'intelect' as the path to enlightenment is a dead-end

[Skyfeather]

My view is that 'intelect' can become enlightened, but that to follow 'intelect' as the path to enlightenment is a dead end. We accumulate and rearrange structures of thought that describe a thing. We then take it upon ourself to agree with or disagree with a set of presented intelectual descriptions. Whether the forms of intelect are clever or stupid they are still structures of mental debate, dialog and shapes.
The cultivation of intelect is a good thing in m person view, but not to the extent that it becomes the main driving force for self-discover, evolution and completion. Intelect is a part of the whole. It is relevant to seperate out 'attention' and 'intelect' and to discover how intelect integrates into attention. We run the risk in our societies and small social groups hooked on debate that we are mearly producing circles of intelectuals who lke to *discss* enlightenment.

I am talking in a generalisation about the addiction i suppose of intelect and the need to have it in the driver's seat.

[Skyfeather]

Someone else's description will never do, it will never be enlightenment, and neither will your or my thoughts about it. I know that your seeking moves into this, that you uphold debate and intellect highly. You will surely do this for years until you realse that none of your thoughts have sown the thread through the needle of enlightenment. The enlightenment happens as silence, and then intellect realises it is not in the driver's seat like it talks itself to belive. Will is in the driver's seat. But intellectuals will defend until their very last breath that they are enlightened and that it is through thought that they attain it. This is because thought is their God.

Thought is the servant...

God said to 'thought', Be still, and know that I am he.

Maybe try with eating a hamburger without having even one thought.

[Skyfeather]

Ok, I'm going to use my intellect to try and explain something here.

If we are beleiving that intellect delivers you to enlightenment then we must accept that there must be a point of intellectual accumulation that says *I've reached that point* after... one is now enlightened.

If we observe a child we know that the space in between thoughts is longer, the thoughts ar enot cultivated and the intelectual knowledge of the world is very small indeed. So then, is a child *not enlightened*?

I see children as more enlightened or at least closer to enlightenment than adults. The don't have the addiction to the intellect that adults do.

This relates to intellect, knowledge, the east. It relates to the enemy *clarity*

The Scholar accumulates descriptions and cultivates his intelect but in now way does he see this as his knowledge or knowing. they branch into it, but the knowing and knowledge is more about the kindling of fibres that he actaully is in energy. The Scholar and the Nagual man face east eternally and see the fog of Clarity. The fog of clarity is upheld by knowledge, it is upheld by intellect. Knowledge actually blocks seeing.

This is tricky to grasp, and in truth I cannot word it better according to the set of intellect that I have used here.

Knowledge leads to and away from enlightnement. The addiction to *want to know* and the addiction to *debate* are attachments that block and reinforce the resistance to see and become enlightenment. We read another book, and we explore another new set of inventories. But as a hard-sold intellectual we uphold the importance of defining knowledge so high in our beliefs that we see nothing other than *clarity* which blocks the connectivity of knowing.

The intellect can't accept this.

[Skyfeather]

Facing east:



Staying with the east face for a while, let's look at it as a whole...

My personal medicine for the east is Eagle, that won't have much to do with anything other than with how I myself face that face of the pyramid of eternity.

Regardless of our inborn nature to connect with knowledge, we can see the east path as follows:

Knowledge > Awareness > Illumination

We see that knowledge integrated into awareness, awareness is the whole thing, the whole egg of luminousity, the fibres of energy that make up *us* and the fibres of energy that make up *other*

With our attention we explore this and we can see the world according to their being 2 main types of awareness for humans. On the left side we gaze, our attention is a gaze and we hook dreaming through it. The right side of the egg of awareness assembles things, gathers things, hunts, and has something called *intellect* that integrates into it.

So as a whole, we can see that intellect is one of the parts that stems into the knowledge that makes up the right side of the total egg of awareness.

As a seer, I could never accept that intellect is what leads s to enlightenment. I enjoy intellect, I enjoy defining and grooming my descriptions, but I am under no illusion that intellect is the path to enlightenment.

That is what the Eagle part of me says, and yes, that is an opinion, a view. It is a description describing something.

Knowledge links into awareness and awareness links into our illumination as governed by the laws of manifestation.

[Skyfeather]

A thing to note is *when does knowledge block our seeing*