Changing beliefs is not spiritual awakening

Originally Posted by Kioma

There are limits on our limits. Anything can bring us closer to our spiritual path - if we are open to it.

If we are not open to it, well then, all we will see are obstacles.

That's the irony of it all, for me anyway. When the Spiritual Path becomes your Path, only then does it become Spiritual.

[Tuesday]

Greenslade, i actually believe there is An universal truth, and that universal truth contains the level of awakeness. Guess we just disagree. :)

Originally Posted by Tuesday

Greenslade, i actually believe there is An universal truth, and that universal truth contains the level of awakeness. Guess we just disagree. :)

So how do you define 'Universal' and 'truth'? Both of those are many things to many people, and as far as I'm aware there hasn't been any conclusion to that particular discussion - in fact I haven't seen any discussion about it in a long time. Thankfully.


My point has never been that awake, enlightenment etc don't exist but that I personally don't attach any importance to them. Many people hold the belief that they do exist, and as long as one single person holds the belief that they exist then exist they do. Personally I think they've become an impediment to awakening, which sounds ironic I know. I could also argue 'Universal' and 'truth' with you but that would only be another reason to go around in dizzying, pointless square circles.


My point is that awakening comes when we become awake to the reasons we use the words, because it's in the how and why we use the words that we find the truth of ourselves. So I'd disagree that we disagree. I can't remember the exact quote but Buddha said that we should question everything, even what he said. So what makes me enlightened? Am I enlightened because I know the (inexact) quote or am I enlightened because I question my definitions and my reasons, therefore coming to the source of my beliefs and reality? Am I enlightened in knowing that I can then co-create my reality in a much more consciously-aware way that suits me? I am enlightened as to the reasons I don't use the words, quite frankly it makes me feel pretentious.



In the Spiritual vernacular they mean anything to anyone so it's my choice of perspective if they have any meaning or not to me - the same as it's your choice that they have meaning for you. That enlightenment and all the other words we've talked about exist or not isn't important to me, this interaction and co-creation is more important.



I know that I don't need to know, and if I did need to then know I'd know. Y'know?

[Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

So how do you define 'Universal' and 'truth'? Both of those are many things to many people, and as far as I'm aware there hasn't been any conclusion to that particular discussion - in fact I haven't seen any discussion about it in a long time. Thankfully.


My point has never been that awake, enlightenment etc don't exist but that I personally don't attach any importance to them. Many people hold the belief that they do exist, and as long as one single person holds the belief that they exist then exist they do. Personally I think they've become an impediment to awakening, which sounds ironic I know. I could also argue 'Universal' and 'truth' with you but that would only be another reason to go around in dizzying, pointless square circles.


My point is that awakening comes when we become awake to the reasons we use the words, because it's in the how and why we use the words that we find the truth of ourselves. So I'd disagree that we disagree. I can't remember the exact quote but Buddha said that we should question everything, even what he said. So what makes me enlightened? Am I enlightened because I know the (inexact) quote or am I enlightened because I question my definitions and my reasons, therefore coming to the source of my beliefs and reality? Am I enlightened in knowing that I can then co-create my reality in a much more consciously-aware way that suits me? I am enlightened as to the reasons I don't use the words, quite frankly it makes me feel pretentious.



In the Spiritual vernacular they mean anything to anyone so it's my choice of perspective if they have any meaning or not to me - the same as it's your choice that they have meaning for you. That enlightenment and all the other words we've talked about exist or not isn't important to me, this interaction and co-creation is more important.



I know that I don't need to know, and if I did need to then know I'd know. Y'know?

When arguing about universal truth, we are using our subjective knowledge on the Matter. Doesnt mean universal truth doesnt exist.

What Comes To Being enlightened by not using Words, Or using Words, they are the same thing. Both hold a belief. By refusing To use the Word enlightened doesnt make anyone enlightened. One person Who is More awake than i am doesnt use the Word enlightent because most People argue over what it really means. Also, it's a path that has no end, it only changes. How ever i've heard him use other Words describing how he sees the world, and frankly, i believe him.

Originally Posted by Tuesday

When arguing about universal truth, we are using our subjective knowledge on the Matter. Doesnt mean universal truth doesnt exist.

What Comes To Being enlightened by not using Words, Or using Words, they are the same thing. Both hold a belief. By refusing To use the Word enlightened doesnt make anyone enlightened. One person Who is More awake than i am doesnt use the Word enlightent because most People argue over what it really means. Also, it's a path that has no end, it only changes. How ever i've heard him use other Words describing how he sees the world, and frankly, i believe him.

I agree. Most begin to place status along with the word enlightened.

When I speak of anything spiritual amongst friends and acquaintances I prefer to not use the terms awake, enlightened or woke. I try to never place awareness to anyone’s place on their path or my own. Placing status on anyone’s progress is unnecessary and backwards considering being woke means you understand that we’re all one. And how can anyone be labeled or viewed as further along than another.

Imagine a young soul who is mentally woke telling and old soul that they are asleep. When the old soul could have walked with Jesus or Buddha or even learned from Thoth. The possibilities are endless.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Starman

In my opinion words and labels don't go there and the term "spiritual awakening" is just another label, a label that means different things to different people. The bottom line about the spiritual experience is that it is the most personal and intimate experience that a person will ever have. The human mind attempts to objectify everything with the dynamics of compare and contrast, but in my opinion, the spiritual experience does not compare nor contrast with anything else. It is fashionable for human beings to place everything in a hierarchy, and the term "spiritual awakening" denotes a particular hierarchy of consciousness. But I do not accept any high or low in these matters.

Its' sort of like a one-upsman-ship in a so-called spiritual community. Ego loves to raise itself up by putting others down, and there are lots of labels people use to do this. I do not say I am "spiritually awakened," or enlightened, because to me the spiritual journey is infinite, way beyond thoughts, words, and labels, and any kind of awakening is not a plateau. The minute we start agreeing on what something is, or what something is not, when it comes to spirituality, we have left the purview of spirituality and are entering the arena of religion. Religion is an attempt to codify spirituality, but spirituality is unique to each person's particular intimate unfolding, and that defies codification. The codification of spirituality is one of the reasons why there are so many religions and different beliefs about spirituality, and spiritual awakening, in this world.

This is brilliant.

In my view, a "Spiritual Awakening" is merely the realisation that there is something more to life and existence beyond the superficial and mundane...and to seek that out and live in accordance with it.

There is also the distinction between a " belief" and a "personal truth" or a "knowing" which is called Gnosis or Jnana.

There is much I can say on this topic, but I wouldn't know where to begin.

Each of us have our own cognitive biases, dissonance, conditioning and upbringing which shapes what we know and how we perceive the world, including religious and spiritual matters...and whatever labels we use to define it, is what suits us and forms "our path".

For example, the OP mentioned something about letting Jesus into our hearts and if I did not know any better (which I don't) I would thus view this whole thread as an attempt at a veiled Christian indoctrination process.

That being said, I affix the label of being a "Hindu" to my forehead... somebody may come along and say " why Hinduism? Buddhism can give you better results" and so, I will become a Buddhist....then somebody else may come along and say " why Buddhism? Christianity can give you better results" and so, I will become a Christian... somebody else may rock up and say " why Christianity? Islam will give you better results" and so, I will become Muslim...only to find another will say "Why Islam? Hinduism will give you better results" so tell me, why should I go through all of the rigmarole only to arrive at the same place I started?

Yeah, so I get " don't worship Shiva....Krishna is where it is at" and all I can say is "I didn't know there was a difference, so does it really matter?"

Originally Posted by Tuesday

When arguing about universal truth, we are using our subjective knowledge on the Matter. Doesnt mean universal truth doesnt exist.

What Comes To Being enlightened by not using Words, Or using Words, they are the same thing. Both hold a belief. By refusing To use the Word enlightened doesnt make anyone enlightened. One person Who is More awake than i am doesnt use the Word enlightent because most People argue over what it really means. Also, it's a path that has no end, it only changes. How ever i've heard him use other Words describing how he sees the world, and frankly, i believe him.

Whether it's 'Universal' or a 'truth' are subjective beliefs and not a facts, so equally it does mean they do exist. Spirituality is called a belief system for a reason.



So your beliefs are as subjective as mine and really, there is no subjectivity. One thing you still haven't told me is who decides what enlightened, awake and aware are?



I can so easily use the words but I don't actually know if I am enlightened/awake/aware or not because there's nothing for me to measure myself against. I know things you don't and you know things I don't so who is more of what than whom, or does it really matter a toss? I can understand why people use the words but the important thing to me is why I don't. I don't attach any importance to the words. If you're going to talk about their existence or not, they cannot enter into your consciousness unless they exist - things that do not exist cannot enter your consciousness. So, enlightenment, awake and aware all exist and I'm not saying otherwise. The argument is not they they exist, the argument is what they exist as in our respective realities. Obviously they are important to you because you're a strong proponent, in my reality they exist as meaningless labels that only serve to chop our feet from under us. To someone else they may be Brownie points and escapism from the 'mundane'.



Everybody is where they need to be, otherwise they'd be somewhere else. Everybody is walking their own Path, doing their own chosen thing for their own chosen reasons and all of those things and all of those reasons contribute to the collective consciousness in ways we couldn't possibly imagine. Universal Truth or not, enlightened or not, aware or not, awake or not... all of these have their place in the Universe just the same so if we deny the existence of them?



Being enlightened, awake and aware should also encompass what we are not enlightened or awake to and aware of. If I make comparisons between you and me, what am I enlightened to or awake and aware of? Personally, the understanding is not in the use of the word but in that question.

[Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Badcopyinc

Imagine a young soul who is mentally woke telling and old soul that they are asleep. When the old soul could have walked with Jesus or Buddha or even learned from Thoth. The possibilities are endless.

'mentally awake' isn't the same as Being awake. Mental means mind and you cant be spiritually awake with mind. Also, i'm not sure what you mean by old soul and young soul. To me, a Being Can be here for all eternity and original Come from An alien race and Still get now here spiritually. Where as a young soul could learn how To let go of attachments and become More awake than the 'old soul'. If you're talking about young as In less awake and old as In More awake. Well then, it doesnt really Matter whether the young soul thinks themselves as More awake than the other. It makes no difference except that the young soul is inpredictable and egoish because they are thinking that they know something others dont.

Greendale, you asked who decides Who is More awake than others. Well, universal truth which is almost impossible To know with yoour limited view. Subjectively, it's all of us. People, Who wish To learn from the one More awake and the More awake Beings themselves Who Can say. Where they are At life.
Cant remember Who said that only another enlightened Being Can detect another one. Not sure i believe it though. I believe it shines through.
So what are the pros on finding someone More awake? They Can make you More awake, they Can teach you. Imagine Jesus and his followers. Imagine all the People Who claimed he was a fraud because he told them That they were all idiot Who were only interested in power.

Originally Posted by Badcopyinc

I agree. Most begin to place status along with the word enlightened.

One of the reasons I won't use the word is because I don't want to harbour that paradigm.

Originally Posted by Badcopyinc

When I speak of anything spiritual amongst friends and acquaintances I prefer to not use the terms awake, enlightened or woke. I try to never place awareness to anyone’s place on their path or my own. Placing status on anyone’s progress is unnecessary and backwards considering being woke means you understand that we’re all one. And how can anyone be labeled or viewed as further along than another.

But then, what is Spiritual? Is it Spiritual to talk about ideologies and theologies to people who have absolutely no interest in them and thereby create separation, or to come to the understanding of another level of 'We Are One'? What does it say about a Spiritual person when all they have to talk about is Spiritual stuff? Or when 'All That Is' isn't? What we also might not realise is that those people may well be of your Soul Group and you being there fulfils a Karmic Agreement. Beyond the labels there are so many things that we'll never have the answer to in this existence at least. Sometimes 'enlightened' is just a box to put your consciousness into.

Originally Posted by Badcopyinc

Imagine a young soul who is mentally woke telling and old soul that they are asleep. When the old soul could have walked with Jesus or Buddha or even learned from Thoth. The possibilities are endless.

But more than that, if we came from Spirit? Apparently Spirit is Source and that's where we come from; we are one with Source, collective/Universal consciousness, no separation yadda yadda. If that's the case what makes us not enlightened, awake and aware?



There is an understanding between an Old Soul and the Young Soul who tells them they are asleep. The Old Soul might understand that the words the Young Soul uses are a reflection of the Young Soul and has nothing to do with the Old Soul. It's in that space where comparisons have no meaning and differences bring realisations.

[Shivani Devi]

Please forgive me for what I am about to say, but my heart requires that it speak.

I don't know that many people in real life...Maybe a dozen all up, including family, friends and associates and none of them make the claim to be "spiritual" or "religious" and refuse to discuss the subject, saying stuff like "that's a very personal and private thing" if and when I raise the issue, which I didn't after the first time.

The only indication I get of self-professed "spiritual people" is from this forum here, but the statistical sampling is so small and insignificant in regards to all of the "spiritual people" out there, I wonder if any conclusions can be drawn from it whatsoever.

What I am finding is that many (not all) are harshly critical and judgmental IN the name of "spirituality" when those who are " not spiritual" don't need a reason, or they are much more tolerant of the morality and ethics of others. I have learned that "because I said so" is a valid enough reason.

Sometimes I just close myself off because there's no point in being "open" if that is not conducive to spiritual development and I can see myself visiting an Ashram soon...Maybe becoming a member of Sadhguru's brigade, because I realise I will never find what I really need on this earth and that's about as close as it gets because I am tired of belonging to a "spiritual movement" that has only one member.

If somebody is going to say "FTW" it sounds much better when others are also in on it. LOL