SUNDAY, 20 JUNE 2004
I think I’m ready to declare that life is to a great extent a game.
It works like this: you define for yourself a character from the human character material you observe in your environment and from what you are exposed to from other sources (alternatively you become, to a large extent, the character your environment forces on you or which it requires from you), and then you play a role you define for yourself, or that you choose from the possibilities (or you play the role forced on you by the environment or the one required of you).
Differences between the ENLIGHTENED INDIVIDUAL and the OTHER INDIVIDUAL can be found in the above explanation: The former defines to a considerable extent his or her own character as well as the role they want to play, while the latter mainly plays the role of the character the community imposes on them or requires from them. The ENLIGHTENED INDIVIDUAL knows who and what they are, because in a practical expression of their free will they choose among many possibilities the role and character they deem fit for themselves. They can also explain why they chose a specific role and character, and not someone or something else.
How well both types of individuals function in the world depends on how well they know the Rules Of The Game Of Life, and how willing they are to play accordingly.
It is also true that many ENLIGHTENED people do not have a high opinion of the Rules. However, only a moderate degree of intelligence is required to decipher the rules of the Main Game, and of the various sub-games in which both ENLIGHTENED people and OTHER people are sometimes obliged to take part. In other words, there is always hope.
———–
[Additional note: The role and character chosen by the type of person I call enlightened are not necessarily better – in a moral sense – than the role and character that is required by the community of another individual, or a role they feel compelled to choose at the expense of other ambitions they may have harboured. The role in the latter case might be one of leadership in an extraordinary difficult time for the community, while the chosen role (and character) of the so-called enlightened individual in similar circumstances may be one that is characterised by non-involvement. I mention these possibilities because, despite the fact that the enlightened individual is my chosen hero figure, I am not blind to heroic acts of so-called other individuals.]
———–
[One more note: Just because a person does not define his or her own character and role, is not to say that he or she is not enlightened. Such a person may be fully aware of alternative characters that they could be or could have become, or alternative, even more enjoyable roles they are more than capable of playing. Due to the best of reasons they might accept their prescribed roles and characters (or the roles and characters that society expects of them), for the sake of service to the community, and for the sake of leaving behind positive results of their existence.]
______________________