universe they live in. His words imply that > > the essential nature of the universe we live in > > is pain. And that it was *designed* that way, > > by God. Only by going beyond *all* experience can > > one have an experience that *isn't* pain. > > > > Call me crazy, but I think that when one "steps > > back" from revering these supposedly enlightened > > guys and examines the things they say critically, > > a lot of them don't hold water. A lot of them, in > > fact, devolve into pure ego. "I *know* the Truth. > > I *know* that all experience is pain. Your only > > hope for avoiding this pain is to do what I tell > > you to do, which is essentially to become more > > like me." What else can one call this BUT ego? > > > > The supposedly enlightened are so caught up in > > the narcissistic vision with which they see the > > world that to them it appears to be not only > > Truth, but some kind of Universal Truth. They > > go out of their way to try to convince others > > that it IS the Truth, and that these others > > should (or must) become more like them. You can > > call this wisdom or dharma if you like; I call > > it ego. > > > > I see the supposedly enlightened as Just Guys. > > They have OPINIONS, same as I do. These > > OPINIONS are inherently no better than mine. > > When they attempt to say that their OPINIONS > > ARE better than mine, or synonymous with Truth, > > I cry bullshit. That's not being "enlightened," > > that's being Just Another Religious Fanatic, > > mistaking one's own personal subjective exper- > > ience for Universal Experience. > > > > I don't need no "single source" of OPINIONS > > about the nature of reality and of life itself. > > I may *consider* some other source, and adopt > > parts of that OPINION if they strike a kind > > of intuitive resonance with my own, but I will > > never grant these OPINIONS the "authority" > > they seem to want so much. The very fact that > > so many of them want it so *badly* and dismiss > > or excommunicate anyone who doesn't buy into > > what they say *as* Truth speaks to me not of > > balance and wisdom, but imbalance and out-of- > > control ego. YMMV. > > >
