Is Enlightenment a Choice?

[Truthseeker]

Does one, at some point in their life, make a moral or ethical conscious choice to become enlightened or to have enlightenment experiences?

Is it experience, mystical or otherwise, that either leads one to the path of enlightenment or to automatically 'become' enlightened? Or does one become familiar with the term and its definition and make the choice to seek enlightenment?

What measure of discipline, if any, in your opinion, does it take to become enlightened or to have an enlightenment experience?

Most importantly, is my fashion sense really all that bad?

I think when you decide to look at ideas relatively independently, then you are on the road to enlightenment.

 

[blü 2]

Does one, at some point in their life, make a moral or ethical conscious choice to become enlightened or to have enlightenment experiences?

Um, what are we talking about here?

Do you mean the habit of skeptical thinking, as in the Enlightenment?

Do you mean the habit of credulous thinking, like the need to be Born Again, or to access those Higher Planes of Being, or otherwise to prefer stories to information?

It may be that skepticism and credulity ─ and indeed, indifference ─ are all matters of temperament.

And even if they are, it may simultaneously be that the environment in one's infancy exerts a strong influence.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Does one, at some point in their life, make a moral or ethical conscious choice to become enlightened or to have enlightenment experiences?

Is it experience, mystical or otherwise, that either leads one to the path of enlightenment or to automatically 'become' enlightened? Or does one become familiar with the term and its definition and make the choice to seek enlightenment?

What measure of discipline, if any, in your opinion, does it take to become enlightened or to have an enlightenment experience?

Most importantly, is my fashion sense really all that bad?

As far as understanding God's word and having eyes opened for salvation? That requires help from God

Psalm 119

 

[Sunstone]

Do you mean the habit of credulous thinking...

Could you elaborate, please?

 

[blü 2]

Could you elaborate, please?

Giving story precedence over evidence, for instance.

Or deeming it unnecessary to examine the correctness of a statement because one has wished a favored status on it.

Things of that sort.

 

[Sunstone]

[

I think when you decide to look at ideas relatively independently, then you are on the road to enlightenment.

Probably.

 

[sandandfoam]

I think when you decide to look at ideas relatively independently, then you are on the road to enlightenment.

I wonder whether independent thinkers are just another group?

 

[sandandfoam]

Does one, at some point in their life, make a moral or ethical conscious choice to become enlightened or to have enlightenment experiences?

Is it experience, mystical or otherwise, that either leads one to the path of enlightenment or to automatically 'become' enlightened? Or does one become familiar with the term and its definition and make the choice to seek enlightenment?

What measure of discipline, if any, in your opinion, does it take to become enlightened or to have an enlightenment experience?

Most importantly, is my fashion sense really all that bad?

Absolutely. The choice mostly is conscious. Enlightenment, to my mind, is a belly laugh, a couple of pints, the outdooors, good company, or my team winning. Amongst many other things.
I can't choose whether my team wins, but I can choose my team. I can't open the pub when it's shut, but I can rock in when it's open. Situated freedoms, I'm all for them.

The esoteric guff has it's adherents - but that choice looks like a dead-end to me.

 

[Ponder This]

Fascinating question! Could you elaborate a bit on that?

The question seemed to be asking about the morality of enlightenment itself, but if you look carefully, it's about the choice to pursue enlightenment. Motivations can be good or bad, selfish or compassionate. This is true regardless of the morality of enlightenment itself (to which we do not attach desires). Therefore, the choice to pursue enlightenment and the means by which it is pursued depend on the motivations of the person doing the pursuing.

If you want to announce, "Look at me; I am being moral/ethical, because I am pursuing enlightenment, which is a worthy goal," stop and examine: why you are really pursuing enlightenment?

 

[Dantedeven]

Enlightenment has no morality. Because someone that is enlightened does not see duality. Someone that is selfish in nature cannot achieve enlightenment because he clings to material objects. Someone that is bad cannot achieve enlightenment because his mind is occupied with the harm of others. Someone that must confirm constantly that he is good cannot achieve enlightenment because he must think that some others are bad compared to him, thus he carries haughtiness. Someone that is compassionate, perhaps. But that is only if their compassion is honest. And not in the mode of passion. And that is something that only that person knows.

Absolutely. The choice mostly is conscious. Enlightenment, to my mind, is a belly laugh, a couple of pints, the outdooors, good company, or my team winning. Amongst many other things. I can't choose whether my team wins, but I can choose my team. I can't open the pub when it's shut, but I can rock in when it's open. Situated freedoms, I'm all for them.
The esoteric guff has it's adherents - but that choice looks like a dead-end to me.

They say ignorance is bliss. And this is correct when you consider the knowledge regarding duality. Out of a thousand vices, in the end it is only the individual that decides whether or not someones Karma is considered a vice or not. It is not about good or evil, right or wrong because all these things are always personal opinions based on something (Or someone) outside of the body. (That is good, he is wrong, I am good, i am right) Righteoussness remains divine, because we have free will. This life is about sukha and dukkha in the end. If your sukha causes dukkha in others, you are not enlightened, you will suffer. Only you know what your sukha is and only you know what your dukkha is

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Does one, at some point in their life, make a moral or ethical conscious choice to become enlightened or to have enlightenment experiences?

Is it experience, mystical or otherwise, that either leads one to the path of enlightenment or to automatically 'become' enlightened? Or does one become familiar with the term and its definition and make the choice to seek enlightenment?

What measure of discipline, if any, in your opinion, does it take to become enlightened or to have an enlightenment experience?

Most importantly, is my fashion sense really all that bad?

To Question 1: I don't think so. Enlightenment in the Buddhist understanding transcends the self and other paradigm of all choice.

2) The Buddha is someone that had experience to talk about that, while I have only speculations. One that does stick out to me in the discipline department that he spoke of regards sex. The Buddha chastens one of the monks very seriously in the monastic rules because he allowed himself to be coaxed into sex by his family and former lover.

The Buddha said in very strong terms: I have told you that one tied down by such things cannot even achieve a jhana, much less Nirvana

3) I mixed up questions 2 and 3 it seems. I am tired, so consider this question 2's response.

In Buddhism one can touch enlightenment spontaneously, but there is an element of ignorance. It's like a kid playing with a fire without knowing what they're doing. Knowledge is one of the necessary aspects to perfect enlightenment. That's why no Dharmic religion encourages solitary practice without a teacher.

A person that randomly and briefly touches Nirvana has no idea what to do with the insight gained, especially if they are still bound in all kinds of appetites.

4) I don't know what you'd expect me to judge your fashion sense by