Enlightenment

[Uday_Advaita]

Enlightenment???

What do you get out of it?

Sages who have tasted it say:

• You get nothing out of it
• No special knowledge comes to you
• No special powers are acquired.
• No riches, recognition, fame awaits you

Yet! Seekers all over the world are desperate to get it.

They indulge in various practices (Sadhanas) like, meditation, vipassana, yoga and quite a few punishing routines etc. and even travel continents for that “Bang” moment.

In Marathi there is a saying – “Unless you die, you can’t see Heaven”

Is this similar?

After Enlightenment what remains is:

• The Mind Body Apparatus (MBA)
• The World around you
• The awareness of I AM – I exist
• Peace & Harmony

Even Lord Buddha has declared that – “Samsara (the phenomenal life) and Nirvana are not different”. However, the all important “Me” – the Doer is lost for ever.

There is truly no one to enjoy the Enlightenment.

SHOULD YOU EVEN CARE???

[janielee]

"Nibbana is perfect peace (santi)"

Even all the world's riches cannot buy you the peace of a joyful heart. It is truly priceless, and only to be known by the wise.

Worth it? A thousand million billion times over.

[janielee]

I knew from reading your initial post that you are new, and here to stir.

[Unseeking Seeker]

Ascension steps let us stagger
Begin now by embracing the beggar! :smile:

***

[iamthat]

Enlightenment???

What do you get out of it?

SHOULD YOU EVEN CARE???

You get the knowledge that you exist everywhere. You are everything. There are no limits to your Being. This is our natural state. This is priceless.

True, there are no powers, riches or fame, but what do they matter?

Yes, personality, mind, emotions, body are still there with all their limitations. The world has not changed. And yet everything has changed because you know that there is only Being, one thing everywhere. Separation is no more.

Knowing the Self to be everywhere, there is unchanging stillness pervading all movement.

And this state of Being never changes, it is always present in every moment of every day.

It truly is worth whatever effort is required.

Peace.

[NoOne]

I will defer to Gopi Krishna here, who is a rarity in that he has gone through a genuine Enlightenment process himself and has kept meticulous written records of what happened to him. He was also close friends with some of the famous Quantum Physcisists of the 20th century, such as Von Wiezsacker and Heisenberg, who provided a scientific and philosophical framework to his experiences. The former wrote a lengthy foreword to his first book, which made it immediately credible even in scientific circles. Anything from Gopi Krishna can be considered an authentic account of Enlightenment, which is a process, not a single event.

Enlightenment starts with what is know today as Kundalini Awakening and continues with a process of transformation that slowly but surely transforms a human body of mere physical matter into one made of higher-dimensional light. If successful, enlightenment ends in Ascension where, upon death, the enlightened person sheds all his physical bonds and moves on to the next state of evolution, becoming a light being.

Enlightenment is about evolution, moving on to the next stage of our development and we all have a desire to become more than what we currently are.

It isn’t confined to Eastern religions either, all cultures have concepts of enlightenment and saints are depicted with a halo around their heads for this reason. In a Christian context, enlightenment is about being touched by the Holy Spirit, through the Grace of God. Islam and Judaism have their holy men too, mostly through the practice of Sufism and Kabbalah. All religions and spiritual practice have the same goal in mind, but achieve it through different means. It is usually the mystical, hidden tradition within each religious tradition that concerns itself with individual enlightenment.

[Moondance]

Even Lord Buddha has declared that – “Samsara (the phenomenal life) and Nirvana are not different”. However, the all important “Me” – the Doer is lost for ever.

Hello Uday Advaita - welcome to the forum.

I don’t know about enlightenment - I’m not keen on the magical thinking associated with that word. But yes, in awakening the doer is no more - but the ‘me’ is still operative in the sense that it is used in connection with a specific body-mind.

There can be confusion regarding these sort of designations. Recently, following a conversation with someone who was trying to make sense of all this I complied a list which reflects my experience and understanding. I’ll share it here.
---------------

Body-mind: It’s plainly the case that there is a body-mind system (or organism.) But, as with all apparent things, it is not actually an entity, it is a conditional, temporal, ever-shifting (yet fairly consistent) matrix of conditions. The body-mind system is without agency to initiate action yet is the locus or instrument of action.

Person: Person is almost synonymous with body-mind except that we tend to use it less formally and in order to convey more of the character or personality of the organism.

Ego: Ego is often misunderstood in spiritual circles. Some equate it with the personality, others with the self. Its original use (in spirituality) is derived from the Hindu word ‘ahamkara’ which means attachment to an identity. So to be rid of ego really means to lose this attachment - not be void of personality.

Self: Self (small s) is generally understood (at least it’s my understanding) to be a kind of essential, immutable inner nature which is the thinker of thoughts, feeler of feelings etc. This inner entity is thought to have agency and be responsible for decision making etc. Most human organisms develop this kind of sense of self. But it’s an illusion (not the sense but that which the sense purports to convey) since on no level does this immutable enduring self actually exist.

Me (or I): In one usage 'me' simply points to the body-mind. When asked who the blue car belongs to we reasonably answer ‘me’. What we are really confirming is that the blue car is associated with this particular body-mind system. In another usage, when asked who wrote this poem, a person might, again, answer ‘me’ which in normal conversation and for practical and social (and legal) purposes is obviously acceptable. But on closer examination this is not actually (ultimately) true. As with the comment above about the body-mind, the person (body-mind) is the locus of the poetry (or the painting or the recipe or the plan or the doing etc.) but the person/body-mind is not the originator, author, initiator, first cause etc. of the action, creation or deed etc. The real origination is co-dependent on a numberless myriad of conditions, prerequisites and complex factors - which brings me on to:-

Source: Source is the designation I’m using to refer to that which is the ‘prime mover’ behind all events, phenomena and occurrences. In a sense (certainly a spiritual sense), Source (or Reality or Life or the Cosmos or whatever you prefer) could be said to be the real me or I. And when we have a vivid sense of ‘I am’ we rest as something vast and ineffable which is clearly prior to the objects of the mind. Source is the creative source, origination and wellspring of the above 'numberless myriad of conditions, prerequisites and complex factors' and could be said to be, in some mysterious (and non-anthropomorphic) sense, the doer behind all actions.

[iamthat]

Thanks to NoOne and Moondance for their intelligent contributions.

The problem with the word enlightenment is that it means different things to different people, to the point where it almost becomes meaningless.

I would suggest that the journey to enlightenment is a process, culminating in a single event - ie the actual realisation of the Self (using the terminology of Ramana Maharshi).

And I would also suggest that it is not necessary to go through the kundalini process to have this realisation. The awakening of kundalini is certainly one path but it is not the only path.

Some people consider enlightenment to be the end of the spiritual journey. Perhaps it is the end of one stage of the journey, but also the start of a new stage.

Peace.

[Uday_Advaita]

Hello Moondance. Truly appreciate your views. The way this MBA (i.e. me) understands this as:
1. Mind-Body is an Apparatus, where Body is accumulated food and mind is electronic circuitery with accumulated memory. It has appeared and will disappear in horizontal time
2. Person, Ego, Self and me are identifications with a Mind-Body. Hence conceptual.
3. Source is all there is
Happening of this - Total conviction of above - is worth

[Uday_Advaita]

You get the knowledge that you exist everywhere. You are everything. There are no limits to your Being. This is our natural state. This is priceless.

True, there are no powers, riches or fame, but what do they matter?

Yes, personality, mind, emotions, body are still there with all their limitations. The world has not changed. And yet everything has changed because you know that there is only Being, one thing everywhere. Separation is no more.

Knowing the Self to be everywhere, there is unchanging stillness pervading all movement.

And this state of Being never changes, it is always present in every moment of every day.

It truly is worth whatever effort is required.

Peace.

Hello iamthat,
While fulling agreeing with you, this me believes that any effort to "reach' there is counterproductive. It can only happen

[Shivani Devi]

Namaste.

I don't know anything about enlightenment, but from what I understand about it, is if there is a desire to achieve anything through the ego, enlightenment will not even happen. If there is an agenda, attachments, the desire for siddhis etc, seekers will be very satisfied getting only half way there and then honestly believe they have "reached the goal" or have "attained Moksha" when nothing could be further from the truth.

This is why the saints and sages say all of those things, to discourage the insincere and selfish seeker...but it tends to have the opposite effect...tell someone "nothing to see here...move on" and they think the person is hiding something from them...coveting an experience and thus human curiosity dictates they need to find out for themselves...then when they do, they laugh and go "he was right all along".

[iamthat]

Hello iamthat,
While fulling agreeing with you, this me believes that any effort to "reach' there is counterproductive. It can only happen

I understand what you are saying. It is a common belief, particularly with the neo-advaitists, that striving for spiritual attainment gets in the way of actual spiritual attainment. But from my own experience, effort is required, right up to the point where all effort is surrendered along with everything else.

After all, did the Buddha not make an effort to reach enlightenment?

An excerpt from Introduction to Buddhism by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso:

Siddhartha then made his way to a place near Bodh Gaya in India, where he found a suitable site for meditation. There he remained, emphasizing a meditation called “space-like concentration on the Dharmakaya” in which he focused single-pointedly on the ultimate nature of all phenomena.

After training in this meditation for six years he realized that he was very close to attaining full enlightenment, and so he walked to Bodh Gaya where, on the full moon day of the fourth month of the lunar calendar, he seated himself beneath the Bodhi Tree in the meditation posture and vowed not to rise from meditation until he had attained perfect enlightenment.

... Siddhartha then continued with his meditation until dawn, when he attained the vajra-like concentration. With this concentration, which is the very last mind of a limited being, he removed the final veils of ignorance from his mind and in the next moment became a Buddha, a fully enlightened being.

Peace.

[Unseeking Seeker]

***

Each micro-ascension assimilated within consciousness is an awakening, an enlightenment, the embracebaility of which becomes a pattern of receptive unexpectancy ...

***

[Joe Mc]

Here's a nice take, a tune, by the brilliant poet and singer Van Morrison. Appropriately titled, Enlightenment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOUilsuZj1E :)

[Uday_Advaita]

I understand what you are saying. It is a common belief, particularly with the neo-advaitists, that striving for spiritual attainment gets in the way of actual spiritual attainment. But from my own experience, effort is required, right up to the point where all effort is surrendered along with everything else.

After all, did the Buddha not make an effort to reach enlightenment?

An excerpt from Introduction to Buddhism by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso:

Siddhartha then made his way to a place near Bodh Gaya in India, where he found a suitable site for meditation. There he remained, emphasizing a meditation called “space-like concentration on the Dharmakaya” in which he focused single-pointedly on the ultimate nature of all phenomena.


After training in this meditation for six years he realized that he was very close to attaining full enlightenment, and so he walked to Bodh Gaya where, on the full moon day of the fourth month of the lunar calendar, he seated himself beneath the Bodhi Tree in the meditation posture and vowed not to rise from meditation until he had attained perfect enlightenment.

... Siddhartha then continued with his meditation until dawn, when he attained the vajra-like concentration. With this concentration, which is the very last mind of a limited being, he removed the final veils of ignorance from his mind and in the next moment became a Buddha, a fully enlightened being.

Peace.

Lord Buddha is often quoted to have said:
"Events happen, deeds get done. There is no individual doer thereof"
There is neither a me nor a you nor any one doing, achieving, reaching anything. Source is all there is.
Deepest conviction of personal Non-doership .... is Peace

[NoOne]

Regarding the element of surrender vs conscious effort in enlightenment, there is a fine balance that needs to be achieved. It is true that the process can’t be forced. Yet, it needs true, honest intention from the part of the seeker. The trick is in learning to let go.

Enlightenment would actually happen to everybody reading this, in an instant, if we all knew how to allow it to happen. It is our natural state of being, but we are so used to holding it back and clenching our emotional-energetic body into knots of neurosis, fear and hangups, that we can’t imagine letting go even for a second. It is worth practicing the art of letting go when you meditate. I usually do it with each exhalation, start from my throat and „release” downwards. When I do it right, there is a noticeable release of energy upwards, from the lowest chakra, almost as in a lightning bolt. This then tends to build up in the crown chakra as intense light and heat.

[Shivani Devi]

How I see it, is like this...

In my own tradition and upbringing (based on Patanjali), Sadhana is necessary for enlightenment and to realise the Self.

It isn't about attaining or arriving anywhere, but to peel away the layers of conditioning...to rid oneself of accumulated samskaras and habits one has developed over countless lifetimes.

If there is no effort... nothing to be done, what is stopping the "average Joe" from getting Moksha this very instant?

Having said that, I have heard many of the Neo advaitins say there's nothing to do...nowhere to reach...etc, but that is their path and not mine...and if there is anything I have learned on my spiritual journey, it is that everybody's path is unique, different and subjective.

So, if they can obtain enlightenment by merely saying that they have, good for them, but this is not my way....and we will all find out after we shrug off this mortal coil, who is gonna come back for another go around and who ain't...and nothing can be said about this while we are still alive, so that Marathi saying is quite apt.

[Moondance]

Hello Moondance. Truly appreciate your views. The way this MBA (i.e. me) understands this as:
1. Mind-Body is an Apparatus, where Body is accumulated food and mind is electronic circuitery with accumulated memory. It has appeared and will disappear in horizontal time
2. Person, Ego, Self and me are identifications with a Mind-Body. Hence conceptual.
3. Source is all there is
Happening of this - Total conviction of above - is worth

Yes, this sounds about right to me. But just to reiterate an important point, the use of ‘me’ and ‘person’ is context dependent. If by me/person we are simply referring to a specific body-mind then this is a legitimate practical device. However, if me/person is used in reference to a supposed enduring self then this is a misapprehension since no such thing exists.

[iamthat]

Lord Buddha is often quoted to have said:
"Events happen, deeds get done. There is no individual doer thereof"
There is neither a me nor a you nor any one doing, achieving, reaching anything. Source is all there is.
Deepest conviction of personal Non-doership .... is Peace

Indeed. But do you know this just on an intellectual level? Or is this your everyday reality as a state of Being?

The problem with modern day advaitism is that many people understand the ideas on a mental level but have not had any shift in consciousness to make these ideas a reality. So they can repeat all the words but remain in ignorance.

Peace.

[iamthat]

How I see it, is like this...

In my own tradition and upbringing (based on Patanjali), Sadhana is necessary for enlightenment and to realise the Self.

It isn't about attaining or arriving anywhere, but to peel away the layers of conditioning...to rid oneself of accumulated samskaras and habits one has developed over countless lifetimes.

If there is no effort... nothing to be done, what is stopping the "average Joe" from getting Moksha this very instant?

Having said that, I have heard many of the Neo advaitins say there's nothing to do...nowhere to reach...etc, but that is their path and not mine...and if there is anything I have learned on my spiritual journey, it is that everybody's path is unique, different and subjective.

So, if they can obtain enlightenment by merely saying that they have, good for them, but this is not my way....and we will all find out after we shrug off this mortal coil, who is gonna come back for another go around and who ain't...and nothing can be said about this while we are still alive, so that Marathi saying is quite apt.

Agreed. I sometimes wonder if some of these neo-advaitins are simply lazy - they don't want to make any effort and they hope that realisation will just happen.

And for a path which is based on the idea of nothing to do and nowhere to reach, there seems to be a lot of books and youtube videos talking about doing nothing and going nowhere. I guess that someone must be doing something.

Having said that, I totally agree that the Self does nothing and goes nowhere. But somehow we have to realise the Self, otherwise all we have are ideas. Which is where sadhana comes in.

Peace.

[janielee]

Lord Buddha is often quoted to have said:
"Events happen, deeds get done. There is no individual doer thereof"
There is neither a me nor a you nor any one doing, achieving, reaching anything. Source is all there is.
Deepest conviction of personal Non-doership .... is Peace

Yeah, that's Buddha who spent decades attaining that Truth. Not to be made a placard and belief of.

[janielee]

Agreed. I sometimes wonder if some of these neo-advaitins are simply lazy - they don't want to make any effort and they hope that realisation will just happen.

And for a path which is based on the idea of nothing to do and nowhere to reach, there seems to be a lot of books and youtube videos talking about doing nothing and going nowhere. I guess that someone must be doing something.


$, prestige, belief system.

[Uday_Advaita]

Agreed. I sometimes wonder if some of these neo-advaitins are simply lazy - they don't want to make any effort and they hope that realisation will just happen.

And for a path which is based on the idea of nothing to do and nowhere to reach, there seems to be a lot of books and youtube videos talking about doing nothing and going nowhere. I guess that someone must be doing something.

Having said that, I totally agree that the Self does nothing and goes nowhere. But somehow we have to realise the Self, otherwise all we have are ideas. Which is where sadhana comes in.

Peace.
I respect your concept that without sadhana or effort, Enlightenment cannot take place. You have further said that, I quote –“But somehow we have to realise the Self” – Who is this “we” wanting to realise the Self. It must be the: me, the person, the Ego

My humble submission is (whenever I refer to me or my, please consider it as this Mind Body Apparatus -MBA)

1. Source is operating through all objects, animate or inanimate
2. If in a particular MBA, Enlightenment is destined to happen, the Source will ensure that the required effort or the desired path would also happen.
3. If an MBA is too lazy to do any effort then it is so designed / programmed by the Source and yet Enlightenment may happen if destined. Why blame the Apparatus.
4. Lord Krishna has said that “Out of thousands, only a few would become seekers and out of that only a few would know me” Why would the urge to become a seeker come to a normal person unless it is a happening?
5. A seeker who constantly thinks that “I must do this or I must do that to somehow go nearer and nearer to the goal of enlightenment” is carrying the burden of personal doer-ship. There is truly no separate you or me to do any effort.
6. So I wish to simply say that: Please let it go. If Enlightenment is destined to happen, the choice of path will happen and the required effort too will happen.
7. Source is all there is and is the sole Doer

Namaskar

[Shivani Devi]

http://www.dlshq.org/discourse/nov97.htm

[Shivani Devi]

Also, we are still in Kali Yuga...There is a lot of deception, false gurus and self-serving ideologies in Kali Yuga and those who follow Dharma should guard themselves against it... because it will be taken as a "fact" by those who have been caught up in the whole process.

This includes, but is not limited to those who become lazy and believe they can get liberation through the touch of a charlatan, or by not doing any Sadhana whatsoever. They will believe that no effort is required to attain Samadhi and will tout themselves as being realised souls... putting on the garb of a Sadhu and going around deceiving others and themselves.

In Kali Yuga, one has to be very careful and use total discrimination (Viveka) to get to the truth...and they will also be ridiculed and persecuted by those already lost to the whiles of this age.

Thus, they can also keep going for hundreds of lifetimes saying "I don't need to do anything to get enlightened" until such times as they realise that they DO...and it is pointless trying to tell them otherwise, because this is their karma...their minds have already been made up.

Once, I said to a Neo Advaitin "so, you say you are enlightened without having to do anything.... isn't the bliss, the 'Satchitanananda' of the enlightened state totally awesome!!! Incredible!!!"

To which, they simply said 'what bliss?'

...and in that moment, I understood.

[Joe Mc]

I've got about 15 mins before the school run so this is going to be rushed isnt it. Ok have you ever had your mouth shut up ! or your mind stopped !! That quality of our being we call our intellect. The ability to word and concept make, do we actually know what that is ? Have you ever had your posh school burned down or your ordinary school closed ? Have we ever really ? Have you ever been humbled in this way ? Surely intellectual titillation abounds more than any other other human preponderance on our planet. But is good or bad ? Is conceptual knowledge a prison or is it a path leading to 'Enlightenment' ? A question i have asked myself many times. People have it seems a smathering, an inkling of what deep certitude and happiness is, spiritual liberation, and they weld it to some intellectual knowledge and viola, they are enlightened. Not sure if this two pence worth of a post has contributed at all. I'm quite enjoying the thread however. thanks.

Also, just an after thought, alot of the what might be termed the neo-advaitins, although i'm not too sure who fits into that category and who doesn't have done Sadhana if i may use that word. And some of them have done lots of it but they always claim it wasn't the Sadhana that liberated them ? I find this very puzzling sometimes, the fact that some guy has practiced meditation assidiously for 20-20 yrs and can then say ..that the meditation had nothing to do with his so called 'awakening'. hmmm ..more food for thought.

[iamthat]

Also, just an after thought, alot of the what might be termed the neo-advaitins, although i'm not too sure who fits into that category and who doesn't have done Sadhana if i may use that word. And some of them have done lots of it but they always claim it wasn't the Sadhana that liberated them ? I find this very puzzling sometimes, the fact that some guy has practiced meditation assidiously for 20-20 yrs and can then say ..that the meditation had nothing to do with his so called 'awakening'. hmmm ..more food for thought.

Very true.

Peace

[iamthat]

I respect your concept that without sadhana or effort, Enlightenment cannot take place. You have further said that, I quote –“But somehow we have to realise the Self” – Who is this “we” wanting to realise the Self. It must be the: me, the person, the Ego

My humble submission is (whenever I refer to me or my, please consider it as this Mind Body Apparatus -MBA)

1. Source is operating through all objects, animate or inanimate
2. If in a particular MBA, Enlightenment is destined to happen, the Source will ensure that the required effort or the desired path would also happen.
3. If an MBA is too lazy to do any effort then it is so designed / programmed by the Source and yet Enlightenment may happen if destined. Why blame the Apparatus.
4. Lord Krishna has said that “Out of thousands, only a few would become seekers and out of that only a few would know me” Why would the urge to become a seeker come to a normal person unless it is a happening?
5. A seeker who constantly thinks that “I must do this or I must do that to somehow go nearer and nearer to the goal of enlightenment” is carrying the burden of personal doer-ship. There is truly no separate you or me to do any effort.
6. So I wish to simply say that: Please let it go. If Enlightenment is destined to happen, the choice of path will happen and the required effort too will happen.
7. Source is all there is and is the sole Doer

Namaskar

And yet Source is not the Doer. Source does nothing, although all actions occur within Source.

We could discuss this endlessly, questioning what is meant by the use of words such as "we" and "I", and it all gets a bit pointless.

The question is, are you speaking from a position of identification with Source (or enlightenment if you want to use such a term)?

Or are you just sharing mental concepts without knowing the reality behind them?

Peace.

[Shivani Devi]

Many Advaitins follow the teachings of the Sage of Arunachala, Ramana Maharishi.

Ramana Maharishi became awakened during his late teens as the direct result of a near death experience...He could have stopped there...said "I am enlightened now" and that would have been that...The whole world would have been none the wiser.

What followed, was 50 years of INTENSE Sadhana! Meditating for hours and hours on end until insects bored into his skin.. until calluses formed...until he collapsed with malnutrition.. until he couldn't walk anymore..

The statements...the Mahavakyas like "I am That" is not a statement of truth..It is a statement of attainment..an utterance of personal experience! You can teach a parrot to say it! Will the bird be thus enlightened?

Also, Ramana Maharishi was a great Shiva devotee all his life! Why do you think he went to Arunachala instead of just staying where he was? Again, the world would have been none the wiser.

What is the legacy of this great personage? An entire generation of intellectuals who believe that the very act of introspection is sufficient unto itself to claim enlightenment. They are just using another aspect of ego to override the more apparent one and perform all manner of mental gymnastics in the attempt to make it sound more plausible.

I believe that what Ramana Maharishi was saying is "want to know who you really are? Then meditate until you find out... don't just take my word for it".

[Altair]

It's about getting rid of all the baggage.. the less baggage the easier the connection to X/Y/Z..

I have yet to see anyone who has freed themselves fully of anger, doubt, sadness, desire, attachment, etc. All the things that are conditional, learned habits and part of human's lower reality. A lot of people may claim to be, but my first instinct is to always not believe them. They make the big claim, so it's up to them to show it. Speaking in parables ain't enough to make an impact.

[janielee]

Many Advaitins follow the teachings of the Sage of Arunachala, Ramana Maharishi.

Ramana Maharishi became awakened during his late teens as the direct result of a near death experience...He could have stopped there...said "I am enlightened now" and that would have been that...The whole world would have been none the wiser.

What followed, was 50 years of INTENSE Sadhana! Meditating for hours and hours on end until insects bored into his skin.. until calluses formed...until he collapsed with malnutrition.. until he couldn't walk anymore..

The statements...the Mahavakyas like "I am That" is not a statement of truth..It is a statement of attainment..an utterance of personal experience! You can teach a parrot to say it! Will the bird be thus enlightened?

Also, Ramana Maharishi was a great Shiva devotee all his life! Why do you think he went to Arunachala instead of just staying where he was? Again, the world would have been none the wiser.

What is the legacy of this great personage? An entire generation of intellectuals who believe that the very act of introspection is sufficient unto itself to claim enlightenment. They are just using another aspect of ego to override the more apparent one and perform all manner of mental gymnastics in the attempt to make it sound more plausible.

I believe that what Ramana Maharishi was saying is "want to know who you really are? Then meditate until you find out... don't just take my word for it".

:smile:

------------

[Uday_Advaita]

:smile:

------------
With due respect
My understanding is that after awakening there was no "Venkatraman" as a person. Whatever happened after the event of enlightenment / awakening was impersonal in the sense that his going to Arunachal, meditating there, spending days and months in the state of samadhi could not have been intentional or with any purpose. Devotees who noticed him started calling him Ramana Maharshi and built Ashram around him so that Devotees could meet him and ask him questions. That is how his teachings reached the world.
This is my understanding. Namaskar

[Shivani Devi]

With due respect
My understanding is that after awakening there was no "Venkatraman" as a person. Whatever happened after the event of enlightenment / awakening was impersonal in the sense that his going to Arunachal, meditating there, spending days and months in the state of samadhi could not have been intentional or with any purpose. Devotees who noticed him started calling him Ramana Maharshi and built Ashram around him so that Devotees could meet him and ask him questions. That is how his teachings reached the world.
This is my understanding. Namaskar
With more due respect, why won't you address me personally yourself? Why take issue with those who just smile at my words? Why not confront me directly about the points I make?

Suffice to say, you should know yourself that there are many stages and forms of the "enlightenment process"... Savikalpa Samadhi - Conceptual realisation... Nirvikalpa Samadhi - Transcendent realisation and Sahaja Samadhi - Perpetual realisation.

After one has an initial awakening or realisation of the nature of Self, they come to also understand that this is not the end of the story, merely the beginning and many refinements and adjustments need to be made and need to KEEP being made to avoid complacency.

We will never know if Ramana Maharishi attained Sahaja Samadhi after initial awakening, or after realising the possibility, meditated until the Sahaja Samadhi state was achieved...Just like, did Buddha naturally meditate because he was already IN Nirvana? or did Buddha meditate until he realised Nirvana? All of his disciples and contemporaries will point to the latter.

Even so, if meditation is an automatic symptom OF enlightenment and does not actually lead to enlightenment, what is everybody doing here just talking about it and NOT in meditation 24/7? or is there nobody here discussing anything and in that case, no discussion is happening, no words are being typed in a thread on a forum and I am just imagining it all? Including the fact that you are hiding behind people? This says a lot about your character right there!

[Uday_Advaita]

With more due respect, why won't you address me personally yourself? Why take issue with those who just smile at my words? Why not confront me directly about the points I make?

Suffice to say, you should know yourself that there are many stages and forms of the "enlightenment process"... Savikalpa Samadhi - Conceptual realisation... Nirvikalpa Samadhi - Transcendent realisation and Sahaja Samadhi - Perpetual realisation.

After one has an initial awakening or realisation of the nature of Self, they come to also understand that this is not the end of the story, merely the beginning and many refinements and adjustments need to be made and need to KEEP being made to avoid complacency.

We will never know if Ramana Maharishi attained Sahaja Samadhi after initial awakening, or after realising the possibility, meditated until the Sahaja Samadhi state was achieved...Just like, did Buddha naturally meditate because he was already IN Nirvana? or did Buddha meditate until he realised Nirvana? All of his disciples and contemporaries will point to the latter.

Even so, if meditation is an automatic symptom OF enlightenment and does not actually lead to enlightenment, what is everybody doing here just talking about it and NOT in meditation 24/7? or is there nobody here discussing anything and in that case, no discussion is happening, no words are being typed in a thread on a forum and I am just imagining it all? Including the fact that you are hiding behind people? This says a lot about your character right there!

My post was meant to be addressed to you personally. Unfortunately by mistake it got posted as a reply elsewhere. My apologies.
I abide in my Guru's teachings. My understanding therefore is, Meditation and or samadhi's are states in phenomenon. A seeker comes back to its original state (in duality)from or when coming out of samadhi. Whereas Enlightenment once happened is transcendental to a phenomenal person. For a person it is point of NO return.
This interaction between the two of us is Consciousness speaking to Consciousness through phenomenal objects (which is what we apparently are) in this phenomenal duality. The difference in understanding, concepts and views is the very basis of what we call as life which must happen through all of us. Namaskar

[Shivani Devi]

My post was meant to be addressed to you personally. Unfortunately by mistake it got posted as a reply elsewhere. My apologies.
I abide in my Guru's teachings. My understanding therefore is, Meditation and or samadhi's are states in phenomenon. A seeker comes back to its original state (in duality)from or when coming out of samadhi. Whereas Enlightenment once happened is transcendental to a phenomenal person. For a person it is point of NO return.
This interaction between the two of us is Consciousness speaking to Consciousness through phenomenal objects (which is what we apparently are) in this phenomenal duality. The difference in understanding, concepts and views is the very basis of what we call as life which must happen through all of us. Namaskar Namaskar.

If the error is due to a technical problem, I humbly apologise for reaching an incorrect conclusion regarding your motivation.

Maybe once this technical issue has been fully rectified, you may also be able to see and respond to all of the other posts I have made in this thread too. :wink:

I read an interesting article a while ago and I shall transpose it here:

http://the-wanderling.com/nirvakalpa.html

According to some scholars, even in the event of Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the vasanas are not completely destroyed and one can still "come down" into the base mind and you know, allow themselves to be caught up in philosophical discussions like this one. =)

You also must realise by now, that I have been totally holding back and holding out on you (and myself). The Mind and the intellect can only take one SO far in regards to enlightenment, for the mind cannot transcend itself in the act of "Self knowledge/awareness"..Just like how the eye cannot see itself..It takes the heart to get further! It takes unconditional love, surrender and the willingness to let go of everything you already know about anything at all.

I was an Advaita Vedantin for many years... However, my heart (nor my mind really) could relate whatsoever to an impersonal nothing!... Suffice to say, I didn't make for a good Buddhist either..because both Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism only go as far AS the mind..been there, did that, felt absolutely nothing.. just like it said I would, so no surprises there..I don't have to do anything to experience nothing whatsoever, so in that case...The aim of the philosophy was commensurate with the goal.

It wasn't until I gave up Non Duality and totally embraced Duality, that I found that "missing piece"..I found God and followed the path of Bhakti Yoga.

What followed was me finding a happy medium between Duality and Non Duality in the form of Vishishtadvaita or qualified Monism and that is the platform I speak from, like Gaudapadacharya (The teacher of Adi Shankaracharya)..

I told you I have been holding out..and yeah, I am also "enlightened" if that means anything at all..

[Uday_Advaita]

And yet Source is not the Doer. Source does nothing, although all actions occur within Source.

We could discuss this endlessly, questioning what is meant by the use of words such as "we" and "I", and it all gets a bit pointless.

The question is, are you speaking from a position of identification with Source (or enlightenment if you want to use such a term)?

Or are you just sharing mental concepts without knowing the reality behind them?

Peace.
Barring a few glimpses – far and few, I do not claim any identification with the source or enlightenment either. However I do abide in my Guru’s teachings and I am not unduly bothered as to whether the Source will reveal itself to this Mind Body Apparatus or not.

A few weeks ago, I had not even considered writing or sharing my thoughts on this or any other forum. A sudden urge to express came and this participation happened. What I am sharing are not my mental concepts but are the words that come to this Mind Body Apparatus by my teachers grace. The only practice I follow is to deeply contemplate on any question and ask, how my teacher would have responded. To that extent these are my concepts and there is no other platform from which I can speak.

Being new to this forum the choice of words – that happened - have offended you. I feel deeply and passionately sorry for that. All the words spoken hitherto by anyone or even the sages are concepts. The experienced Reality by the sages is simply beyond words. In this bi-polar world, some concepts are acceptable to some and some are not acceptable. This is how the life as we know happens. Namaskar.

[Uday_Advaita]

Namaskar.

If the error is due to a technical problem, I humbly apologise for reaching an incorrect conclusion regarding your motivation.

Maybe once this technical issue has been fully rectified, you may also be able to see and respond to all of the other posts I have made in this thread too. :wink:

I read an interesting article a while ago and I shall transpose it here:



According to some scholars, even in the event of Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the vasanas are not completely destroyed and one can still "come down" into the base mind and you know, allow themselves to be caught up in philosophical discussions like this one. =)

You also must realise by now, that I have been totally holding back and holding out on you (and myself). The Mind and the intellect can only take one SO far in regards to enlightenment, for the mind cannot transcend itself in the act of "Self knowledge/awareness"..Just like how the eye cannot see itself..It takes the heart to get further! It takes unconditional love, surrender and the willingness to let go of everything you already know about anything at all.

I was an Advaita Vedantin for many years... However, my heart (nor my mind really) could relate whatsoever to an impersonal nothing!... Suffice to say, I didn't make for a good Buddhist either..because both Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism only go as far AS the mind..been there, did that, felt absolutely nothing.. just like it said I would, so no surprises there..I don't have to do anything to experience nothing whatsoever, so in that case...The aim of the philosophy was commensurate with the goal.

It wasn't until I gave up Non Duality and totally embraced Duality, that I found that "missing piece"..I found God and followed the path of Bhakti Yoga.

What followed was me finding a happy medium between Duality and Non Duality in the form of Vishishtadvaita or qualified Monism and that is the platform I speak from, like Gaudapadacharya (The teacher of Adi Shankaracharya)..

I told you I have been holding out..and yeah, I am also "enlightened" if that means anything at all..

It was an inadvertent mistake on my part that I did not realise, I was responding to a reply to your post by someone else. Let us leave it at that.

As I can see, you have a deep study of scriptures and spiritual practices and long experience in spiritual seeking. My seeking happened only a few years ago and my study has been limited mostly to teachings of my Guru.

I have been a corporate executive for 40+ years and a student of physics (by inclination) since my childhood. Since I was not getting answers from scientific enquiries, I was drawn into seeking quite late. My good fortune got me across to the teachings of my Guru (Books and Videos), whom I did not have the good fortune to meet in person. This was in spite of the fact that we were in the same city for more than 30 years. He is no more.

I have never been trained in any sort of spiritual practice, like meditation, Yoga, kundalini or satsang. I always deeply contemplate on any question or thoughts that comes to this Mind Body Apparatus and ask how my teacher would respond to it. This is the only platform I can speak from. I fully abide in my Guru’s teachings and am convinced that events and deeds happen and there is no individual doer thereof. We all are sentient objects (non-sentient objects included) through which life as we know happens by the grace of the source. Namaskar

[Shivani Devi]

It was an inadvertent mistake on my part that I did not realise, I was responding to a reply to your post by someone else. Let us leave it at that.

As I can see, you have a deep study of scriptures and spiritual practices and long experience in spiritual seeking. My seeking happened only a few years ago and my study has been limited mostly to teachings of my Guru.

I have been a corporate executive for 40+ years and a student of physics (by inclination) since my childhood. Since I was not getting answers from scientific enquiries, I was drawn into seeking quite late. My good fortune got me across to the teachings of my Guru (Books and Videos), whom I did not have the good fortune to meet in person. This was in spite of the fact that we were in the same city for more than 30 years. He is no more.

I have never been trained in any sort of spiritual practice, like meditation, Yoga, kundalini or satsang. I always deeply contemplate on any question or thoughts that comes to this Mind Body Apparatus and ask how my teacher would respond to it. This is the only platform I can speak from. I fully abide in my Guru’s teachings and am convinced that events and deeds happen and there is no individual doer thereof. We all are sentient objects (non-sentient objects included) through which life as we know happens by the grace of the source. Namaskar Beautifully expressed! :hug3:

I didn't even think to consider for one moment how old you would be...and not that physical age has anything to do with the nature of Atman, but I obviously did not show you as much respect as an elder that I should have, so please accept my apologies. Checking a profile is something that I don't usually do.

If it is in your capacity to say, would you be able to reveal the name of your Guru? If not, I will understand...It is difficult to know who to trust with sensitive information these days and you will actually find me to be a very kind and loving person...unless I get treated unfairly through no fault of my own..then, lookout! LOL

I am still trying to overcome that aspect of my ego, yet if others show me love, it will be returned a hundred-fold...it is such a shame that not many do...they don't even want to get to know that side of me.

Anyway, it has been a pleasure to meet you and sorry again for my rudeness, but you have passed the test... welcome to the forum.

[Moondance]

My seeking happened only a few years ago and my study has been limited mostly to teachings of my Guru.

Is your 'guru' Ramesh Balsekar by any chance? Some of your wording and concepts are very similar.

[Altair]

There's what... a gazillion of individuated ''souls'' in the universe? What is the purpose of seeking and attaining full enlightenment?
Sometimes I get the impression that people seek to ''liberate'' all which would mean the purpose is to make the universe actually void of physical life itself..

[iamthat]

Barring a few glimpses – far and few, I do not claim any identification with the source or enlightenment either. However I do abide in my Guru’s teachings and I am not unduly bothered as to whether the Source will reveal itself to this Mind Body Apparatus or not.

A few weeks ago, I had not even considered writing or sharing my thoughts on this or any other forum. A sudden urge to express came and this participation happened. What I am sharing are not my mental concepts but are the words that come to this Mind Body Apparatus by my teachers grace. The only practice I follow is to deeply contemplate on any question and ask, how my teacher would have responded. To that extent these are my concepts and there is no other platform from which I can speak.

Being new to this forum the choice of words – that happened - have offended you. I feel deeply and passionately sorry for that. All the words spoken hitherto by anyone or even the sages are concepts. The experienced Reality by the sages is simply beyond words. In this bi-polar world, some concepts are acceptable to some and some are not acceptable. This is how the life as we know happens. Namaskar.

Thank you for your response, Uday Advaita. There is no offence taken. As you say, all words are concepts, and all is simply a manifestation of the Self. What is there to be offended?

Having said that, engaging in lengthy discussion of doership and what it is that identifies with the Self seems to end up going round in circles. The mind likes to argue these points, but the Self is unaffected by such concepts.

Peace.

[janielee]

Having said that, engaging in lengthy discussion of doership and what it is that identifies with the Self seems to end up going round in circles.

The OP sounds more like he is pros·e·lyt·izing - his threads are intended to convince you of the wonderment of doing nothing and getting the same results as a Buddha.

[Uday_Advaita]

Beautifully expressed! :hug3:

I didn't even think to consider for one moment how old you would be...and not that physical age has anything to do with the nature of Atman, but I obviously did not show you as much respect as an elder that I should have, so please accept my apologies. Checking a profile is something that I don't usually do.

If it is in your capacity to say, would you be able to reveal the name of your Guru? If not, I will understand...It is difficult to know who to trust with sensitive information these days and you will actually find me to be a very kind and loving person...unless I get treated unfairly through no fault of my own..then, lookout! LOL

I am still trying to overcome that aspect of my ego, yet if others show me love, it will be returned a hundred-fold...it is such a shame that not many do...they don't even want to get to know that side of me.

Anyway, it has been a pleasure to meet you and sorry again for my rudeness, but you have passed the test... welcome to the forum.
Revealing my Guru's name is not a trust issue at all. Firstly having never met, I do not have permission to call someone as my Guru. I would never know whether I would have been accepted as disciple. More importantly whatever I may say or write as my Guru's teachings may not pass the test and may not be approved. You will understand . Namaskar

[Shivani Devi]

Revealing my Guru's name is not a trust issue at all. Firstly having never met, I do not have permission to call someone as my Guru. I would never know whether I would have been accepted as disciple. More importantly whatever I may say or write as my Guru's teachings may not pass the test and may not be approved. You will understand . Namaskar
Of course I do!

There are many things I wish I had kept to myself over the years! They don't call it "Occult Wisdom" for nothing and I had to learn that the hard way.

[Uday_Advaita]

There's what... a gazillion of individuated ''souls'' in the universe? What is the purpose of seeking and attaining full enlightenment?
Sometimes I get the impression that people seek to ''liberate'' all which would mean the purpose is to make the universe actually void of physical life itself..

If all were to get liberated / Enlightened on this earth, the world would be a very boring place. Namaskar

[Uday_Advaita]

Is your 'guru' Ramesh Balsekar by any chance? Some of your wording and concepts are very similar.

................?? Your guess is as good as mine

[It Is]

If all were to get liberated / Enlightened on this earth, the world would be a very boring place. Namaskar

strongly disagree

[janielee]

If all were to get liberated / Enlightened on this earth, the world would be a very boring place. Namaskar

Completely ridiculous statement, with due respect.

[Altair]

Completely ridiculous statement, with due respect.
Think of it this way..

If all life on earth would be that far to have the possibility and actual means to achieve enlightenment we would have a world with humans only. And a human world devoid of the human drive to improve the world since all they’d be doing is doing nothing, literally..

This drive to liberate all is just profoundly anti-physical life and anti-diversity. Everyone must be human and must be living free of desire and attachment.
It would mean the end of reproduction, of humanity, of science, of nature.

Enlightenment fanaticism has very extreme implications..

[It Is]

Think of it this way..

If all life on earth would be that far to have the possibility and actual means to achieve enlightenment we would have a world with humans only. And a human world devoid of the human drive to improve the world since all they’d be doing is doing nothing, literally..

This drive to liberate all is just profoundly anti-physical life and anti-diversity. Everyone must be human and must be living free of desire and attachment.
It would mean the end of reproduction, of humanity, of science, of nature.

Enlightenment fanaticism has very extreme implications..

Oh my God, where do I even begin?

If all life on earth would be that far to have the possibility and actual means to achieve enlightenment we would have a world with humans only.

What makes you so sure that there would be no animals or visits from beings from other parts of the universe?

And a human world devoid of the human drive to improve the world since all they’d be doing is doing nothing, literally..

Oh man, that's such an insult to the enlightened. You really think they'd sit around doing nothing if there were things to do?

This drive to liberate all is just profoundly anti-physical life and anti-diversity.


What on Earth? Where did you get that from? Call me crazy if you will but I thought enlightenment was pro life and pro diversity.

Everyone must be human and must be living free of desire and attachment.

So a humanoid-like being from another solar system could't be enlightened? Is that what you're saying?
Also, the idea that that enlightened beings are free from desire is misleading. All that was ever meant was that they are free from attachments to any particular outcomes.

It would mean the end of reproduction, of humanity, of science, of nature.


LOL... you sure it would mean the end of reproduction? I could name many a master that has had children...

of humanity what are you even... what?


of science
... okay, you're joking now right? ...

of nature.
because enlightened folk just HATE nature don't they? :rolleyes:

Okay, look I'm sorry if I'm coming off as a bit harsh but clearly you have some serious misconceptions about what it actually means to be enlightened. You've probably read a few things, no doubt - but you've clearly misinterpreted them!

[Altair]

Oh my God, where do I even begin?
What makes you so sure that there would be no animals or visits from beings from other parts of the universe? Enlightenment would result to, upon death, the end of the cycle of death and rebirth and the cessation of taking on a form of any kind..

Oh man, that's such an insult to the enlightened. You really think they'd sit around doing nothing if there were things to do?
It's said they wake other people up. But what if ALL life on earth would be enlightened..? There'd be nothing to do...


What on Earth? Where did you get that from? Call me crazy if you will but I thought enlightenment was pro life and pro diversity.Those who believe in the cessation of the individual, and I don't mean the ego, but the actual individualized consciousness, are very much anti-diversity. If ALL life is One and exactly the same.. and we are on a cycle of death and rebirth only to attain eventual enlightenment then it follows naturally that physical life, and with it all of its splendid diversity, is but illusion and not the real state of being. To even suggest living beings can be pretty or beautiful would be seen as an insult to ''God'', to All-that-Is.. because we are simply not allowed to favour one over the other when All = Same, and All = One. Anything else would imply Separation. You do not seem to understand what ''merging with the Universe'' would actually imply..


So a humanoid-like being from another solar system could't be enlightened? Is that what you're saying? They're more or less the same, for all practical purposes. The belief that there's a special species that can attain king or queen hood remains intact.. whilst the rest of the species on the planet are seen as mere fodder stages to eventually incarnate as humanoids.

Also, the idea that that enlightened beings are free from desire is misleading. All that was ever meant was that they are free from attachments to any particular outcomes. Cessation of all desire is pretty much a basic tenet of all Enlightenment teachings.
Desire is a separation between you and a subject/object. It’s not that different from attachment.

LOL... you sure it would mean the end of reproduction? I could name many a master that has had children... That means they are still in desire. Nobody conceives children without desire.

because enlightened folk just HATE nature don't they? :rolleyes: In some ways they do. To suggest nature and all its creatures are only existing to eventually ''realize'' themselves once they incarnate as human (or humanoid) beings does suggest a very interesting take on nature. What if we simply were to destroy most life forms? Actually that is what we are doing right now.. so naturally, to the Enlightenment fanatics this is a good thing, since it increases the chances that ''souls'' incarnate as human beings, even more so now that we're in the billions and the biomass of human life and livestock combined is far greater than that of wildlife.

What Enlightenment teaching does is reduce all of life's splendour and diversity to a singular goal of ''Merge with the Universe'', as if there's no other valid and worthwhile pursuits to take. Life's diversity is seen as illusionary and merely exists to help ''souls'' become human, to then ''realize'' their ''self''. Why this entire process of ''spiritual evolution'' even exists nobody can explain. We just have to take it for granted or pretend we will ''understand'' once we are there. But then.. ''nobody'' is ''there'' so the entire discussion and topic becomes a useless exercise...


Okay, look I'm sorry if I'm coming off as a bit harsh but clearly you have some serious misconceptions about what it actually means to be enlightened. You've probably read a few things, no doubt - but you've clearly misinterpreted them!There is no need to apologise..
And I understand that to be free of desire and attachment is a very radical position. It seems you have not thought about the implications this ''Everyone should merge with the Universe'' has towards reproduction, human society, science, and everything else we take for granted as part of this world.
The Advaita path is full of assumptions that are rarely questioned and scrutinized properly.

[Moondance]

................?? Your guess is as good as mine

Okay... Ramesh it is then. :smile:

No need to be cautious - I like Ramesh's approach. He's not a religious purist and has a great understanding of Buddhism and Taoism which compliments his take on Advaita.

[Milo333]

is this a serious posting ? if you enter the light you gain access to all that is hidden for those veiled incarnated people .

its arriving in paradise as in the bible yet a cherubim with flaming sword guards the entrance.

these days so many have access to all that which was once hidden
they never really use oriental words from ages long ago but more terms as 'awakening' and 'the energies'

anyway all this talk here must make sense to those participating in some way , so much talk so much to say

perhaps some day you will see all from a different perspective

[iamthat]

I won't go through Altair's post line by line - just a few comments.

Talking about everyone on Earth (as we currently know it) being enlightened is a very extreme position, and anything taken to an extreme becomes ridiculous.

Does individualised consciousness cease on attaining enlightenment. What is enlightenment? It may be that enlightenment is infinite Being knowing itself through individualised consciousness. How else would infinite Being know itself?

Is it not possible to be enlightened and appreciate the magnificent diversity of Creation as an expression of the One, even while knowing it to be an illusion?

The idea that enlightenment fanatics(?) would like to destroy all animal life forms to increase the chance of souls incarnating in human form so they too can become enlightened is somewhat bizarre, and not really worth further comment.

I don't think that Altair has grasped the meaning of "merging with the universe". But if Altair wants to follow other pursuits then that is fine. We each pursue that which is right for us.

Peace.

[Altair]

Is it not possible to be enlightened and appreciate the magnificent diversity of Creation as an expression of the One, even while knowing it to be an illusion?Possibly.. but none of us knows..
There are no enlightened masters on SF.. we all have experiences, but who here is self realized..? Come on. What enlightened person spends time arguing on an internet forum?

The idea that enlightenment fanatics(?) would like to destroy all animal life forms to increase the chance of souls incarnating in human form so they too can become enlightened is somewhat bizarre, and not really worth further comment. No I did not say anyone believes that, to my knowledge, but it becomes a tempting thought nonetheless..


I don't think that Altair has grasped the meaning of "merging with the universe". But if Altair wants to follow other pursuits then that is fine. We each pursue that which is right for us.

Peace.And you have grasped its meaning..?
All teachings on Enlightenment tell us that cessation of ALL attachment and desire are required to attain self realization.

Bit condescending as well to try and nullify me like that as if I merely seek other pursuits. I concern myself with this stuff on a daily basis, practically. But I have other pursuits too, yes. I don’t claim to be some Grand Architect of the Universe. It’s a very strong position to take for anyone who actually isn’t self realized.

[iamthat]

Possibly.. but none of us knows..
There are no enlightened masters on SF.. we all have experiences, but who here is self realized..? Come on. What enlightened person spends time arguing on an internet forum?

How can we judge anyone's state of realisation? How can we say what an enlightened person may or may not do with their time?

And maybe an internet forum could be a very good place for an enlightened person to teach. It's as good a place as any, and all from the comfort of one's own home. :smile:

No I did not say anyone believes that, to my knowledge, but it becomes a tempting thought nonetheless..

My words were:

The idea that enlightenment fanatics(?) would like to destroy all animal life forms to increase the chance of souls incarnating in human form so they too can become enlightened is somewhat bizarre, and not really worth further comment.

in response to your comment:

To suggest nature and all its creatures are only existing to eventually ''realize'' themselves once they incarnate as human (or humanoid) beings does suggest a very interesting take on nature. What if we simply were to destroy most life forms? Actually that is what we are doing right now.. so naturally, to the Enlightenment fanatics this is a good thing, since it increases the chances that ''souls'' incarnate as human beings,

It does rather read as if that is your belief.

And you have grasped its meaning..?
All teachings on Enlightenment tell us that cessation of ALL attachment and desire are required to attain self realization.

I would suggest that enlightenment comes with complete surrender. Yes, this surrender includes desire and attachments, but after enlightenment the body is still present, and the body continues to feel hunger and thirst and tiredness and even sexual impulses.

Let us not be too idealistic about enlightenment. It is a state of Being, but the mind, emotions and body are still present with all their limitations.

Bit condescending as well to try and nullify me like that as if I merely seek other pursuits. I concern myself with this stuff on a daily basis, practically. But I have other pursuits too, yes. I don’t claim to be some Grand Architect of the Universe. It’s a very strong position to take for anyone who actually isn’t self realized.

I am sorry if I seemed to be condescending - that was not my intention.

Peace.

[Shivani Devi]

How can we judge anyone's state of realisation? How can we say what an enlightened person may or may not do with their time?

And maybe an internet forum could be a very good place for an enlightened person to teach. It's as good a place as any, and all from the comfort of one's own home. :smile: :smile:

Dear peeps..

What would you have an "enlightened master" DO? and if the answer is "nothing" it is impossible to do nothing...trust me, I have tried.

There is an old Zen saying...You may have heard of it; "before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water...after enlightenment, chop wood, carry water". If everybody on the planet became enlightened, the world would not stop turning. Also, there is nothing wrong with having desires...As long as the attachment to the desire isn't there...So if it doesn't work out, so be it and if it does work out, so be it.

Although, even an "enlightened master" realises that they can only lead the thirsty horse to water and they are not to blame if the horse decides to bolt off in the opposite direction and then collapse with dehydration...only those who are meant to be helped and/or enlightened will be...So it is rather idealistic to expect that the whole world will ever turn out that way.

Meanwhile, the only way one can tell if another is enlightened, is to be enlightened themselves..and those others shine out like a lighthouse beacon in the night...I can "recognise" the person I just quoted, for example.

[janielee]

Think of it this way..

If all life on earth would be that far to have the possibility and actual means to achieve enlightenment we would have a world with humans only. And a human world devoid of the human drive to improve the world since all they’d be doing is doing nothing, literally..

This drive to liberate all is just profoundly anti-physical life and anti-diversity. Everyone must be human and must be living free of desire and attachment.
It would mean the end of reproduction, of humanity, of science, of nature.

Enlightenment fanaticism has very extreme implications..

No need to think - it's regrettable that you not only do not understand enlightenment - you completely misrepresent it. But that is the thing with ignorance. It's anti-diversity and apparently pro-confidence.

For the joy of the mystics and the Awakened, just go read Rumi. Life is BEAUTIFUL! :biggrin:

[janielee]

The Advaita path is full of assumptions that are rarely questioned and scrutinized properly.

Not sure whether to laugh or cry :confused:

I'll just laugh.

Peace, peeps. :biggrin:

[Altair]

As I suspected.. some here may actually confuse their spiritual experiences with actual Enlightenment, but usually sources on the matter describe enlightenment/self realisation as a state of being reached once one has transformed all lower human characteristics..

Basically..

There is no attachment..
There is no ego..
There is no desire..
No jealousy..
No anger..
No violence..
No doubt..

Not just in a special experience but forever ever after, 24/7/365, and after death there would be no need to take on another form since karma is gone.
Enlightenment is not described as having a spiritual experience or becoming aware of the fact you are divine. It is realized when all karma is dealt with.

So who has achieved that and gotten rid of all the above, permanently?

And how is expecting or wanting everyone to reach that also not an issue to physical life itself? That is the issue I’m having, and why I believe it should be treated as an individual pursuit, not a grand cosmic and collective goal.. because that is over dramatic and probably impossible. Our bodies alone have numerous living beings, i.e. bacteria. It’s sad some of you can’t look at my post and think about the implications if all reached that level. It would imply that physical life and diversity would become a finished book.

[Uday_Advaita]

Completely ridiculous statement, with due respect.

Hello janielee

It was not a casual remark
My understanding is

1. There are about 7 Billion people on this planet. Out of which a few hundred thousand have turned to seeking their true nature. And out of these may be a few thousand have identified with the Source or Self realized or Enlightened and have become living Sages.
2. As stated by me in my earlier posts elsewhere, Seeking happens. And for only a few seekers, in some cases after a lot of efforts (Effort also happens) Enlightenment happens. There are instances where self-realization has happened quite early too. Whether Effort or No effort, Enlightenment cannot be obtained. It cannot be achieved by someone. It is a happening only if the Source by its grace decides to reveal itself to the seeker.
3. So there is absolutely no possibility of everyone getting enlightened on this Planet because the Source will not Will it. Why???
4. Because Sages / Gyanis are truly and fully identified with the Source. Their personal identity is lost forever. For them – I am That, He is That, She is That. There is no separation between a “Me” and the rest of the world. All that is, is That. (This is my understanding from the life stories of the sages and their writings.) I have no personal experience of it.
5. So IF the world were to be full of sages – there would be no disagreement, dissent, debates. Life as we know would simply not happen. There will be NO SPICE.
6. Isn’t life without any spice boring???
7. Hence the Source will not allow it.

These are my concepts / my understanding. It is absolutely ok that some of you may agree and some may not agree. Let there be a debate. Namaskar

[Altair]

Thank you much Uday_Advaita..

That is my understanding too.. and to be truly enlightened would be quite the achievement. To be free of all doubt, anger, jealousy, suffering, desires, attachments, etc. It is totally different to be that and live that fully.. not just in a meditation experience. If everyone were to extinguish all lower attributes what you have left is no more drive for worldly things. If ALL living beings were at that level there'd be no physical life left once they all died and shed their karma..

What many of us can and do experience is a 'temporary' glimpse of what we are, and what is possible to achieve. It is not the same as enlightenment, to my understanding of what I've read. It is a truly profound thing, and if one were to give up even two 'vices' one can already feel differently in spiritual practice. To remove more and more layers, eventually all of them, through years/decades/life times of sadhana would bring enlightenment.. and this instinctively makes a lot of sense to me..

So it is no casual thing.

And where I criticized the idea is the common conception of it just being a spiritual experience, as well as the drive some have to ''liberate all''. I do not think that is possible anyway. Our bodies alone contain numerous living beings in the form of bacteria. The only logical conclusion I can come up with is that there are numerous 'individuated' ''souls'' and it is folly to count them or even imagine all can be liberated. Only as an individual can we have that pursuit..

And it would not be 'desirable' either considering that... for whatever ''reason'' there is.. 'life' also seeks to show itself through physical diversity and forms. And I think it's more complicated than a simple matter of ''It all exists to eventually incarnate as human and then to reach enlightenment''. These are some of the assumptions I have come across in texts on self realization and soul's 'evolution'..

[It Is]

Enlightenment would result to, upon death, the end of the cycle of death and rebirth and the cessation of taking on a form of any kind..

Not necessarily. I've heard that some chose to come back to Earth to help. Also, why couldn't they just go wherever they want - including another planet of fully enlightened being?


It's said they wake other people up. But what if ALL life on earth would be enlightened..? There'd be nothing to do...

Surely they'd do the same kind of stuff that people are already doing... who's going to do the plumbing, get the food, organize the transport etc.?.... what makes you think an enlightened person can't have an "ordinary" job???

Those who believe in the cessation of the individual, and I don't mean the ego, but the actual individualized consciousness, are very much anti-diversity. If ALL life is One and exactly the same.. and we are on a cycle of death and rebirth only to attain eventual enlightenment then it follows naturally that physical life, and with it all of its splendid diversity, is but illusion and not the real state of being. To even suggest living beings can be pretty or beautiful would be seen as an insult to ''God'', to All-that-Is.. because we are simply not allowed to favour one over the other when All = Same, and All = One. Anything else would imply Separation. You do not seem to understand what ''merging with the Universe'' would actually imply..


The mind with it's likes/dislikes and preferences still remains after enlightenment, as I understand it... We have to use the mind to interpret reality - but deep down the enlightened know and feel the truth.

They're more or less the same, for all practical purposes. The belief that there's a special species that can attain king or queen hood remains intact.. whilst the rest of the species on the planet are seen as mere fodder stages to eventually incarnate as humanoids.

As I understand it, animals are generally at an earlier stage of their spiritual cycle than humans and aren't really able to attain enlightenment in their current forms.

Cessation of all desire is pretty much a basic tenet of all Enlightenment teachings.
Desire is a separation between you and a subject/object. It’s not that different from attachment.

Any teaching that states the enlightenment nullifies desire or that desire must be nullified in order to obtain it - I disagree with.


That means they are still in desire. Nobody conceives children without desire.

Well, as I just stated, I don't believe the enlightened don't experience desires.

In some ways they do. To suggest nature and all its creatures are only existing to eventually ''realize'' themselves once they incarnate as human (or humanoid) beings does suggest a very interesting take on nature. What if we simply were to destroy most life forms? Actually that is what we are doing right now.. so naturally, to the Enlightenment fanatics this is a good thing, since it increases the chances that ''souls'' incarnate as human beings, even more so now that we're in the billions and the biomass of human life and livestock combined is far greater than that of wildlife.

Okay, but do you have any idea how vast and ancient the universe is?
I'm sure there are lots of places the enlightened can incarnate to and also lots of places that might be more appropriate for younger souls.

What Enlightenment teaching does is reduce all of life's splendour and diversity to a singular goal of ''Merge with the Universe'', as if there's no other valid and worthwhile pursuits to take. Life's diversity is seen as illusionary and merely exists to help ''souls'' become human, to then ''realize'' their ''self''. Why this entire process of ''spiritual evolution'' even exists nobody can explain. We just have to take it for granted or pretend we will ''understand'' once we are there. But then.. ''nobody'' is ''there'' so the entire discussion and topic becomes a useless exercise...

Some might say that the ultimate purpose of life is fun. And fun doesn't exclude the non-enlightened obviously.

The theory goes that one cannot experience the upper unless they have first tasted/experienced/known the lower. Also, as I'm sure you can imagine, transitioning from one to the other would be quite the adventure!!!

Calling somebody a "nobody" is perhaps the highest compliment!:smile:


There is no need to apologise..
And I understand that to be free of desire and attachment is a very radical position. It seems you have not thought about the implications this ''Everyone should merge with the Universe'' has towards reproduction, human society, science, and everything else we take for granted as part of this world.
The Advaita path is full of assumptions that are rarely questioned and scrutinized properly.

I've addressed all of that in the above bolded sections and I might address a few other things I noticed you wrote subsequently too. :D

[It Is]

As I suspected.. some here may actually confuse their spiritual experiences with actual Enlightenment, but usually sources on the matter describe enlightenment/self realisation as a state of being reached once one has transformed all lower human characteristics..

Basically..

There is no attachment..
There is no ego..
There is no desire..
No jealousy..
No anger..
No violence..
No doubt..

Not just in a special experience but forever ever after, 24/7/365, and after death there would be no need to take on another form since karma is gone.
Enlightenment is not described as having a spiritual experience or becoming aware of the fact you are divine. It is realized when all karma is dealt with.

So who has achieved that and gotten rid of all the above, permanently?

And how is expecting or wanting everyone to reach that also not an issue to physical life itself? That is the issue I’m having, and why I believe it should be treated as an individual pursuit, not a grand cosmic and collective goal.. because that is over dramatic and probably impossible. Our bodies alone have numerous living beings, i.e. bacteria. It’s sad some of you can’t look at my post and think about the implications if all reached that level. It would imply that physical life and diversity would become a finished book.

No, one certainly doesn't have to overcome all "lower" tendencies in order to obtain enlightenment.

Nor does enlightenment necessarily mean the end of all "negative" emotion.

Also the idea that enlightenment means that all karma has vanished is simply FALSE. Where there is life, there is karma.

I think when people speak about "everyone" becoming enlightened they're really talking about humans only.

[It Is]

Hello janielee

It was not a casual remark
My understanding is

1. There are about 7 Billion people on this planet. Out of which a few hundred thousand have turned to seeking their true nature. And out of these may be a few thousand have identified with the Source or Self realized or Enlightened and have become living Sages.
2. As stated by me in my earlier posts elsewhere, Seeking happens. And for only a few seekers, in some cases after a lot of efforts (Effort also happens) Enlightenment happens. There are instances where self-realization has happened quite early too. Whether Effort or No effort, Enlightenment cannot be obtained. It cannot be achieved by someone. It is a happening only if the Source by its grace decides to reveal itself to the seeker.
3. So there is absolutely no possibility of everyone getting enlightened on this Planet because the Source will not Will it. Why???
4. Because Sages / Gyanis are truly and fully identified with the Source. Their personal identity is lost forever. For them – I am That, He is That, She is That. There is no separation between a “Me” and the rest of the world. All that is, is That. (This is my understanding from the life stories of the sages and their writings.) I have no personal experience of it.
5. So IF the world were to be full of sages – there would be no disagreement, dissent, debates. Life as we know would simply not happen. There will be NO SPICE.
6. Isn’t life without any spice boring???
7. Hence the Source will not allow it.

These are my concepts / my understanding. It is absolutely ok that some of you may agree and some may not agree. Let there be a debate. Namaskar

People love to complain about how messed up the world is... wars, pollution, corruption, violence, rape, murder, the list goes on.

Yet if someone suggests that we (collectively) need to enlighten - "oh no, that's boring - only hippies care about that stuff!"

I'm sorry but the idea that we need tremendous amounts of stupidity on this planet in order to have fun or find meaning, is not a concept that I find palatable.

[Spirit Bear]

I think we're all still children in this playground, and i hope we grow up soon, or our parents come, or we might soil ourselves if we haven't done so already.

It's easy to blame others, but we're all imperfect aren't we? Also, those sages are still human, wouldn't they also have needs and wants, are they beyond corruption and self-delusion by definition?

If they lose themselves, where did they go? I certainly don't want to lose myself, i'm dear to me. Sorry, that's too funny, but you know what i mean hopefully.

[Unseeking Seeker]

***

Perhaps ... addicted to delusion
We have ... fear of freedom. :smile:

***

[JohnHermes]

As my man Carl Jung would say

"One does not become enlightened be imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. " -Carl Jung

[iamthat]

5. So IF the world were to be full of sages – there would be no disagreement, dissent, debates. Life as we know would simply not happen. There will be NO SPICE.
6. Isn’t life without any spice boring???
7. Hence the Source will not allow it.

These are my concepts / my understanding. It is absolutely ok that some of you may agree and some may not agree. Let there be a debate. Namaskar

A world without disagreement, dissent or debates sounds rather peaceful and pleasant. Who needs spice?

It does seem a leap of deduction to go from life without spice is boring to the claim that therefore Source will not allow it. Many spiritual writings extol the virtues of peace, but I have not read any that extol the virtues of excitement.

Peace.

[Shivani Devi]

I shall now expound the doctrine of the Varnashramas according to Sanatana Dharma.

The Wise Beings of old, were also faced with this conundrum.

If everybody became enlightened, they would have no desire to reproduce nor contribute to society...worst case scenario, they would be eaten by wild animals as they sat in their caves or under a tree blissed-out in Samadhi...So what do?

They realised there were four stages in the life of a human being...
Childhood, Young Adulthood, Householder and Retiree.

The Wise ones conceived of the fact that Enlightenment probably would not happen in the first three stages, as the attention or focus would be elsewhere..On playing, studying, procreating and making money.. and so, by the time they reach 50 and all of their obligations to society are over, they give up all of their worldly possessions, take themselves off into the forest/mountains and devote the rest of their lives to seeking God/Enlightenment...So, if they get eaten by a tiger, they have already passed on their genes...Think of it as "population control".

[happy soul]

Enlightenment cannot be obtained. It cannot be achieved by someone. It is a happening only if the Source by its grace decides to reveal itself to the seeker.


Yet the READINESS for enlightenment must be achieved.

We must get to the point where we're fully PREPARED and READY for Source to take the 'final step.'

Each person has their own unique path to the readiness for enlightenment.

Traditionally, there are said to be four paths one may take - jhana yoga (the path of knowledge), raja yoga (the path of meditation), bhakti yoga (love and devotion), and karma yoga (selfless service).

It can help to know which of these four paths we've taken, so we can delve more deeply into that path and apply ourselves more diligently to it.

After completing one of the four paths, one may switch to one of the other three, and begin a new journey on that path, having already found enlightenment.

[happy soul]

double post sorry

[janielee]

Hello janielee

It was not a casual remark
My understanding is

1. There are about 7 Billion people on this planet. Out of which a few hundred thousand have turned to seeking their true nature. And out of these may be a few thousand have identified with the Source or Self realized or Enlightened and have become living Sages.
2. As stated by me in my earlier posts elsewhere, Seeking happens. And for only a few seekers, in some cases after a lot of efforts (Effort also happens) Enlightenment happens. There are instances where self-realization has happened quite early too. Whether Effort or No effort, Enlightenment cannot be obtained. It cannot be achieved by someone. It is a happening only if the Source by its grace decides to reveal itself to the seeker.
3. So there is absolutely no possibility of everyone getting enlightened on this Planet because the Source will not Will it. Why???
4. Because Sages / Gyanis are truly and fully identified with the Source. Their personal identity is lost forever. For them – I am That, He is That, She is That. There is no separation between a “Me” and the rest of the world. All that is, is That. (This is my understanding from the life stories of the sages and their writings.) I have no personal experience of it.
5. So IF the world were to be full of sages – there would be no disagreement, dissent, debates. Life as we know would simply not happen. There will be NO SPICE.
6. Isn’t life without any spice boring???
7. Hence the Source will not allow it.

These are my concepts / my understanding. It is absolutely ok that some of you may agree and some may not agree. Let there be a debate. Namaskar

The ignorance of these comments is amusing. Ignorance is not a negative term here - it just means a complete and clear lack of comprehension of what spiritual terms even mean - "enlightenment" included. Understand that if one picks up a book and reads it, it is completely different to taking a journey. The Sages all went on the journey - thank goodness there are real road travelers. The rest of us can stay in our chairs and talk about hobbits and gnomes.

[janielee]

A world without disagreement, dissent or debates sounds rather peaceful and pleasant. Who needs spice?
.

The insinuation that enlightenment means a boring life is funny to the extreme - but then again we can cast doubts about how happy a joyous man/woman is all day long. Laughing? Ahh the joy!

[janielee]

If everybody became enlightened, they would have no desire to reproduce nor contribute to society...

Buddha taught for 40+ years, establishing the oldest living Sangha that still exists today

Ramana Mahasri taught

Jesus went out and helped the poor, sick and disadvantaged

There are countless married and relationship based Saints in this world today, many enlightened, some more established than others.

The myth of enlightenment propagated (most commonly it seems by the Neo-Advaitan types as seen on this forum) is a result of laziness, ignorance - reading a book and imagining that they tasted the meal, and like unhappy wayfarers along the road, urging others to stay in theory based misery, when the Enlightened Ones are happy and at peace in their hearts, minds and souls - happy, genuine, lives of peace and laughter, clarity and Truth.

That is why these topics, as banal as they are, are no laughing matter for those genuine aspirants along the Way.

'A day will dawn when you will laugh at your past efforts. What you realize on the day you laugh is also here and now'

- Ramana Mahasri

[kumarjitghoshal]

Enlightenment???

What do you get out of it?

Sages who have tasted it say:

• You get nothing out of it
• No special knowledge comes to you
• No special powers are acquired.
• No riches, recognition, fame awaits you

Yet! Seekers all over the world are desperate to get it.

They indulge in various practices (Sadhanas) like, meditation, vipassana, yoga and quite a few punishing routines etc. and even travel continents for that “Bang” moment.

In Marathi there is a saying – “Unless you die, you can’t see Heaven”

Is this similar?

After Enlightenment what remains is:

• The Mind Body Apparatus (MBA)
• The World around you
• The awareness of I AM – I exist
• Peace & Harmony

Even Lord Buddha has declared that – “Samsara (the phenomenal life) and Nirvana are not different”. However, the all important “Me” – the Doer is lost for ever.

There is truly no one to enjoy the Enlightenment.

SHOULD YOU EVEN CARE???

Who cares !

[Shivani Devi]

Buddha taught for 40+ years, establishing the oldest living Sangha that still exists today

Ramana Mahasri taught

Jesus went out and helped the poor, sick and disadvantaged

There are countless married and relationship based Saints in this world today, many enlightened, some more established than others.

The myth of enlightenment propagated (most commonly it seems by the Neo-Advaitan types as seen on this forum) is a result of laziness, ignorance - reading a book and imagining that they tasted the meal, and like unhappy wayfarers along the road, urging others to stay in theory based misery, when the Enlightened Ones are happy and at peace in their hearts, minds and souls - happy, genuine, lives of peace and laughter, clarity and Truth.

That is why these topics, as banal as they are, are no laughing matter for those genuine aspirants along the Way.

'A day will dawn when you will laugh at your past efforts. What you realize on the day you laugh is also here and now'

- Ramana MahasriI totally agree with you...for the same "wise ones" who gave us the four rites of passage and the duties of each, also gave us the caste system.

As for "contributing to society", most of society sees that as having a job, paying taxes and producing offspring and I guess Buddha got all of that out of the way early on...but teaching a philosophy without pay isn't really seen by most as contributing to society..

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oBIxGjSHzF8

I also agree that these conversations go nowhere...As evidenced by the number of posts I have made in this thread versus the replies I get to them...I generally get more feedback talking to myself.

It's the same all over the forum though...What can one say about a personal experience in the way that anybody else who hasn't experienced it would be able to understand it anyway?

However, as to the part you quoted...Lord Brahma had many attempts at creating mankind..but for the first dozen or so attempts, all they wanted to do was to go off and meditate on the Absolute. It wasn't until Shiva/Shakti got involved that things started to heat up..

Well, that's the story and I'm sticking to it. LOL

*Loving the signature of the poster above me right now*

[Uday_Advaita]

The ignorance of these comments is amusing. Ignorance is not a negative term here - it just means a complete and clear lack of comprehension of what spiritual terms even mean - "enlightenment" included. Understand that if one picks up a book and reads it, it is completely different to taking a journey. The Sages all went on the journey - thank goodness there are real road travelers. The rest of us can stay in our chairs and talk about hobbits and gnomes.

Criticism, condemnations are all OK. But they don't add to anyone's knowledge.

You are so very knowledgeable.
Unfortunately I have not come across a single post from you which states your understanding, your concepts, your convictions.
I awaiting your contribution. Namaskar

[Uday_Advaita]

Who cares !

Thanks you Dada. You made my day

[janielee]

Criticism, condemnations are all OK. But they don't add to anyone's knowledge.

You are so very knowledgeable.
Unfortunately I have not come across a single post from you which states your understanding, your concepts, your convictions.
I awaiting your contribution. Namaskar

Knowledge is available to anyone who seeks it - there is book and theoretical knowledge. The knowledge promoted by the Usurpers.

Then there is the knowledge of the Sages who come through the path of realization, practices and inner knowledge.

Talking to the former is like talking to people who think the description of the sun means that there is a fireball in the sky which will burn everyone. Talking to the people who know the sun means mutual smiles as they relax together under the warmth of the Light.

JL

[Moondance]

The ignorance of these comments is amusing. Ignorance is not a negative term here - it just means a complete and clear lack of comprehension of what spiritual terms even mean - "enlightenment" included. Understand that if one picks up a book and reads it, it is completely different to taking a journey. The Sages all went on the journey - thank goodness there are real road travelers. The rest of us can stay in our chairs and talk about hobbits and gnomes.

Hello Janielee

These differences of opinion hinge on what is meant by the concept of enlightenment. I can bet you that if each wrote down their definition they would all be different - some significantly so. So until we can have a clear idea of what is meant by enlightenment there is no real hope of meaningful conversation here.

Perhaps you might like to share your definition. In that way it would provide a context as to why you are so critical of Uday’s (or his guru's) views.

[iamthat]

Going back to the question of whether effort is required to attain realisation, I just came across the following from Ramana Maharshi:

Effort is necessary up to the stage of realisation. Even then, the Self should spontaneously become evident, otherwise happiness will not be complete. Up to the state of spontaneity, there must be effort in some form or other.

Divine Grace is essential for realisation. But Grace is vouchsafed only to him who is a true devotee, or a yogi [one working to gain union of the mind and Self]. It is given only to those who have striven hard and ceaselessly on the path to freedom.

There is a state beyond effort and effortlessness. However, until it is realised effort is necessary.

Peace.

[Spirit Bear]

To OP,

I don't know, but I hope you get a sense of responsibility for those around you and a compulsion to help in any way you can.

[Chanine]

Enlightenment???

What do you get out of it?

Sages who have tasted it say:

• You get nothing out of it
• No special knowledge comes to you
• No special powers are acquired.
• No riches, recognition, fame awaits you

Yet! Seekers all over the world are desperate to get it.

They indulge in various practices (Sadhanas) like, meditation, vipassana, yoga and quite a few punishing routines etc. and even travel continents for that “Bang” moment.

In Marathi there is a saying – “Unless you die, you can’t see Heaven”

Is this similar?

After Enlightenment what remains is:

• The Mind Body Apparatus (MBA)
• The World around you
• The awareness of I AM – I exist
• Peace & Harmony

Even Lord Buddha has declared that – “Samsara (the phenomenal life) and Nirvana are not different”. However, the all important “Me” – the Doer is lost for ever.

There is truly no one to enjoy the Enlightenment.

SHOULD YOU EVEN CARE???

Wanting enlightenment in itself is part of this theatre, if we long for it we are accessing the feeling of missing ourselves which is the mind creating distance, we all long to be back where we were, realisation is the realised fact that we are back and never left, we have just entered the theatre for a bit..or so the mind would have us think :)....you beautiful people

[God-Like]

Some might agree that there are many levels to so called enlightenment,

Firstly there has to be a realization of what you are in reflection of this world.

What transpires from this point will contain the levels that I am speaking about.

One can either be a blissed out bunny not really engaging and functioning in this world, or one can put on your clothes brush your teeth have some toast and go to work.

So what is apparent is that there is a realization had but what transpires post realization will reflect the level.

One can therefore be enlightened, but to what degree does one engage and interact with the world.

To what degree does one identify pain and suffering for one to identify such qualities one must still have an self reflection.

If what is realized is impersonal so to speak then there has to be a personal touch when saying I love you, enlightened or not.


x daz x

[Altair]

Wanting enlightenment in itself is part of this theatre, if we long for it we are accessing the feeling of missing ourselves which is the mind creating distance, we all long to be back where we were, realisation is the realised fact that we are back and never left, we have just entered the theatre for a bit..or so the mind would have us think :)....you beautiful people
What you describe is becoming aware of your own divinity/soul. It's a 'realization' in and of itself, sure, but it's not the same as actual self-realization.. which is the cessation of all karma and lower human characteristics. We can delve into etymology here but if we're all going to describe a state of being based of eastern teachings perhaps we should stick with a more authentic description, and not confuse enlightenment/self realization with a mere spiritual experience of knowing where we come from..

Please take no offense when I say that, it is not meant to be read that way, but enlightenment is not something casual..
It is said to be cessation of karma and being in enlightenment 24/7 forever ever after.

[It Is]

What you describe is becoming aware of your own divinity/soul. It's a 'realization' in and of itself, sure, but it's not the same as actual self-realization.. which is the cessation of all karma and lower human characteristics. We can delve into etymology here but if we're all going to describe a state of being based of eastern teachings perhaps we should stick with a more authentic description, and not confuse enlightenment/self realization with a mere spiritual experience of knowing where we come from..

Please take no offense when I say that, it is not meant to be read that way, but enlightenment is not something casual..
It is said to be cessation of karma and being in enlightenment 24/7 forever ever after.

There's alot of misinformation out there. And some teachings haven't been translated very well/clearly and have become very much open to interpretation.

Just saying.

[Altair]

The biggest misinformation is this belief that you're already perfect. Yes, you may experience that, temporarily.. but unless you have actually cleansed yourself of all lower characteristics (doubt, anger, jealousy, greed, ego, attachment, desire) you are simply confusing your temporary spiritual experience of bliss and soul for actual Enlightenment. Affirmation to yourself that you are Divine does not make all the karma go away..

Unless we can actually be in such a state 24/7 forever after we are nothing but aspirants. People who are really serious about it even live in monasteries and are monks or nuns. This becomes more clear with the more spiritual practice (sadhana) you do, and you'll observe that much of the world and human baggage is distraction on the pursuit to grow spiritually. To improve takes discipline and determination, to what extent we want that and how serious we are depends on the individual. But lets all be humble enough to admit we are in fact not self-realized, and either aspirants or curious people..

[Moondance]

Going back to the question of whether effort is required to attain realisation, I just came across the following from Ramana Maharshi:

Effort is necessary up to the stage of realisation. Even then, the Self should spontaneously become evident, otherwise happiness will not be complete. Up to the state of spontaneity, there must be effort in some form or other.

Divine Grace is essential for realisation. But Grace is vouchsafed only to him who is a true devotee, or a yogi [one working to gain union of the mind and Self]. It is given only to those who have striven hard and ceaselessly on the path to freedom.

There is a state beyond effort and effortlessness. However, until it is realised effort is necessary.

Peace.

Hi Iamthat

That’s a nice quote but I think that we have to be cautious about drawing conclusions from isolated quotes in this way. Ramana spoke to those who came to see him at the level of understanding that they were at in that moment. As a consequence many of his utterances are context dependent (some even seem contradictory).

For instance, he also said:

“You impose limits on your true nature of infinite being. Then you get displeased to be only a limited creature. Then you begin spiritual practices to transcend these non-existing limits. But if your practice itself implies the existence of these limits, how could they allow you to transcend them.”

And:

“There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no effort, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his (her) eternal, natural, inherent state.”

This is not to take sides on the effort vs no effort conversation. From my perspective it makes no sense to say that one approach is superior or more suitable than the other - awakening will only occur via certain organisms under certain life circumstances. It’s all about ripeness and ripeness can emerge in different ways - not just formal sadhana.

[iamthat]

Hi Iamthat

That’s a nice quote but I think that we have to be cautious about drawing conclusions from isolated quotes in this way. Ramana spoke to those who came to see him at the level of understanding that they were at in that moment. As a consequence many of his utterances are context dependent (some even seem contradictory).

For instance, he also said:

“You impose limits on your true nature of infinite being. Then you get displeased to be only a limited creature. Then you begin spiritual practices to transcend these non-existing limits. But if your practice itself implies the existence of these limits, how could they allow you to transcend them.”

And:

“There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no effort, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his (her) eternal, natural, inherent state.”

This is not to take sides on the effort vs no effort conversation. From my perspective it makes no sense to say that one approach is superior or more suitable than the other - awakening will only occur via certain organisms under certain life circumstances. It’s all about ripeness and ripeness can emerge in different ways - not just formal sadhana.


More nice quotes - thank you, Moondance.

Regarding the first quote, is RM actually saying that no practice or sadhana is necessary? Or is he just advising against following any practice which implies that we are limited? Which suggests that some practices are more useful than others.

I was curious about the context of the first quote, so I found:

Truly there is no cause for you to be miserable and unhappy. You yourself impose limitations on your true nature of infinite Being and then weep that you are but a finite creature. Then you take up this or that sadhana to transcend the nonexistent limitations. But if your sadhana itself assumes the existence of the limitations, how can it help you to transcend them? Hence I say know that you are really the infinite, pure Being, the Self Absolute. You are always that Self and nothing but that Self. Therefore, you can never be really ignorant of the Self; your ignorance is merely a formal ignorance... Know then that true Knowledge does not create a new Being for you; it only removes your "ignorant ignorance." Bliss is not added to your nature; it is merely revealed as your true and natural state, eternal and imperishable. The only way to be rid of your grief is to know and be the Self.

Which is supported by the second quote given: There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no effort, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his (her) eternal, natural, inherent state.

Being the Self is simple and effortless, once we have realised the Self. Having realised the Self, it is always present without having to think about it. Until we realise the Self, it is neither simple nor effortless. The question that seekers face is how to remove the "ignorant ignorance". Talking about being the Self is not the same as the realisation of being the Self.

Peace.

[janielee]

Hi Iamthat

That’s a nice quote but I think that we have to be cautious about drawing conclusions from isolated quotes in this way. Ramana spoke to those who came to see him at the level of understanding that they were at in that moment. As a consequence many of his utterances are context dependent (some even seem contradictory).

For instance, he also said:

“You impose limits on your true nature of infinite being. Then you get displeased to be only a limited creature. Then you begin spiritual practices to transcend these non-existing limits. But if your practice itself implies the existence of these limits, how could they allow you to transcend them.”

And:

“There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no effort, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his (her) eternal, natural, inherent state.”

This is not to take sides on the effort vs no effort conversation. From my perspective it makes no sense to say that one approach is superior or more suitable than the other - awakening will only occur via certain organisms under certain life circumstances. It’s all about ripeness and ripeness can emerge in different ways - not just formal sadhana.

And yet to the Sage, these two sayings mean the same thing. Of course people are at different stages (And hence why walking the path is more beneficial than debating/thinking/intellectualizing it), but it doesn't mean Ramana contradicted or said different things in REALITY :smile:

Edit: PS Thank you for bringing the full quote, iamthat - context is everything as usual :smile:

[janielee]

One can either be a blissed out bunny not really engaging and functioning in this world, or one can put on your clothes brush your teeth have some toast and go to work.

I disagree. All the Awakened Sages are functional and more than involved in the world. There is no discrepancy, imo.

[janielee]

It is said to be cessation of karma and being in enlightenment 24/7 forever ever after.


And eminently do-able

Nirvana, says Ajahn Sumedho, is not some far off goal that can only be attained through years of effort. It is a state of being you can realize at any moment once you let go of grasping.

https://www.lionsroar.com/nirvana-now/

[iamthat]

I disagree. All the Awakened Sages are functional and more than involved in the world. There is no discrepancy, imo.

And I would suggest that the Awakened Sage who sits in a cave in deep samadhi is also serving humanity, by raising the overall consciousness of humanity. Enlightened teachers may work on many levels, not all of which are obvious to the casual observer.

Peace.

[janielee]

And I would suggest that the Awakened Sage who sits in a cave in deep samadhi is also serving humanity, by raising the overall consciousness of humanity. Enlightened teachers may work on many levels, not all of which are obvious to the casual observer.

Peace.

No disagreement whatsoever; some work in cloistered environments, others in towns. etc.

[janielee]

More nice quotes - thank you, Moondance.

Regarding the first quote, is RM actually saying that no practice or sadhana is necessary? Or is he just advising against following any practice which implies that we are limited? Which suggests that some practices are more useful than others.

I was curious about the context of the first quote, so I found:

Truly there is no cause for you to be miserable and unhappy. You yourself impose limitations on your true nature of infinite Being and then weep that you are but a finite creature. Then you take up this or that sadhana to transcend the nonexistent limitations. But if your sadhana itself assumes the existence of the limitations, how can it help you to transcend them? Hence I say know that you are really the infinite, pure Being, the Self Absolute. You are always that Self and nothing but that Self. Therefore, you can never be really ignorant of the Self; your ignorance is merely a formal ignorance... Know then that true Knowledge does not create a new Being for you; it only removes your "ignorant ignorance." Bliss is not added to your nature; it is merely revealed as your true and natural state, eternal and imperishable. The only way to be rid of your grief is to know and be the Self.

Which is supported by the second quote given: There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no effort, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his (her) eternal, natural, inherent state.

Being the Self is simple and effortless, once we have realised the Self. Having realised the Self, it is always present without having to think about it. Until we realise the Self, it is neither simple nor effortless. The question that seekers face is how to remove the "ignorant ignorance". Talking about being the Self is not the same as the realisation of being the Self.

Peace.

Yes it reads as pointing out the limitation of said sadhana

But if your sadhana itself assumes the existence of the limitations, how can it help you to transcend them?

[janielee]

"If other thoughts rise, one should, without attempting to complete them, enquire, 'To whom did they arise?', it will be known 'To me'. If one then enquires 'Who am I?', the mind (power of attention) will turn back to its source. By repeatedly practising thus, the power of the mind to abide in its source increases."

- Ramana Maharsi

Sounds like a Zen koan technique. Interesting.

[janielee]

Unless one is happy, one cannot bestow happiness on others.

-Ramana Mahasri

[God-Like]

I disagree. All the Awakened Sages are functional and more than involved in the world. There is no discrepancy, imo.

Do you know the difference between the blissed out non functional state and the functional state that facilitates an individual preference to brush their teeth and put on clothes?


x daz x

[Altair]

A lot of what I read here on SF is just confusion, etymology and philosophy..
The quotes that mention stuff along the lines of ''..don't try..'' and ''..it takes no effort..'' are easy to misinterpret..

No.. when you are in that ''state'' it takes no effort, no trying. But to actually be there forever, 24/7, requires actual self-realization, and to achieve that.. discipline and determination, and yes, action, as in doing spiritual practice, are still necessary. For as long as you still aren't there always you will need a degree of action. This is what makes humans equipped to grow spiritually, otherwise we may as well have been born as pigeons or raccoons...

All those quotes are actually easy to fathom.. and I've never read anything about this 'Ramana'..
I don't know him but I bet he spend most of his life doing sadhana..

... but we can walk around in circles not getting the meaning of non-doing and actually doing sadhana, and just confusing things.
It's because most of us are culturally shaped by viewing ''spirituality'' along the lines of philosophy, argumentation and writing like a poet, and not practice.

If you can still experience anger, doubt, hatred, jealousy, desire, attachment you are simply NOT enlightened..
You are just an aspirant or practitioner or monk..

If 'God' is perfect, divine, and pure THAN the enlightened person exemplifies that by having conquered all those lower characteristics..
He/she is in effect a ''God amongst men''..



This is not to take sides on the effort vs no effort conversation. From my perspective it makes no sense to say that one approach is superior or more suitable than the other - awakening will only occur via certain organisms under certain life circumstances. It’s all about ripeness and ripeness can emerge in different ways - not just formal sadhana.
Yes.. you can have a spontaneous experience that “wakes you up” but to actually grow further does take sadhana.. I learned that the hard way..

[Moondance]

And yet to the Sage, these two sayings mean the same thing. Of course people are at different stages (And hence why walking the path is more beneficial than debating/thinking/intellectualizing it), but it doesn't mean Ramana contradicted or said different things in REALITY :smile:

Edit: PS Thank you for bringing the full quote, iamthat - context is everything as usual :smile:

Of course - only seemingly so - that why I say context is so important. Ramana might say one thing to a follower which he might not deem appropriate for another. For some he was known to quote quite basic stuff from Buddhism as well as Advaita - and even from the Bible. For his advanced followers he would merely sit (as the Buddha before him) in silence. I would imagine that that was a very powerful silence. :smile:

[Moondance]

More nice quotes - thank you, Moondance.

Regarding the first quote, is RM actually saying that no practice or sadhana is necessary? Or is he just advising against following any practice which implies that we are limited? Which suggests that some practices are more useful than others.

I was curious about the context of the first quote, so I found:

Truly there is no cause for you to be miserable and unhappy. You yourself impose limitations on your true nature of infinite Being and then weep that you are but a finite creature. Then you take up this or that sadhana to transcend the nonexistent limitations. But if your sadhana itself assumes the existence of the limitations, how can it help you to transcend them? Hence I say know that you are really the infinite, pure Being, the Self Absolute. You are always that Self and nothing but that Self. Therefore, you can never be really ignorant of the Self; your ignorance is merely a formal ignorance... Know then that true Knowledge does not create a new Being for you; it only removes your "ignorant ignorance." Bliss is not added to your nature; it is merely revealed as your true and natural state, eternal and imperishable. The only way to be rid of your grief is to know and be the Self.

Which is supported by the second quote given: There is nothing so simple as being the Self. It requires no effort, no aid. One has to leave off the wrong identity and be in his (her) eternal, natural, inherent state.

Being the Self is simple and effortless, once we have realised the Self. Having realised the Self, it is always present without having to think about it. Until we realise the Self, it is neither simple nor effortless. The question that seekers face is how to remove the "ignorant ignorance". Talking about being the Self is not the same as the realisation of being the Self.

Peace.

I’m not sure that the extended quote changes anything - but thanks for posting it. Ramana Maharshi is, of course, most famous for his advocacy of self-enquiry as the principal means to remove ignorance. His method for conveying this was a form of satsang. People of all stages of development would visit him and he would share his wisdom. He did not present a formal systematic teaching of Advaita Vedanta.

This direct pointing approach can be found with other latter day presenters such as (the previously mentioned) Ramesh Balsekar, (his teacher) Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, J Krishnamurti, Jean Klein, Alan Watts and so on.

All these ‘teachers’ advocate some form of seeing for yourself or introspection. In doing this they often borrow from the traditions while stripping away that which is superstitious, archaic and superfluous.

Of course this involves some form of application. But not the effort associated with the systematic approaches of purification etc. of traditional schools.

But anyway, again, I’m not taking any side in that aspect of the conversation. As I say, for me it makes no sense to say that one approach is superior or more suitable than the other - awakening will only occur via certain organisms under certain life circumstances. There are no formulas - although the key seems to have something to do with ripeness and receptivity.

[It Is]

The biggest misinformation is this belief that you're already perfect. Yes, you may experience that, temporarily.. but unless you have actually cleansed yourself of all lower characteristics (doubt, anger, jealousy, greed, ego, attachment, desire) you are simply confusing your temporary spiritual experience of bliss and soul for actual Enlightenment. Affirmation to yourself that you are Divine does not make all the karma go away..

Unless we can actually be in such a state 24/7 forever after we are nothing but aspirants. People who are really serious about it even live in monasteries and are monks or nuns. This becomes more clear with the more spiritual practice (sadhana) you do, and you'll observe that much of the world and human baggage is distraction on the pursuit to grow spiritually. To improve takes discipline and determination, to what extent we want that and how serious we are depends on the individual. But lets all be humble enough to admit we are in fact not self-realized, and either aspirants or curious people..

I've studied the topic of enlightenment extensively. Pretty much all the recognized spiritual masters seem to the be saying the same thing: that enlightenment isn't about being some kind of all-powerful-all-seeing super-God, but simply the permanent (and shattering) realization that "I am nothing!"

I believe that POWERFUL experiences are required to reach this state. That is, things like kundalini, samadhi and visits to the higher realms. However, I am open to the possibility of other paths even though they are not my cup of tea.

[Chanine]

What you describe is becoming aware of your own divinity/soul. It's a 'realization' in and of itself, sure, but it's not the same as actual self-realization.. which is the cessation of all karma and lower human characteristics. We can delve into etymology here but if we're all going to describe a state of being based of eastern teachings perhaps we should stick with a more authentic description, and not confuse enlightenment/self realization with a mere spiritual experience of knowing where we come from..

Please take no offense when I say that, it is not meant to be read that way, but enlightenment is not something casual..
It is said to be cessation of karma and being in enlightenment 24/7 forever ever after.

Actual realisation....:biggrin: I only point, my words have no meaning

[janielee]

I believe that POWERFUL experiences are required to reach this state. That is, things like kundalini, samadhi and visits to the higher realms. However, I am open to the possibility of other paths even though they are not my cup of tea.

Haven't heard one Master teach that "POWERFUL experiences are required to reach this state"

Here's a related thread: http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=91770 that may be of interest

[happy soul]

Pretty much all the recognized spiritual masters seem to the be saying the same thing: that enlightenment isn't about being some kind of all-powerful-all-seeing super-God, but simply the permanent (and shattering) realization that "I am nothing!"


Thanks for sharing this. J. Krishnamurti has said things like 'the thinker' must cease to be, and that we must become utterly empty of thought and of any kind of self or experience. He says that LOVE exists only when 'the me' is absent.

I've also heard many times that 'enlightenment' is the experiential knowledge of your divine nature, or oneness with God. Although you don't have to believe in a personal god, but there must be a deep, inner realization of one's true self, one's Buddha nature.

This may manifest as a sense of being 'connected' to everything and also a sense of one's WORTH. One would feel completely WORTHY.

And we're completely worthy in our divine nature. In other words, the divine nature itself is completely worthy, therefore we are completely worthy, because we are the divine nature. Its worthiness IS our worthiness because we ARE it.

[happy soul]

sorry double post

[It Is]

Haven't heard one Master teach that "POWERFUL experiences are required to reach this state"

Here's a related thread: http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=91770 that may be of interest

To be fair, I suppose most teachers would place the emphasis on meditation/yoga first and then if powerful experiences happen then they will happen of their own accord. Otherwise, without a proper foundation laid out, things could get messy quick!!!

[janielee]

To be fair, I suppose most teachers would place the emphasis on meditation/yoga first and then if powerful experiences happen then they will happen of their own accord. Otherwise, without a proper foundation laid out, things could get messy quick!!!

Well :smile: if we were going to go on topic, there would be a lot to it. I have looked up some old posters on this, and there is some good stuff. But back to teachers, genuinely adept spiritual teachers don't really overemphasize that in my experience. Experiences COME and GOES but the focus is on what is ever-present. Isn't that what is real, dear friend?

I think some of the most helpful advice I ever received was: just keep at it, put aside expectations, let the blossoms bloom when they are ready, tend to your garden as best as able. Love and cherish yourself, and learn kindness in your daily works.

JL

[It Is]

Well :smile: if we were going to go on topic, there would be a lot to it. I have looked up some old posters on this, and there is some good stuff. But back to teachers, genuinely adept spiritual teachers don't really overemphasize that in my experience. Experiences COME and GOES but the focus is on what is ever-present. Isn't that what is real, dear friend?

I think some of the most helpful advice I ever received was: just keep at it, put aside expectations, let the blossoms bloom when they are ready, tend to your garden as best as able. Love and cherish yourself, and learn kindness in your daily works.

JL

:smile: thanks and well said

[no1wakesup]

Enlightenment???

What do you get out of it?

Sages who have tasted it say:

• You get nothing out of it
• No special knowledge comes to you
• No special powers are acquired.
• No riches, recognition, fame awaits you

Yet! Seekers all over the world are desperate to get it.

They indulge in various practices (Sadhanas) like, meditation, vipassana, yoga and quite a few punishing routines etc. and even travel continents for that “Bang” moment.

In Marathi there is a saying – “Unless you die, you can’t see Heaven”

Is this similar?

After Enlightenment what remains is:

• The Mind Body Apparatus (MBA)
• The World around you
• The awareness of I AM – I exist
• Peace & Harmony

Even Lord Buddha has declared that – “Samsara (the phenomenal life) and Nirvana are not different”. However, the all important “Me” – the Doer is lost for ever.

There is truly no one to enjoy the Enlightenment.

SHOULD YOU EVEN CARE???

Beautiful. There is no one to get enlightenment

[bluebird21]

There is certainly someone/something there to enjoy ‘enlightenment.’ The REAL you! Just not the “me” you THINK you are. Aka you don’t disappear, you are more you than ever through enlightenment, just all that isn’t truly you falls away.

[Unseeking Seeker]

***

Let us imagine that we have four senses instead of five
Then we are granted, by divine grace the fifth
Now multiply the ecstatic exuberance thousand fold
Get it?

Love & Light

***

[ImthatIm]

***

Let us imagine that we have four senses instead of five
Then we are granted, by divine grace the fifth
Now multiply the ecstatic exuberance thousand fold
Get it?

Love & Light

***

I can SEE___:icon_cyclops:___ !!!!!!