email excerpt from Master

Well, see, indeed someone had put Giordano Bruno on the Net. ;) It’s funny that it is on an atheist site, considering that Bruno saw God as very real, both Transcendent and Immanent, the total sum of all there is, both Creator and ongoing and infinite Creation. However, traduttore, traditore, the title of his book is not "The Infinite Universe and the Worlds", but "The Infinite, the Universe and the Worlds", which is definitely something different. This being said, I remember that the whole thing is not that easy to grasp, let alone translate.

Now, back to the core issue: To tell you a secret, what you called "Enlightenment" is really "Awakening". It does not last (which further proves that you were not dreaming up the experience, since yours replicates all known patterns, including details no one could really describe from hearsay, without having actually experienced them). This is why documenting the experience the best you can is such a good idea, so you have a map to help you get back there someday.

The difference between the two can be found explored quite in details in Madhu's book (www.madhukarthompson.com). In a nutshell, Enlightenment and Awakening are fundamentally the same thing, but Enlightenment lasts, while awakening doesn’t: Enlightenment is a way of being, or if you prefer, a way of experiencing the world. However, like the Taoist Master once remarked, before Enlightenment, it's chop wood, carry water. And after having been there, it's carry water, and chop wood. ;)

The best exploration of the issue of the Known, Knowable and Unknowable I can remember of was once made by Casteneda's Master from a nahualist perspective. I can't remember in which of Carlos' books it was, but that shouldn't be too hard to find, it was in a comparative study of "nahual" and "tonal". I was always amazed at the extraordinary levels of insight displayed by "Don Juan" and his cohort, and I always laughed to no ends at the idea that some "critics" thought he had invented it all, and there was no one beyond the Don Juan persona. Well, if he has, he sure was a genius first class!

Marxism I have always perceived as one of the most limitating ideologies erring minds could conceive or subscribe to. It's like living in a mental jail. One you carry on your mind like the tortoise carries its housing around, except that it's not a house, but an inescapable prison.

The only way to persuade ourselves of the validity of new concepts that shatter old belief systems is to live them, and experience their effects.

When I was exploring the concept of the Infinite, I always came to the conclusion that the Universe must be both finite and infinite, because according to the IVth Law of Logic (principle of co-identity of the contraries), it had to be so. The way I tried to formulate it sounded a bit like your quote. I think I even used the mirrors mirroring mirrors analogy. However, if Finite in any manner… Well, to perceive something as finite, you have to be or project yourself outside of it. Interesting idea, no? ;)

"When I say the "differences in enlightenment", I only mean the personal limitation of the enlightenment. I know there is only one kind (one great ocean of light) and everyone who's been there experiences the same. But I notice the difference in my two encounters."

There would be a lot to say here. Enough for a book. I wish I had the time. Again, Madhu "Odyssey of Enlightenment" is the best guide on the matter I can refer to. It’s real good.

> The ultimate freedom is when we are one with the being.

You mean "The ultimate freedom is when we are one with Being."

In Indo-European languages, any use of a definite article like "the" automatically refers to, in this case, a definite being (as a rule): God, Napoleon, me, you, or your dog. Where the "being" you refer to here is definitely an Immanent and non-personal one, it's "being" itself -- Being.