Who here is enlightened?

[Repox]

I am here trying to get my bearings as to what people think or say that enlightenment is and it is an interesting read I must say!

there should be multiple definitions of enlightenment so that we know which one whomever is talking about. and there are but no one knows them.

I first thought I was enlightened when I realized evil is not real or the devil or satan whatever. But that is my perspective.

Yes, the word conjures up several interpretations. For me, dreams have been enlightening because they have disputed what I formerly assumed about God, Satan, paradise, and heaven. I know that is a lot of inf., but these dreams have occurred over a long period, every since about 1988.

 

[Leftimies]

It is now absolutely clear that you do not comprehend what is being said to you, There is nothing that can be responded to here as your understanding is a misrepresentation of the intended message.

Please consider humility as a way forward and learn about what and who you are, that is the journey towards enlightenment. Non-dual awareness will only ever be revealed from within...

I see no dissolved ego in your posts. You talk of enlightenment in such a confident manner - as if you have actually experienced it. Now speculation is fine, when it is on equal and modest basis, but this...gee, I don't know. Let me cite Vasala Sutta for what Buddha had to say on the subject:



"Whosoever debased by his pride, exalts himself and belittles other — know him as an outcast."

- Buddha Gautama, Vasala Sutta, verse 17; Sutta Nipata.

[/I]"Whosoever not being an arahant, a Consummate One, pretends to be so, is a thief in the whole universe — he is the lowest of outcasts."

- Buddha Gautama in Vasala Sutta, verse 20; Sutta Nipata.

So I am not exactly sure what your aim is being all high and mighty.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So I am not exactly sure what your aim is being all high and mighty.

Haha, it must be a result of Zen practice? You must love this little dialog between Zen master Huang Po and a student...

Huang Po: What sort of thing do you suppose the Way to be, that you should wish to follow it?

Aspirant: What instructions have the Masters everywhere given for spiritual-practice and the study of the Way?

Huang Po: Words used to attract the dull-witted are not to be relied on.

Aspirant: If those teachings were meant for the dull-witted, I have yet to hear what Truth has been taught to those of really high intelligence.

Huang Po: If they are really men of high intelligence, where could they find people to follow? If they seek from within themselves, they will find nothing tangible; how much less can they find a Teaching worthy of their attention elsewhere! Do not look to what is called the Way by preachers, for what sort of Truth could that be?

Q: If that is so, should we not seek for anything at all?

Huang Po: By conceding this, you would save yourself a lot of wasted mental effort.

Aspirant: But in this way, all activity would be eliminated. There cannot just be nothing.

Huang Po: Who called it nothing? Who is this fellow? But you want to SEEK for something.

Aspirant: Since there is no need to seek, why do you also say that not everything is eliminated?

Huang Po: Not to seek is to rest tranquil. Who told you to eliminate anything? Look at the void in front of your eyes. How can you produce it or eliminate it?

Q: If I could reach this Truth, would it be like the void?

Huang Po: Morning and night I have explained to you that the Void is both One and Manifold. I said this as a temporary expedient, but you are building up concepts from it.

Q: Do you mean that we should not form concepts as human beings normally do?

Huang Po: I have not prevented you; but concepts are related to the senses; and, when feeling takes place, wisdom is shut out.

Aspirant: Then should we avoid any feeling in relation to the Way?

Huang Po: Where no feeling arises, who can say what is right?

Aspirant: Why do you speak as though I was mistaken in all the questions I have asked Your Reverence?

Huang Po: You are a man who doesn't understand what is said to him. What is all this about being mistaken?

Btw, what Huang Po is trying to do out of kindness and wisdom, is to correct the erroneous mindset of the aspirant whose present approach is to use his conceptual mind to try and realize enlightenment. If one actually understands that the conceptual approach to attain enlightenment is doomed to end badly for the aspirant, there is a great responsibility to try and correct it,..whatever it takes.

If the aspirant gets angry and departs, it just means their ego was not ready to approach the wisdom of the teaching with humility. No problem, there is no point in wasting time with recalcitrance. But the master will always keep the door open if the aspirant wants to return, as many times as it takes.

:namaste

 

[Windwalker]

Haha, it must be a result of Zen practice? You must love this little dialog between Zen master Huang Po and a student...

Does Zen make an aspirant blind to his own arrogance? I wonder.

Experiencing Nirvana, does not at all translate into Wisdom. That's an entire other exercise that uses the mind, as well as the experience of Emptiness. And furthermore, if one views ones meditation experiences as a measure of successes, well, you have the sorts of condescending self-assurance that blinds one to ones own arrogance. We look at how 'deep' we went, when in practice afterward it's taken as a merit to hang on a weak ego.

Emptiness? Big deal. An infant experiences that. Wisdom, grace, and humility? Not so much. Try bringing the two together. Then there's no argument. Words speak for themselves through the heart.

Btw, what Huang Po is trying to do out of kindness and wisdom, is to correct the erroneous mindset of the aspirant whose present approach is to use his conceptual mind to try and realize enlightenment. If one actually understands that the conceptual approach to attain enlightenment is doomed to end badly for the aspirant, there is a great responsibility to try and correct it,..whatever it takes.

And here, you view yourself the Master, assuming we not only don't know these very basic truths, but don't apprehend that we practice them all ourselves in full awareness. That's the problem. Not only are you preaching to the choir who's been convinced long ago of these really basic, and apparent understandings, you assume the choir has no clue how to sing! It's cute, in a slightly abrasive way.

If the aspirant gets angry and departs, it just means their ego was not ready to approach the wisdom of the teaching with humility.

Is this like refusing to read the points others bring up and refer you to because you don't want to expose yourself to any understanding beyond your own? I've experienced this with you in my attempts at discussion with you. You very much walk away, in exactly the same manner you describe above. One finger pointing at others, has three fingers pointing back yourself. You do a lot of finger pointing.

No problem, there is no point in wasting time with recalcitrance.

Sounds just like a Christian fundamentalist!

But the master will always keep the door open if the aspirant wants to return, as many times as it takes.

:namaste

Again, exactly the same. "Shake the dust off your sandals at them", "Hate the sin, love the sinner," blah, blah.

Are you sure you yourself are ready for a lesson in humility, aspirant?

 

[Vinayaka]

Quite an entertaining thread actually.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Are you sure you yourself are ready for a lesson in humility, aspirant?

There's another irony, the natural ego wants to give the impression of humility, and yet gets angry fast when it feels its been humiliated...haha

The soul who has been subject to intense and long enduring humiliation is one who exhibits true humility, humbleness can't be realized through conceptual desire or effort!

Btw, is this thread going to be about me, or the subject of enlightenment?

 

[Windwalker]

There's another irony, the natural ego wants to give the impression of humility, and yet gets angry fast when it feels its been humiliated...haha

Who says I'm angry? You assume so very much, all the time actually, quite tellingly. Do you assume motives of others to dismiss their words that point to the heart of the matter? I think so.

The soul who has been subject to intense and long enduring humiliation is one who exhibits true humility, humbleness can't be realized through and conceptual desire or effort!

Whoa, really? No. What you have just describe is someone whose ego is dying for validation! And rightly so! Is this you?

True humility comes when one encounters that which is so beyond itself, that it prostrates itself involuntarily to a light too great to bear. It weeps before it, in a fully emptying of all pride, only to be filled by it's light and to stand free.

Have you ever experienced this? It puts all things, forever, into perspective. That is humility. It is nothing you do. It it a forfeiture of yourself to that which could crush you, but through love holds you instead in its palm. It is that absolute Love that humbles you. It is knowing that.

Would that everyone did!

Btw, is this thread going to be about me, or the subject of enlightenment?

It would be wonderful if you joined it with us in a discussion of that, rather than placing yourself as someone who knows better than us. We'd love that, actually. You're welcome to join us.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It would be wonderful if you joined it with us in a discussion of that, rather than placing yourself as someone who knows better than us. We'd love that, actually. You're welcome to join us.

You presume to know and judge me adversely because you disagree with my contribution,...wise souls can learn from fools, but fools can't learn from the wise.

Here's a zen riddle for you...the finger pointing at the moon..what is the real subject here?

 

[Ouroboros]

Here's a zen riddle for you...the finger pointing at the moon..what is the real subject here?

I know! Blue! Circle? Wrong finger to flip off the moon? Or is it a symbol for mooning?

Just trying to lighten up the thread a little...

 

[Willamena]

Does Zen make an aspirant blind to his own arrogance? I wonder.

In Zen, arrogance is as naturally spontaneous as everything else.

 

[Sunstone]

Quite an entertaining thread actually.

In a disgusting sort of way.

 

[Penumbra]

Is this thread for people who have had a certain experience during meditation that has been given the tag "enlightenment" or not? It has been called many things in different faiths but if someone has experienced it they would know. It is not a general happy go lucky feeling or experience. Those kind of feelings are nice but that is not the event that so many have tried to explain for eons.

do I just go to my local Buddhist temple or something?

I am not interested in every type of philosophy prancing about in disharmonious play. I am looking for people on the same path so that I can learn something form those ahead of me and light the way for those behind. would that not be the point of a religious forum or a thread about enlightenment anyway?

The thread is for anyone who believes themselves to be enlightened, whatever that means to them, and then for people to ask those enlightened people questions if they wish.

 

[Penumbra]

Clearly those who claim "I am enlightened" are not enlightened, but unfortunately for now are suffering under messianic wannabe delusions of grandeur. It is a kind and honourable action to help the unenlightened correct the errors of their ways.

The ego is forever the obstacle to enlightenment, for dualistic perception can't exist in a state of non-dual awareness.

When the 'I' is present, perceived existence/reality is divided into two parts, 'you' the perceiver and that perceived to be other than 'you', ie. the 'not you'.

When the mind is still and free from conceptualization of reality, there is only non-dual reality.

He who says does not know, one who knows does not say!

I highlighted obstacle as a word of interest.

In your view, from where do obstacles arise? Why do you have obstacles?

This is a continuation of the question I previously asked- in your belief system, why is all of existence not already and always in a pure, monist, state of pure enlightenment without any delusions or duality or any enlightenment to be achieved? From whence did duality arise, and how?

 

[Penumbra]

I'll open the question up to the whole thread.

Most religions have a narrative that explains the need and method to move from an imperfect/inferior state to a perfect/superior state. If a religion didn't have a narrative describing a movement from one state to another, it would basically just say, "You're perfect as you are, be on your way." Very few religions do that.

In Christianity, for example, the narrative is about moving from a state of original sin, via Jesus, to a state of salvation and eventually heaven. In Islam, the narrative is that life is a test, and a person's works and beliefs in this life will result in a heavenly or hellish afterlife.

In Dharmic religions, there are generally two related narratives. The first is the proposal that there is reincarnation or rebirth, and many realms, so people's actions lead them to various realms in this cycle of Samsara. Generally, you'd rather go up than down. The second is the proposal that there is duality, a lack of realized enlightenment, and that even in the best of realms, there will be dissatisfaction and impermanence. So that narrative is about moving from a state of being stuck in Samsara, stuck in duality, to achieving a state of Nirvana or Moksha.

So, religions generally have a narrative about moving from an undesirable state to a desirable state.


The question to proponents of enlightenment here, is why is it that all of awareness in existence is not already in a state of pure, monist, ego-less, perfect, enlightenment? Why does the perception of duality exist anywhere in existence? Why is it that you and others find themselves as mammals in an illusionary world of dualism from which they must escape via meditating to eliminate the ego? What led you to ever have this problem, rather than having always existed as the enlightened state in which you currently attempt to develop? What makes you not perfect as you are?

 

[Windwalker]

I'll open the question up to the whole thread.

Most religions have a narrative that explains the need and method to move from an imperfect/inferior state to a perfect/superior state. If a religion didn't have a narrative describing a movement from one state to another, it would basically just say, "You're perfect as you are, be on your way." Very few religions do that.

In Christianity, for example, the narrative is about moving from a state of original sin, via Jesus, to a state of salvation and eventually heaven. In Islam, the narrative is that life is a test, and a person's works and beliefs in this life will result in a heavenly or hellish afterlife.

In Dharmic religions, there are generally two related narratives. The first is the proposal that there is reincarnation or rebirth, and many realms, so people's actions lead them to various realms in this cycle of Samsara. Generally, you'd rather go up than down. The second is the proposal that there is duality, a lack of realized enlightenment, and that even in the best of realms, there will be dissatisfaction and impermanence. So that narrative is about moving from a state of being stuck in Samsara, stuck in duality, to achieving a state of Nirvana or Moksha.

So, religions generally have a narrative about moving from an undesirable state to a desirable state.


The question to proponents of enlightenment here, is why is it that all of awareness in existence is not already in a state of pure, monist, ego-less, perfect, enlightenment? Why does the perception of duality exist anywhere in existence? Why is it that you and others find themselves as mammals in an illusionary world of dualism from which they must escape via meditating to eliminate the ego? What led you to ever have this problem, rather than having always existed as the enlightened state in which you currently attempt to develop? What makes you not perfect as you are?

This is loaded with many pages of response. If possible to put this in any condensed form in a couple paragraphs, basically how we perceive these things is within a certain metaphysical framework inherited from and developed off of the first axial age in religion, beginning around 800 BCE. It was during this time, the time of Buddha, that religions saw that the material world was illusion and we should flee samsara and seek rest in Nirvana. That was considered enlightenment. Then you have the rise of the nondual schools much later, and so on.

But if you step back and look at it, it still speaks in a basic binary system of hierarchical progression, from the lesser, the fallen state, to the higher or enlightened state, that good is here, and evil there, and we must seek the good and flee the bad. Our minds work off these sorts of models of reality. But reality is far more dynamic and complex than these sorts of systems of thought, these metaphysical models. In reality, instead of a binary system, it's more like a ternary system of dynamism, which embraces more of an evolutionary path. It's not a straight line progression, but rather a looping and turning system, spiraling its way towards a greater and wider inclusion, adding to itself, passing the same points again and again, from every widening perspectives, etc. But that's not what we've inherited in our general frameworks based on binary systems of equilibrium.

So you ask why the world religions think the way they do, or rather express this existential question the way they do? Experience, and models that have been ingrained in our psyches that themselves influence our symbols and our approaches to spirituality, or the state of our being. Somehow, through it all we find our way, through blind luck it seems. As Ian Malcolm said in Jurassic Park, "Life will find a way. It always finds a way".

I'm sure if I spent more time with this I could say this better, but I just blather out there and see what sticks.

 

[apophenia]

In Zen, arrogance is as naturally spontaneous as everything else.

What is this 'everything else' ?

 

[Penumbra]

This is loaded with many pages of response.

Well, we're on page 82 so we might as well keep this rolling.

If possible to put this in any condensed form in a couple paragraphs, basically how we perceive these things is within a certain metaphysical framework inherited from and developed off of the first axial age in religion, beginning around 800 BCE. It was during this time, the time of Buddha, that religions saw that the material world was illusion and we should flee samsara and seek rest in Nirvana. That was considered enlightenment. Then you have the rise of the nondual schools much later, and so on.

But if you step back and look at it, it still speaks in a basic binary system of hierarchical progression, from the lesser, the fallen state, to the higher or enlightened state, that good is here, and evil there, and we must seek the good and flee the bad. Our minds work off these sorts of models of reality. But reality is far more dynamic and complex than these sorts of systems of thought, these metaphysical models. In reality, instead of a binary system, it's more like a ternary system of dynamism, which embraces more of an evolutionary path. It's not a straight line progression, but rather a looping and turning system, spiraling its way towards a greater and wider inclusion, adding to itself, passing the same points again and again, from every widening perspectives, etc. But that's not what we've inherited in our general frameworks based on binary systems of equilibrium.

So you ask why the world religions think the way they do, or rather express this existential question the way they do? Experience, and models that have been ingrained in our psyches that themselves influence our symbols and our approaches to spirituality, or the state of our being. Somehow, through it all we find our way, through blind luck it seems. As Ian Malcolm said in Jurassic Park, "Life will find a way. It always finds a way".

I'm sure if I spent more time with this I could say this better, but I just blather out there and see what sticks.

There's kind of two concepts there.

The first concept is why or how did these religions (specifically the ones promoting various names for enlightenment or non-dualism) develop on this planet. That's not exactly what I was asking. I already have some thoughts and readings on how and why various religions developed.

The second concept, what I was actually asking, is why is existence like this at all, in your worldview? Your answer was all reasonable when looking at it like the first concept, but doesn't address the second concept. You began describing situations that people found themselves in, progressions they made, human psyche, etc. But I'm talking ten steps back- why do people even seem to exist? Why does any being find itself in Samsara? Why would any aspect of existence ever develop any perception of duality in an existence that is said to truly be non-dualistic? Why is there anything other than pure, monist, perfect enlightened awareness in existence?

 

[challupa]

Interesting question. I'm coming into this conversation really late. I also haven't read the whole 82 pages. Got as far as 6.

Maybe we are all enlightened. Maybe we just have decided to forget what we know in order to experience what we already know. Viewing it from a place of 'all knowing' takes the awe out of the actual experience. Maybe we curious beings that like to experience a concept from a place of 'not knowing'. I think far too much emphasis is put on 'being enlightened'. jmt

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I highlighted obstacle as a word of interest.

In your view, from where do obstacles arise? Why do you have obstacles?

This is a continuation of the question I previously asked- in your belief system, why is all of existence not already and always in a pure, monist, state of pure enlightenment without any delusions or duality or any enlightenment to be achieved? From whence did duality arise, and how?

In the Abrahamic tradition, the obstacle arises from the eating of the metaphorical fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, the fall from non-dual awareness to that of duality through self identification with the body in finite time and space. But evolutionary wise, it was the development of individual self consciousness.

The reason behind the fall is, first, so that the spirit of god breathed into the clay experiences existence as a separate point of consciousness and hence develops self awareness, albeit a limited egoic one. And second, so that when it has reached the appropriate level of ego development, it can be integrated back into the pure spirit as an Angelic entity. Angel/Dharmaakaya/etc..

All that exists has always existed, there was never a beginning, nor an end. The omnipresent, omniscient underlying unity is timeless. The eternal dance of duality/ying and yang/good and evil/etc., is maya, only perceived as duality/multiplicity by sentient beings, who, because of their limited design criteria, perceive just an infinitesimal part of actual existence, and imagine their senses and conceptualizations about reality in finite time sequence and local spacial environment is actual reality.

Beyond that, the questions about why it is this way doesn't arise, except in the mind of the unenlightened, absolute reality is just as it is, unspeakable glory beyong understanding,..the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow...

 

[Willamena]

What is this 'everything else' ?

Not something else.