> > The way that can be spoken is not the Constant Way. Enlightenment > > isn't something you can describe, so why try? > > It's fun! > > ------I can describe it but you won't understand or like my description.
I try to stay out of discussions about "what is enlightenment," attempts to *define* it in words. That, to me, is a classic waste of time. What is not necessarily a waste of time to me is the attempt to do some kind of justice to one's personal, subjective experience of certain steps along the path of realizing enlightenment. Those can be interesting for the person doing it, because trying to express the inexpressible can be a means of clarifying one's own personal experience. The descriptions might also resonate with someone who has had a similar exper- ience, and who might not have described it in those terms. An example that springs to mind was the attempt by Marek and Dr. Pete and others to clarify an aspect of the first onset of enlightenment, and whether it (enlightenment) can be said to "appear." That struck me as interesting, because it wasn't really an attempt to define enlightenment per se, merely one's percep- tion of an enlightenment experience, in contrast to a "normal" perception before enlightenment "appeared" (or, as was the topic of conversation, before the illusion that it had not always been present disappeared). Unc To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
