Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Reading the Mahabharata Unabridged.
The ego, or how I use the word, is our conditioning and programming, we are born ego-less, we are then conditioned, this conditioning takes us away from our true SELF, we then believe we must find our true SELF, even though this may help, or seem to help, its not a necessary thing to do, we can do nothing, if we are under grace we will awaken, no matter what we do.
Well as I see it, whatever we do will keep us in ignorance, as I have said, we are already there, why is that so hard to see, its our true SELF, or Being, enlightenment usually happens when one has drooped all that they have learnt about enlightenment, its in that silence that we get the, AH, now I see moment.
Unmitigated rubbish.
I keep telling myself Ima write a book. I get but so far and just stop.
That's a lot of words to describe the simple, but that's your way, and I have mine, I have had the so called experience of what is called enlightenment, and I can only speak from that experience. The Buddha had his experience and he also has his way of sharing his experience, the Buddha isn't more enlightened than anyone else, as I keep saying we are already there, we are already that which IS.There is a Buddhist analogy on this. In the Lotus Sutra, The Buddha (I think I mentioned this in one of my many threads; de ja vu) was talking to, I think Manjushri or Shariputra. His disciple asked him what the meaning of life was (not his wording). The layman behind him and his disciples waited for the answer. Then The Buddha looked at his disciple and his disciple back at him and a silence developed them both. The Buddha said, "now you understand."
I always kept that in mind when I think of enlightenment, god, or however one wants to name it. I don't devalue how people get there whether they look forward to a goal, stay in the present, or find themselves in the past, they are all valid.
The goal (just as any other goal, say for work) gives you a mark of where you would like to be; that doesn't mean many people know they will get there. It's a focal point not a replacement for enlightenment.
The present may seem better than the goal; but, then, I see people walking around in circles or on a ball park like lemmings. Yes, they are present in the moment; and, for some, are walking in a circle. That doesn't devalue or replace their enlightenment. It's alright that they see enlightenment being where they are at the moment no matter where they walk forward or backwards. That doesn't change they are walking in a circle.
The past, tradition, might seem the better route. I mean, think of it. If we have children, we may want to give them knowledge we have. If we come together as a family and pray at the dinner table, that ritual or tradition may be carried to their parents grandchildren later on in life. Even rituals in the Church, being part of the past is like carrying the wisdom and knowledge of one's ancestors--humanity--and when we forget where we come from, we forget who we are. That doesn't mean we replace the past for enlightenment. It just means that our enlightenment is enriched by our origin.
I don't mind not having a goal. I find that a lot easier for me in all aspects of my life. I don't care for walking in a circle. So, I am on a journey not running bases. I love to look back to my past but I don't want to stay there.
All of this is enlightenment: our goals, our journey, our tradition. If we took out these things: future, present, and past, what do you have left?
"Being, enlightenment usually happens when one has drooped all that they have learnt about enlightenment, its in that silence that we get the, AH, now I see moment."
I call this standing still. It's like a Christian who says they do not do anything for god. God does things for them. The holy spirit will do things within them. They just move in the present letting their true nature/holy spirit work in them.
The Buddha and his disciple had that AH moment. However, it took a lot of practice, discipline, and knowledge to get there. It wasn't just an awareness. He had a goal (relieve himself and others from suffering). He was in the present (in mindfulness and awareness of the nature of life). He was in the past (carrying on traditions of his culture and telling people to carry his teachings after he pass on-as many Buddhist follow).
He never stood still.
There is a Buddhist analogy on this. In the Lotus Sutra, The Buddha (I think I mentioned this in one of my many threads; de ja vu) was talking to, I think Manjushri or Shariputra. His disciple asked him what the meaning of life was (not his wording). The layman behind him and his disciples waited for the answer. Then The Buddha looked at his disciple and his disciple back at him and a silence developed them both. The Buddha said, "now you understand."
I always kept that in mind when I think of enlightenment, god, or however one wants to name it. I don't devalue how people get there whether they look forward to a goal, stay in the present, or find themselves in the past, they are all valid.
The goal (just as any other goal, say for work) gives you a mark of where you would like to be; that doesn't mean many people know they will get there. It's a focal point not a replacement for enlightenment.
The present may seem better than the goal; but, then, I see people walking around in circles or on a ball park like lemmings. Yes, they are present in the moment; and, for some, are walking in a circle. That doesn't devalue or replace their enlightenment. It's alright that they see enlightenment being where they are at the moment no matter where they walk forward or backwards. That doesn't change they are walking in a circle.
The past, tradition, might seem the better route. I mean, think of it. If we have children, we may want to give them knowledge we have. If we come together as a family and pray at the dinner table, that ritual or tradition may be carried to their parents grandchildren later on in life. Even rituals in the Church, being part of the past is like carrying the wisdom and knowledge of one's ancestors--humanity--and when we forget where we come from, we forget who we are. That doesn't mean we replace the past for enlightenment. It just means that our enlightenment is enriched by our origin.
I don't mind not having a goal. I find that a lot easier for me in all aspects of my life. I don't care for walking in a circle. So, I am on a journey not running bases. I love to look back to my past but I don't want to stay there.
All of this is enlightenment: our goals, our journey, our tradition. If we took out these things: future, present, and past, what do you have left?
"Being, enlightenment usually happens when one has drooped all that they have learnt about enlightenment, its in that silence that we get the, AH, now I see moment."
I call this standing still. It's like a Christian who says they do not do anything for god. God does things for them. The holy spirit will do things within them. They just move in the present letting their true nature/holy spirit work in them.
The Buddha and his disciple had that AH moment. However, it took a lot of practice, discipline, and knowledge to get there. It wasn't just an awareness. He had a goal (relieve himself and others from suffering). He was in the present (in mindfulness and awareness of the nature of life). He was in the past (carrying on traditions of his culture and telling people to carry his teachings after he pass on-as many Buddhist follow).
He never stood still.
