Jonathan H. B. Lobl

You would gladly forgive others for being weak. Are you willing to forgive yourself? You love others despite their failings. Possibly because of them. Do you love yourself? We can also consider the Christian tradition. Jesus commanded his followers to love others, as they love themselves. Without self love, that doesn't count for much. It's Buddha's Middle Path. Don't live only for others. Don't live only for yourself. I also like cats. Love transcends species.

The dimmer switch is an interesting image. Well done. I think it would be more descriptive to consider a sleeping person. He becomes awake gradually.

Before Buddha was Buddha, he began by asking questions. He began life as Prince Gautama. A young man raised in luxury. His father, the King tried to shield him from reality. Despite the King's best efforts, his son made a few discoveries. The young prince discovered old age, sickness, suffering and death. This led him to ask simple questions. "Why do people suffer?" "What can we do to lessen suffering?" Nothing about these questions was about metaphysics or the supernatural. It was all pragmatic. He tried all the standard answers. Studying the Vedic texts, austerity, Yoga and all the rest. He came up with a Path. Number 1. Letting go. All things are ephemeral. All things pass. We lose everything. Family, friends, possessions, everything. In time, even the body when we die. We must learn to let go of all that is transitory. Number 2. The Middle path of Moderation. Get enough sleep. Don't sleep your life away. Don't work yourself to death. Don't be lazy. Don't be a glutton. Don't starve. Number 3. Releasing desire. Not going through life wanting things. Number 4. Misc.: Ethics. Living a good life. Honest work. Meditation. Balance. Moderation. There is nothing here that can be called metaphysics or theology. It's all about how to live a life without suffering. Perhaps even the concept of Enlightenment, is something that Buddha would disdain as intellectual twaddle. Of course, the professional monks who came after, made Buddhism way more complicated. Needless to say -- supporting the monk class became a source of good karma. The very best. You're right. The right questions matter. What would Buddha say about Enlightenment? I think he would tell us to -- "Count your breath. Don't worry. The question will go away."

If that were so, it would be possible to tell the Enlightened Masters apart from everyone else. This does not seem to be the case. To me, it seems more likely that the quest for Enlightenment is itself illusory. That is -- trying to become something that does not exist in reality. By any terms, a fantasy.

Besides being funny, the story makes a point. In Buddhism, the supernatural is a mere distraction on the Path. But what is Enlightenment? I find the idea hard to pin down. I'm sure that it's not about the lights coming on and everything after that is different. But what is it?

In that case, a little humor. A young Buddhist monk was deep in meditation. Buddha appeared before him. In shock, the monk ran to get his teacher. "Teacher, Teacher. I was deep in meditation and Buddha appeared before me!" The teacher was a kind man who smiled gently. "Go back and continue counting your breath. Don't worry. He'll go away."

Mindfulness is good. Mindfulness is powerful. I prefer breathwork.

In addition to sitting meditation, I practice qi gong. Stillness in motion.

I don't want to limit meditation, by trying to define it. In loose terms, it's an experience. Some things can only be herd in silence.

There is an old joke about scripture. That we can't possibly understand it, unless we are at the level of the people who wrote it. If we have that level of understanding, we don't need the book. Think of what happens when a country has too many lawyers. The law gets overly complicated. I think something similar applies to religion. We have too many seminaries, producing people with advanced degrees in religion. Of course, the religion gets complicated. I think that a religion that focuses more on meditation than study, will produce less mayhem and confusion.

I'm stuck on trying to understand what Enlightenment means.

You sound like fun. Welcome.

Your surprise is due to one thing. You don't see Atheists as people. Surprise.

Conservative Atheists

Feel welcome. A church is it's people. You're one of us.

That's our ULC. You're a full member.

This takes us back to the start. What does it mean to be in an Enlightened State? Must the Enlightened being know that he is a Buddha? Is it the way that others perceive the Buddha? In the mythology of the original Buddha -- which may or may not have something to do with actual history -- Prince Gautama was on the path to Enlightenment. After various trials, tribulations, practices, studies, etc. -- he decided that he was ready for the final stage. He sat himself down under a tree -- which became known as the Bodhi Tree. He vowed to remain there until he gained Enlightenment. That is the story as I understand it. At some point, Prince Gautama decided that he had attained his objective, and rose to his feet as Buddha. So, yes. He was aware. Then he spread his teachings. That means that others saw him as worthy of being followed. What does any of this mean in cultural context? Gautama was a Hindu Prince in South India. In the Vedas, the gods are constantly manifesting on Earth as avatars. The woods are full of enlightened masters who teach as gurus. It fits a cultural pattern. I'm not sure what it counts for. To my understanding, Buddha was a Hindu reformer. I don't think he was trying to start a new religion. Indian Buddhism was largely absorbed by Hinduism. Buddha himself is said to be an avatar of *Vishnu, the Preserver. Buddha taught that he was only a man, who had found the path to Enlightenment. Well, that sort of thing happens in religion. Over time, religion accumulates like layers of sediment. In time, it becomes stone. What did Buddha mean by Enlightenment? I think something different than what we understand in the West, today. Again, look at all those enlightened gurus in modern India. There are a lot of them. Some of them have large Western followings. Here's a hint. A Zen Buddhist saying. "Before enlightenment, chop wood. Carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water." Of course, Buddhism in various forms has spread to the West. I have been greatly influenced by Buddhist thinking. I find the core ideas helpful. I am not a Buddhist. *The structure of Hinduism is interesting, but not now.

Words often explain themselves. A wizard is someone who is wise. A dullard is someone who is dull of wit. Not sharp. A drunkard is someone who is often drunk. Another example would be retard. A mean spirited word that continues in use.

Just so. Nobody tells an Agnostic what to believe -- or disbelieve.

I don't know what happened to the old rams. They lost their horns and their minds. I think it's a warning and a lesson for Atheists. The Lord is my shepherd. I shall not want. What did happen to those horns? They should maybe "grow a pair". Double meaning intended.

Yes. Paul, the big shot apostle, who never actually met Jesus. He had a "vision". Such claims carry no weight now. They didn't then. At least, not with the Jews of that time.

Just so. I have spent some time with one such group. There are different such groups. For me, the problem is reality. I care about such trivialities as truth and reality. I know what Hasidic Jews believe. I know what Christian Jews believe. In the end, they all go off the deep end. The Hasidim have a cultural authenticity behind them. Are they more in touch with reality? Or what's true? No. To my understanding, the opposing sides are engaged in competing fantasies. This makes it difficult for me to take sides. On a purely emotional level, I do find the Christian Jews more irritating. Also, more ignorant. To my experience, the Christian Jews have a solid grounding in Protestant Christianity. They don't know Jack ** about Judaism.

It's not such a mind bender. All crows are birds. Not all birds are crows.