Do you expect to reach enlightenment in this life?

[Aupmanyav]

I also have another question sir.
This, what you say, that you are 80+, is an ignorance based on your Advaita view that, you and body/world are not different. The matter continue to go around.
So your age, is really not 80 now, but about 13 billion years and still counting and don't know when it will end, based on Non-duality. Your brain makes you think that you are 80+ by making duality of "you" and "world" , but not truly that. YOLO is not within 120 years, but actually, YOLO is 13 billion years+. Right?

You are correct. In 'Vyavaharika Satya', duality is present and I am 80+.
In 'Paramarthika Satya', where there is no duality, I am eternal, where the bounds of time have no meaning, and not just 13.78 billion years old.

Nope. There is no 'my molecule' and 'way to you'.
You are the every sub-atomic particles, atoms and molecules. Non-duality - Only You and "You are (or is?) the Universe". The molecules and atoms and the whole universe, which is you, is always enlightened. No 'way to me' for enlightenment. No wasting and preservation of molecules, no differentiation within. No Aup and No Viswa, just the Universe and that's THE One and That's you. Only You are alive as Universe as Always Free/Liberated/Enlightened and no second/other. Right?

Again, you are correct, you understand it. The forum is in 'Vyavaharika', we are exchanging views while in 'Vyavaharika'. In 'Paramarthika', there is no forum, no exchange of views, and I am you and you are none other than me. See, how close you are to enlightenment. Now don't fall back in ignorance. That is all what you have to do.

 

[Viswa]

You are correct. In 'Vyavaharika Satya', duality is present and I am 80+.
In 'Paramarthika Satya', where there is no duality, I am eternal, where the bounds of time have no meaning, and not just 13.78 billion years old.
Again, you are correct, you understand it. The forum is in 'Vyavaharika', we are exchanging views while in 'Vyavaharika'. In 'Paramarthika', there is no forum, no exchange of views, and I am you and you are none other than me. See, how close you are to enlightenment. Now don't fall back in ignorance. That is all what you have to do.

Right, if there is such a 'satya' as 'Vyavaharika'. But there is no 'vyavaharika' at all. It is just an imagined concept to not let ignorance go vanished. The concept of 'Vyavaharika', treating it as 'satya', is a trick to keep duality as Real in Illusion/Thought. It is like an imagined unreal boundary made by oneself as a Truth, and defend their view that what they view is only water but not Mirage in desert. Why to speak about water in Mirage(Vyavaharika Satya - how the water looks, when the water born, what the water does, the wife/sons/daughter/grand of waters, when the water will die, when the enlightened water will liberate bondaged water), if the water is not at all there?

There is no Vyavaharika Satya.
Like you say "Only Brahman. Saguna Brahman is a lie/ignorant concept", Vyavaharika Satya is a lie or ignorant concept.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Can you ignore 'Vyavaharika Satya'? That you feel hunger, cold or heat. Your form mandates that these cannot be ignored. That your country may have friends or enemies? I don't think one can. 'Vyavaharika Satya' has its own place as 'Paramarthika Satya' too has. Both are truths at their own levels. That is what Sankara opined.

 

[Viswa]

Can you ignore 'Vyavaharika Satya'? That you feel hunger, cold or heat. Your form mandates that these cannot be ignored. That your country may have friends or enemies? I don't think one can. 'Vyavaharika Satya' has its own place as 'Paramarthika Satya' too has. Both are truths at their own levels. That is what Sankara opined.

Which is my country? I am Brahman, I am the Universe, which country I 'have' to choose as Mine? I am every countries itself. There is hunger or heat or cold, which I/Brahman sense, as a fire sense heat, as ice sense cold. Fire cannot deny that it sense heat, and Ice cannot deny that it sense cold. I/Brahman sense every aspect as it's own essence. Can I differentiate my essence from me? Can heat be differentiated from Fire? No duality between Fire and Heat, Ice and Cold, and so Me and Every essence sensed.

"Vyavaharika Satya" has it's place to one who is ignorant of oneself. It's place vanish to one who realised oneself.

. If there happens a war, choice is made upon the country which provided food for me, as I am obliged to which satisfied the hunger within me, like Heavenly Gods give Boon to those who provide Sacrifice and satisfy the hunger of those Gods. Food is Brahman. Those Gods can never escape from the obligation of providing Boon as Gods ate the food from the sacrifice.

I am not Indian. I am not the one you see with your eyes and heard as my character. I am GOD, the Omnipresent, all-pervading, One. In your brain/heart I am, in the stone I am. You can see me, if you stop speaking/thinking about "Vyavaharika" and think only about ME ("Aham Brahmasmi") 24/7.

 

[Viswa]

Can you ignore 'Vyavaharika Satya'? That you feel hunger, cold or heat. Your form mandates that these cannot be ignored. That your country may have friends or enemies? I don't think one can. 'Vyavaharika Satya' has its own place as 'Paramarthika Satya' too has. Both are truths at their own levels. That is what Sankara opined.

As per your scientific view, Paramarthika Satya has to include hunger, heat, cold, etc. Those are not "Vyavaharika Satya".

What "Vyavaharika Satya" means is "I am this body, I am this body, These are MY Car/Bike, Here are my Wife,Son,Granddaughters,etc.". "Vyvaharika" means "'I' associating with limitations ignorantly". It's not about denying presence of physicality, but denying the 'self'/mine/ego/etc. It's also denying that physicality is moving, because physicality as a whole never moves, and ignorantly considered moving because of seeing within limited range. No birth or death of Physicality/ME, never there happens a movement.

Physicality never moves, there is no My Body or My Mother or etc. Just Brahman, and that's ME.

The only difference between your philosophy and Mine is, Your Paramarthika Satya sees "Universe as Brahman", but I see "Universe not Me but My Own Essence like Fire and Heat". Never interested in Heat and never interested in sensing heat, but abide in my own nature as Fire. Even if Heat is not sensed and only Cold is sensed from Fire - or Fire helps as heat/light to someone - or Fire destroys - or even if nothing is sensed and be an Useless Fire, Never Mind. I am Fire.

I AM GOD.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I am not Indian. I am not the one you see with your eyes and heard as my character. I am GOD, the Omnipresent, all-pervading, One. In your brain/heart I am, in the stone I am. You can see me, if you stop speaking/thinking about "Vyavaharika" and think only about ME ("Aham Brahmasmi") 24/7.

Kindly do not ask me to do that. Do it to yourself if you do not recognize 'Vyavaharika'. Don't eat anything, don't drink anything. You are God? Are you? You are not God. You are Brahman. And Brahman is not a God. Brahman is what constitutes a human as well as a cockroach. Fan your essence a little more. Then talk to me after a week. I recognize both, 'Vyavaharika' and 'Paramarthika'. I will do what is required of me in 'Vyavaharika'. What you do is your choice.

 

[Viswa]

Kindly do not ask me to do that. Do it to yourself if you do not recognize 'Vyavaharika'. Don't eat anything, don't drink anything. You are God? Are you? You are not God. You are Brahman. And Brahman is not a God. Brahman is what constitutes a human as well as a cockroach. Fan your essence a little more. Then talk to me after a week. I recognize both, 'Vyavaharika' and 'Paramarthika'. I will do what is required of me in 'Vyavaharika'. What you do is your choice.

God, not in sense of Duality speakers but what Shankara said. In Vakyavritti, Shankara clearly describes "Tat Tvam Asi" as " I am God/Ishwara/Brahman/All-pervading/Omnipotent/etc." You may refer talks of Sarvapriyananda in the month of August 2022 in YouTube too. Or else, just read plain texts of Vivekachudamani and many. You may find also in Commentaries of Bhagavat Gita about This, where he says Brahman as GOD.
But It's okay. Brahman (but not God) is well and Good.

The God, Omnipresent is like what Buddha stays in Silence, when asked about God. Neither accepts nor rejects. God, I see, not as n Entity, but the real ME. Just Bliss alone.

I don't eat while eating. I don't act while acting.

These kind of paradox can be understood, only when you cast off speaking/thinking "Vyavaharika", and just BE in ME or Thinking of ME alone.

Yeah, I stopped mostly speaking/thinking "Vyavaharika". Spend time only in preparing for exams and little enquiries/findings about wht scriptures says and feeling "Bliss" (Bliss is the only experience I consider as GOD as Fire and all others are Heat). In Bhagavat Gita, Krishna says "I am Bhrigu amongst Rishi/Sages". I contemplated many times why he/Vyasa said so. Why not other Sages! Why Bhrigu is top amongst sages like Arjuna/Rama in Bow and Arrow!
Then, while reading Bhrigu Valli in Taitteriya Upanishad and while coming to know Bhrigu Samhita in Astrology, I came to know why he is considered as Top. He is the only sage who found GOD only by just penance but not by any knowledge imparted. Varuna just gave a clue "From which everything came and to which everything dissolve, that is Brahman/God, and find it by Penance". He contemplated more and more, whereas other all found only by some knowledge shared by Guru about Truth. Then, Bhrigu finally comes to "Ananda". There he stops. There he says "Ananda, is from and that to which everything arise and settles".
Not just that, he is the true all-seer of three times (the idea of all forms happen), writing down Bhrigu samhita - the real astrology passed down to Brahmins so that Brahmins can hold position in society by helping Kings and survive themselves by rightly finding out what Ritual should be done at which time. No doubt he is top among Sages as Krishna/Vyasa says.

And so, I see, I am GOD, I am Fire, I am Bliss alone. All these, Universe, Molecules, etc., are my own essence, as Heat of Fire, but never interested in Heat like Ignorant and abide in the Blissful Fire.

Stay Blessed (Blissed ).
See you.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I don't eat while eating. I don't act while acting.
These kind of paradox can be understood, only when you cast off speaking/thinking "Vyavaharika", and just BE in ME or Thinking of ME alone.

In that sense, I am also not participating in what I do, since there is no 'I'. So let it be.
To feel that I am doing something is but an illusion.
I do not need Sarvapriyananda or anyone else. I have Buddha and Sankara.

 

[Viswa]

In that sense, I am also not participating in what I do, since there is no 'I'. So let it be.
To feel that I am doing something i but an illusion.
I do not need Sarvapriyananda or anyone else. I have Buddha and Sankara.

Participating is different from desiring. Starting/Beginning is the most important not the process/ending.

Sarvapriyananda, I don't regard him as Guru, but he is very open and straight forward regarding what is said in scriptures. Accepts if he misunderstood in a polite manner, considers Buddhism/Tao/etc. in a better way too. Not desires much respect but just love. Good Guy and just a very little tuning required, not like any other Swamis very ignorant and egoistic.

Yeah, take half Buddha and leave half Buddha. Take half Shankara and leave half Shankara. Those Half Buddha and Half Shankara will make you only more egoistic until you consider their whole view. Shankara too asks Vairagya, Mumukshutva like Buddha says in different words the same. I am not interested to change you, but deluding in their half-name will make you suffer more, that's the dark side of blind-knowledge upon scriptures.

Bliss, the ONE in all hearts/guha, is repeated in mostly many Upanishads, and not just Upanishads but Shankara too. Go deep beyond heat, that's the real source of Heat. Bliss "Paramartika" - is the source of all temporary happiness in "Vyavaharikta". Until you reach that, until it is sensed by you and few good of your surroundings, not enlightened in "Vyavaharika" sense.

You know, even in Buddhism, it is said that, only Bliss can teach you real knowledge. They say it as "Sambhogakaya". Only when you reach Bliss/Sambhogakaya, the intelligible teachings in body/Dharmakaya is imparted. Until you reach Bliss, no true high knowledge of Paradoxes and others, or even Enlightenment possible. Even Dualists enlighten, only when Bliss felt, and devotees do feel Bliss in their presence.

Stick to Bliss, that is YOU. Tat Tvam Asi.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Shankara too asks Vairagya, Mumukshutva like Buddha says in different words the same.

Stick to Bliss, that is YOU. Tat Tvam Asi.

If they talk of 'viragya', then I differ with them. I give importance to 'dharma'. My views have never caused any suffering to me.

"karmaṇy eva adhikārah te, mā phaleṣu kadācana;
mā karma-phala-hetuh bhūh. mā te saṅgah tu akarmaṇi."
Your right extends only to action, not to the result of your action; do not act for the result of your action, do not associate with inaction.

Enlightenment neither has bliss nor sorrow.

 

[Viswa]

If they talk of 'viragya', then I differ with them. I give importance to 'dharma'. My views have never caused any suffering to me.

"karmaṇy eva adhikārah te, mā phaleṣu kadācana;
mā karma-phala-hetuh bhūh. mā te saṅgah tu akarmaṇi."
Your right extends only to action, not to the result of your action; do not act for the result of your action, do not associate with inaction.

Enlightenment neither has bliss nor sorrow.

Oh... You don't act for the results!!...
What is action? What is desired by oneself or what is requested from other as an obligation?
The sufferings, when time comes, will be felt. I think I won't come here to you hereafter, because as you are not true in your speech. Thought that you might be true atleast to yourself, even not to me, so that a conversation can happen. It's okay. I learned many things from you, knowledge and deep thinking, all of such is positive, but now that "what is to be not true in speech and true to oneself" something negative, which might be the end between us until.... you know when you change.

Though it looks like personal damage, I don't do it in anger. Just to show what you are doing. I am not of an experienced in age to point this, but I can see it very clearly your negative side now. So sir, I end with this negative of being untrue.
Sorry.
Thank you.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Of course, as is common, the term 'enlightenment' has yet to be defined and agreed upon here. It's not used that often with regard to the ultimate goal in Hinduism (nirvikalpa samadhi, with moksha as an outcome of that) but is more common when speaking of Buddhism, and I suspect was the English translation of 'nirvana', hence it's more common usage.

When I looked at Webster's, this idea wasn't even there, but there were lots of definitions relating to the age of enlightenment, the European Renaissance, and greater ability to think. This is, I believe, directly related to its precursor, the dark ages.

It is also commonly used as an expression relating to the simple gaining of more knowledge, as in 'please enlighten me on the subject'.

Perhaps it would be useful for each poster to explain what it means to them personally.

Enlightenment in my personal belief is living in a way that life is worth dying for. For me that means learning acceptance, detachment, and self awareness of your mind patterns, meanwhile striving for goals and being prosperous.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh... You don't act for the results!!...

A little correction. I work for results but do not pine for results, because as Krishna says this is not in my hands. There is a subtle difference.
In essence, the message is that you do your action according to 'dharma' and forget about it.

 

[Viswa]

A little correction. I work for results but do not pine for results, because as Krishna says this is not in my hands. There is a subtle difference.
In essence, the message is that you do your action according to 'dharma' and forget about it.

Krishna never ask to "work for results but forget/not pine for results".

See, in every action, there is a start-middle/process-end. What you say is, you do start and process action based on certain result/end, and at the end you forgo. But Krishna not say so.

Krishna says, to start-and process/middle, not based on end of certain result, because all results are "Vyavaharika" (I/self centred), but only do it as duty.
Say, you fight a war, not fight as "my country" should win, but start with a mind "win or lose, whatever it might be, I do it as my duty". Mind should not be at any result, from the start till the end of action, as every result is ego-centric (favourable for me, is opposing others). It's like Bhishma, "let Gauravas/Adharma or Pandavas/Dharma win, I do what is my duty as a Battle Chief, both in Kurukshetra war and in Virata war in after 12 year if Pandava Vanavasa. I advice what is Dharma to King, but whatever the King decide, I abide to King and fight as a duty". Likewise Kumbhakarna, etc.

See sir, I know you will say to this as "If it is so, then I differ from BG, Shankara, Buddha, Krishna, etc.", then go on saying "My guru is Shankara and Buddha and Blah Blah Blah" and do the same actions with ego-centric result oriented mind and suffer of that. Suffering is not just weeping, but even a slight dissatisfaction if a result is not achieved, is itself a suffering. If one is not oriented to results, they have to "start" and "proceed in middle" without a thought about result, but only as a duty. But you, won't will look into it what Krishna/Shankara/Buddha points, and defend only your ego-centric views, being untrue to yourself.

Yesterday, I felt I was leaving with a negative impression upon you. But now, I got a good learning about "Why God reveals only to one who is true in speech and true to oneself". Whomever is not true in speech and true to oneself, and speak religious stuffs, is a ego-centric religious fools and not fit to get real knowledge and you know what not. Very much worry that, you come under that now. Hope you soon snap out of it and so every ignorant ones.
From the learning, I decided that, to speak these things only to one "who is really true in speech and true to oneself" like Arjuna, Yudhistra, but not like Saguni,etc.. Before I never mind the second person's intentions/actions while speaking those - let be Aupmanyav, Nobody, Miss, Still Waters, etc., like that. But no fake hereafter, and only speak these to those who are true and serious. Speaking these with Ignorant ego-centric untrue fools, even Knowledgable become fools. I understand now why Buddha and Sages remained silent to those ego-centric fools, as because they are untrue in speech/action towards oneself, and those Sages only accept those as devotees who are very true and serious in thought-speech-action.

Thank you for the lesson.

 

[Viswa]

Hello Aup.

From the learning, I decided that, to speak these things only to one "who is really true in speech and true to oneself" like Arjuna, Yudhistra, but not like Saguni,etc.. Before I never mind the second person's intentions/actions while speaking those - let be Aupmanyav, Nobody, Miss, Still Waters, etc., like that. But no fake hereafter, and only speak these to those who are true and serious. Speaking these with Ignorant ego-centric untrue fools, even Knowledgable become fools. I understand now why Buddha and Sages remained silent to those ego-centric fools, as because they are untrue in speech/action towards oneself, and those Sages only accept those as devotees who are very true and serious in thought-speech-action.

Thank you for the lesson.

I feel, this practice is very tough, as in other spiritual forum yesterday and today - I totally lost.

I found that, "Once I am in Contemplating 'I AM GOD/Brahman', the practice of silence is very easy, whereas if I am not contemplating that any moment, I become foolish and ignorant".

Though no Maya and only Brahman, I fix my mind now to contemplate that "I (I/me - not body, not mind) am God, the all-knower, the Lord of the senses and Mind, the in-dweller in all hearts, the only ONE in all things, no second", as much as I can until the day no foolishness and Ignorance and fear comes up, and be the Lord himself, like the all-seer Bhrigu - being the embodiment of wholesome knowledge.

I am very egoistic, and I am now fixing me (not body/mind, the ego) upon GOD, and so after one day never the ego arise. Until that day, I feel I keep on contemplate as much as I can, and not being around if the practice has no distraction.

Nice meeting you all and learning much. Thanks a lot.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Aren't we already enlightened? And if so, doesn't that mean in all literal senses that there is nothing to strive for or not strive for? Aren't we just building castles in a sandbox?

 

[YmirGF]

Enlightenment is available to anyone. It's not a question of belief. Believing isn't a path to liberation. Action, devotion, and knowledge are.

I've always been an extremist, so I'd be more inclined to say that "enlightenment" is somewhat inevitable for the average human animal. In general terms, we do all grow and accrue wisdom and vision through our mistakes and errors, just by the process of living. Whether formal "enlightenment" exists is anyone's guess, but it does seem to be more of a pipe dream with the passage of time.

 

[ajay0]

Aren't we already enlightened? And if so, doesn't that mean in all literal senses that there is nothing to strive for or not strive for? Aren't we just building castles in a sandbox?

An enlightened person is not under the grip of karma or unconscious tendencies of strong desires like craving-aversion (raag-dvesh), manifesting as vices like greed, lust, hatred, egoism, inordinate attachment, addiction and others.

Yes, a serial criminal or drug addict or tyrant or neurotic/psychotic person has the Self or Buddha nature within them, but it is of no utility to him or the world around, unless the layers of unconscious tendencies are cleansed by spiritual practices like mindfulness, total love, self-inquiry, virtuous conduct and service.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Aren't we already enlightened? And if so, doesn't that mean in all literal senses that there is nothing to strive for or not strive for?

Enlightened to what?

Aren't we just building castles in a sandbox?

There are no castles. There is only sand.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Enlightened to what?


There are no castles. There is only sand.

There is no sand. There is only...

whoa...I'm getting dizzy!