Define ignorance

[Mskied]

I have a friend.  He emulates the trickster Gods and clown figures.  I recognize that he does this out of bitterness.  He thinks people are ignorant.  Im in the process of trying to enlighten him that giving in to wicked action, contradicting the very virtue that you admire to prove a point i.e. cynical action, is just as evil as the evil you are trying to expose.  I recently asked him how he sees people as ignorant, and Ill ask you the same question here.  There is much speculation on what enlightenment is, so I will ask too, what is enlightenment, as well as what is ignorance?

[C T]

Is this a realistic consideration, minus religious overlays, on the notions of enlightenment/ignorance? 

 

 

I like this poem by Jed McKenna asking Where Is Enlightenment? 

 

 

[Mskied]

I don't like these definitions though they are not far from what I consider to be enlightenment.  The key here isn't "living in the now" it is in the act of fighting delusion- and to do that we have to name the now, for the now is simply time moving, but to be enlightened ie, to know, is to know what is now, and none of these two videos tell us what that is, only what it feels like to be there.

[rex]

What's the difference between ignorance and apathy?  I don't know and I don't care.

[C T]

19 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I don't like these definitions though they are not far from what I consider to be enlightenment.  The key here isn't "living in the now" it is in the act of fighting delusion- and to do that we have to name the now, for the now is simply time moving, but to be enlightened ie, to know, is to know what is now, and none of these two videos tell us what that is, only what it feels like to be there.

 

Why do consider it a necessity to name the now as a means to "fight" delusion? 

Anyway, the first video mentioned the almost impossible task to define it or to fit the concept neatly into an intellectual box. 

 

It would be a tedious and unproductive task to try and encapsulate enlightenment within the confines of human intellect. 

 

How does one even attempt to describe some ineffable thing that cannot be limited even within the realm of experience due to its space-like nature? Approximations and pointers are present, and basically alludes to such. If the vids had claimed to define what enlightenment is, I would not have posted them to waste anyone's time. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by C T

[Jeff]

18 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I don't like these definitions though they are not far from what I consider to be enlightenment.  The key here isn't "living in the now" it is in the act of fighting delusion- and to do that we have to name the now, for the now is simply time moving, but to be enlightened ie, to know, is to know what is now, and none of these two videos tell us what that is, only what it feels like to be there.

 

If you are fighting something, you are caught up in it.  Freedom comes from being able to let is simply dissipate.

[Mskied]

That's not true.  You fight something to defeat it, and when it is dead, you are free.  

 

You can live in delusion, and in a lot of ways, people do this all the time in healthy methods.  It depends on your culture and what is acceptable or expected.  What is your Law?  That is how you start with what is delusion.  There are other realms of delusion, which some call genius, which may or may not yield truth.  We certainly do not understand the whole of manifest material reality, and spiritual truth seems to be elusive- so some delusions are necessary to pierce the heart of the invisible.  But still, we want to "know" and not be deluded, for we want to interact with the now- which is only just "is", and yet... it is more than being, it is action, and those actions are being played out by people of Will, and what is their Will?  Are they delusional?  Should I wade through their fantasy for the sake of interaction?  Why would I, other than experience, or to accomplish a task.  And what task needs to be done?  Survival.  So delusion is that which detracts from our survival, and now you can proceed to making and stating Laws, which will provide you with naming the non ignorant needs of the managing of the now.

[Mskied]

also, some things will not just dissipate because you ignore them

[Jeff]

4 minutes ago, Mskied said:

also, some things will not just dissipate because you ignore them

 

Ignoring is not the same as dissipating (or letting go). Ignoring means you still feel its existence and simply avoid it. When something is dissipated it is simply gone, like it was empty and never really existed.

[Mskied]

Tell that to the villain with the weapon that harms your life choices as they oppress you, or move against you, or inflict pain on you, or prevent you from maturity, or harm those you love.  Not all things "dissipate"

[C T]

32 minutes ago, Mskied said:

Tell that to the villain with the weapon that harms your life choices as they oppress you, or move against you, or inflict pain on you, or prevent you from maturity, or harm those you love.  Not all things "dissipate"

 

Responses to oppressive situations can vary. Whats implied above seems to assert some sort of uniformed reaction to oppression. Anyway, whats your understanding on the relationship between oppression, ignorance and enlightenment? 

[Mskied]

It depends on your society mostly, though society can be changed by those that feel they are oppressed.  It also depends on personal choice of faith in Truth.  Anyone can feel oppressed and call someone ignorant.  Anyone can claim to be enlightened and call someone ignorant.  I have my own use for those terms, but I recognize that so does everyone.  Where do I draw the line to take action to address ignorance or oppression?  I don't really, but then, I live in America and don't stray too far- so I don't have to.  Unfortunately laws are just laws until they aren't, and then we all reckon with the consequences.  Id be a hypocrite to declare any, but I don't blame anyone that does.  Should we?  Yes.  Do I know where to draw that line?  Havent done enough thinking on that.  

 

You would say that an enlightened person would know an ignorant person, and know when that ignorant person is oppressing them- and this is true, but to name it on an absolute level?  Im afraid to- because I think we have and will always utterly fail the goal.  In failing the goal, however, we draw out new things that help us move technology and industry forward, so its a trade off.  As always, one door closes and another opens.  Lets just hope we don't open the door to Hell.

[ilumairen]

41 minutes ago, Mskied said:

Tell that to the villain with the weapon that harms your life choices as they oppress you, or move against you, or inflict pain on you, or prevent you from maturity, or harm those you love.  Not all things "dissipate"

 

Something I used to say, "Bruises fade, cuts heal, and words are like the wind."

 

"The pages of the story have turned."

 

I once had a women voice great anger towards me for "always smiling" - with the notion I must have had the "perfect life." I said, "no, but nothing is happening now." 

 

She was angry, and with cause, her ex- husband had nearly killed her with a hammer blow to the head. She was surprised to learn my mother had tried to stab me with a scissors.. We talked in depth.. and my smiles to her became a bit more gentle, and were more often returned - with enough space for her to say, "I don't feel like smiling right now."

 

Some people talk without having experienced things such as what you've pointed towards..

 

[Mskied]

What is a delusion?  It is something that is not how you imagine it to be, or is not real altogether.  Sometimes real things are unknown, and so we are prone to wondering about them, and what is- which we cannot perceive as is.  So enlightenment is twofold:  discovering what is unknown and clarifying it, and seeing what is known for what it truly is, so as to know it.

 

When it comes to knowing what is, there is the material reality and the spiritual reality.  The spiritual reality relies heavily upon other people, and what they think is.  To know what they think is, and to know what you think is, and to clarify what it actually is, is not easy, because what "is" can also be defined by what should be.  When it comes to a cut, what is, is that someone cut you- should they have?  The cut "is", but how did it happen?  If you cut yourself, you should know why, but if someone else did the cutting, you might not know, and you might not know if it was justified.  If it was an accident of material, then it is simple enough to know "This paper edge raced across my finger too quickly and cut me".

 

The first video by "Men of infinity" is about the now- the material now- and not the spiritual now- but the two videos play head games about knowing the now, like its a puzzle.  This is addressed by the Greeks, to know the now.  It was well defined by Plato and Aristotle- the world of forms and what "is".  Morality and the actions of the now by living things is harder, and to be enlightened about cause is difficult, as is deciding if that cause is something you agree with, for if you do not, you should want to take contest with it.  If you ignore these factors waiting for them to "dissipate" they might, but then so might whatever the action was that you pretend doesn't exist will take away your home, your food or your life.  You cannot pretend that something is not, for all things are- and should you ignore, and yes, you are ignoring it- waiting for it to dissipate, then you are at the mercy of someone elses power over the result of action, and this is not enlightenment, it is learned helplessness.  Some things will indeed recede, but the result of the choice and action remains.  Its like this:  you are a slave, and your slave master is angry, and he beats you in anger for something you have done (whether you should or should not have is up to him to decide as your master) so he is angry and vents his anger in beating you.  You can sit and allow this, and take the punishment until his anger fades or "dissipates" and then things go back to normal, but if you haven't rectified why you got beat and taken action to see that it does not happen again, it will happen again.  

 

Magick is about taking control of your actions.  It is about learning why other people take action.  It is about controlling the actions to secure a just or welcome outcome for the magician.  Were we all magicians, we would find ourselves discussing on action that we all agree with, but not all magicians want to play fairly, and so we have some that do unjust deeds, hide it, and get away with what we normally would not agree with.  This takes diligence; to know what is good and right for yourself, and beyond that: for all people.  This is the righteous persons challenge, and it takes place daily in public all over the place.  If you simply wait it out for it to "dissipate"  you will be missing out on your act of choice to influence the outcome of the debate, and will have to accept what comes.

 

Enlightenment is about knowing the now, and knowing what the now should be in light of what is right- and what is right is open to debate depending on your society, but I think it can go deeper, should you have a truly moralistic understanding of Nature, and the nature of Nature, and the things that matter- such as existence.  

[Mskied]

And as far as "men of infinity" just their name betrays their flaw- what they speak of is Eternity, not infinity- for infinity  is something that is endless, and while eternity is endless, the infinite is such because it is ever changing, not because it is static, for infinity is the idea of no end, where if it were Eternal, then it holds its place.  What they speak of is Eternal now, not infinite movement of idea.  

[Nungali]

10 hours ago, Mskied said:

I have a friend.  He emulates the trickster Gods and clown figures.  I recognize that he does this out of bitterness.  He thinks people are ignorant.  Im in the process of trying to enlighten him that giving in to wicked action, contradicting the very virtue that you admire to prove a point i.e. cynical action, is just as evil as the evil you are trying to expose.  I recently asked him how he sees people as ignorant, and Ill ask you the same question here.  There is much speculation on what enlightenment is, so I will ask too, what is enlightenment, as well as what is ignorance?

 

Well  ......

 

" You either know how it works , or you dont . "

[Mskied]

28 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Well  ......

 

" You either know how it works , or you dont . "

 If this is referencing my ambiguity of the use of the key of the faery star, trust me, you don't want to know how it works.  Mind expanding, that's all I can say.  That, and inner worlds.  Its a key to a door, and works that way.  A door you want to enter?  That remains to be seen.  You can say all kinds of things about whats inside and what its like to be there, but the only thing that counts is what you bring when you come back out.

Edited August 5, 2019 by Mskied

[thelerner]

9 hours ago, Mskied said:

That's not true.  You fight something to defeat it, and when it is dead, you are free.  

 

You can live in delusion, and in a lot of ways, people do this all the time in healthy methods.  It depends on your culture and what is acceptable or expected.  What is your Law?  That is how you start with what is delusion.  There are other realms of delusion, which some call genius, which may or may not yield truth.  We certainly do not understand the whole of manifest material reality, and spiritual truth seems to be elusive- so some delusions are necessary to pierce the heart of the invisible.  But still, we want to "know" and not be deluded, for we want to interact with the now- which is only just "is", and yet... it is more than being, it is action, and those actions are being played out by people of Will, and what is their Will?  Are they delusional?  Should I wade through their fantasy for the sake of interaction?  Why would I, other than experience, or to accomplish a task.  And what task needs to be done?  Survival.  So delusion is that which detracts from our survival, and now you can proceed to making and stating Laws, which will provide you with naming the non ignorant needs of the managing of the now.

I don't know if you can personally fight a concept.  Seems to me you can drop it, but not fight.  You can fight and argue with people who hold said concept, but isn't that what we all constantly do?   I think its delusional when we do that and think we'll win. 

 

Delusion.. if a person is happy, well adjusted, doing no harm, then who's to say if they're delusional, who should care?   People who strive too hard to 'know' are usually just trading one delusion for another. 

 

Truth..bites off a keyboard key, then spits it out.  Truth capital T, is over rated in my book.   Too often its a whoopie cushion we use to hit others over the head.  I like my truths low brow and experiential.. like this $4.99 Don Simon Chardonnay I'm drinking.   Is it Whole Foods, finest?  No but for $4.99 not half bad.  And like Truth and Delusions best watered down a bit. 

[Mskied]

It does seem more and more that defeating someones arguments is difficult in our world.  That is because, at least in America, liberty is the central theme, and so there is much that has to be allowed.  One thing about concepts is that there are factors involved in society that can help you win these arguments.  Take for instance taxes and social programs that aid people of low income.  If you are paying for my health care, should you not have a say in some of my health care choices, especially the ones that raise the cost of things, such as smoking?  Sure, we don't absolutely know who will get cancer and why, but there is strong evidence of other diseases that are caused by smoking.  If someone else is having to pay for my treatment, shouldn't we prevent the choices that create the disease?  This isn't how things run, but maybe they should?  As I keep saying, it all depends on the views and structure of the society you live in, and whether you can change it.  

 

Do you think that eventually we will allow anything?  In the past 100 years, so many things have been opened to people that were frowned on if not outright unlawful.  How far should we go with this?  Where do we stop?  Should we stop?  Who is to say what should or should not be done?  Is it enlightened to do this, or ignorant?

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, Mskied said:

 If this is referencing my ambiguity of the use of the key of the faery star, trust me, you don't want to know how it works.  Mind expanding, that's all I can say.  That, and inner worlds.  Its a key to a door, and works that way.  A door you want to enter?  That remains to be seen.  You can say all kinds of things about whats inside and what its like to be there, but the only thing that counts is what you bring when you come back out.

 

 

I was doing both ;  using your answer to me there to   actually  answer your question to us here   .   

 

 

- the enlightened know how things work, the ignorant don't , that's the difference between them.  

 

  ....

 

regarding your above quote ;   I already know how it works and have many years experience in using it   and  know  a good deal about its history and usages.  I didnt get it tattooed over my heart chakra  as a whim,  or because it 'looked cool'  ,  ya know .

 

And  to answer your question, which remained to be seen ,    no I do not want to enter a door you created with use of a symbol that you interpret your own  way ( which appears to be some convolution of Thelemic and Faery - both fields open to   W  I  D  E   misinterpretation and modern degradation )  .

 

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Nungali

[Mskied]

Well that's just the thing, I named it what someone else named it because that is what can be found popularly.  If I named it based on what it was for me, no one would know what Im talking about.  Sure, what it means to me and the names of what it meant to the author that had experience with it will be different, I actually have had little luck finding those explanations so I really cant speak about what it is to those authors, only to me, and for me, it was a key to other worlds and spirits.  Ive posted some of my experiences here elsewhere.  I really cant coincide what Ive seen with what has been written, and I get the impression that most people that have used a system based off of the actual use of it don't actually have first hand experience with what it physically and psychicly did to me. I gather its like anything: a symbol that has been granted meaning based on the research by the author- and really, that doesn't have to be similar from one case to the next.  Its like any identified symbol in nature- the actual meaning will vary based on the authors experience.  Since my experience with it has been very hellish, and I haven't read anyone talk about the psychic Hell that happens when something like this is used, I assume they are just imitating other authors explanations, who may not have had similar experiences.  

 

Im curious to hear your explanations, and would ask to point me to some resources about it, as I said I have little real writing on the subject.  

[ilumairen]

12 hours ago, Mskied said:

It does seem more and more that defeating someones arguments is difficult in our world.  That is because, at least in America, liberty is the central theme, and so there is much that has to be allowed.  One thing about concepts is that there are factors involved in society that can help you win these arguments.  Take for instance taxes and social programs that aid people of low income.  If you are paying for my health care, should you not have a say in some of my health care choices, especially the ones that raise the cost of things, such as smoking?  Sure, we don't absolutely know who will get cancer and why, but there is strong evidence of other diseases that are caused by smoking.  If someone else is having to pay for my treatment, shouldn't we prevent the choices that create the disease?  This isn't how things run, but maybe they should?  As I keep saying, it all depends on the views and structure of the society you live in, and whether you can change it.  

 

How, in your hypothetical scenario, would this "say" in the choices of others be policed?

 

How much "right" do you believe financial assistance should grant perceived benefactor in the recipient's life?

 

just curious

Edited August 6, 2019 by ilumairen

[Mskied]

That is my question too.   If we say that what is right is based on societies interpretation of what needs to be done, then we accept that as a community, we all have a voice in what is happening.  If there is no absolute moral truth that stems from enlightenment, then it varies depending upon other things, like amount of resources, or public opinion.  In a community all parts rely upon one another, so how much say do I have on what goes on?  With taxes, this is my money too, and with liberty, some actions have consequences that drain on our taxes.  It is not just about wronging someones personal property, its about wronging the coffers of society.  We seem to allow certain things taking place at upper levels of production and technology while the common person has less freedom.  Certainly there should be a standard for this type of thought; uniform truth for uniform law- logic based on enlightened concepts of what is right.

 

For instance, I have no right to say what you should not do, but the Law does- and the Law is based on what is right to protect the rights of others, and yet when it comes to my tax dollars- which I pay to care for public works, and now health care- it is something I co-operate with because I take advantage of it too.  Do you think the time will come in the future that certain behaviors which are unhealthy will not be paid for with tax dollars?  Right now drug addiction- and the drugs are illegal, is being paid for by tax dollars- is this right?  If they are caught doing the drug they go to jail but if they fall ill from doing it we pay?  That doesn't make sense.  

 

There is also the problem with my labor and the price of your goods.  I have little choice in how much you pay me, and I have little choice in what you charge for your goods.  In a community that decides right and wrong, a community that should recognize that we are a united people that rely upon one another to create a working whole- shouldn't all parts be covered in consideration?  They say that if we don't like the price, we don't have to buy, but the way our wage system is set up, we increase the wealth to certain positions so that they can afford the price of the object while the lower class has no access to those goods.  They obviously expect to sell X amount of the good at XXX price, a price that is affordable by the wealthy alone- so they factor in how many wealthy people need to buy it at XXX rather than pricing it at XX to sell more to the lower class too.  The lower class are being ignored, essentially- and this is the labor force on whose back all of this relies upon.  With public health care, the lower class has no way of paying for the escalating costs.  On services that we all need to survive, we should have some sort of % control over the profit from said service.  Shouldn't we all have some say in this?  

 

The alternative, of course, is that there is no moral truth, and that anything I want and can get away with- whether by law or not, is allowable- and I fear that this is the truth from top to bottom to some degree.  So where is enlightenment, and what is it good for exactly?  It seems to be loose rules for the people that are willing to follow rules obey, and the rest of them get away with what they like.  There is no justice, really, except when certain powers captivate the masses and stir their emotions to prosecute people in power.  So, is enlightenment even necessary?  Does it really "exist" or is the enlightened mind the one that knows the rules, and how to break them. getting away with whatever they can when they can?

 

I fear for our species and our people, because when the day comes that the less educated and less important lower class are no longer needed, there will be genocide.  Right now we are a pool- we are a resource, and we provide consumption and labor, but when the need for those positions are absent so too will the need for the lower class.  The lower class already is disposable, but what happens when we no longer need them to produce with their labor?  Is enlightenment really peace and security, or is it spawned by vicious predators that will one day execute the less deserving?

[C T]

Enlightenment is when the bad make peace with their badness and use their bad for good. 

[Mskied]

Angels have swords.