[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

(1) the wisest way to live life is along the lines of what Buddha taught (that is, we should pursue a truly spiritual path and seek to have no attachment / desire); and

(2) the potentially dangerous way to live life is constantly use, or try to use, the LOA to manifest our desires (because attachment / desire, we are told, inevitably lead to suffering).

...

(3) they are not seeking spiritual growth; they are constantly filled with material desires; they have no clue about the mind/reality connection and regularly fail to fulfill their desires; and yes, they constantly suffer as a result of attachment.

I like these break downs you made. I aim for (1) more than others. However my version of (1) is not specifically tied to non-attachment dogmas of Buddhism but of looking for ways to feel spirit without dogmas. But I have lots of (3) by nature of being in a consumer driven society and having been taught to be logical to the expense of my softer spiritual side. We just aren't taught to listen to spirit in school and worse we are told to kind of ignore and not train intuition, for the most part. So you have to want to do this yourself and find resources to get into (1). I think (2) is a natural by product of being more in the (1) category.

I see (2) as trying to make reality using the ego but then maybe if it is a step to stage (1) then there are successes being in stage (2) since some of (1) will be part of it as a spectrum instead of black and white going from (2) to (1).

(3) can be non-seekers, that may not be suffering because they are not looking for more spiritually. They only suffer when not satisfied materially and then go trying to make reality or support the ego some more with material things but don't think there's some other way and sometimes they are happy and satisfied or just numb.

For Category (3) people who no longer wish to be in Category 3, I would also say that entering Category (2) is much easier than entering Category (1). I would further add that Category (2) may well serve as a transition phase to Category (3).

So then I'm not on the same page as you for the approach out of category (3). I find it more difficult to be trying (2) without first finding peace and non-attachment that comes with (1). Then, as I say, (2) is a by product and will not contain trying or striving or need to work on desire without attachment. However, that is just what I think now - that may change.

Not completely relevant, but it's also interesting to reflect on the life of Gautama Buddha. Before Gautama Buddha was Gautama Buddha, he was Prince Siddharta, and already enjoyed vast wealth, luxury and power, as well as the deep love of his royal parents.

Have you ever considered that this stage of his life could have been essential to his subsequent spiritual growth? Perhaps it was the fact that every earthly desire he could have conceived of was already satisfied, that he could turn fully to his spiritual quest.

This is renouncement. That the spiritual path is about giving up the feelings of being separate. And I've read ideas that say you can't give up anything unless you have had it already. So then one has to have it all first before being able to give it up. One has to experience having a strong ego and attachment before being able to let it go and see the light. So then, with that, maybe it does make sense to reinforce (2) as an ego thing to see the folly then give it up and flip into (1).

So then there is renunciation and it's opposite, accumulation. But then both renunciation and accumulation have similar structure. They are both about striving that also contain a hierarchy. If one gives up enough, one is better off then before, which is a hierarchy or comparison. Also accumulation has that mentality of being ambitious or striving, that more things or a certain life situation will make one "happy" or better off, in that way of thinking. So then I get lost again and think what is there to strive about? Maybe, just to strive for either accumulation or renouncement, eventually shows the futileness of either since there's a desire to "get something" or become enlightened or satisfied.