Personally, I am of the opinion that you are close to being right on
the money with your definition of enlightenment, but just slightly
off. Defining enlightenment as a skill rather than simply a way of
being makes me think you miss the boat a bit. When one uses a word
such as 'skill' it identifies that action as something one can turn on
and off on a whim. For example, if I am a skilled carpenter, my
incredible carpentry skills do not neccesarily come into play with
every action I take. When I go to the Taco Bell to get my lunch, my
skills have nothing to do with my state of being. However, being
enlightened has everything to do with one's state of being. Being
enlightened alters how I order my taco. It alters how I go about my
carpentry. It alters everything. Maybe I am just nitpicking, but
this comes from a long time ontologist and first time poster.
Abiding,
Jonny
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:16 BST