What is enlightenment?

[sweetheart]

Is not the very purpose of having a mind and a live, to contemplate
the profound question, no? Attempting to write about it, the first
folly that words and the self that knows words, think it knows, as
knower and object in the deception of mind.

Do not all people live their lives measured against some invisible
semantic moral, ethical or something or other enlightenment? Surely
as easily as one can discern evil and that bad things are being done,
there is the same up-side ability to "know" enlightenment?

Is it just being really really smart?
Is it being profoundly loving?
Is it having magic powers?
Is it nothing, as in "no thing or experience"?

It is defined by englightened people as "life without thought".
Something direct, immediate, total, in and not in meditation, or all
of life is that meditation... even with the terrible fear-states,
contractions and contradictions of this world.

If it is true, and we better hope it is, that we are the enlightened
left, then we better dang well show some. If life is without thought,
and the self who writes, who knows language, is false, then knowledge
of words and langauge, surely is not enlighenment, then that all of
life "is" enlightenment, it is a false contradiction of the mind to
presume there is anything else. In that case, the entire world, every
instant in time is deeply alive and vibrant with deep mystical
richness, only richer and richer. Writing fancy verses or singing
great songs can lead to weaith, but the wealthy are not enlightened,
that whatever form of government has reduced us from respecting the
roots of knowledge (universities) as the basis of our culture,
and has replaced this with GOP mediocrity, wallmart wealth of cheap
plastic inauthenticity. How could such a culture based on plastic,
not crumble? How could a culture based on enlightenment not be quite
different?

And yet it is all enlightenment, and there is "no self",
"Tat Tvam Asi", "I am", "Sum ergo cogito",
"the father the son and the holy ghost",
knowable and unknowable.

"Who" knows enlightenment?

[mdmc]

1. understanding impermanence

enlightened!

[firebee]

17. Enlightenment...

Enlightening yourself is seeking truth
Enlightening others is giving truth
Enlightenment is knowing the difference between the truths and the deceptions.
We will never know all the truths, so we can never become fully enlightened.
However, the excellence of achieving enlightenment isn't in the result... It's in the quest.

[indigobusiness]

Nice prayer wheel...seen these?

His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, has said that having the mantra on your computer works the same as a traditional Mani wheel. As the digital image spins around on your hard drive, it sends the peaceful prayer of compassion to all directions and purifies the area.

Animated images like this one are digital Mani wheels which can be placed on Web pages. Similar animated graphics can be used for Mani-wheel screen savers.

This page offers information on how to install several types of digital prayer wheels on your computer:

http://www.dharma-haven.org/tibetan/digital-wheels.htm

[frankly_fedup2]

51. Thanks Indigo. I will gladly add anything into my life to help me . . .

to feel peace.

Which brings me to Enlightenment.

Enlightenment is Nirvana and Nirvana is total peace of mind, which is not an easy thing to achieve.

[nashville_brook]

2. the unexamined life is not worth living -- plato

shine the light!

cast off your fetters!

emerge from the cave!

we are only being shown shadows on the wall.

we are being lied to.

[indigobusiness]

5. The lynchpin

of the American dilemma.

[nashville_brook]

7. wow -- what is that spinning icon?

[indigobusiness]

9. It is a Tibetan prayer wheel.

'om mani padme hum'

[nashville_brook]

12. it's beautiful!

i thought it might be hebrew -- wow -- it just really speaks to me!

[indigobusiness]

91. I'm glad you like it.

The language is unimportant.

[indigobusiness]

3. Enlightenment is the precise opposite...

of endarkenment.

[sweetheart]

4. Then lots of folks must know it pretty well!

:-)

[indigobusiness]

6. You ask the best questions...

and often offer the best answers.

edit-

I posted this on a thread asking about reincarnation. Would you argue with me?

---

It is difficult, in a culture which stresses the individual, to grasp
concepts such as reincarnation. Which is sort of ironic since Christianity was reincarnationally oriented until Constantine's purge.

We exist in a timeless, interconnected field of becoming, with concepts such as time, space, and materialism framing our perception as reality; while, as Buddhism states, "all is mind". Very difficult to grasp rationally, but consider that the chair on which you sit is a construct of mostly emptiness, or that the cup you drink from loses its cupness if shattered...where did it go? These sort of seemingly ridiculous questions are used to grasp the deeper meaning of things like soul, self, and reincarnation. Good luck in your efforts, and remember one admonition: 'Seek and ye shall find'.

[Warpy]

21. My mother was an Irish Carholic who firmly believed in

reincarnation.

Oh, and the chair you're sitting on is really a chair. What makes it solid is an interconnecting lattice of energy. What we think of as matter, those infinitesimal bits of "stuff" in an otherwise empty universe, is really energy spinning in different directions in dimensions we aren't capable of recognizing with our senses.

We're all made of energy, folks, and energy is never destroyed, only changed.

[indigobusiness]

23. But those "infinitesimal bits of "stuff""

are overwhelmingly comprised of empty space.

I somewhat understand the physical nature of matter, and the weak and strong electromagnetic forces, but this is not the point.

[magnolia]

29. You sound like...

...Deepak Chopra. One thing he says that gives me pause is that molecules that were once in Jesus, Saddam Hussein, a sheep in China, are at some point in me. All living things are constantly interchanging molecules.

[indigobusiness]

30. Every breath you take contains atoms from air that Jesus breathed.

...and Buddha and Mohammed and Lao Tzu...

That blows my mind.

[sweetheart]

37. Mental puzzles

And understandings that are not absolute, involving a perceiver,
an ego "I" and "me" that remembers a past that incarnated formerly.

And when the self now, gives up living in the past, or any connection
with caring what reincarnates, only now.

Buddha did not talk about past lives. They are not relevant as they
involve arising in the ego that knows past and future.

In every moment we re-incarnate, and the question is whether we carry
the baggage of the past life in to the present one, or who carries
that baggage, what do you want that is satisfied by knowing you were
napoleon and once an indian chief? There were napoleons in every
lifetime, and everyone's been napoleon, as no past exists but the
present.

Are you willing to let all of your past lives go, and for this moment
to put it all down, and carry no history or burden? How badly do you
want to be free, are you willing to put it all down finally, totally
and absolutely.... as your sincerity in answering, will, if you are
totally willing, forever enlighten you about the nature of reincarnation. If you are willing to put down the self, no self
reincarnates. The question is irrelevant to the enlightened present,
yet relevant in the sense of exoteric comprehension of how the
universe works.

I'm usually wrong in questions and explanations, beware. Read all
the posts of the thread, and "FEEEL" the conscious attention behind
them.... i think sheeptramp, brin.... , are lucid..., awakened mind
knows itself by aura, directly aware of knowledge without paragraphs
of woooly explanation like i write.

Lucid still, funny, brilliant, absolved... qualities one feels
in enlightened mind, dispassionate, as someone mentioned in the
definitions of paranirvana and such.... and recognizable by the
profound feeling of the light.

[indigobusiness]

40. Yes, of course...

in terms of ego and attitude toward being, yes. Yet, a distinction in the nature of the discussion should be drawn.

In terms of concepts of reincarnation and soul, written about and discussed, by Masters even. Wouldn't you be willing to discuss the possibility and nature of such things?

I mean: an analysis of such concepts, not how we should deal with, or manage, them.

[sweetheart]

54. Exoterically speaking

So rather than, for a moment, suspending direct approaches, and in
mysticism (appreciating enlightenment through form, experience and
daily life), explaining a concept that can't be understood, only
inferred...

Dharma, Karma, reincarnation and refuge.

Dharma is truth, truth of this moment, the natural way of things,
truth for a society, an individual, the way of the earth, lao tzu's
tao. Into the totality of truth, postulate karma, a nucleus self
around which it forms, and relative states of mind.

So then, using the atomic metaphor, the soul is the nucleus of a
heavy atom, that is undergoing radioactive decay/transformation.
When the nucleus changes by gaining or losing a particle, the
electron cloud around the atom does, as well gain or lose karmic
weight.

A nucleus with no weight, is not bound to one karmic cloud of
experiential cause and effect, and is "free", "liberated", "mukti".

Yet there are strong and weak forces that bind karma to the nuclear
self. One force is from the nucleus, creating karma. The other
the "effect" of the karma that effects the nucleus. If you, are
willing to stop smoking, say, by letting go of the self that smokes,
then the nucleus ejects the smoking particle, but the habits of
action (karma) are resident in the experiential life (electron cloud)
and the effect tries to re-insert the nuclear particle, to
reestablish staisis. In this ionic state, karma is in effect until
all forces of the ejected particle of self are no longer in effect,
and the person forgets that they ever were a smoker.

So then same is true with reincarnation. What was a smoker,
reincarnated as a non-smoker, that had a causal body change
(the field of light-body that is beyond death (soul)), effects a change
in the world. Such approach is spiritual, and anyone who has quit
smoking by merely deciding one day to stop, can attest to how the
life-habits to not change over night... and the inertia of that
change defeats most who would quit. Another way to quit is to
throw away all the ash trays, toss all the fag packs, lighters
and keep no pocket change on one's person. Enroll in a health club,
and make a deliberate change in behaviour without trying to make
any deep decisions at all, much as how an actor changes their
blocking in a play to the invisible director's hand.

This latter method is "stalking." in the parlance of carlos castenada,
and is the more realistic way to bring about change of
the self, change the environment, and the soul adapts.

So rather than see reincarnation as a concept of the past to be
mulled over after 2 pitchers, it is the very present moment, and the
self that carries the bagggage from moment to moment; as well it is
the baggage that drags the self that is still attached to it. Given
that there IS free will, any bag can be dropped, and this is the
spritual rebirth process, "short path", to die and be reborn moment
to moment, that all of life be a springboard to awakening.

Indeed, after 1000's of lifetimes, your causal nucleus is a very
complex thing, with some of your karmas in this life from previous
trends of other lives, and others of this very short current
existance. And they all suspend in this moment as a heavy nucleus
with all its attendent electron orbitals of habituated states of
being. And even this very chat, itself an outgrowth of interlinking
karmas of electrons that touch, as dharma is to awaken, when these
fingers type truth, they are an instrument of dharma, and are beyond
the karmic field of even this body's nuclear self.

Truth is without self. Truth is not attached to baggage. The
dharma is that if you want to be free, then the strong and weak
forces of "cause" and "effect" are broken when you take refuge in
enlightenment, and in your deepest center of your deepest heart
ask to be free. It is the loudest voice in the universe, that cry
for freedom, and the awakened nature of existance ALWAYS answers
a true prayer.

[indigobusiness]

56. I need a smoke.

I feel like I just got laid by the Cosmos.

If you're going to put it like that, you should at least buy me a drink first.

[sweetheart]

58. yaa

I'm sure a very profoundly aware person can just shift your
consciousness in to enlightened states of mind, from afar, but that
is certainly not me. :-)

If you ask a profoundly enlightened person such a question, likely
they'll respond to you directly in consciousness, and you'll feel
suddenly profoundly deeply touched. That being directly hurled into
satori, is such a gift.

I do indeed owe you a drink for burdening you with such prose. ;-)

[indigobusiness]

61. Not burdened...

sort of ravished. The drink was only a formality to spare me feeling cheap. Too late now...though, a drink with you would be interesting folderol. No doubt I'd learn from it.

Your take on this fascinates me. The wheels in my mind spin wildly while the springs go haywire, and, for a moment, my clock seems broken in a constructive way. Then I'm back on the ground with my mundane concepts of enlightenment. Which tell be that a brush with nirvana, the satori moment or whatever, is a significant threshold of enlightenment. Perhaps not Grand Master Enlightenment, but meaningful and transformative---leaving one forever changed and with a sense of certainty. It is a taste of egodeath, and an introduction to interconnectedness.

You've finished your drink? Now, wash your cup.

[itzamirakul]

98. Thank you, sweetheart...you have

taken MY awareness to an even deeper level of realization. Enlightenment is indeed limitless and unlimited.

I have to agree with Indigo's assessment of "being laid by the Cosmos" WOW! :)

[itzamirakul]

95. And therefore, enlightenment is...

AWARENESS. Awareness of one's "real self" which is actually that of the state of absolute beingness.

[patcox2]

112. yes, here is one who knows.

Good definition.

[sweetheart]

138. well said

Awareness. Dharma kaya.

[indigobusiness]

205. Absolute becomingness, maybe.

And forgetting one's self, in the process.

[Vanje]

8. In a heart-breakingly beautiful nation stolen by tyrants.......

I slowly unwrap a chewy caramel.
Despotism cant steal my eager salivation.

[indigobusiness]

11. Lots of salivation going around.

Seems to be plenty for everybody.

[sweetheart]

36. you rock sheeptramp

I'm glad you're on DU. :-)

Good to read your sheeptrampings. May they be loud and
reverberate across the land. :party:

[nashville_brook]

10. another sense of enlightenment is The Enlightenment

as in science and progress and relief from the dark ages when all was the struggle bewteen ghosts and good and evil.

mark crispen miller rightly points out in Patriot Act that bushitler and the theo-cons want to take us back to the dark ages -- pre-enlightenment thinking, where the church programs all culture and science.

postmodernists have been saying for a while that the enlightenment and enlightenment thinking is in crisis -- but 10 years ago i thought that was a good thing. that the culture of science was keeping out alternative voices (like Gaia). but now i will take all the postivist thinking in the world before shitler's theocracy!

[mitchum]

13. Yeah, but that's a product of "Old Europe"...

and we know how bad that can be >sarcasm<

[nashville_brook]

14. those Old Europeans are soooo 500 years ago :)

[Lexingtonian]

43. That sense of the term

is easily summarized as Not Occultism.
Not occultism but Reality as it declares itself.

[Cats Against Frist]

178. Agreed. I vote that Enlightenment is THE Enlightenment

Or roughly one of the closest things we've seen to enlightenment embodied in the thoughts of humans. It was actually quite brilliant, and YES, most importantly, it was the beginning of the modern age, and YES it did pull us out of that God and nobility crap, and YES the radicals in the GOP and the religious right want to put us right back there.

Thanks for the post -- one thing I find incredibly fascinating is that the GOP, in an attempt to restore classicism is actually proving, or helping to prove some of the tenets of postmodernism, by attempting to "shift" reality, undermine the media in an attempt to completely destroy the notion of "objectivity," do away with the scientific method and manipulate the language to the point where it is merely a tool to oppress people.

It's quite fascinating, really. And it scares the holy living fuck out of me that there are right-wing intellectuals who understand this shit (not your average NASCAR & gravy pleb), and actually hold the OPPOSITE opinion -- that the Enlightenment and modernity was bad.

[G_j]

15. nice

thoughts, contemplating your question..mmmm

in my own life I've often thought that "Nirvana" is accepting that my existance is a question always being asked and accepting that there is no static answer, just an ever expanding and deepening question. If the mystery could be answered then well, it would get rather boring and it wouldn't be a great mysterious wonderful question anymore. If that makes any sense ..? :-)

happy you near SH
peace & love G_j

[indigobusiness]

18. I see nirvana, in terms of satori...

as being an all-encompassing transcendental awareness beyond all things, all thought, and all knowing: pure understanding.

It usually comes in a flash, and leaves transformation in its wake.

[G_j]

26. well said

sometimes seen as the center amidst conditions, that point of nothingness without which the wheel could not turn.
Lao Tzu had some wonderful descriptions, creative ways to describe the indescribable.

[Arianrhod]

48. I see satori

as the bone-felt recognition of the interconnectedness of all things, of the One Thing.

I see awakening as the ego-based desire to act on that recognition, in compassion.

I see enlightenment as the complete absorption of the Self--mental, emotional, spiritual, physical--into the One Thing.

[shelley806]

282. Isn't understanding knowing? To fully understand the Real is to

Know the Real; Beyond thought, I agree with. When you know, thought is no longer necessary. Truth, Reality speaks for itself, or in silence.

[aneerkoinos]

24. Nirvana

In Buddhism, Nirvana simply means sorrowless state, achieved by letting go, not grasping. There is no real difference between ordinary life and Nirvana, life goes on as it did before.

Parinirvana is the final liberation of Karmic cycle, no return, possible when Nirvana reached and after physical death.

[G_j]

27. yes

that is sort of what I was trying to say: the acceptance/knowing of not knowing

[Vanje]

16. .

1."Is it just being really really smart? "
No. because then simple people and children would not be blessed.

2."Is it being profoundly loving?"
No. because then lonely people would not be blessed.

3.Is it having magic powers?
No. Not needing magical power is more useful.

4.Is it nothing, as in "no thing or experience"?
Dont understand question. Refer to question # 1.

[sweetheart]

31. nice

Neti Neti

lucid :-)

[Raenelle]

84. Neti neti--Not I. Not I. It means the disappearance of selfish desires

and expectations. Understanding that God is present in everything, and that "I" is illusory, that we are instruments, to be of service to all creation, from which we are not separate.

[sweetheart]

102. interesting way to put it

I said it as sheeptrap used "not this, not that" approach to
explaining. As is classic, enlightenment described by what it is
not, as in "life without thinking". That all of the things to be
discarded are really reflections of self, "i", and to rephrase
neti neti as "not i not i", is wonderfully eloquent.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sweetheart]

33. What does happen when the vase is broken?

So we smash the ego-self, and the asseblage of identity is no longer
the movie character, but the celluloid itself, alight.

So when i know longer have any impulse to know whether the vase is
broken, i'll be enlightened?

Or to be enlightened in the first place? Perhaps just "free" or
"liberated" is a better word... free of wanting to be enlightened
or not, of the dilemma being irrelevant.

Yet surely, every person with a body, has an emotive consciousness that
does not dissociate away, but rather exists as the body-consciousness
alongside the "awakened" consciouness... that which eats, rests and
farts to exist, and the subroutines that support that.

So when the vase is broken, an empty reflection remembers life? What
is this reflection that is "me" that reflects life in the first place.
I seems smoke and mirrors already, false. So the "me" of the vase,
is perhaps in truth, gone already. So then not writing or discussing
enlightenment, as no one is left to care.

Than are you enlightened souls, invoked by a prayer? Is there not
some jesuitical connection? Is to be enlightened, then in ones broken
vase to not care, not vote and become an apathetic political force?
So then enlightenment cannot be political if it has no concept of
a body and a self, which is contrary to enlightenment of a broken
vase, no? What is broken.

[indigobusiness]

46. wtf

Why was that message deleted? I thought I read it...but I don't recall it being delete material?

[sweetheart]

53. I felt the message very well put and not the least bit outside the ruels

It said something like
"if you are a vase, and all the world you
perceive is on the outside of the vase, and reflected as well on
the inside of the vase, what happens when you smash the vase?

Perhaps the moderator mistook the zen message as a death threat?

Then i hope i did it justice by memory.

[indigobusiness]

55. That's how I remember it.

The only thing I can figure is he must've been tombstoned elsewhere, and all his messages deleted. Damn...sure didn't seem the disruptive type???

[brindis_desala]

20. Enlightenment is not a state of being

rather it is a process that arises through experience. The American dilemma to which you refer stems largely from the fact that the society itself has no cultural grounding and thus has evolved as merely a corporate state whose sole obligation is the protection of private property. Paine and Jefferson nonwithstanding only two themes have forged the American consensus: the exploitation of labor to create new wealth and the freedom to worship as one chooses.

[sweetheart]

32. Incredibly consise

The American dilemma to which you refer stems largely from the fact that the society itself has no cultural grounding and thus has evolved as merely a corporate state whose sole obligation is the protection of private property. Paine and Jefferson nonwithstanding only two themes have forged the American consensus: the exploitation of labor to create new wealth and the freedom to worship as one chooses.

Wow. Beautifully put.

It seems as if the themes themselves contradict each other, when
the exploitation reaches a certain threshhold, one obscures the other
completely by taking all of one's life force that the latter is
never accessed... worshiping dead asleep from exhaustion.

[brindis_desala]

38. Insightful comment. Precisely why I think we are experiecing

such moral confusion. I'll look forward to your posts...

[Arianrhod]

49. The "pursuit of happiness" is generally interpreted by Americans

as the acquisition of money and material possessions. What we do not understand is that no one can "possess" anything in this life. It withers, it fades, it rusts, and thieves break in and steal.

All is impermanence. Desperate clinging to that which is dissolving is the ultimate irony of American existence. And our land is strewn with the landfills of discarded desire.

[porkrind]

82. Nice post.

This is also a basic teaching of Buddhism.

[rman]

22. In the context of politics, enlightenment is

usually referred to as something equivalent "The Enlightenment" aka The Renaissance; the period of time after the Middle Ages when philosophy, science, and culture revived after a long period of ruthless despotic rule by various elites, including religious ones.

It was during that time that the contemporary concept of democracy was born. Not a democracy for a few rich white men like the Romans and the Greeks had at some point. But governance by, for and of The People. Which requires transparency in government, freedom of information, separation of church and state and all that.

[sweetheart]

34. Then it is rousseau, marx, voltaire and crowd?

The period was lead by a few "enlightened" great wise thinkers,
understanding they were no mystically or spiritually enlightened,
were living brilliant souls themselves, jefferson, franklin, emerson
thoreau, or we would never have had enlightenment and trancendentalism
at all... so the living vessels, whilst omitted from the political
framing, are as political by the culture that they were planted and
thrived in, to what they said and represented as well. The politics
of enlightenment surely then both the visceral objective of getting
souls to achieve political enlightenment and "find their power to be
good philosopher kings", and hey, even spiritually enlightened would
be nice to have around more often! ;-) If the religious left is to
support its bretheren, and by definition, the religious left is really
enlightened, and does not feel like talking that much, then please
may we recieve their living blessing, as indeed, it is the more
important of the two, social awakening, a reflection of cultivating
human awakening.?

[Jim Warren]

25. "Who" knows enlightenment?

You cannot taste your own tongue.

Many paths will lead you to the abyss.
What seemed like a leap became a small step.

[sweetheart]

35. Dissolution of the "me" self

I ask, as a metaphor for saying that whatever mind knows enlightenment
that is already present now, must already be an illusory mind,
so inquiring to what that mind is "who" knows, i'm testing the
evidence, and chasing around in my head at the vapours that form
like a gas chamber the voices that then says "I" am the "who" who
knows and does not know.

Then if breaking the vase is immediate and total, and not a progression
at all, and no self dissolves, rather one realizes that there never
was a self there to start with, and the self that is inquring itself
never existed, itself an outgrowth of the childhood need to search
and forage for food and care. If that vapourous consciousness of origin
is investigated, i am immersed in liquid light, afire and silent,
not arising.

And an ego storm clouds and once again the cloud re-forms and asks
was that it, as if any experience of the senses is awakening.. obviously
not, so before that the fire, and the fear of being burned away, all
illusory selves in a blue sky.

[indigobusiness]

41. Egodeath is big medicine

http://egodeath.com

[indigobusiness]

44. Perhaps you are actually the "what"

that understands the pretense.

[Jim Warren]

45. Sweet of Heart

Thank you for this thread and these beautiful post.

I wish you well on the path of discovery.

[indigobusiness]

68. Are you drunk?

...again?

[Jim Warren]

71. ?

Huh, did I miss something?

Hope there is no confusion about the goodwill offered for the start of a thread somewhat off the beaten track for this forum and the subsequent post that follow, including yours.

Your comment leaves me perplexed as I don't drink.

[sweetheart]

72. Probably drunk of the water of life

And that indeed you might very well be. :-)

Goodwill is all that will ever be offered, by any soul
who indeed ascribes to the real deal enlightenment.

Our good friend is drunk with his aspiration for the ineffable.

Grant us all good peace in this mispoken chat and happy new year.

:party:

namaste,
-s

[indigobusiness]

74. Sorry Jim

just kidding. It was an absurd thing to say, but I thought that showed. What you said was very nice. So nicely said that I reacted in an absurd way. No, offense...I'm a bad man.

[Arianrhod]

50. There are a few thinkers

who have suggested that ego is a relatively recent construction. Jung is one, Jaynes is another. According to their thought, the human psyche developed the ego as a means of differentiating self from other, an evolutionary survival strategy that rather accidentally gave rise to the coherent sense of "self" that we now have. As you might suspect, I am an adherent of this hypothesis. :) If it is correct, then our desperate clinging to ego is twice in error. Also if it is correct, then it follows that releasing one's obsession with survival ("attachment"?) might allow the ego to dissolve.

[bemildred]

28. A fairly nice window manager:

http://enlightenment.org/pages/main.html

[St. Jarvitude]

47. Dammit, you beat me to it

I'm just about set to emerge the latest e17 build on my Gentoo box... wish me luck!

[jandrok]

39. Enlightment....

...is what you find when you stop looking for it.

[mdmc]

42. kick

:dem:

[davekriss]

52. I don't know what enlightenment is...

...but I'd like to share an experience I had 25 plus years ago.

Someone on another board was contemplating the possibilities of an "after-life". What follows was my answer:

Way back in ancient history during my early undergraduate days, I thought a lot (for me) about questions such as this. I was also practicing Zen meditation daily. I was contemplating pursuing biology and medical school (ended up in eng lit) when, in a cellular biology class where the professor was articulating the many complex activities that go on in every cell (e.g., molecules, like fingers, stacking themselves end over end to push a mitochondria exactly where and when needed), I began to think science was wonderful at describing "what" was happening and "how", but offered no satisfying explanation of "why". Why such grandly coordinated dancing within every living cell? And I needed the why.

Walking home from class along a street with towering maple and oak trees that formed a canopy above me (a favorite street!), I started thinking about those mitochondria again. They have their own DNA which have more in common with eachother, across the continuum of species, than they had with me.

I noticed squirrels scampering in the branches above; chirping birds swooping down from the canopy; the wind in the trees and light dappled by dancing leaves. I started thinking about the mitochondria within me, within the squirrels, the birds, and within the trees; a kind of life within life, a solid connection between us, as if the life within me was inseparable from the life within them -- it's all the same life.

Then suddenly, with every breath, with every step, I felt deeply the movement of the earth spinning on its axis while racing around the sun. I was somehow extended, a greater space unfolded, everything in perfect synchronized motion, each in its perfect place, interrelated in one grand symphony. I no longer sensed myself as before, but instead I seemed to be at the top of my head, radiating out through the trees and light all around me. A warm golden Light seemed everywhere, emanating from everything! Then I heard myself thinking, "this is great!", "what is this?", and I felt as if I tumbled down, back to where I was before, back to the mundane drudgery of daily life.

What did it mean? I have no words. I left that experience feeling that it was a gift. Perhaps from those giant trees that comforted me every day as I walked home!

I understood that "davekriss" is something Life is doing here, right now, while over there it does you, and over there it does someone else, but "it" is the same Life in all of us. So how can I not feel deep brotherhood and compassion and empathy for all beings not me? I do feel these things, even all these years later.

I also understood that nothing changed, that I still had all my worries and duties and daily stresses -- that this is it, there is no place to go except where we are now. There are no exits. But things became lighter; life became fun. Contemplating such things as the possibilities of an after-life, or of a heaven and hell, became simply unimportant.

Instead, being here is all important. Joy is found right here, not in some mythical promise of a future that cheats unavoidable non-being. Listen to your childrens' laughter; as your parents once listened to yours; and their parents to them -- laughter echoing down time. Connections. Don't fret over the possibilities of an unknowable after-life. Be here now.

A few years later I was willing to talk about this to some. I recall telling a devout Christian; he declared that it was God's Grace flowing through me. I told a Hindu and he told me that I opened my eighth Chakra and did experience (a kind of) enlightenment, adding that people in his culture sometimes stumble on these experiences without following the disciplines. My thought? It had nothing to do with either of their belief systems, which were irrelevant. The experience was what it was; interpretation is unnecessary.

However, because of additional and more recent experiences, I've come to know that what I "stumbled" upon was the close presence of God, a God who suspends all things in loving light. If I can wax metaphorically, I hear the roar of love that emanates from the throne of God, and which spins the Angels in their heavenly choir, which in turn spins out galaxies and stars and planets, until finally we get to here, earth, where human beings look back on high, with gratitude, dancing in the sun. It's all...good...it's all very very good. :)

[shelley806]

277. What an absolutely wonderful description of a 'mystical experience'

and your acceptance of it without interpretation, explanation, etc. I had a similar experience years ago, but it left me longing forever to always experience that moment of blissful enlightenment. Mine was prompted by marveling over the miracle of chlorophyll, not mitochondria, and a feeling of absolute gratitude for the perfection in the universe, in that very very good and loving dance of God.

Your post was so delightful to read. And thanks for the originator and the replies; good links to check out.

[indigobusiness]

279. Did your experience

change you?

[shelley806]

281. Forever changed.

But I kept forgetting about the experience. And still do. I think that the goal of 'enlightenment' must be to always remember, so that you are constantly aware of your unity with the universe, even with all its darkness, farts, wars, warts and all! So far, I've found it impossible. But nonetheless, I'm forever changed.

[Jose Diablo]

57. "What is enlightenment?"

A fried egg.

[Viktor Runeberg]

59. Um, you don't get it

Enlightenment isn't a set of conventional, cute paradoxes about the "emptiness" of self - nor a self taking pride in having mastered the production of same.

The Republicans would be very happy if we'd all just go back to being hippies somewhere on the margins, providing the example of the futility and vacuity of resistance. Is this why books about "no self" and "the falseness of distinctions" are displayed so generously in so many corporate bookstores?

[sweetheart]

60. Ok, then enlighten me?

People don't talk about enlightenment, as it seems to admit that one
is not enlightened, as if thats not bloody obvious. So then, i made
an effort at describing something that cannot be described.

You just put it down and offer nothing in response. The ball is still
in your court mate. It seems rather clear in this thread, that
enlightenment is not a state of experience, that it is not complex,
rather immediate and present, nor is it the pride of not being able
to discuss something.

If i had pride to protect, i certainly would not breach such a
subject. Come on then... we're waiting.

[indigobusiness]

62. Lao Tzu knew something about enlightenment, and he said it best...

"He who knows does not speak; he who speaks does not know."
---
One things is fairly certain: enlightenment isn't found in fearing what makes Republicans happy.

http://www.geocities.com/onkellotus/TTK/English_Lau_TTK.html

[mdmc]

63. enlightenment is when we all find out that we are Republicans!

:kick:

[sweetheart]

64. But indeed lao tzu had something to say

In the very first "poem" of the tao te ching, he makes clear that
words mislead, by naming.

Why would this be? When we use language and names, there is an automatic
presumption of understanding, which itself is false by that it is
a "thinking" self that understands, one that is based on the ego,
and grubbing about in life to satisfy its desire for awakening the
same way it goes about grubbing for food or sex, and this presumption
that awakening will come from the same behaviour that a 3 year old
uses to get mummy to feed it, is false.

Rather i believe, that discussing enlightenment puts a lot of people to
their own reasons for not attaining it. "Denial", "cynicism" and
the toxic thought forms of secular media culture. Frankly the same
complaint that the radical islamists and the christians have, that
secular culture has created a "fallen" culture, has some elements of
truth... just perhaps the way is THROUGH the cynicism and denial, not
in running away from them. Perhaps enlightenment can very well be
discussed, with lao tzu's caveat that one recognizes it can only be
inferred, not understood.

And all of us have had glimpses of the totality, moments of immersion
where words totally fail to render the feelings. In remaining silent
we only cheat ourselves, so whilst neo-christian materialists are free
to bullshit away about their false war-god, people who have direct
mystical awakenings are lot to open their mouths, for fear of being
labelled with lao tzu's maxim that "he who speaks does not know."
Bullshit. He who believes the words to be real does not know,
speaking and silence are both nirvana.

That enlightenment, and "the enlightenment" is core to the founding
of the USA and to the core values of opposition to the BFEE, i'm
suprised that anyone would bad mouth discussing it. :-) I'm totally
unenlightened, and it feels great to be thick. I'm totally
liberated and to discuss it brings me down, opening up the pure light
of the totality, to the doubtful crass cynics who, if they wanted
enlightenment would have to surrender their toxic advise. The self
that is free, is here now, reading these words, awake to the sounds
in the room, the temperature the feeling of being alive. That self
is not writing, for you OR me... it is, like the chap with the lovely
story about the trees, universal.

[indigobusiness]

65. Lao Tzu's quote was less about speaking, and more about arrogance/humility

A better translation is:

-He who knows, doesn't know. He who knows he doesn't know, knows.-

It is not about words.

[sweetheart]

66. Words are his first focus

The Tao that can be trodden is not the enduring and unchanging Tao. The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name.

2. (Conceived of as) having no name, it is the Originator of heaven and earth; (conceived of as) having a name, it is the Mother of all things.

Notice "naming", which is what i'm calling "words". Having a name
is the mother of all things... "samsara". By embarking on naming
something, we bring it in to the world of words and intellect.

It is "not" about words, but notice that lao tzu starts out clarifying
the place of words in his subsequent stanzas of words.

[indigobusiness]

67. I won't argue with you there.

But the quote "he who speaks..." was not about words. It was about the ineffable nature of the Tao.



Lao Tzu leaves China on his water buffalo, disappearing into the sunset...never to be seen again.

[sweetheart]

69. Yea, and lao tzu was a living teacher

Who spent a lifetime, like buddha and so many others like living
enlightened:

www.gangaji.org
www.adidam.org
satya sai baba
mother meera
and others who spend their time dealing with the complex context of
people in the enlightenment process directly.... writing words, or
speaking them to an unknown context, like on DU, is a sure fire method
to being misunderstood, and being poorly interpreted at best.

Like all the quality spiritual books say, if you're "really" interested
find a living master who enters samadhi... and ask for personal
instruction. Everything else is just an argument.

I discuss enlightenment on DU, not because i expect anyone to become
interested in it, but rather to assert, just like the hateful bush
non-christians assert, that a religious path of enlightement exists
that is not based on a book... and obviously, based on the folks who've
spoken up, there are many who are very alive and conscious living the
knowledge far beyond a 2500 years old book of words.


In the story of the ox, from which you post a photo, the ox is tamed,
by the satguru, and depending on where the reader's context is, the
frame of an ox, is quite different than the last frame of the
story which is "empty" (totality-nirvana-samadhi). In awakening,
the teacher that is not wasting their time, medtates with the
devotee, and charges them to let go and surrender all things to be
free. I know it sounds culty, but if you want to be free, like
learning martial arts from a book, you won't get far without a living
teacher.

Its not that the guru is ever external, but the satguru (guru of light)
that dispells darkness, is inside one's heart, and for some folks,
who need an external manifestation of the satguru, if it is the
dharma, that one will not come to full realization without tutiledge.

This basis of guru yoga may not be popular in secular libertarian
culture, but it is still just as true as it was 1000 years ago, and
is the basis of tibetan buddhism, non-dualistic vedanta and pretty
much all schools of mysticsm.

He who gives advise without knowing the context of the perceiever,
clearly can't know much. Yet, like life, there is a paradox that
some knowledge is indeed written, and the fingers that write it,
part of the play.

[indigobusiness]

70. I'm just here to learn,...by argument...or however.

41
When the best student hears about the way
He practises it assiduously;
When the average student hears about the way
It seems to him there one moment and gone the next;
When the worst student hears about the way
He laughs out loud.
If he did not laugh
It would be unworthy of being the way.
Hence the Chien yen has it:
The way that is bright seems dull;
The way that is forward seems to lead backward;
The way that is even seems rough.
The highest virtue is like the valley;
The sheerest whiteness seems sullied;
Ample virtue seems defective;
Vigorous virtue seems indolent;
Plain virtue seems soiled;
The great square has no corners.
The great vessel takes long to complete;
The great note is rarefied in sound;
The great image has no shape.

The way conceals itself in being nameless.
It is the way alone that excels in bestowing and in accomplishing.

[sweetheart]

73. Ok, lets do it bit by bit.

When the best student hears about the way
He practises it assiduously;
What does it mean to practice? Does it not mean to intend to
be of "the way" or "the tao"? Then rather practice is a folly
by which one tries... and ultimately, in another frame of the
story of the ox, masters the untamed mind, to not practice, but
rahter to know the way assiduously as the only way.

When the average student hears about the way
It seems to him there one moment and gone the next;

Honestly, this is a factor of how much it hurts. THe spiritual
pain will drive you, and if it hurts like hell, subjectively (of course)
as its all you can trust, you are inclined to listen. Otherwise, why
bother... change the channel and watch some MTV.

When the worst student hears about the way
He laughs out loud.
If he did not laugh
It would be unworthy of being the way.
Hence the Chien yen has it:
The way that is bright seems dull;
The way that is forward seems to lead backward;
The way that is even seems rough.
The highest virtue is like the valley;
The sheerest whiteness seems sullied;
Ample virtue seems defective;
Vigorous virtue seems indolent;
Plain virtue seems soiled;
The great square has no corners.
The great vessel takes long to complete;
The great note is rarefied in sound;
The great image has no shape.

This is no student, i would throw this out of my classroom within
an hour, never to return. A tantric veils the light, as all mystical
teachings are tantric and veiled, only those who have the guidance
of a true heart, see through the veil. The universe is being kind
to those not ready to embark on the path, as they, rather than seeing
a path they are not capable of following, see falsity and are
content not to follow. It is the dharma, that enlightenment is
not cruel to torture those who are not ready. Remember, not all
folks are cast of the same mold as thou, no matter what any book
you might have read has said. You share the planet with mostly
very very young souls who are not ready... and per the rules posted
by cheswick (4 stages of spirituality) or 5? they are early on, and
will take 1000's of lifetimes to achieve the level of being ready
to see through the veil.

In this regard, the veil is the tantric first test. In the midst of
maya, all the desires affix to the teacher's pure gesture. The
gesture is misinterpreted based on the ego of the aspirant, pure
aspirant seeing nothing but light behind a pure gesture. Others
indolent, forgetting, slothful, selecting themselves out, and rather
than being judged unworthy, judging themselves by their choice to
deny a hand.

The way conceals itself in being nameless.
It is the way alone that excels in bestowing and in accomplishing.

Passing the test of the argument then, is to be not fazed by the
words, to be acting of the foundation of the nameless. All real
spiritual awakening can only be built on a true foundation.

Are you willing to give up everything and be naked to the truth of
this next moment? It is nameless, unmanifest, summarized well in
this recent song "the future's still unwritten" by beckingsdale? or so.

In this dark word, you've already had many many teachers of darkness
and illusionment. Are you willing to accept your guru in any form,
even if its the very form you're most personally averted towards?
If your guru turns out to be a texan woman who herself has attained
liberation, will you submit to her totally, provided she shows in
every single moment the impeccable states of enlightened realization?

Our culture focuses on the teacher, yet the problem, is the devotee
is not ready... and what can a true teacher do except wait for the
devotee to purify their intent until they see enlightement, even
in the thickest fog of maya, and are willing to committ totally to
it, as what is life, without being ready to sacrifice it all for the
totality.

[indigobusiness]

75. I can't do the Calculus

When I read the Tao, I don't judge or analyze it. I embrace it, and do my best to understand it. The Tao doesn't lend itself to linear equations, it is more of a lateral quantum conundrum.

[Jim Warren]

76. Tao

I like the Tao. I found it to be a journey to as far as it is possible to go with words and meaning and leads to the abyss that is waiting there for the jump into the experiential unknown. The inside of the cup, the center of the wheel, The essential and the useful and the interconnectedness of the singular binary unity.
Reason comes to the edge.
The Tao is human and comes to the edge of the finite and leaves you there.
With an ache to make the jump but there is no path forward.


This reminds me of the movie,(pop culture to the rescue) Temple of Doom maybe? When the hero is going after the grail and comes to the abyss and there is no bridge. He pauses and then closes his eyes and steps out and .. There is a bridge that is hidden and unseen but is there and there is no sensual clue but only a choice.

Spirit is like that. It is not seen or felt and it may or not be there but it beckons you to take the step.

You can never know unless you act and there is no way of predicting the consequence. That is not reasonable and yet it is but safety (as familiar) is not a part of the equation.

You have to leave the known to enter the unknown.
It is an adventure and your life is at stake.

[Jim Warren]

77. How did the bridge get there

If your foot finds the bridge - Then the question that becomes apparent is, "How did the bridge get there?"
That opens up a whole world of possibilities and interactions with something that connects and remains elusive. When you focus it disappears and when you act it is there.

[indigobusiness]

80. It is a test of your abject commitment to the way.

What is called God's will in our culture, but often seen differently.

When Lakota warriors shouted "hoka hey" as they rode into battle, they weren't declaring a wish to die. They were affirming their trust and their deep spiritual connection to God's will. An absolute affirmation of the fullness of their being, reflected in the absolute fullness of life in perfect balance.

Today is a good day to die, because it is a great day to live.

[indigobusiness]

83. You make a profound point, IMHO

"When you focus it disappears and when you act it is there"

This resonates. The "focus", or sef-consciousness, breaks down or undermines the stuff of the path or bridge. Bridge is more dramatic and implies dire consequence. Maybe I'm drifting afield of the message here, but it all seems to go back to the matter of implicit trust. And self-realization through acting in that trust.

[Jim Warren]

87. Yes

Not drifting afield at all I would say. The element of trust is there and it becomes paramount, like trusting your water when you swin, without it you can flail and go nowhere...........or sink like a stone.

[indigobusiness]

79. "Hoka hey!"

Today is a good day to die!

[sweetheart]

85. When lao tzu wrote the verses

As i understand, Lao Tzu and Ko fu tzu (confucius) were contemporaries
and lao tzu said the latter was not enlightened, and generally full of
shit... in so many words.

There were political pressures on lao tzu to "conform" so he decided to
leave "civilized" china for the untamed wilderlands. Myth has it that
as he was about to leave, he was asked to write down teachings for
posterity, and we have the tao te ching.

Clearly, then, he wrote the book for the common folks who were not
likely to walk the path themselves. As well, it might be seen as a
book of rules that the regular society govern itself well and be a
balanced place. By that, it was not a book to his advanced devotees
on becoming enlightened. That context, as you say, places it firmly
in the ground of the secular world, and one can only infer the lucid
awareness that penned the words.

I have several transations, as in translating, one can shoot for 2
approaches, either to be poetically fluid, or to be meaning-precise.
These inevitably are at odds, and as chinese characters are not single
words, but rather whole sets of multiple meanings, the translations
vary quite widely. In reading several, one can see through the
translator better towards the original.

[indigobusiness]

86. Lao Tzu`------(in a nutshell...for anyone interested)

Lao Zi (also spelled Laozi, Lao Tzu, or Lao Tse) was a famous Chinese philosopher who is believed to have lived in approximately the 4th century BC, during the Hundred Schools of Thought and Warring States Periods. He is credited with writing the seminal Taoist work, the Dao De Jing. He became a popular deity in Taoist religion's pantheon. His most famous follower, Zhuang Zi, wrote a book that had one of the greatest influences on Chinese Literati, through the ideas of individualism, freedom, carefreeness, and, even if the author never speaks about it, art, which may well be the cornerstone of Chinese aesthetic.

His life

Little is known about Lao Zi's life. His historical existence is strongly debated as is his authorship on the Dao De Jing. Regardless, he has become an important culture hero to subsequent generations of Chinese people. Tradition says he was born in Ku Prefecture (苦縣 Kǔ Xiàn) of the state of Chǔ (楚), which today is Lùyì County (鹿邑) of Henan province, in the later years of Spring and Autumn Period. Some legends say he was born with white hair, having spent eight or eighty years in his mother's womb, which is given as an explanation for his title, which can be both read as "the old master" and "the old child".

According to the tradition, Lao Zi was an older contemporary of Confucius and worked as an archivist in the Imperial Library of the Zhou Dynasty court. Confucius intentionally or accidentally met him in Zhou, near the location of modern Luoyang, where Confucius was going to browse the library scrolls. According to these stories, Confucius, over the following months, discussed ritual and propriety, cornerstones of Confucianism, with Lao Zi. The latter strongly opposed what he felt to be hollow practices. Taoist legend claims that these discussions proved more educational for Confucius than the contents of the libraries.

Afterwards, Lao Zi resigned from his post, perhaps because the authority of Zhou's court was diminishing. Some accounts claim he travelled west on his water buffalo through the state of Qin and from there disappeared into the vast desert. These accounts have a guard at the western-most gate convincing Lao Zi to write down his wisdom before heading out into the desert. Until this time, Lao Zi had shared his philosophy in spoken words only, as was also the case with Socrates, Jesus, the Buddha and Confucius (whose Analects were most likely compiled by disciples). Lao Zi's response to the soldier's request was the Dao De Jing.

[Az]

117. Actually

The myth goes that he didn't write it down. He dictated it to a guard at the gate.

As to meaning precise.... the tao that can be told is not the true tao. So much for precsicion. Though we both understand what he meant. Of course our understandings are different. But they are our Tao.

[indigobusiness]

78. The three students are symbolic of people at large.

Everyone is a student of life. The good student comes easily to the Tao. The average student is sincere, curious but ambivalent, with infinite potential, but limited promise. To the bad student, the whole idea is absurd, laughable.

These three types categorically comprise the human contingent in terms of the path.

[Old Mouse]

203. a pause

Eastern disciplines are not destined for success on a persona formed in the west, or anywhere in our modern capitalistic age.

[TahitiNut]

104. You'll probably like this, sweetheart.

"Why know the name of a thing when the thing itself you do not know? Whose work is it but your own to open your eyes? But indeed, the work of the Universe is to make such a fool of you that you will know yourself for one, and so begin to be wise!" — George MacDonald, Lilith, 1895


To the best of my knowledge, I'm the only one I know who's extracted this pithy quote from Lilith; I've never seen it elsewhere in print. When I read Lilith, this blew me away. It had an influence in my (somewhat pretentious) choice of the nom-de-net of 'TahitiNut' in the hope that by accepting my foolishness I may eventually gain. Lots of navel-gazing in that.

[sweetheart]

142. bumbling along

it seems my dharma to be a bumbler, like your quote says.... and to
accept that in being thick and asking questions, one can be wise and
thick. :-)

Where are we to get to if we are not enlightened all these thousands
of years after socrates, plato, aristotle and the first western
universities. For all the journals, papers, libraries and bullshit,
it seems we're as thin on the ground as ancient greece.

No matter, i'm inspired that the sacred candle is alight, and i can
only pray that it turns in to a sun.

"If 10,000 suns were to rise together in the sky such is the glory of
enlightenment." -Bhagavad gita

[Az]

145. Perhaps true enlightenment is not possible

Perhaps only the temporal illusion of enlightenment is possible for some while the rest struggle on to find what they believe others to have found.

[sweetheart]

148. That runs contrary to the evidence

Profoundly enlightened people exist... even some of the folks who've
spoken up on this thread... and more. For most, it is a passing glimpse,
and for some, it is the basis of life.

I've spend a coupla decades hanging out with enlightened teachers, and
i've met several people who have ecstatic awakening... so much so that
it transmits in a room like wildfire. It represents by far the
greatest ecstacies of my life to have had darshan with very enlightened
people. The room glows with light, all suffering is absolved and
a profound joy fills the hearts of all.

That said, i don't think i'd believe it had it not seen and tasted it
myself. But in this regard, i've first hand experience that says your
postuation is wrong. There are real enlightened people, and they can
transmit real enlightenment, which is really the real thing, total
liberation.

This website is for a living enlightened person who holds public
meetings. (very rare... most have little to do with a toxic and
skeptical public)... if you are willing to see some evidence that
will "enlighten" your theory: www.gangaji.org Check the schedule and
try out a weekend meeting.

Ignore all the cult around the master.... they don't get it or they
would not be there. Listen only to the master, and i swear that you
will have a radical ephipahy that will re-order your conception of
humanity.

It is lucifer's cynicism that says enlightenment does not exist. What
suffering to give up on the only thing in life that is really real.

Love,
-s :-)

[Az]

161. There is nothing I would say

To take those feelings away from you. They are more valuable than truth.

I will say this though. I too have experienced a world of things. Some I suspect not too disimilar from your experiences. And yet there is room for us to see things differently.

Let me add this as well. The world your mind creates is the most important world you will ever know.

[indigobusiness]

207. It is what it is.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[Az]

208. I could not agree more

And nothing anyone has to say about it will change it.

[indigobusiness]

210. Agreement isn't necessary.

It isn't listening.

[Az]

211. Never said it was

Don't assume anothers meaning.

[indigobusiness]

218. You absolutely refuse

to laugh at my jokes.

http://tinypic.com/163u3q

[Az]

225. Sorry, dealing with death over here

Just lost two fishies. Not in my best form for appreciating jokes right now.

[klyon]

216. I am not sure what you meant when you started this thread

but you sure got response.

I think one point of confusion is the difference between to be enlightened which means to know something and Enlightenment which you could spend many lifetimes studying the teachings of The Buddha(The Enlightened One) and never find it. The Tao te Ching can also be very helpful in your quest for understanding. The Buddha gives people a way out of the pain and suffering that is our world. In Zen Buddhism faith is not needed.

KL

[indigobusiness]

220. A hammer is not needed to build a house...

but it helps.

[sweetheart]

221. What is it to be a poet

Frankly i did not start out to discuss poetry, as i'm not big on
literature. Rather, i see enlightenment as the poet's school of
spirituality, where we are actors, and we let someone else be the
reviewer of the play.

In this regard, knowledge of enlightenment might be the actors approach,
the esoteric comprehension of that awakening, and as well descriptions
and teachins of those who have done it.... literature school.

For people who are inspired about the possibility of attaining
enlightenment, literature school can not satisfy, by the nature that
one intends to go beyond simply studying the great ones of the past,
and in a truly zen approach, if it does not exist right here right now,
its not worth learning. ;-)

I started the thread to open the pandora's box on what people here
believe enlightenment is. I was hoping that by coming to better terms
with this paramount olympus of western liberalism, that we might be
the wiser. Some seek to melt away the witch and leave "the
enlightenment", but then there is that castle on the hill that
remains unexplained. I can't help but see "the enlightenment" as an
outgrowth of human awakening, and in this regard, for us to defeat
bush, we need the blessing of enlightenment. I was wishing that
this blessing help usher in this new year, that we are on the highest
note... as it looks like a tough year ahead.

[Az]

223. The trouble is

The notion of enlightenment presumes one set path to enlightenment. But as it is a construct of our own minds the paths are infinite. It saddens me to see individuals contest over who is enlightened and who is not. Each individual is enlightened as to the experience of their own existance. Each person has their own path. And yet some would say they are walking the wrong path.

Our brains and minds are not identitical. The drives and passions that one individual feels are not going to be the same drives another feels. Thus one person's enlightenment may have no bearing on anothers. This falls into the same trap that the concept of sin in western religions does. It presumes we all face the same tests and temptations. It fails to realise that each and every person has a different perspective. Each view is unique.

We can learn from each other. But what we learn has to be taken in and applied to our own existance. It becomes part of our own unique view of the world. The teachings of those that have attained enlightenment may work for some and may be useless for others. To presume otherwise is the height of arrogance and indicitive of a lack of understanding.

Life is change. To think that there is a fixed unchanging path is to embrace death. Death is the end of change. It is not death that the notion of enlightenment fears. It is life that it fears.

[sweetheart]

228. Breaking 10 boards with bare hands

There IS one set metaphor of enlightenment, in to which the myriad
plays, but i would not call that a set path. I agree with your view
given that this is a public board, and any person reading will have a
frame of reference regarding "their" enlightenment, and in this regard,
there is no singular maximum.

Isn't that an early on maxim of the metaphor anyways? That all people
go along the path at their own pace...? The only judge of your path
is you, and if you're in a guru-disciple relationship, your guru, but
nobody else. Deciding about other people's paths and their
development is a pointless waste of energy, unless you can help them
by it.

Since i'm talking about real enlightenment, one person's enlightenment
definitely has an intense effect on others. It is in ways that are
not direct, occult means and all... If you walk down a street that
an enlightened person walks down as well, you get the benefits of the
light. If we dumb it down and call enlightenment merely very very
smart, then surely there is a benefit for all, the more people become
very very educated and smart, as it rubbs off on culture and life.

Kids of university educated parents are more liekly to attend university... enlightenment benefits all. I don't know how we get to
sin from there. There is no sin, just experiences. Hopefully one
learns from them.

I agree with your point about the plurality of human kind, that there
is no one-size-fits all view... be that one enlightened tradition,
social tradition, or economic tradition, and to create a neoliberal
pogrom around such a thing is not being very enlightened in "The
Enlightenment" sense. I am a fan of teaching comparative religion
in high school, so that students learn about many different traditions
of enlightenment, as if we're honest, religion seeks to describe that.

Most people are not interested in enlightenment, and i never advocated
forcing it on anyone. Wouldn't enlightened views be for liberality
and freedom of religion. I never abdicated "the enlightenment" to
walk the path of enlightenment.

However, once you're in a school/tradition, it means you are there
to learn what the school teaches, much as with martial arts. YOu may
enter the school not able to break anything but plastic bags with
your hands, and learn to break 10 boards. Then you put yourself
under the tutiledge of the school that teaches people how to break
10 boards safely as part of developing their physical strength,
discipline and prowess. Similarly, a guru of an enlightened tradition
would not be the guru of "your" tradition if you did not accept them,
and, as with a university, one recognizes when a professor knows
more than ones self. If it is not obvious that your guru is not
more profoundly aware than yourself, then perhaps its time to leave.

[indigobusiness]

230. Enlightenment fears nothing.

You speak of vanity in your assertion of sadness for concerns of enlightened individuals, death, uniqueness...etc. You speak from an ego base. There is nothing unique in the things you assert, only vanity, there is nothing new under the sun. There is one true path, only the scenery varies. Die to your ego, and you will understand. Until then, you won't.

[aneerkoinos]

234. No path

nobody shall stay to understand

just scenery

[indigobusiness]

255. You've already turned my mind into a pretzel

...must I choke on it to please you?

[aneerkoinos]

256. I'm hard to please

I will never be satisfied.

[indigobusiness]

257. Not until you

find your path.

[aneerkoinos]

258. There is no path

that will satisfy me.

I can't get no satisfaction, I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm drivin' in my car, and the man come on the radio
He's tellin' me more and more about some useless information
Supposed to fire my imagination

I can't get no. Oh, no, no, no. Hey, hey, hey
That's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction, I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm watchin' my TV and a man comes on and tell me
How white my shirts can be
But, he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke
The same cigarettes as me

I can't get no. Oh, no, no, no. Hey, hey, hey
That's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction, I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm ridin' round the world,
and I'm doin' this and I'm signin' that
And I'm tryin' to make some girl, who tells me
Baby, better come back maybe next week
'Cause you see I'm on a losing streak
I can't get no. Oh, no, no, no. Hey, hey, hey
That's what I say. I can't get no, I can't get no
I can't get no satisfaction, no satisfaction
No satisfaction, no satisfaction

[indigobusiness]

261. No soup for you

then

[aneerkoinos]

262. Who are you

to deny me my daily soup?

I am that what wants my daily soup.

And some ice-cream too, please.

[indigobusiness]

263. I offer you now, the soup of enlightenment----with ice-cream

Kogi Tribe of Colombia

The Kogi are an indigenous people who live in a mountain in the high Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta mountains of northern Colombia, in South America. Their remote mountain home is situated in Northern Columbia, and is considered to be the highest coastal mountain range in the world.



The Kogi believe the Sierra Nevada to be the 'Place of Creation' and the 'Heart of the World'.

They call themselves the Elder Brothers of humanity and consider their mission to care for planet. They understand how the planet works as an integrated unit rather than the separation of all things in our worlds.

Much like other ancient tribal civilizations, that still exist on the planet, they believe themselves to be the custodians of the planet Earth here to keep things in balance. They achieve this through meditation wherein they communicate with all living things on the planet - humans, animals, plants, rock, etc.

They live in Aluna, an inner world of thought and potential. From Aluna they astral travel or remote view to places both on and off the physical planet.

Their sacred lands are perceived as a metaphysical symbol of cosmic forces within the whole world - an oracle of the natural balance and health of the planet.

As with other indigenous tribes, Kogi society has changed little in the past five centuries.

They survived as a culture because the Kogi focus all their energy on the life of the mind as opposed to the life of a body or an individual.

Fundamental to that survival is the maintenance of physical separation from their world and the rest of humanity. They are very protective of their sacred space and the dense jungle is not kind to tourists.

They worry about the destruction of the rain forest as well as the planet itself. This area embraces some of the most biologically diverse tropical rainforests on the planet. The Kogi are inseparable from the rainforest habit in which they have lived since the dawn of time.

As with most indigenous tribes a connection to Spirit or entities from other worlds who bring messages, is found.

Through oracle propheices and message with Spirit, they are aware of a great change that is coming now to planet Earth. Their Mountain is dying, symbolizing this transition. Similar to what many other tribes around the world see is a world that was about to be destroyed by the misuse of consciousness. Then they saw the emergence of light consciousness as part of the process of humanity emerging as a race of beings in higher evolved light bodies. This strongly connects with the metaphysical teachings of our times.



http://www.crystalinks.com/kogi.html

The Kogi do not see us as "sleeping" as many of the Hindu and Oriental religions perceive us. The Kogi see us as "dead". We are not alive, but only shadows of the energy we could be. We do not have enough life force energy and consciousness to be classified by them as real people.

The Kogi set out to find out why the "dead ones" were still on Earth, and as they searched the living vibrating records of this Reality, they found exactly where and why it had happened.ݠSome of the 'dead ones' had become alive, and had created a dream with enough life force to "save the world" as we know it.݊

In our terms, some of us had created a 'parallel world' where life could continue to grow, a world where the "dead" could become alive. The Kogi were so specific to locate exactly who these people were that were creating this change that had altered the world's destiny.

The Kogi saw these people with living bodies of light around them. People who had activated their 'Light Bodies' or in the ancient terms, their 'Mer-Ka-Ba'

[Xipe Totec]

233. Enlightenment is Mapquest for the soul

It is knowing your place in the universe.

[klyon]

232. I wish you luck in your quest

<<literature school can not satisfy, by the nature that
one intends to go beyond simply studying the great ones of the past,
and in a truly zen approach, if it does not exist right here right now,
its not worth learning. ;-)>>

Zen is real, it is true and it is now. It is all around us, we are it. It is very much worth reading and studying, it is the only goal. And really it doesn't have to include faith in a god it is a way to look at life, more a philosophic approach to living in this world. We all have much to learn, this is one possible path.

KL

[TahitiNut]

92. ROFL! The most seminal humor I've read on DU in a year!

"Enlightenment isn't found in fearing what makes Republicans happy." - indigobusiness


No, grasshopper, it's not found in fear at all. I've experienced "ego death." I've experienced satori. "Fear"? What a funny thing it is, indeed.

Namaste.

[indigobusiness]

93. "Fish will be the last to discover water." --Albert Einstein

Thanks, that's high praise indeed.

[TahitiNut]

94. From one flying fish to another ...

... that is, by almost any measure, one of my favorite quotes of all time. Possibly next on my list are the following:"All that we are is a result of what we have thought." — Buddha
"Sometimes I feel like a figment of my own imagination." — Lily Tomlin


A while back, when I was having some particularly valuable learning experiences, I was asked somewhat dismissively by a good friend (a BornAgain-iban) "I don't know about you, Mike. Do you think you can find enlightenment or something?"

I was a bit taken aback, since I didn't regard my learning process as complete enough to rely on what I already thought. I could only reply "I really don't know, Dennis, but if I could I sure wouldn't want to miss it just because I didn't think it were possible. Would you?"

I like living in that question. :silly:



"The best navigators are not sure where they're going until they get there... and even then they're not quite sure." — Frank Bama

[indigobusiness]

96. Who would presume to know the extent of the possible?

Or deign impose limits?

Well done! I rarely think that well on my feet...I almost always need to be prone.

There's something oddly balanced about the two quotes you cite. They compliment each other very well. Thinking of the Buddha and Lily Tomlin, in concert, makes me feel better about it all...somehow.

Another quote of the Buddha that I carry around in the back pocket of my mind:

-Nothing is as it seems, nor is it otherwise.-

[TahitiNut]

100. Sometimes we think we're gods. Sometimes we think we aren't.

:evilgrin: Maybe some day we'll get it and, laughing, let it go.

[indigobusiness]

103. If we do ever get it, we will surely laugh...

and, almost certainly, let it go.

[orpupilofnature57]

81. The "Rosetta stone" of knowledge!!

[sweetheart]

106. And what is that

Surely with such an important role, enlightenment must have some
working definition for us in this "enlightened left"? Or do we call
all of politics ego, and eschew it for being a false path? Perhaps so
in one spiritual sense, but in the mystical or tantric sense, where
all things are enlightenment, where there is no sin, or earthly
thing to be separate from.

Then this rosetta stone must have some substance. We must be able to
take a photograph to help us develop a theological approach that we
offer as a contrary poll to neocon chirstianity of the baby and
the crucifix, where jesus is not heard except his baby gurgles and
his dying screams. In the middle there, he seemed to have some things
to say about enlightenment.

Then perhaps jesus was the example, and not the exception. I postulate
that he was enlightened, and that the power of his enlightenment
was what created all the fuss. What must this state be, that it has
the tsunami power to affect all of western civilization from an
earthquake 2000 years ago?

[The Zanti Regent]

88. The more money religion steals from your wallet...

...the more "Enlightened" it gets!

ALL religion is bullshit. All it has ever done is enslave the masses.

[codswallop]

90. Enlightenment/Religion

Two separate issues.

[sweetheart]

99. How cynical

I find it ironic, that our entire political system i based on
"the enlightenment" and "enlightenment" yet defining it is so
challenging, and rather people lump it in with religion and say
humbug. Yet, if there is, in a word's summary what DU represents
politically in the US, it is certainly political enlightenment.

So then what gives. Either we are cynical about the very political
views we support, or rather cynical that spiritual enlightenment could
not exist. Clearly this thread attracts cynicsm from many people,
people who feel that to bring up enlightenment, must be an act of
ego, as why else discuss it.... how odd. To discuss hatred of a
republican action, is par for the course, and to ask about the pinion
gear upon which all of the social evolution of our culture rests is
taboo, bound to be tied in with cult leaders, religion, con artists
and fraud.

Perhaps the cynicsm your reflect is the "message" of the republican
machine that claims to be spiritual, honest, truthful, but in fact
represents the marginalization of any true religious sentiment. How
even more effective, that someone on DU would repeat the psyops
message unconsciously.

How do you know "ALL" religion is bullshit. You are making a glib
statement based on ignorance. Perhaps enlightened people are
individuals, not "religion", and perhaps around them there is a
divine blessing that might be seen as religious.. a spiritual force,
or some such. Unless you have travelled the world and met all the
guru's you can not make such a statement. To make such a statement
is as absurd as saying that god will come down on a cloud and save
the holy. You are making a blatant assertion as religious and
full of hubris as any religious person.... so indeed, you are acting
as a religious speaker, speaking out of faith, rather than fact,
and then indeed, you are enslaved by ignorance.

So if you are not of the masses, are willing to check your facts,
and ask what is truth, then you can't say all religion is false.

That you try to tie it to money is interesting, given the american
conundrum. Here on one hand, a society that is based on exploitation
of labour, and that anyone is free to worship as they wish, if they
have the time left over from being exploited. What frees one from
the exploitation to pursue faith... money. So hmmm, by making
everyone poor and destroying the middle classes, the marxists and
cynics like yourself are pursuing a radical marxist (neocon) adgenda
to eliminate religion by making it economically impossible to
live a religious lifestyle, where one spends one's energy in life
to become aware, and to help others become aware, rather than grubbing
100% of the time to feed your own mouth.

In that sense you are right on. It takes a level of power, a level
of command of life's basic essentials to have the luxury of asking
about enlightenment. Does that obscure enlightenment... hardly.
Attachment to money is primitive and materialist, that this secular
materialistic religion is degenerate next to true inquiry, and the
person who adopts such a tone, has only adopted the self-fulfilling
religion of cynicsm, as a replacement for something that really is
fulfilling.

[The Zanti Regent]

204. Ask my son about fulfillment.

Oh, you can't, sorry, you see he got hooked on Jesus TV as a teenager, and went into the armed forces to fight for Jesus.

He took a bullet in the spine, lay in agony for months and died last Thanksgiving.

He's now in the VA Cemetary, 19 years old. dead.

Died for Jesus.

Take your religion and stick it.

[indigobusiness]

213. Your sad tragedy

has nothing to do with enlightenment. Enlightenment would have prevented it. Sorry for your loss, I feel somewhat similar about the forces you despise.

[Az]

214. Would have?

Why hasn't it? Are you saying enlightened individuals have no care for the world? Are you saying their enlightenment gives them no insite in how to rid the world of such conflict? Enlightnement seems to be more about a greedy state of personal comfort by your suggestion. I certainly hope this is not true.

[indigobusiness]

219. Man you weave some tangled webs. Depersonalize your view.

Enlightenment makes war unthinkable.

[Az]

222. Thats nice

So a single enlightened person will not declare war. That is a load off my mind.

War involves multitudes of people. And it is waged daily. It is thinkable. It happens. There is work and effort that has to be made to stop it. If the enlightened had a notion of how to stop it their existance in the past would suggest it had already been stopped. But it persists. Perhaps they have no answer for eliminating war and only have a method for personally avoiding the stress and conflict of war.

We are social creatures. Even the most enlightened individual is dependent on others for their survival. To deny one's own nature does not seem very enlightened to me.

[indigobusiness]

227. If ALL were enlightened, not just one.

Or maybe, just the one that insisted on this war.

[Az]

229. If all were of one mind

There would be no conflict. Enlightened or not.

[sweetheart]

226. Perhaps not

When asked once, about hatred and war my old buddhist teacher was
confronted by this person who was vehement that bad energy would just
pass through him, if he became enlightened enough.

Rama said: "If i took a gun right now, and shot you, the bullet
would pass right through you."

Would an enlightened person start a war, probably not, but would they
fight against a demonic civilization that was out to destroy the
potential liberation of their devotees... likely yes. Jesus had his
own war he fought, using the weapons of enlightenment. You can't say
that the dharma may not be to fight for justice.... it very much is
to fight for absolute justice, just as krishna advises arjuna in the
Bhavad gita.

However, when nobody is trying to kill you, there is no point in
war, rather to take that intense energy and use it to be vigilant of
egotism that the fertile ground of ones mind be a suitable vessel for
the blessing of beingness.

Brainwashing millions of people with lies to go on a murder expedition
is criminal.... of course enlightened folks eschew such criminality.
There is the issue of a just war, something totally forgotten in the
bush filth. If there really is a just war, likely enlightened people
would be supporting winning swiftly and wisely. Perhaps enlightened
people would feel the war directly, as a terrible pain and suffering,
and as well be absorbed in the inevitable life and death struggle
which will kill us all.

[aneerkoinos]

235. Valid questions

>>Are you saying enlightened individuals have no care for the world?<<

From what I hear, an "enlightened" mind-body unit does not HAVE any cares, because there is nobody to care there. Also they don't have any protection against the cares of the world.

>>Are you saying their enlightenment gives them no insight in how to rid the world of such conflict?<<

The conflict is mine and yours creation, how could somebody else take that away from me and you, even if he got rid of conflict for his own part?


>>Enlightnement seems to be more about a greedy state of personal comfort by your suggestion.<<

Search for enlightment most certainly seems to be so. When search ends, there's no reward, there is no person to feel comfort, although functional aggregate of personality and other causes don't vanish anywhere.

[Az]

236. Inversion

This is a similarity with the Christian notion of a soul. It inverts reality. It leads one to discard life in favor of death. It is a hope for stagnation.

Life brings with it many things. Stress and love. Toil and joy. Enlightenment on the terms set by the terms being expressed here is valuable only to those that do not value life, with all its idiosyncracies. They wish to be free of life. It is not that I do not understand this concept. It is that it is not everyones goal, nor should it be.

This is my key issue with this notion of enlightenment. It presumes that all feel the same way about life as everyone else. It presumes that its insights are as valid for the next person as it is for those that came up with it. In the end it is arrogant to assume such things.

Perhaps if it were not couched in such grandious terms it would not be so. But for those caught by the glamor of such things the notion of enlightenment carries with it a sense of magical certainty. Some fear and loathe uncertainty. They seek to rid themself of it. They cannot abide with it. And that is the source of their stress. Not the uncertainty itself.

Life is change. Life is uncertain. You can embrace life or death. Not all wish to embrace death.

[aneerkoinos]

246. Not soul

>>This is a similarity with the Christian notion of a soul. It inverts reality. It leads one to discard life in favor of death. It is a hope for stagnation.<<

Not such similarity. Soul is something imagined permanent, and there is no such thing. Believer's mind and body are controlled by the believer's thoughts and beliefs, enlightment means letting go of controll.

>>Life brings with it many things. Stress and love. Toil and joy. Enlightenment on the terms set by the terms being expressed here is valuable only to those that do not value life, with all its idiosyncracies. They wish to be free of life. It is not that I do not understand this concept. It is that it is not everyones goal, nor should it be.<<

Agreed, there is no reason for it to be everyones or even anyones goal. Wishing to be free of life would be absurd and easy thing to fix, you don't see many searchers of enlightment suiciding. Search can be motivated by many things, curiosity, wish to become free from suffering etc., but enlightment is the absense of any and all search and questioning, just pure, simple, natural life.

>>This is my key issue with this notion of enlightenment. It presumes that all feel the same way about life as everyone else. It presumes that its insights are as valid for the next person as it is for those that came up with it. In the end it is arrogant to assume such things.<<

Yes, that would be arrogant. But enlightment does not presume such thing, even without person the personality and other skandhas (what is skandha in English?) of cause and effect chains continue as long as life continues, forming unique aggregates. Insights can be valid or invalid only to persons with value systems, and enlightened mind-body unit is not a such a person.

>>Perhaps if it were not couched in such grandious terms it would not be so. But for those caught by the glamor of such things the notion of enlightenment carries with it a sense of magical certainty. Some fear and loathe uncertainty. They seek to rid themself of it. They cannot abide with it. And that is the source of their stress. Not the uncertainty itself.<<

Those grandious and glamorous terms are certainly misleading. Uncertainty, which many feel frustrating, comes with the fact that any dualistic conseptual system of conventional knowledge is fuzzy and fundamentally self-contradictory, and many wan't to get rid of that frustration. But uncertainty will not be replaced by certainty, only frustration will cease because in enlightment there will be no person to question and seek after certainty.

>>Life is change. Life is uncertain. You can embrace life or death. Not all wish to embrace death.<<

Yes, life is life. "You" can't embrace life without embracing death. If "you" stop embracing, "you" die, but life goes on with or without "you".

[sweetheart]

253. What is the ghost in the machine

You suggest that there is a religion of enlightenment and that all are
supposed to follow a set path. Yet those who wind up on the path to
enlightenment, find themselves there for entirely personal reasons.

The rigour of the path is simply to unpleasant to be doing it for
someone else's concern. People so motivated, might meditate well, but
the dissolution of the self is motivated by something more profound.

You could call it love, but no word suffices. It is a ghost in the
machine, a leftover voice from the enlightened soul that says press on
when all the physical will of ego-self nears exhaustion... to surrender
the ego, as by that point in the process, one has had many immersions,
tastes of the totality, and though you might equate it with death,
i rather equate it with the most being alive one could ever be.

You make a presumption that all us walking around in monkey bodies are
cut from the same cloth, and i think its a rather large one. Perhaps,
if everyone just followed their inner true nature, the world would work
fine... inner dharma. So those who are called to the pathway of
enlightenment, are of a certain cloth, no better, no worse, but a
different cloth than from those who are not called.

There is no magical certainty. There is absolute confidence in the
truth of one's nature, by the time the fever rises to that level of
pitch... and that realizing it before dying, is all that is real,
as the rest will pass like a cable TV dream shortly enough.

And all your concerns are predicated on the religion of selfhood,
that happiness and its pursuit can only come from defending that self
from dissolution. What if the inversion is really that happiness
comes rather from embracing the dissolution, the impermanence and
giving the chatter of the self no credence.

Life and death appear different to the mind, that defines itself as
starting at birth. Enlightened mind has no reference of such starting
and stopping, existing rather in the totality. Is letting to of all
"taught" human structures of self and mind, embracing death? Rather
it might be returning to the wild, like the film born free.... sad
when they let the lion go, but the sadness is for the ego, not for
an animal finally free.

[sweetheart]

224. Blame the religion of Rome and empire

So you're against religion, yet spout the views of your own anti-religion
religion. The tragedy of your son, and the tragedy of coup-2000 have
more in common than any religion i'm discussing.

I don't have a bible. Jesus may indeed have been an enlightened person,
but his teachings are very obscured compared to equally enlightened
teachers that have walked the earth since. Ramana Maharshi of south
india, died in 1958, and taught total surrender and total silence as
his way of communicating enlightenment. War?

Real enlightened people internalize the war of ignorance, and treat all
of humanity equally to help end the spread of the disease of ignorance.
Jesus in his life did so, and surely a father of his time, might have
lamented that his son was killed along with jesus for thieving... damn
religion of the roman law!

I'm suprised you blame religion and not rome. The hurt must be really
deep, and i can offer no words to one who has lost such a loved one.
Rather i would blame the pope, who started the war, not the people who
want to learn about spiritual liberation.

Enlightenment is often associated with war, the war where 99.99999%
of the people on this earth die after lives of immense suffering
without a glimpse beyond the veil... that Gautama buddha described
as the compassion that drove him to spend decades of his life giving
direct satsang (truth-telling "teaching") to all comers. Unlike
jesus, the indian culture of the time was more sophistocated and
did not murder buddha, rather leaving him be.

Sadly, your son suffered very much like jesus, killed for roman
hubris, and must we take this horrible death and re-play it like a
bad movie over and over, learning nothing from it, that 2000 years
after jesus was murdered by roman war mongering imperialists, another
spirited youth is taken by the same.

[codswallop]

89. What a load of baloney...

I am.

[Massachusetts]

97. Unfortunately

We were ALL enlightened at one time, between the ages of Pure Thought, 2-3 years old (maybe 4 years). By the time we reach 4/5 years the mind pollution in one form or another is in full swing.

Heavy!:smoke:

Where is my inner child??

[indigobusiness]

101. I've long recognized the innate wisdom of children.

The guiless acceptance and unobstructed forthrightness shines with the glow of enlightenment. Funny how it dims when a child goes to school. Truly, one of the bitter ironies of life.

More than one wise-man advised men to be childlike, but not childish. We seem to have taken the wrong fork in that road, for the most part.

[Az]

105. Enlightenment

A state of mind that occurrs when the balance of thinking suddenly shifts. Some new peace of information may enter into the equation and shift our current thinking. This can have a profound emotional effect on individuals. Called an epiphany it creates a striking sense of completeness.

The trouble of course is this is an internalised realisation. Thus it may be inaccurate. But we still experience it as being correct. This goes to how our mind stores and defines experience and belief.

When we experience a thing we associate it with a certain emotional relevance. This establishes the weight which our brain considers the event. It takes its collection of events and compares and contrasts various notions and ideas that conflict with one another. It combines concepts that are similar. The emotional weights associated with each of these positions are pitted against each other and the ideas with less gravitas are discarded or buried.

The difference between positions is not always so clear. Sometimes we cannot so easily bury or rid ourselves of the conflicting information. This causes stress. We use learned tools such as reason and logic to handle these situtations. But the value of these tools may not be enough to overcome the situation.

It is into this struggle that new information comes. This new information may be sufficient to sway the scales significantly thus breaking the deadlock. As the lock was not likely a perfect balance if the epiphany aids the side that was slightly in dominance we see it as a joyous thing. If it lends itself to the opposing side it shatters our beliefs and for a time will be a dark thing.

Either way we come out of the struggle feeling enlightened. We feel as if we have struggled through and come to a deep realisation. Whether this realisation is the truth or not is independent of the feeling. Many have undergone multiple contending epiphanies.

[indigobusiness]

107. You have defined delusion

and labled it enlightenment.

Enlightenment in unerring, and anything but incomplete.

[Az]

108. And you have proven my point

Delusion is merely the feeling of enlightenment towards something that is not true. There can also be feelings of enlightenment towards things that are true.

The sense of enlightenment does not convey unerring knowledge of the matter. It is a feeling that derives fron our own mind. It brings with it confidence and insite to deeper ideas. Whether these ideas are an accurate conceptualisation of the real world is another matter.

Delusion is a subset of enlightenment.

[indigobusiness]

111. I would say...

that you have proven mine.

[patcox2]

113. Enlightenment is not about knowlede, its more perspective.

An enlightened person would not be "wrong" or "right" about enlightenment. Enlightenment is more perspective, placing oneself in the proper perspective with what one might "know," although what one "knows" is not really important as long as the proper relationship with "knowing" is established, which is that one should have no sense of ego or pride in "knowing," that in the cosmic perspective the difference between the genius and the moron is tiny enough to be insignificant, that in fact egotistical attachment to attachment "knowing" and "being right" is an absolute bar to enlightenment. It is probably easier for a less intelligent person to free themselves from the prison of ego than for a more "intelligent" person, but than again, it is very unenlightened of me to use even these judgmental descriptions. Enlightenment requires embracing not knowing as much as knowing.

[indigobusiness]

114. Some of the difficulty of this discussion

rests in the fact that one moment "enlightenment" is referred to as a process, the next moment as a thing, the next as state of being. The subtleties complicate the discussion, but you have done a fine job of getting at the heart.

[Az]

115. This derives from the notion

That there is an external measure of what is or is not enlightenment. This matter is rectified by reducing enlightenment to a personal state. It is indicitive of what the individual defines themself as. If they believe they have made a significant breakthrough then they will behave as if enlightened beyond the scope of others.

This in turn gives the impression to others that they have achieved a higher state of understanding. Sometimes this is true.

Enlightenment is akin to opening a new door. With the new understanding you can approach problems in entirely new ways. Thus bringing about a cascade of revelations to things which were once dark. Again this need not be revelations about the truth.

There are multiple paths of constructs that our mind creates. Some of these are efficacious for certain dynamics and not others. Thus they have value even if they are not to absolute truth. This is the utilitarian notion of belief. Just because something is not true does not mean it is not useful.

Thus large effective systems built upon falsehoods can be created within society. These systems develop a logic of their own and those that find new links and applications within this construct believe themself to have become enlightened. They believe they are glimpsing part of the mysteries of the universe.

Their discoveries may very well improve matters extrodinarily. People will turn to them because they exhibit an understanding of the social construct in play beyond what others seem to posess. All this is still independent from absolute truth. This does not destroy its value though.

[indigobusiness]

118. The matter is utterly confused...

in trying to force such concepts as internal/external into the matter. These are among the false notions one might address in a discussion of enlightenment.

Patcox nailed it when he said it is about perpective: one who pretends to pontificate about enlightenment has no clue.

[Az]

120. Perspective

That coincided with my point exactly. An external concept of what is a valid point of enlightenment or not is unavailable to us. We only have our experience and lives to go on. Thus enlightenment is based on the perspective of the individual evaluating the merrit of the ideas.

To a practitioner of Bushido a Taoist would seem to have little enlightenment to the flow of power. Yet to the Taoist it is the reverse. Both have their own perception of enlightenment. Both percieve the others perception as invalid. Both believe their concepts have value to them over the others. All is perspective.

[indigobusiness]

126. Enlightenment is said to be about reconnecting to the source...

beyond the confining concepts and limits you impose.

[Az]

132. External source again

This presumes that there is a source concerned with our path defining proper enlightenment and improper enlightenment. As we do not have direct access to this source, its existance is meaningless to us determining who is or is not enlightened.

Thus we are left once again with an individuals seeming exhibition of enlightenment as our means of determining enlightenment. And this could well be flawed.

Enlightenment is a transitory state. Thus if you meet the Buddha kill him.

[indigobusiness]

135. There is no "external source".

Only the unenlightened concept of an "external source".

All is one.

[Az]

156. This notion also seems flawed

There are those that achieve a sense of enlightenment while believing in an external source. Are you saying that they have the wrong sense of enlightenment? Is there an authority on proper enlightenment?

I fully expect that some find their own enlightenment in any number of ways. For some it is control of power. For others it is letting go of power. Others find their way by letting go of desire and identity and becoming one with the universe. Others find honing their own identity to be an equally enlightened path.

Which is correct? Or are all correct? None? Is correct even a valid question?

[indigobusiness]

160. I'm not asserting my ideas,

but the ideas of the Masters. Name one...that's my reference.

[Az]

162. That is a pity

As you are the one I am talking to.

[indigobusiness]

163. I wouldn't pretend to know these sorts of things

better than they. Why is it a pity? This is not the stuff of dogma.

[Az]

167. Not looking for what you know

I am looking to who you are. Slightly more important to me. Connectivity first. This gives us the insite to begin to understand what you convey. The masters are not here to present their ideas. You have taken some wisdom from them and believe it has value. Your view of this information is just as valid if not more so than theirs. Because you can present it with the experience of this time and place. Because you have tansformed it in your experience to your way. It is not their wisdom you contain any longer. It has become irrevocably yours. And I may discern some bit of wisdom that may be of some value to me in talking to you.

[indigobusiness]

169. The Masters are here, through their teachngs.

My experience is only annecdotal. This is timeless stuff, and something that is best depersonalized entirely if anything is to be essentially learned or determined. I haven't expressed my beliefs, but argued from a point of view of trying to keep the concepts on track, as I understand them. My belief is open-ended, I couldn't explain it to myself, much less to anyone else. I know one thing, my opinion of these things is not on par with a Master's. I only argue to further my understanding on their terms, not mine. To do otherwise would be the height of hubris.

The wisdom is universal and immutable, its nature and value do not change. Don't believe for a second it is different person to person -- that's my only direct advice.

I try to keep my bad self out of it, as much as possible.

[Az]

170. Interesting

See I learned something already. ;)

[aneerkoinos]

172. Hagia Sophia

Wisdom is consept.

Wisdom is not immutable.

Dharma is mutable.

Nothing is immutable.

[indigobusiness]

175. "Nothing is immutable" is an affirmation...

not a negation.

[aneerkoinos]

177. Yes

But only conseptually. :)

[indigobusiness]

180. No

actually.

[Az]

181. Trouble

The line of communication you have going on is about to break down. Is there some way you can salvage this line of discussion without taking the path you seem to be about to embark on?

[aneerkoinos]

Line

Where does the line go when it ends?

Communication is allways broken, continuity is mirage, ask Zeno or Quantum.

[Az]

200. But when all you have is the mirage

It may be in your interest to preserve it.

[indigobusiness]

201. Who says the line must end...

Mobius? That's circular logic.

[Az]

116. Dupe

[indigobusiness]

119. I can't argue

with that.

[Az]

122. You seem to have trouble

with the fact that we disagree on some things. This is how things are. You can either find a path that brings us closer together or you can reject the world and live in discomfort at the notion that all cannot be brought to your view of the world.

[indigobusiness]

124. Not at all.

Nothing matters to me less, nor matters less.

We should be serious about taking ourselves, and our views, less seriously.

[Az]

125. Excellent

Then we may enjoy this journey all the more.

[indigobusiness]

127. Could that be...

possible?

[Az]

130. The vinegar tastes as it should

Why be troubled by it?

[indigobusiness]

134. Who claimed otherwise?

Or is troubled by it?

Wine and vinegar are two virtues of the same thing.

[patcox2]

110. Thats not enlightenment, thats too ego driven

This thing you describe which leaves one satisfied and moved by one's new knowledge is not true enlightenment, it sounds like the false enlightenment of a new convert who does not yet understand. It places too much emphasis on the importance of one's self, as if one's having learned something or had an experience is important, thus encouraging one to live in oneself and to have egotistical thoughts and feelings about how great one is for being so enlightenened. Thats what the fundies might think of as enlightenment. You describe something empowering and self-actualizing. True enlightenment embraces the ironic power of powerlessness, and the finding of identity in the abnegation of self and ego.

[Az]

139. That is egocentric

Would you say that a practictioner of Bushido would describe what you do as enlightnment or mere delusions?

The trouble here is the notion of an external definition of truth. That there is a true path defined by an external set of codes. There may or there may not be. We do not have access to them so we can only presume to guess when someone seems to have alited upon such a code.

Math is an abstract construct. It is a creation of our mind. It is a very useful creation of our mind, but a creation none the less. It even seems to reflect the reality of the world around us. Thus it is useful to physicists and scientists.

It takes a certain amount of insite to recognise the world of numbers. How they mesh together and function. A person that can grasp this has become enlightened in regards to this created construct.

We create other mental constructs as well. Philosophical schools of thought and religious beliefs. It takes a certain amount of effort to gain insite into these as well. Those that are still with us have some utility to them and serve us. Thus they survive.

Within these constructs are convoluted interactions of codes. A simple reading may leave one with an impression of simplicity or irrelevance. But they establish a set rules that create more complex systems. Piercing this complexity is where enlightenment comes into play.

Just because they may not be based on truth (ie there actually isn't a blue humanoid with an elephant's head parsing out the information) does not mean that the codes and systems established by these constructs are without value. Where social engineers only have a limited span to study intracacies, evolutionary constructs have generations to develop increasingly effective codes.

Like peering at a weather pattern. We can understand the simple parts of it. But we fail to be able to predict them more than a few days into the future. An enlightened weatherperson would be someone that became aware of some interaction that had been unaccounted for and allowed us to foretell the weather a few days further.

[sweetheart]

140. Flavours of enlightenment

It appears we have several types of enlightenment in this thread: Part
of the friction appears to be the reconciliation of approaches.

Spiritual enlightenment = Awareness, beingness, as well put by izamirakul, sheeptramp, g_j and others.

Political enlightenment ("the enlightenment") = An 18th century rising
of political liberalism from which the USA was born, but, as brindis_desala points out, something that is ultimately betrayed in
the modern us concensus that is formed around exploitation of labour
to create wealth, and the appearance of worshiping as one chooses as
long as its christian.

Social enlightenment = Some folks have postulated this, doing good for
others, being kind, and that sorta thing.

Intellectual enlightenment = what you're talking about, having
epiphanies as part of the process of maturing as an intellectual
person.

It does seem that they all stem from spiritual enlightenment, which by
its very definition, encompasses all the others. That said, the
others are exoteric reflections, more substantial in words, as your
well crafted prose makes clear.

Is not any part of life enlightenment? I fail to see where something
can not be enlightenment in a dicussion where we intend to become
enlightened. Shakespeare can be very enlightening, by the profundity
of his plays. But in that example, we see a whole series of
words and meanings that are in fact, abstract concepts of the mind,
of a self that is already there, and in our enlightenment, we come
to see the ephiphany as not something external, but internal.

But as sheeptramp says, if being enlightened was being really smart,
then the simple could not be blessed. Direct awareness is more
immediate than thought, however eloquent the thought. Direct
awareness, beingness is free already, before thought, sharing our
consciousness with thinking if we can accept that "we" exist beyond
the internal dialog.

Ahhh!! so then we get to the crux, the presumption in your approach.
You presume the ego-self to be paramount in enlightenment, that this
self is immutable, and solid. This is an assumption, unprovable
without dying to see its immutability. If we presume, that at death
all personal ephiphanies will dissolve alongside the jewels and the
cars, then perhaps the experiences are as well a form of materialism,
existential materialism.

As enlightenment is not a state of being, not an experience of the
body-mind (ego), then it is beyond that materialism, absorbtion as
beingness with a body having an experience. The two are not
mutually exclusive, ego-mind and enlightened mind. To measure,
simply note in the spreadsheet all the things that you achieve and
understand that will outlast your death. Beingness is deathless,
as it is already present, death comes of karma and experience.

So when one becomes tired of experience (dukkha), which is a sort
of suffering, even the best experiences, then enlightenment could
perhaps be even greater than that.

Someone indicated that enlightenment is a process of awakening, not
a state.. and every part of awakening IS awareness bubbling through
whatever levels the human person is prepared to accept given their
evolutionary state.

It makes your comments deeply cogent, and yet impermanent when taken
as ultimate. They say life is a dream. It does not mean that it is
not real, rather it passes and is ultimately insubstantial.
Enlightenment, by its very approach must therefore be that which is
left substantial when the rest has proven ephemeral... awareness.

And if we follow the inquiry to its semantic roots, all of us are
putting words and metaphors on awareness, some labelling it as metadata, and some as content.

[indigobusiness]

149. It seems an identifiable distinction is essential, for clarification.

Like Liberal/liberal, Enlightenment/enlightenment might be appropriate nomenclature.

[sweetheart]

152. What happens when we fit it in a box?

When we can say, "Oh yea, i know about enlightenment... i read a
thread on DU... been there done that." The problem of these labels
is the conundrum behind them, that they presume something can be known
and by stamping the primal mother in to words, we cheat both.

It is the folly of this thread that rather than coming to see that
enlightenment is something that some of the most educated people in
the world know dick about..... is healthier than having the book closed
because everyone's been there, done that and got the T-shirt.

The mystery remains profound, and no labels replace the abstract
metaphor that challenges the known with the unknowable.

[indigobusiness]

154. Who would ever presume to do that?

It is just a catagorical clarification for purposes of discussion: transcendant Enlightenment as opposed to more mundane forms of enlightenment. Not a declaration of the full understanding. The mystery is preserved.

edit- Who would claim a knowledge of the unknowable? Has that happened here?

[sweetheart]

202. The touchy subject

In the circles of the enlightened, to discuss the subject is to be
asking for one's ego to be decimated, as to ask is to presume that one
knows something enough to ask... and that hubris, in the subtle
circles is not coherent with the real deal.

Yet this is DU, a forum of open speaking, and a place where we celibrate
enlightenment. Other folks, might say the aspiration, or the sincerity
of the question is critical to the answer, as the properly prepared
individual, on asking of enlightenment, can simply awaken at that point.

Many enlightened hold to traditions that themselves eschew others from
attaining enlightenment. It is the unenlightened dark cloud following
the guru syndrome. Tibetan buddhists have some 5 star enlightened, and
prior to the tibetan chinese invasion, were loth to teach women.

So, here on a modern technology discussion, where by the very nature of
the internet, what is written is really public, then what be that public
domain discussion. What is the public consensus. On one hand i hear
cries that the "religious left" support justice and the end of the BFEE
hoodlums. On the other, people want the religious left to somehow be
different than we are.

In my own glimpses of that ineffable, it is true to the thunderbolt
description, that the oneness is total and complete, not a pithy
thought. As well, when awake to that, there is no dualistic
awareness at all. As the person who writes now is speaking from
dualistic awareness, then unenlightenment describes a memory of the
past, trying to hyjak in the present something that is as well in the
present unhyjakked if, rather than writing about it, i were to
surrender to the thunderbolt directly.

It tears me between describing it as an exoteric thing and naming
its attributes from without, and inspiring people to taste it directly
by pointing to its direct metaphor. The former being exoteric and
the latter esoteric introduction of the subject.

One can attain liberation at death, by letting go totally of all the
karmas of a lifetime, consciously as the body falls eternally still.
Beneath all of these thoughts are the blessings of enlightened
traditions that make the discussion possible... from Lao Tzu, to
Rama, there are enlightened souls that underwrite this chat, and
to whom i offer my sincere apology for being so with-self and trodding
so heavily on such sacred ground.

And nature puts in front of us a sacred lake, perfectly still,
and the first thing we get about to is splashing it up and making
a hoopla of noise... missing the point to have a fight. It is not
that it can't be discussed, as long as one knows the folly that
the discussion gets one closer to the thunderbolt.

That indeed is a divine gift.

[indigobusiness]

206. Hubris is also wanting to appear more humble than you actually are.

Who among the enlightened would find fault with the unenlightened letting it all hang out, warts and all, in their awkward attempts to confront and define the ineffable?

Why apologize for trodding so heavily upon such sacred ground, if that is your genuine spiritual weight?

Limiting the discussion is the folly. Not, risking the thunderbolt.

[patcox2]

109. It is perspective, mindfulness, lovingkindness.

It is perspective, first and foremost, changing your perspective from "me, my, I , me, mine," to a universal perspective from which the broad picture is visible, the ability to see that life is transitory, that desires are an illusion and a trap, that attachments to material things and even to cleverness and "intelligence" are illusions which strengthen ego and make enlightenment more, not less, difficult. From this perspective a human is a tiny thing, a human life indescribably short, and human perceptions flawed, and human knowledge puny and inadequate. This leads to knowledge that being is itself its own purpose and its own reward. The ego is overcome, things like anger, resentment, and feelings of superiority, justification, or righteousness are banished, those who are kind to you and those who injure you are regarded with the same attitude of benignity.

Mindfulness comes from empathy toward all things, always having in mind the impact of one's actions on others.

Lovingkindness is the prime directive, act with lovingkindess towards all living things.

That is enlightenment.

[KansDem]

121. Go outside and take a look...

"Enlightenment" is just the opposite of what you see...

[Jim Warren]

123. One way to trap a monkey

I do not know all the options or any of the finite answers. I am not looking for the answers any more. When I find an answer I know there are many more just under the surface. Many more, and always much more than I can hold. You may not agree. I do like finding out more ways to do and view the same things from different perspectives. I search, but more for the questions and those different perceptions that show different facets of the same situation. So I do think that I am a student as you say but not with the focused hope that I can acquire enough knowledge to succeed or to even be a contender but with the opposing hope that I can let go of all that I carry (nuts) so I can see and not be bound by what I do not need. I know where they are, some of those nuts of value that is, and I can go and touch one now and then when I need to but I do not have to possess them and carry them with me or feel like I need to show them to others unless there is a reason other than the one of being considered knowledgeable by others. There are many reasons to show the nuts but never to those who fixate and are stopped short in their journey of discovery by being given gold mines before they know the value of gold.

“Knowledge puffs up,” it is said and it is true. I have been a victim of puffery both my own and others and I do not like it nor will I practice it knowingly and I like to prick it with a pin even if I have to stick myself.
At this stage I let others hold and know the answers. They are, all of them, correct and even though all answers may contradict each other from time to time they are still correct at the proper time and circumstance because the truth contains all the possible answers and solutions. I do not follow the tides and the winds anymore. Once upon a time I did, but now I just go.

I am thinking about how monkeys once were caught. The hunters would take a jar with a wide neck and put a sizable nut inside of it. Then they would tie the jar to a big tree with a long rope and wait. The monkey would come along and put its hand in the jar and grab hold of the nut. When he did that the hunter/s would make an appearance and the monkey would bolt only to come up short and have its hand stuck in the jar. The hunters would come closer and closer and the monkey would screech and howl and jump and scream but he would not let that nut go. His fist held him prisoner. All he had to do was open his hand and he could run and escape the hunter.

I am sure that he had his reasons for holding on to the nut. The only problem is those reasons cost him dearly. He lost his freedom to either a pot or a cage. Sometimes we have a nut that we know is good and we will not let it go and because of that - year after year and season after season the year comes and goes and we have our nut and never let it go and never know what changes outside of our vision come and go and how things evolve and we never see the things we may hear about with our own eyes that do work and we do not make room for that growth. We do have our nut and it is good.

There is a big world out there once we let go of the nut. A different world a world other than the world of the nut. The nut will still be there if we let it go and when we come back to the familiar and the safe we can pick it up and perhaps for the first time let it go and.... pick it up when we need it and smile at all that we have learned.

[TahitiNut]

128. I often feel I'm in the grasp of monkeys.

:evilgrin:

[indigobusiness]

129. You nut.

:bounce: :yourock: :bounce:

[Jim Warren]

131. Flying monkeys?

They'll make a grab for your nuts.:evilgrin:

[indigobusiness]

133. That reminds me of the story of the monk and the stones...

And typing that statement, in this context, made me laugh.

Remembering jokes and stories is not my long suit, and neither is telling them, but here goes:

A troubled monk asked his master for help in monitoring and assessing his karmic merit, on a daily basis. He wanted a way to determine and measure his progress. His master instructed him to carry a bag of white and black stones. Every day he was to put a black stone in his pocket whenever he compromised his karma, and to do the same with a white stone when he acted meritoriously. At the end of the day he was to empty his pocket and inventory his actions as revealed by the ratio of white to black stones. Ultimately, he should find he has no need for the black stones.

[sweetheart]

136. monk stories of karma

2 monks are walking down a road in ancient japan. They come upon a
beautiful woman who asks if they might carry her across a ford in a
river. They oblige and happen upon their way. A while later, the one
monk turns to the other and comments on how beautiful that woman was.
The other one says. "I put the woman down back at the river; you're
still carrying her." ;-)

[knight_of_the_star]

137. I see it summed up in five parts

1.) Knowing that all things are made up of energy and that energy can be manipulated to manifest one's desires.

2.) Being able to discretely and subtly manipulate said energy to achieve the end result.

3.) Knowing that time is an illusion, an abstract construct used to make a chaotic world orderly.

4.) Transcending time by being able to perceive time as it truly is, and not as a measured construct.

5.) Being able to take what you know and apply it in a fashion that is beneficial to the whole as opposed to the individual.

[Jose Diablo]

141. Enlightenment is a tuna taco n/t

[sweetheart]

143. tasty tasty good eating

An experience, however rich, will fade and die. Yet there is something
in that experience totally essential, that it is the present moment.

Enlightenment is always in the present moment. It is in licking
tuna tacos, sucking on sausages, rolling in chocolate sauce. It is
as well none of those things. That the actors are mistaken for the
play happens quite commonly. If life is a play, some say enlightenment
would be the actors, other say the director is enlightenment and the
actors not. Others would say the producers or the writers were
enlightenment. What if they all are, as they are all present in
this metaphorical prsent moment, as constructs of semantic meaning
in synapses of you, reader.

What we have then, at the end of all the plays, is the reader's
awareness, that very firmament from which we construct a sacred
juicy tuna taco. :-)

[Jose Diablo]

146. Yes, you see!!!

The past is like a bug embedded in amber, it can be examined, but never changed, no matter how we wish to.

The future is truly not predictable. We can plan, but there is so much randomness, it is impossible to predict anything we do will work. Besides, there is nothing in the future we can directly manipulate. We can make a cause and hope for an effect, but there is no guarantee the cause will be the only cause to that effect.

That only leaves the present. And what is the present. Oops it just slipped into the past. Did you catch it? Can you hold it? No, for if you try to understand it, it passes into the past before complete understanding can come.

Thus the only way is to live it, just savior each moment one by one. Pure sensation is enlightenment about the true reality. Sensation is the true reality. Thought is all illusion about a reality that doesn't truly exist because its either about the past or the future.

Will the hoped for future someday become the present? Who can say?

[indigobusiness]

151. That begs the question:

Is the future really any more unpredictable than the past? The past can not be changed? Ok. Like a bug in amber, that past was once the future. When, exactly, in the past, did it lose its unpredictability and become unchangeable? When...exactly?

Maybe both past and future are identical in predictability and unchangeability. After all, neither actually exist, as we ponder our existence in the eternal now.

[Jose Diablo]

157. Sigh..I didn't say it is a bug in amber

I said it is LIKE a bug in amber.

Nor did I say the past became unchangeable in the past, the past is unchangeable as the present events passes into the past and out of existence.

I have been jumping all over the past and future, thus lost part of my life.

I will go to the present now so excuse me if I don't post, because to post, although my body is in the present, my mind wanders everyplace but in the present.

Edit: Besides, whats this got to do with tuna tacos?

[indigobusiness]

158. No need to sigh. I was just using your example as a metaphor

for its exemplary representation of the unchangeable past.

You didn't grasp what I was driving toward, which is my inarticulate fault, I'm sure. You made a a good point and raised an interesting question. That was something, I thought, might be sharpened to a finer point.

This post of yours confounds me: past, present and future.

[Jose Diablo]

166. past, present, future

We think of the future and the past as something real. Like somehow they have some existence 'out-there'.

We have SF literature with imagining of some past that somehow we can go there, like it has an existence if we could only build some machine to take us there we could visit.

The future and past do not exist, anyplace. Except within our minds. Yet our minds spend so much time there.

All that exists is an ever changing now and we marked by the flow of time marking events as they occur.

The the past is a convenience for our understanding of some previously occurring events and we say, well this happened yesterday. And somehow this explains for us what is happening now. Then we plan and make causes for some event to occur when so many ticks of the clock make the present day, Jan 4, 2005.

The past, present, future are words of convenience for our minds and in truth neither the past nor the future exist, except in our minds as some memory or some planned outcome.

As for enlightenment, much of what we perceive has more to do with our shared experience with others and the words we create to communicate these shared experiences.

And most the what we perceive is filtered through a culture sieve to define what it means. When Descartes said, "I think therefore I am" would only be self-evident in the western culture. The concept is far from self-evident in say 14th century China.

In this way, I think it is pretty safe to say that humans are not sane, if we define sanity as seeing reality as it really is, not as we want it to be or as we are told it is. I don't mean to say behave insanely, but rather our actions have more to do with what we perceive than what is. And what we perceive always passes through the culture filters to have meaning.

Take for example our firm belief in technology as our salvation. Has the technology resulted in better life? Certainly more life, but is it better? Yet within our culture, basic questions about what is 'good' cannot be answered unless we step outside the culture filters and see what really is happening. Most people cannot or will not see what is. Anybody pointing out how technology has made humanity less capable of survival would be branded a Luddite and any further discussion would be discounted.

Anyway, I have wandered yet again far from the immediate topic.

[indigobusiness]

209. Astonishing...how much I agree

Especially your comments on technology, and human sanity.

But, you didn't address my clever question about past and future having similar, not different, qualities of predictability.

Past, present, and future: all do exist. They are faces of a three-sided coin...existing in the eternal now. Our perception of them is our reality dream. Our world is built around our psychology, and our rational understanding of the fullness of time and absolute reality is as limited as an ant's chance at understanding the human experience.

Our practical self sees, as truly existing, only the side of three-sided coin we can spend. We will never pragmatically know our place; won't understand, fully, who we are, except through transcendent wisdom.

[Az]

212. It seems sad to me

To place such limits on one self. To deliberately cut oneself off from the beauty and wonders of other paths. But it is not my path to walk or define.

[indigobusiness]

215. One path is all one needs.

All true paths lead to the same ultimate destination.

[Az]

144. You jest, but

Enlightenment is where you find it. Some may find it in a grain of sand. Others in a tuna taco. Who am I to presume where someone is to find enlightenment.

[indigobusiness]

147. ***Yes***

While there's probably something to be said for the searching, and no matter where or how it's found, it's surely the finding that is the nut of enlightenment.

[sweetheart]

150. searching and finding

Is this not the hunter gatherer consciousness, and if we investigate
it, is it not the construct of the 3 years old who is screaming for
mummy to feed it, for if not, it will go hungry.... so the little
ego learns to "do" things that result in "getting" what ti needs...
and as this matures, it becomes the hunter gatherer.... and for
10's of thousands of years, humanity has had hunter gatherer
societies that have been generally unenlightened.

But what is searching, but to feel at some level that what one needs
is not there. It starts with "one needing", and perhaps in the very
formation of the idea of searching, lies the epiphany that maybe one
does not need. What if we just let the searching voice scream scream
scream without paying it heed. What is that voice made up of, if not
a terrible fear that the body will not survive if it does not forage
for sustinance. So even the most enlightened searching, reinforces
the fear-ego, unless one inquires as to who needs search, and what
it really wants.

If we accept that nothing is lacking in this present moment, then
searching and finding are ephemeral to awareness, being and already
having. Our prodestant culture reinforces that there must be something
to "do" that we might cleans ourselves of sin and find enlightenment.
That lie is a great way to motivate people to look outside the moment
and themselves for fulfillment.

Rather, fall in to the fear of failing to search, fail totally, and
feel in the present the totality of that fear avoided by searching...
and if you can really accept and feel it, likely in the midst of the
shallow emotion of fear, one will find total beingness and absolution.
Whatever can be found in a search, is already present.

[indigobusiness]

153. It is no thing, yet everpresent.

In terms of human consciousness, Enlightenment might be the bullseye that the built-in urge of matter homes in on to be fully realized. The vehicle is the individual, not the self, as the engine of Cosmic fullfillment. The angst of the self merely powers it.

Perhaps conscious animals find enlightened without seeking? That would come as no shock to me. Humans must get their ticket punched, usually at quite a cost.

[Cinletharwi]

155. Who am I? What do these feelings mean?? I don't know

Enlightenment (spiritually speaking) is a useless word at the end of the day, and personally I have an aversion to it because it's use implies a state to be attained/possessed, or a moving from one "place" to another. It's easy to get lost in translation', semantics, linguistics. It just has too much baggage attached to it for my tastes, as does religion, zen, etc. It's hard enough as it is, without piling on more luggage.

Debating what "it" is or may be, is also useless; it's like two kids behind the gate telling each other fanciful stories about the world going on outside of it, one they've never seen (my mind does this with itself all the time).

What the word tries to point to is not something you can come to know by consensus; it's more towards something you do, it's the deeper feelings you have and your direct experience of them(you!) that informs you. Your experiences and feelings change, your "perspective" changes, even truth changes, making it all elusive and confusing. What you bring to it, your approach/practice and intention, makes the difference.

Who am I?
What do I really, truly want/need?
What does this need/feeling mean for me?

Don't ask for the answering, but hold the questions indefinitely, just watch who/what is doing/asking it and what comes out of this practice.

If you don't know, and need to, it's best to choose a practice and do it as if your life depends on it (and, it does). Otherwise, you already have everything you need to hop the gate and go find out for yourself.


I feel a need to know(what exactly, I don't know! but it's there), it's of primary importance to me, and it's painfully hard to see clearly, so I made a website dedicated to my efforts and those of others: http://clearwithin.com

"Praxis Resource" may be of particular interest, since I don't have much up on the rest of the site at the moment(it's fairly new, and I'm slow and careful to put things into words).

[indigobusiness]

159. Bodhisattvas are said to be enlightened beings

that choose to stick around to help others in their suffering and to help them achieve enlightenment.

Set aside the social baggage and cloying aspects of the terminology. If this is meaningful why can't its nature be meaningfully and specifically addressed in discussion, or be meditated upon constructively?

Why is everyone so keen to preach about the unnecessity of it as a definable aspect of human reality?

Depersonalize it and the question loses no weight. I agree that questions are as important as answers; yet, answers are often found in well-posed questions.

[Cinletharwi]

164. What?

Hello. Are you asking me something directly?

[klyon]

217. Bodhisattva is the Buddha

KL

[indigobusiness]

239. Bodhisattvas in Mahayana Buddhism

Bodhisattvas in Mahayana Buddhism

In Mahayana Buddhism, a bodhisattva has the compassionate determination to aid all beings on their quest for the highest state of development, full enlightenment of a Buddha. This type of motivation is known as Bodhicitta.

Remaining in this world of uncontrolled rebirth (cf. Wheel of Life), this individual has taken the bodhisattva vows not to pass into Parinirvana until all other beings have achieved Nirvana.

According to the Mahayana tradition of Buddhism, on his/her way to becoming a Buddha, the bodhisattva proceeds through ten (sometimes fourteen) grounds or bhumi.

Before a bodhisattva arrives at the first ground, he or she first must travel the first two of the five paths (marked also with the syllables from the heart sutra that represents each path):

the path of accumulation (gate)
the path of preparation (gate).
The ten grounds of the bodhisattva then can be grouped into the next three paths


The bodhisattva Maitreya, with his characteristic water vial in the left hand, 2nd century, Gandhara.Bhumi 1 the path of insight (paragate)
Bhumi 2-7 the path of meditation (parasamgate)
Bhumi 8-10 the path of no more learning (bodhi)
Great Joy
It is said that being close to enlightenment and seeing the benefit for all sentient beings, one achieves great joy, hence the name. In this bhumi the bodhisattvas practice all virtues (paramita), but especially emphasizing generosity.
Stainless
In accomplishing the second bhumi, the bodhisattva is free from the stains of immorality, therefore, this bhumi is named 'Stainless'. The emphasized virtue is moral ethics.
Radiant
The third bhumi is named 'Radiant', because, for a bodhisattva who accomplishes this bhumi, the light of Dharma is said to radiate from the bodhisattva for others. The emphasized virtue is patience.
Luminous
This bhumi is called 'luminous', because it is said to be like a radiating light that fully burns that which opposes enlightenment. The emphasized virtue is perseverance.
Very difficult to train
Bodhisattvas who attain this bhumi strive to help sentient beings attain maturity, and do not become emotionally involved when such beings respond negatively, both of which are difficult to do. The emphasized virtue is meditative concentration.
Obviously Transcendent
"By depending on the perfection of wisdom awareness, he does not abide in either samsara or nirvana, so it is 'obviously transcendent'". The emphasized virtue is wisdom.
Gone afar
Particular emphasis is on the perfection of skillful means, or upaya-kaushalya, .
Immovable
The emphasized virtue is aspiration.
This, the 'Immovable' bhumi, is the bhumi at which one becomes able to choose his/her place of rebirth.
Good Discriminating Wisdom
The emphasized virtue is strength.
Cloud of dharma
The emphasized virtue is the practice of primordial wisdom.

The Bodhisattva Maitreya practices in a lotus position, 2nd century CE, Mathura.Buddhahood
After the ten bhumis, according to Mahayana Buddhism, one attains complete enlightenment and becomes a Buddha.
According to Mahayana tradition, Arhats have purified their stains and all emotional afflictions, but have not yet attained complete, unsurpassable enlightenment, or buddhahood.
The list of ten bhumis and their descriptions are from The Jewel Ornament of Liberation, a treatise by Gampopa, an influential character of the Kagyu tradition.

A bodhisattva practices several virtues, called the paramitas. These are often listed as the perfection of:

giving
ethics
patience
joyous effort
concentration
wisdom
When becoming liberated from uncontrolled rebirth, the bodhisattva becomes like an Arahant (sometimes spelled Arhat), but rather than moving into Nirvana, remains in the world to lead other beings to liberation and enlightenment.


Specific bodhisattvas

Relief image of the bodhisattva Guan Yin from Mt. Jiuhua in China's Anhui province.Various traditions within Buddhism believe in certain specific bodhisattvas. Some bodhisattvas appear across traditions, but due to language barriers may be seen as separate entities. For example, Tibetan Buddhists believe in Chenrezig, who is Avalokitesvara in India, Guan Yin in China, and Kannon in Japan. A modern bodhisattva for many is the 14th Dalai Lama, considered by many followers of Tibetan Buddhism to be an incarnation of that same bodhisattva, the Bodhisattva of Compassion.

The bodhisattva is a popular subject in Buddhist art.

The place of a bodhisattva's earthly deeds, such as the achievement of enlightenment or the acts of dharma, is known as a bodhimandala, and may be a site of pilgrimage. Many temples and monasteries are famous as bodhimandalas; for instance, the island of P'u T'o, located off the coast of Ningbo, is venerated by Mahayana Buddhists as the bodhimandala of Avalokitesvara. Perhaps the most famous bodhimandala of all is the bodhi tree under which Shakyamuni achieved buddhahood.

[sweetheart]

254. bodhisattvas teach

Bottom line, mahayana buddhism is only fully manifest in the act of
transmitting the dharma... teaching enlightenment.

I don't mean the religious traditions of theory, rather on the ground,
in any given moment, the bodhisattva is the one in the trenches
wrestling with ignorance by being enlightened. It is not a choice,
rather just the way of such a being. As enlightenment is the natural
state, it is the natural state of the bodhisattva to liberate others.

Some enlightened buddha's, sakyamuni, represent the enlightenment
and that attainment for all beings. This is no less or greater,
and if someone is fully engaged in their private enlightenment,
then they are in a theravada moment, awake in the garden of eden.

There are lots of spiritual books of stages, and practices, but when
you are in that enlightenment, and your heart breaks and you can't
help but assist those around you, the word bodhisattva may not come
to mind, such is the difference between the book learning and the
totality.

Its unfortunate, but when viewing high buddhist teachings with western
eyes, there is a tendency to take them as "taught" yogas, rahter than
merely descriptions of the nature of the road. Knowing all these
scriptures can make you an arhat, a very learned pundit... like a
literature scholar. The buddha knows without needing books.

[Cinletharwi]

231. Try again

"If this is meaningful why can't its nature be meaningfully and specifically addressed in discussion, or be meditated upon constructively?"

Because it's the direct experience of feelings that deliver meaning, that make it meaningful, not the intellectual exercises. What are you going to build by discussing what something (of this nature) may or may not be? Better descriptions for what "it" may or may not be? A new philosophy? Religion?

At this moment I feel something I do not understand nor recognize intellectually, it makes no "sense," I have no history of/with it, it's not a "common emotion" (anger, sadness, etc), but something else...deeper..

Can you tell me what I feel and what it means? Can we reach a consensus on that? No. The experience of the feeling is now only a memory to me and my own words and understanding to describe it are useless in encapsulating it. I can focus on the memory of it, maybe build an image of what it was like, but will that provide meaning to you? No amount of discussing will reproduce my experience for you, you have to watch inside yourself, for yourself, to see what's there.

The word enlightenment does have a lot of baggage, but it is used to point to something - a process, not an arrival. This process doesn't take place in the World of shared reality, language, arrivals and calculation - but deep within, on the edge of consciousness and beyond, so discussing what it may be is a waste of time.

How much time do you have left?

If you want to discuss something useful, discuss practical ways of finding out for yourself.

[indigobusiness]

237. Then why do people like the Dalai Lama encourage it?

And why have Buddhist monks, through the ages, gathered on the steps of their monasteries to debate these things?

Would you presume to know better?

I think you might have something important to say, but it isn't this.

[Az]

238. Better or other

Do you presume that Buddhist monks have the only path to understanding? Or simply one of many?

Someone may not know better, but they may know other. Value is personal.

[H2O Man]

241. There is nothing in his post

that indicates that he presumes that the said monk have "the only" path. That idea is found in your post.

[Az]

242. Better

Better implies value. What may be of value to him and the monks may not be of value to others.

[H2O Man]

245. "Better"

has several meanings. You are only able to apply that which you understand.

[indigobusiness]

247. I must be dreaming...Is that you, my waterbrother? Don't torment me

with imposters.

[H2O Man]

250. You'd BETTER

believe it. (wink)

[indigobusiness]

251. I'd best.

:}

[H2O Man]

265. Enlightenment

is literally the reduction of gross darkness, or the removal of those things that keep human beings away from the light. It is an on-going process.

Most people are more afraid of their good potential, than their bad potential.

Enlightenment can be found on my blog. See:

http://h2oman.blogspot.com

[Az]

248. Meaningless

Words. No meaning. I meant nothing by this. But I did. Thus I continue. Without meaning. But meaning too.

[Cinletharwi]

249. I don't know the Dalai Lama, or much about Buddhism the religion

What does he encourage? I know he advocates peace, happiness, and so forth - I see the cover of his books on the shelves - but does he offer practical means of finding out for yourself what's inside you? I'm asking because I don't know him or what he says.

If he offers a practical means for you to do it yourself, then try the practice he advocates and see if it stirs anything within and satisfies your needs. If it doesn't, try something else. Whatever you choose, you'll have to do it with every fiber of your being.

Maybe the monks were discussing how to do it, how to hone their methods, the difficulties they encounter - practical things such as these??

Discussing is ok, as long as it isn't used to avoid real practice (finding out for yourself). Discussion threads like these, where we offer our ideal of what "it" may or may not be, is a waste of time if you need to find out for yourself. Keep it practical, focus on how instead of what; focus on how and the what takes care of itself. Pontificating about what "it" may or may not be is not finding out for yourself, it's flattering your mind. Nothing wrong with that, if that's what you want.

They are monks because they have dedicated their lives to their chosen practice within Buddhism, that's what they do. I can't tell them or you that they are "doing it wrong" - I don't know what they want.

What do you want?

[indigobusiness]

252. Rigorous debate IS practise, in Tibetan Buddhism.

Good luck in your practical efforts, but keep your lateral lines open.

[Chicago Democrat]

165. Enlightenment is in those fleeting moments of clarity or perfection...

Most people experience fleeting glimpses briefly.

Occassionally a person becomes fully enlightened and godlike, like Buddha or Jesus.

[aneerkoinos]

168. Calamity

It happened to U.G. Krishnamurti and he has answered some question about it:

http://www.well.com/user/jct/
click Mystic of Enlightment from the section "books of", then table of contents and then "U.G", for biography and description of the "calamity". (All the books are freely downloadable and none written by U.G.)


Little taste:


"Questioner: So, it happened to you?

UG: It happened to me.

Q: When, Sir?

UG: In my forty-ninth year.

But whatever you do in the direction of whatever you are after -- the pursuit or search for truth or reality -- takes you away from your own very natural state, in which you always are. It's not something you can acquire, attain or accomplish as a result of your effort -- that is why I use the word `acausal'. It has no cause, but somehow the search come to an end."

(snip)

"Q: But I don't feel it, and you do.

UG: No, it is not a question of feeling it, it is not a question of knowing it; you will never know. You have no way of knowing that at all for yourself; it begins to express itself. There is no conscious.... You see, I don't know how to put it. Never does the thought that I am different from anybody come into my consciousness."



_____________
People call me an 'enlightened man' -- I detest that term -- they can't find any other word to describe the way I am functioning. At the same time, I point out that there is no such thing as enlightenment at all. I say that because all my life I've searched and wanted to be an enlightened man, and I discovered that there is no such thing as enlightenment at all, and so the question whether a particular person is enlightened or not doesn't arise. I don't give a hoot for a sixth-century-BC Buddha, let alone all the other claimants we have in our midst. They are a bunch of exploiters, thriving on the gullibility of the people. There is no power outside of man. Man has created God out of fear. So the problem is fear and not God.

______________
I discovered for myself and by myself that there is no self to realize -- that's the realization I am talking about. It comes as a shattering blow. It hits you like a thunderbolt. You have invested everything in one basket, self-realization, and, in the end, suddenly you discover that there is no self to discover, no self to realize -- and you say to yourself "What the hell have I been doing all my life?!" That blasts you.

_______________
All kinds of things happened to me -- I went through that, you see. The physical pain was unbearable -- that is why I say you really don't want this. I wish I could give you a glimpse of it, a touch of it -- then you wouldn't want to touch this at all. What you are pursuing doesn't exist; it is a myth. You wouldn't want anything to do with this.

[indigobusiness]

171. He's right...

he's unenlightened.

[aneerkoinos]

173. Bah

My Master of Calamity can beat Your Master of Enlightment. ;)

But if you have time and interest, read the description of the Calamity - I don't think you did in that short time.

I'm in the middle of the article "Science and Spirituality: by J.S.R.L.Narayana Moorty" from the same web site, also very interesting.

[indigobusiness]

176. I hope you read my Krishnamurti thread.

You know I love his unenlightened bad self.

[aneerkoinos]

183. Missed it

Link to enlighten me?

(Jiddu or U.G. BTW?)

[indigobusiness]

195. Original recipe

I looked for the thread but couldn't find it.

"FREEDOM FROM THE KNOWN"
http://www.choiceless-awareness.com/jkworks_fftk.htm

[Az]

174. How does one tell if another is enlightened?

Its interesting to see someone dispute anothers enlightenment. Is it because his sense of enlightenment does not fit your sense of it? Is it because it does not fit some other person's sense of it?

This strikes me as curious.

[indigobusiness]

179. Opinion is irrelevant in this entire concept.

Krishnamurti is unenlightened because, if he could have, he would have voted for Bush...just to piss me off.

[Az]

182. A lovely disparity

Our discussion of enlightenment has lead you to talking about being pissed off.

[indigobusiness]

185. self delete....(that was so wrong)

You are right...of course.

[aneerkoinos]

186. If I could have

I would have voted Bush just to piss you off.

To my knowledge I'm unenlightened.

Thus, every Cretan is a lier.

[indigobusiness]

187. But, not every Cretan

is a cretin. Not quite.

[Az]

189. There's no plague in Crete!

Name the musical and win a small moment of enlightenment. :D

[bobbobbins]

240. Funny thing happened on the way to the forum!

i was in that show around here about a year ago.

[Az]

243. Yay!

For bonus points name the Doctor that said the line in the movie version.

Trick question.

[bobbobbins]

244. hmm...i thought Miles said it

but its been a long time since i've seen the movie

[aneerkoinos]

190. Zorba is cretin n/t

[Az]

193. Good guess, wrong theater

Think more humorous. The line was spoken by a former Doctor in the movie version. Think something familiar, something peculiar.

[aneerkoinos]

194. Sorry

Private joke with Indigo.

[Az]

196. Ah

No problem.

[indigobusiness]

198. Zorba is enlightened.

Now...I must dance.

[indigobusiness]

184. Ok...U.G. is a gas.

Tell me something, why is it when he says "mind is myth" I sense he is right...and I find it in no conflict with the dharma teaching "all is mind"?



"My teaching, if that is the word you want to use, has no copyright. You are free to reproduce, distribute, interpret, misinterpret, distort, garble, do what you like, even claim authorship, without my consent or the permission of anybody. " -U.G. Krishnamurti

[aneerkoinos]

188. Easy

All is myth. Which in Homer means word, speech, story... so interpretation.

[indigobusiness]

191. D'oh

Homer

[Be Brave]

192. Enlightenment is a nice, looooong nap with my cat. n/t

[aneerkoinos]

197. Thanks

time to enlighten.

[indigobusiness]

199. Can I borrow your cat?

Mine is defective.

[CWebster]

259. What is enlightenment?

A little personal piece of the mystery revealed.

[ArkDem]

260. The Hokey Pokey IS what it's all about.

[Jose Diablo]

264. Is this thread still running??? n/t

[indigobusiness]

266. Soul

This was posted elsewhere. I thought it might be interesting to some here:

Essentially, we come from the Tao.....and the soul evolves over the centuries....learning lessons.

CASTING AND SOUL CONNECTIONS

The ninth, tenth and eleventh rows on the chart are headed up with the title "CASTING". According to Michael, souls are fragments of a larger unit called the "Entity". Entire Entities are "cast" (formed) from the infinite eternal absolute, the Creator which Michael calls the "Tao". Each Entity is made up of between one thousand and twelve hundred fragments. Seven Entities are cast at the same time, forming a yet larger unit called the "Cadre". The seven Entities in the Cadre are numbered from one to seven. When Entities fragment into souls for the purpose of incarnation, they do so in groups of seven. These groups are called "Cadences", and they too are numbered from one to seven. The seven souls in each Cadence are also numbered from one to seven, and this is their Position. Here we have the explanation of the three columns under the CASTING heading on the chart. The first row, "ENTITY", is the designated number of the Entity within its Cadre. The second row, "CADENCE", is the designated number of the Cadence within its Entity. The third row, "POSITION", is the designated position of the fragment within its Cadence. Like Role, Casting does not change from lifetime to lifetime. After its learning on the physical plane is complete, the soul continues its evolution on the astral, mental and causal planes. The evolution consists of the reuniting and reintegration of the Cadence, the Entity and the Cadre, in that order. (Michael says that they are a reunited Entity, and that they consist of Warrior and King fragments.)

http://www.michaelteachings.com/welcome.html

THE SOUL AGES

Michael says the soul goes through seven "Ages" in its evolution back to the creator, in sequential reincarnations. The Age of a person's soul determines the maturity of their perceptions, the depth of their personality, the focus of their interests, the nature of their ethics, the degree of their common sense, and the breadth of their understanding of the world and of their relationships. However, older souls are not "better" than younger souls any more than seniors are better than teenagers — they are just older. This is not unlike the maturation of people during their lives — hence the names of the Ages. In the following explanation of each Age, the number in parentheses is the approximate percentage of the world population in that Age.

[H2O Man]

267. Hello, Mr. Soul

I stopped by to pick up a reason
for the thought
that I caught
that this thread was the event of the season.

(sorry. can't get that song outta my head today.)


http://h20man.blogspot.com

[aneerkoinos]

268. Synchronicity

Funny, I was just discussing 'soul' on another forum, while you were posting this.

Someone (on that other forum) defined soul as 'potential to feel', sentience. Soon after I was reading Heidegger in the crapper, and came by Aristotles definition of soul as the substance of life, 'usia zoes'. Or, to be more precise, "The soul is what constitutes the proper presence (actuality) of a living being, of a being which, according to possibility, is alive (potentiality)", which is, I presume, English translation from Heideggers German translation from Aristotle's Greek, so that Indigo would finally choke on his pretzel. To clarify - or to further mess up - I inserted the words in parentheses, which signify kind of movement (between potentiality and actuality), implying that what is signified is not a thing but a process. Simply put, Aristotel defines soul as the actualization of the potentiality to be alive.

I, being with potential to name and define, found these two definitions, 'sentience' and 'potential to live' good tools to play with. From Quantum physics we know that particles and molecules and even larger structures in certain circumstances have the potential to interact in "supermundane" way, or "non-locally" as the scientist like to call interaction that is not limited by the space-time structure. So, in lack of a better word, we can say that we sometimes perceive molecules, atoms and subatomic particles as having some sort of sense of each other, sense which affects their qualities and their inner structure (like spin) beyond the simple causality of bouncing against each other in space and time, beyond the affects of the four basic forces, beyond the metric of speed of light.

So, if particle events can be said to be sentient, do particles have soul? Yes and no, according to Aristotle's definition particle events do not have the actuality of being alive while they most certainly are involved in the potentiality of becoming alive. So what is soul? I let you to tie the strings, notifying only that so far the only involvement of a sentient, living being with the notion of 'soul' has been the ability of being with potentiality to name to arise the question about the word 'soul' and have all this fun fooling around with it.

The questions will not end. What I'm really interested in, is the sexology of Enlightment. After such a profound physical transformation that e.g. U.G. describes, do enlightened beings still belong to the same species with human kind, can they procreate with humans, does the sperm and ovaries still match? What about with each other, can enlightened beings procreate with each other, or are they each a unique species? Enquiring minds want to know!

[indigobusiness]

269. That's what you get for reading Heidegger in the crapper.

But you did succeed in Heimliching my pretzel, so there's something to be said for that, in spite of your bad self.

Sounds to me like Soul might be the contact point of an eraser rubbing across a page, where the friction point erases the wrong word.

[aneerkoinos]

270. Look what you did!

Only thing You tied was the shoe-laces of my understanding together and made it tumble down, now the laces are in such a knot that they dont know which one came from the right shoe, possessing good self, and cannot but blame their confusion on the other, the wrong shoe, possessed by bad self.

Rubbers and friction points, what they got to do with my profound sexological question or anything else, for that matter?

[indigobusiness]

271. Behold...

Enlightenment.

[aneerkoinos]

272. Where?

Can you show again please, I was busy tying and untying this knot:

The actuality part of that Aristotle's definition is, of course, as I just realized nothing but the potentiality to be felt, the logically required opposite of sentience. Thus, behold, here comes the latest definition of soul:

"The potential to feel and the potential to be felt as potential to become alive."

Now, it seems obvious that potential to become alive is dependent on the potential to feel and be felt, but what about other way around, is this particular dependence mutual or one-sided? Closely related question is, is the potential to become alive dependent on also something, anything else?

I really have no answer, nor can I now think of a way finding one, I'm at loss here, so I plead to you, to anyone, please, pretty please, try give us an answer to the question or questions above, best you can come up with, in all seriousness, even most preliminary and incomplete answer, based on nothing but intuition, if nothing else comes available. To repeat the main question, it was:

"Is the potential to feel and to be felt dependent on the potential to become alive?"



PS: Didn't you once say that you were in search of a better question? If you still are, might this be getting anywhere near better?

[indigobusiness]

273. It was right there...I guess you missed it.

I don't have a better question, so I'll offer a worse answer:

The codependent potential never rests, but percolates...you are but a bubble of independence.

[aneerkoinos]

275. I cannot help but miss it

Your worse answer is as satisfactory as can be and I accept it thankfully, even though it does not solve the problem, just qualifies the general frame. Percolating, isn't that in other words reductionist process of actualization by constant exclusion of some of the infinite potential? Very Quantum, if I understood you right. :)

What the question about soul (or 'subtle mind' in Buddhist terminology)is about is of course how far can go towards objective understanding of reincarnation by using philosopher's tools. The purpose of which, from their part, is to unveil the truth/world phainomenon by removing and unknotting misconseptions that keep shrouding it by forcing their interpretation on the constant perception/sharing of truth/world phainomenon by soul process.

[indigobusiness]

276. It would help you more if you could.

My pretentious instinct was to answer you along a Quantum context of my limted grasp. My experience rubs up against my entanglements and the sense I get is that the field of infinite potential, arising at every chance, is a big part of the answer. Quantum nature's wave/particle duality cleans up some of the crumbly bits of the mystery for me, when you throw in quantum entanglement. But I don't know how or when it reconciled with the more mundane Newtonian folds of my overall puzzled mind. Its fundamental nature is unknowable. Richard Feynman said "If you think you understand Quantum physics, then you don't." Sounds much like the Taoist saying mentioned earlier. I'm cool with that. But I'm interested in your dilemma. I only wish I could move it forward some. Have you looked at Vedic teachings?

Or seen this thread I started?

I don't know if anything in this will interest or entertain, much less enlighten you. There's much in there for me to chew on, but that's just me. In terms of this discussion, I found the final chapter dream/story interesting. Here you are, in case:

The Human Evasion
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x5249

[sweetheart]

290. That sexology

Whether the enlightenment removes the illusion that sexual desire can
fulfill, cetainly it only raises the sensitivity of the machine by
cranking up the kundalini and making sex with enlightened folks very
erotic and an objective of 1/2 the devotees of any given enlightened
tantric master.

This being, that the master is lucid and reflects the awakening of the
devotee in front of them. As much as samadhi can be transmitted by
touching the third eye, it can as well by sex or no touch at all... but
for those who have the good karma to have sex with enlightened folks,
it energizes them tremendously. I remember i used to be able to tell
who was shagging the master by seeing the subtle glow of their luminous
fibre body.... subtle physical body... aura.... The current-consort
usually glowed like a light bulb far beyond her own kundalini capacity.

Surely enlightenment can procreate, and has, if it is the dharma, but
that it would be driven out of attachment to desire, as most sexual
encouter is instigated, likely not. I have heard, on rare occasions
very enlightened folks talk about the cellular transformation that takes
place with the latter stages of the enlightenment process... that the
physical body itself is affected by the kundalini of the profound
samadhi's.

My master once explained that the bodies we inhabit were genetically
engineered slave-species from atlantis time. The original atlantean
species were very tall, fair and hairless, and landed on earth as
an outpost of a greater civilization that fell long back. They created
"i-robot" bodies to do the busy-work, and imbued in to those bodies
hormonal drives that were not like the atlantean bodies that were
not so hormone driven to reproduce. He used to joke, that his
devotees were mostly atlantean souls reincarnated in half-breed bodies
that genetically want to shag themselves senseless... explaining the
continued and ongoing interest in never getting beyond the sexual
chakra. ;-)

Apparently, the atlanteans were master geneticists and used to create
entire species. Even the dolphin was engineered as a vehicle by
those who saw the coming cataclysm. When atlantis fell, some of those
atlantean bodies made it to what we now call ancient egypt, and
re-established a mystical culture... those atlantean bodies living
long long like 500 to 1000 years... yet at death, even with great
wisdom, the mental registers are cleared out, and the interest
became how to do transference of an ancient enlightened mind to a
new baby. The tibetans still have instructions for this process,
that death might be foregone by the ancient wise enlightened, and
the russian roulette of getting reborn i a stupid family.

When i asked about carbon dating and early skulls of "early man", he
explained that the carbon decay itself and the fundamental physics
of the earth changed with the cataclysm that ended atlantis, and that
the scales they think are linear, or curvlinear are geometric, that
the dating is just wrong... and that the skulls of "early man" were
really the subspecies the genetic engineers had been working on.

He said it was unplanned, but the atlanteans were sexually involved
with their own creations, and post-collapse, ended up the whole
human race as half-breeds.... one part old atlantean long-living body,
and another part genetically-tweaked hormone body... that does not
live enough years to follow the old-path to enlightenment, where one
had the luxury of spending 100's of years getting it right... and
why mystical traditions call the path today: "the short path"...
getting shorter all the time. :-)

[indigobusiness]

274. Reasoning Your Way To Enlightenment

Another board's discussion.

http://p067.ezboard.com/fgeniusnewsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=566.topic


Enlightenment - Why?
http://p067.ezboard.com/fgeniusnewsfrm2.showMessage?topicID=598.topic

[Jim Warren]

278. Can't get there from here

reason, lower case r.
Got us thrown out of Eden and Frodo can't wear the ring.

Hey huckleberry, getting some milage outa that link.

[indigobusiness]

280. Call me huckleberry one more time...

and I'll hound you into animated enlightenment.

[indigobusiness]

283. A Few Thoughts on Gurus

A Few Thoughts on Gurus

Joseph Campbell - excerpt from An Open Life (New Dimensions Foundation, c. 1988):

Q. What about the desire to follow a guru? We see religions and cults based on the teacher-disciple relationship flourishing everywhere.

A. I think that is bad news. I really do think you can take clues from teachers--I know you can. But, you see, the traditional Oriental idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the teacher. The guru actually assumes responsibility for the student's moral life, and this is total giving. I don't think that's quite proper for a Western person. One of the big spiritual truths for the West is that each of us is a unique creature, and consequently has a unique path. . . . Now, if there's a way or a path, it's someone else's way; and the guru has a path for you. He knows where you are on it. He knows where he is on it, namely, way ahead. And all you can do is get to be as great as he is. This is a continuation of the dependency of childhood; maturity consists in outgrowing that and becoming your own authority for your life. And this quest for the unknown seems so romantic to Oriental people. What is unknown is the fulfillment of your own unique life, the likes of which has never existed on the earth. And you are the only one who can do it. People can give you clues how to fall down and how to stand up; but when to fall and when to stand, and when you are falling, and when you are standing, this only you can know. And in the way of your own talents is the only way to do it. (pp. 73-74)

One of the typical things in the Orient is that any criticism disqualifies you for the guru's instruction. Well, in heaven's name, is that appropriate for a Western mind? It's simply a transferring of your submission to the childhood father onto a father for your adulthood, which means you're not growing up. . . . So you're still bound; you're still a submissive and dependent person. (p. 75)

There are two responses that are quite natural to the guru. When anyone becomes a model for you, you tend automatically to imitate him. This is the spontaneous identification, and it's through such identification that something inside develops in you. The second phase is finding your own self. I think that wearing Oriental clothes or assuming Oriental names is not the correct way to go about it. You've displaced again; you have mistaken the clothing for the message, and not everyone who says, "Lord, Lord," is going to get to the kingdom of heaven; not everyone who wears a turban is a released spirit. That's one way to get caught again. Then you mistake a certain attitude or manner of living that has nothing to do with the spiritual life. (p. 89)

To make believe that you're Japanese is just to run off on a detour and get stuck in the woods. It's not in the manner of dress or speech; it's the manner of experience and illumination. So I think the guru can be a delusion. But everything can be deluding. The thing about the guru in the West is that he represents an alien principle of the spirit, namely, that you don't follow your own path; you follow a given path. And that's totally contrary to the Western spirit! Our spirituality is of the individual quest, individual realization--authenticity in your life out of your own center. So you must take the message form the East, assimilate it to your own dimension and to your own thrust of life, and not get pulled off track. (p. 90)

buy this book: An Open Life

snip

http://surrealist.org/betrayalofthespirit/gurus.html

[sweetheart]

284. Gurus can play an important role in awakening

Joseph campbell rationalizes his own life. He was very smart, not
enlightened, and smart is, as we well know in life, not to be trusted
necessarily, as it is not the "mark". It could be an omen, but the
blessing of enlightenment is much more profound.

Firstly, some misunderstandings about gurus. THe satguru (dispeller
of darkness within the light of enlightenment) is inside your own heart.
Sometimes, a person or experience mimics that satguru, and it appears
that the voice inside, is outside, and what is so disconcerting is the
two will be so intimate. Cynical culture writes this off as Deja vu,
or endorphins, but perhaps there is indeed, for some people the path
of the guru.

The objective of the guru relationship is to transform the devotee from
a worldly person to full enlightenment. Obviosuly someone who is not
fully on the path to enlightenment, has no need for a guru or any of
the protocols around such things. As well, Mr. Campbell is not in the
sphere to understand, as it was not his calling.

For most people in life, the guru is their own "common sense", "conscience" or inner voice. It never manifests outside, so they have
no frame to see it as so. For those who have indeed had an outer
guru (an enlightened master), it is totally natural, and not contrived
in the least as Mr. Campbell implies... but a relationship of the
deepest and most beautiful love.

My own guru gave me an opportunity to learn about and approach
enlightenment, that i had access to in no other way. I was worldly,
filled with desires, egotism and self delusions and my guru cut
through it all that i came to appreciate and respect enlightenment.
He even tricked me in to following the pathway to enlightenment by
fooling me in to doing things that were good for me, but that i
did not find particularly important, like developing a career and
getting advanced university degrees, even publishing in academic
journals. I love my guru totally, utterly with no reservations
whatsoever. In his company, there is only enlightenment, a golden
ecstatic aura filling all of life. There are no words for how
grateful i am to have been in his company.

One day, he died. The outer guru went away, and once again, i knew
the same awareness as inner. This, IMO, is what they mean by the
phrase, "if you meet the buddha on the road kill him." That one day,
the enlightened person outside you must go away, if it is ever to be
within. That said, meeting a buddha on the road is a great blessing,
and not to be discounted.

Hardly any people on this planet attain enlightenment, and this
crappy attitude towards enlightened teachers is part of the problem,
not the solution... and joseph campbell is simply sharing why he
himself failed to become liberated... a lesson in mistakes made.
It is a very very rare person indeed who can come to full enlightenment
without the instruction of an enlightened person... so much so, that
it is pretty much impossible.

A guru tells you the uncomfortable truths that your ego does not
want to hear. Jesus christ was a much more onery character alive
than dead, and similarly, our cutlure is so far removed from
enlightened culture, a living guru is actually quite important, if
you are so lucky to meet an authentic one. A cynic might question
the motives and whatnot, but are we not discussing enlightenment?
If you meet Babaji, Socrates, Rama or Jesus on the road, maybe it is
wiser to be humble and listen... to follow them around and listen
deeply and profoundly, drinking of the nectar of awakening to your
fullest thirst. Buddhism has 3 jewels, "enlightenment" (buddha), "community" (sangha), and "truth" (dharma).

The first jewel is the sacred satguru, both within and without.
The second is the spiritual family that reinforces enlightened
liberality in one's life in the formative stages.
The third is living truth, that one live the path of awakening,
mindfulness, or having enlightened life... in every single moment.

The 3 jewels produce the golden light of full liberation. If you
miss 1 of the jewels, you miss enlightenment. No family, and you
get eaten alive... much how many here appreciate DU... "sangha of
kindred souls". No enlightened buddha as a guide, and you're just
throwing darts, like picking random stocks in the stock market.
Just like other areas of learning, having a role model example who
really manifests the pure awareness of enlightened mind, gives a
student something to be inspired by. Much as how you learn
swimming from a master swimmer, why people don't believe you don't
learn enlightenment from a master of enlightenment is really a bit
odd. If you don't believe that enlightenment exists, then that is
a purity problem, and one is not ready for the path, and you would
not trust your guru if you met them... as like Mr. Campbell's aura
was filled with subtle intellectual cynicsicsm... not ready... not
pure enough. The pure hearted, sincere aspirant to enlightenment
is ALWAYS victorious, and all of life is the guru. :-)

[indigobusiness]

285. I don't know about Campbell being enlightened or not.

I thought his point about exotic teachers was a good one. As much as I enjoy studying at the feet of Tibetan holy men, I always feel a bit of an outsider to the milieu, and therefore not altogether genuinely integral. My own failing, I'm sure, but I think Campbell makes a good point about it being a distraction. At the same time, I agree with you, and certainly would not argue.

[sweetheart]

286. His remarks are well considered

In the regard, that culture does not transfer, his point is well made.
Watching western people learn tibetan, pranam, and kissing of feet is
usually humourously awkward as it has no place in the culture... yet
the love that motivates such devotion is quite universal indeed.

My Guru once assigned a series of Mr. Campbell's books as required
reading for a class long back, where the objective was to give a global
coverage in general religious background.. (a comparative religion
course on the cheap.) I found his writing to be a bit dry next to
comparative religion teacher's i've met in university and seminary,
where it is so much more alive, that subject.

I really love the studies of the trinities and the dualities of various
religions and seeing what is common, beyond the words... that after
a global comparative religion course, one begins to feel that religion
is really something where mankind does indeed come together as one,
as the spirit of them all is quite universally beautiful, despite what
the despots get up to.

It seems, all religions are formed by enlightened people, pretty much
ALL. Pretty much all have the concept of a universal conciousness,
god, tao, nirvana, nirguna brahman, holy ghost, gaia, or "the force".
Once the original dude dies in the religions, the confused devotees
who did not get it, try to codify the master's words and holy acts
in to a scripture, or some sort of code. This they perceive doing
for the good of human kind, but usually this very act of preservation
is the problem, and often the dharma of the living buddha must be
reverse-engineered from the writings of people who never understood
what the buddha taught.

This is why i find it more interesting to hang out with the tibetan
and indian variations, as they have a tradition of elevating repeated
enlightened masters in recent times, even living ones now, whereas
western christianity has been used to wage a pogrom of total repression
against enlightenment of any sort, misinterpreting christ as the
exception rather than as the example.

In most all cases, the enlightened people of the day, draw out the
poison of the society much as jesus did, as does Sathya Sai Baba and
Adida (Da Free John.. (franklin jones)), bumping up against the
cultural shackles of institutional doubt and their secular religion
that a society outlives its members.

From comparative religion it is evident the sorts of religious
devotee. Some ARE enlightened. Some are in the direct company of
the enlghtened, and generally persecuted for it. Some are in the
direct company of the direct company and are religious about it, and
may even meet the enlightened a few times. Then there are generations
who never take enlightened darshan (blessing) directly and rather
choose their reflections from books of stories.... and each soul
seeks what is a comfortable safe distance from the light of truth.
That the world is uninterested in enlightenment, and rather focuses
on war, and silly things, is more a comment to the dark and subhuman
interests of its median populace, than that enlightenment is not
shining the light.

So once one realizes the generational nature of religions forming
in to books from once-living direct people... one seeks out a place
by the river of light, that one is most acclimized to spiritually.
For some, nothing but the source will do... and those salmon are
already the devotees of today's living enlightened souls. It is so
miraculously perfect, IMO.... how subtle it all works out that
everyone can find their level and justify it mentally as "right".

[indigobusiness]

289. Extraordinarily insightful and well expressed.

Thanks for that commentary. I can't add a thing. So I'll clip the passage that seems so clear, and beautiful, to me. In light of it, I am endlessly puzzled how we find ourselves in such a calamitous political state.

I really love the studies of the trinities and the dualities of various religions and seeing what is common, beyond the words... that after a global comparative religion course, one begins to feel that religion is really something where mankind does indeed come together as one, as the spirit of them all is quite universally beautiful, despite what the despots get up to.

[roguevalley]

287. its the ability to see beyond yourself and your own needs/wants

empathy of the questing mind

[indigobusiness]

288. I think that's true.

A deep realization of how selflessness is in one's self-interest.

[FlemingsGhost]

291. "The Tao that can be trodden ...

is not the enduring and unchanging Tao.
The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name."

-- Lao Tzu

[sweetheart]

292. Then what is aware of the tao

What is it that reads these words 2000+ years after they were written
and recognizes them as wise. Is that awareness itself the unchanging
tao, always aware across time?

So many folks on DU love Lao Tzu's work, perhaps as it is one of the
few examples of an enlightened person who transmitted his teachings
to be written... as it seems verbal/direct transmission is the
status quo.

Is it perhaps that we are linguistic by the very nature of writing on
DU, and appreciate an attempt to make something named enduring?

Isn't it the irony of the stanza you quote, that those words have
lasted over 2000 years unchanged, with rather the reference frame of
language and culture changing around them.

It also seems interesting, in the historical sense, that any person's
name you can state from history over 2000 years ago, was enlightened.
It seems that the "power" of mystical enlightenment has moved
civilizations, and whilst it is ignored in the present, the "sonic
boom" effect eventually washes away all the lesser powers that the
enlightenment shine from thousands of years off.

[FlemingsGhost]

293. Truth resonates because it is the foundation of spirit.

Sigh ... Now that the words are written, I know them to be false.

[indigobusiness]

296. "Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world."

-Grateful Dead

Isn't that about the Tao waking up to itself?

[indigobusiness]

294. It is that very mystery that provides a path.

Otherwise, a destination.

[indigobusiness]

295. Sweetheart

Why not ask the moddys to move this thread over to Religion/Sprituality so it can be more easily referenced and won't be so quickly buried?

Just a suggestion.