Ramakrishna said...I want to taste sugar, not be sugar..

[WabiSabi]

So we are differentiating between relating to God, and being God. What if enlightenment, true enlightenment, is a fundamental realization of both of these states simultaneously? A Middle Way? After all, enlightenment is simply all that is, just as it is (my understanding), and since we are both 'of' God and 'as' God, then why should we only be able to have one or the other?

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by WabiSabi

So we are differentiating between relating to God, and being God. What if enlightenment, true enlightenment, is a fundamental realization of both of these states simultaneously? A Middle Way? After all, enlightenment is simply all that is, just as it is (my understanding), and since we are both 'of' God and 'as' God, then why should we only be able to have one or the other?

The whole problem is with the word 'relationship'. In the enlightened state, there is no 'relationship'. I have the awareness of both states and have also taken the 'middle way' approach (shushumna nadi)...but there's just something special about relating to god that's somehow lost in the process and translation of being god, even though 'being god' is definitely better. I guess I am just in love, can't help it...can't stop it...etc etc

Aum Namah Shivaya

[Floatsy]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

The whole problem is with the word 'relationship'. In the enlightened state, there is no 'relationship'. I have the awareness of both states and have also taken the 'middle way' approach (shushumna nadi)...but there's just something special about relating to god that's somehow lost in the process and translation of being god, even though 'being god' is definitely better. I guess I am just in love, can't help it...can't stop it...etc etc

Aum Namah Shivaya

With respect, what goes up must come down. And even then, enlightenment is ALL about relationship. It's both transcendental and all-encompassing, thus the need to choose does not apply.

The experiences you described in the Buddhist forum are not our version of "enlightenment" or "Nibbana", although it would be hard to differentiate with the group there.

In any case, it is good that you have found the path and direction that works for you. Peace is important.

Namaste,
floatzy

[Floatsy]

Originally Posted by WabiSabi

So we are differentiating between relating to God, and being God. What if enlightenment, true enlightenment, is a fundamental realization of both of these states simultaneously? A Middle Way? After all, enlightenment is simply all that is, just as it is (my understanding), and since we are both 'of' God and 'as' God, then why should we only be able to have one or the other?

This is like the phrase "you can have your cake and eat it too", usually not without some effort before hand

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Floatsy

With respect, what goes up must come down. And even then, enlightenment is ALL about relationship. It's both transcendental and all-encompassing, thus the need to choose does not apply.

The experiences you described in the Buddhist forum are not our version of "enlightenment" or "Nibbana", although it would be hard to differentiate with the group there.

In any case, it is good that you have found the path and direction that works for you. Peace is important.

Namaste,
floatzy

Thank you, Floatsy, although I'd like you to explain to me just how enlightenment has different 'versions' of it.

It's story time...

I am visited once a month by my spiritual counsellor who is also a trained psychologist.

He is having a hell of a time trying to find a 'purpose' for my existence or any 'self-identity' he can associate with.

He's always like 'well, who do you want to be then?' and I'm like 'I don't know' and 'what would you like to do with your life?' and I'm like 'nothing' and he goes 'why am I even doing this?' and I'm like 'trying to help me?'...yeah, it's always like this, with him trying to give me 'goals'...'purposes'...'plans' and me not knowing anything about them.

In this session of counseling frustration, he was like 'okay, we'll try it this way then...suspend all rational thought and do this exercise with me...it's your 100th birthday...you're having a party...you can name 6 people, alive or dead you want to invite...hit me...go".

I'm like "okay, if God counts, He can be there"...and my counsellor was like "okay, God's definitely there...who else?" well, Dalai Lama...Nicola Tesla...Stephen Hawking...my dead loving granny...Jimi Hendrix can provide the backing soundtrack..."

So, my counsellor goes "this is a great start, I can see you value genius, innovation, love and psychedelia...what do you think that God and the Dalai Lama would be talking about?" and all I could do was go "aaahhhh...uuuhhhh...ummmm...." I couldn't answer that one.

So my counsellor goes "that's fine, what about Stephen Hawking and God?" and I was like "meh, they'd just be playing dice together..."

"Stephen Hawking and Nicola Tesla"? and I was like "I dunno, but I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that one"

"What would Jimi Hendrix and Granny be doing?" and I said "probably tripping on the acid I spiked the punch with"..

So, the counsellor goes "what about you and Hawking?" and I was like "I'd be picking his brains about Dark Matter and quantum electrodynamics..."

The counsellor was like "aaahhh...okay whatever...so, what would you be talking with God about then?"

It took all I had not to totally break down at that point...suffice to say, I was just like 'see ya next month'.

[Floatsy]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

Thank you, Floatsy, although I'd like you to explain to me just how enlightenment has different 'versions' of it.

People across, or even potentially within, traditions ascribe different meanings to words.

This is why words are tentative but can be a tool used to indicate/point to. For example, if I eat a mango and have the experience of it, I might try to describe this to you with words such as "yummy, sweet" etc. You might use the words "swell". If we have both eaten it, we could also just nod to each other.

So it is not that enlightenment has different versions, it is how people utilize or imagine this word. This is the same for the word "ego".

The experiences or the no-relationship-state is then not enlightenment as I have been taught and understand.

It is not my intention or desire to say what is right for you, but as you made the comment in relation to Buddhism, I had merely wanted to clarify that point.

Namaste,
Floatzy

[Shivani Devi]

Yes, Floatzy...this forum is where I should live...I know this now. That's why I always deny the 'Buddhist part' of my Hindu tradition...thought I'd revisit it for a bit...just reminded me why I am Hindu and not Buddhist, even though I am Agama.

[Floatsy]

No you are welcome anywhere

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

..this forum is where I should live...I know this now.
That's why I always deny the 'Buddhist part' of my Hindu tradition....

Oh... well, then, let me give you a treat for your soul, Necromancer...


There is nothing that could exist without Me, whether moving or not moving.
Oh Arjuna, I support this entire Universe
with a single fragment of my Myself...

Ch 10
around v 39.
the Gita.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Oh... well, then, let me give you a treat for your soul, Necromancer...


There is nothing that could exist without Me, whether moving or not moving.
Oh Arjuna, I support this entire Universe
with a single fragment of my Myself...

Ch 10
around v 39.
the Gita.

Namaste.

Thank you so much for that...it helped...a bit, but I am left wondering how God can be fragmented...being the stupid advaitin that I am.

I realised through much pain I need to make the choice. I cannot be Advaitin + Shiva Bhakta simultaneously...I could try...I could fail...

I'm scared, you know? I admit this...I'm terrified.

I love Shiva so much, I feel that in becoming Shiva, I'm going to lose all of that and I won't be able to get it back.

If you love something then become it, weren't you just loving for love's sake to begin with?

These are feelings it's really hard for me to deal with and overcome.

The Buddhists talk about 'emptiness' and about 'nothingness'...how can so much bliss and joy that a spiritual experience provides evolve out of 'emptiness' and 'nothingness'?

I don't want to give up what I'm feeling now to go into some kind of 'void' that's devoid of everything I could ever relate to.

Yeah, I'm scared okay?

Aum Namah Shivaya