Enlightenment

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by janielee

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]

Originally Posted by 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???

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]

Originally Posted by Chanine

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]

Originally Posted by Altair

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Moondance

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.