SkyPanther

The thing is not so much the seeking, but the seriousness of it(there should be no seriousness in it at all, it should be sincerity). And further, the understanding that your ego will be with you till the end of enlightenment. Some lucky people get what is called "spontaneous" first stage of enlightenment. People like Tolle, etc. And there are others that have to work toward it. You can work toward it so long as you stick(or realize) with seeing the ego for what it is (a compounded entity), and slowly chipping away at it, till it becomes so thin it pops, or fades away. When that happens you get "full awakening", and along the path you will go through various stages of awakening that technically also mean you are "enlightened" but not fully. Why does this sound so contradictory? On one hand you have always been enlightened, on the other hand you have to work toward it. This is because you are removing the conditioning of society, parents, nature from your ego, slowly unraveling it. Till at the end you see nothing. In essence you forget (then bury)what you were, and the work is to remember (and remove all the cruft) again, but you do that by removing the concepts that bind your ego together as an "I". "This is who I am!".

I agree. And It is already starting to be recognized, but it is called by a different name. "The Overview Effect". Which is pretty much seeing what is, versus what we have been conditioned to think we see. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_effect There is a video of it with a few of the astronauts and people from NASA here:

So something interesting to note at least on the path that is most intuitive for me; the Buddha did tell people that followed his teachings to take nothing on pure faith and probe, study, and see for themselves if his teachings work. Science is about conjecture and refutation. You put forward a hypothesis and test it. You can do the same thing for enlightenment. Find a path that is intuitive to you and follow it; do not mix paths or you will make it confusing for yourself, because sometimes they are contradictory. If you follow it, are you seeing positive changes, are you happy? And the most famous, something you won't hear most religious leaders say: I work as a computer scientist(software engineer/automation), there is nothing in Buddhism, or enlightenment that is at odds with my field.

It would depend on the mindstream of the child, but it is possible that they would get enlightened quicker if they grew up with an enlightened parent(s). Rahula, the son of Siddhārtha Gautama(the Buddha) became enlightened. But this is kind of a conjecture, I don't think anyone can say (Yes, or No) for sure.

This is going to sound contrived, but it worked for me when I used to get depressed when I was younger. Go out into nature; a forest, mountains, ocean, desert, etc (as far away from other people as you can). Turn off your smartphone, if you have one, and just listen to the sounds of your surroundings. Quiet the mind, and just be in the present moment for a bit. As @Sri McDonald Trump Maharaj said, meditation and moderation, work wonders. Staying away from the world of concepts for a bit, helped me a lot.

Something to add to this, the issue is not so much science, as Leo and Neill are saying, it is that most people that take science seriously do not understand that they are dealing with a world of concepts(within science). Math is a concept. So is science, and all the labels we use to identify "stuff". There is nothing wrong with that per se, but the label is not the thing. But even science now is getting to a point where a lot of the classical physics is going out the window: Quantum process demonstrates superposition of ordered events http://phys.org/news/2015-11-quantum-superposition-events.html This is basically saying that a cause can be in the future, and the effect can be in the past. They are interdependent on each other, and local causality is false. Historic Delft Experiments tests Einstein's 'God does not play dice' using quantum 'dice' http://phys.org/news/2015-10-historic-delft-einstein-god-dice.html And this is pointing at local realism being false. Take a look at Indra's net, and how it ties in with science: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra%27s_net#Modern_.26_Western_references

If you take enlightenment seriously you have missed the forest for the trees. Life is absurd, a joke, and not to be taken seriously(but still enjoyed, and be content with), and enlightenment is figuring out why that is so. This is why it is better to be a court jester than the leader, or any other station in life. Everyone else takes themselves, and life too seriously. Interestingly, the Fool is also the first card in the Major Arcana in Tarot. Because the journey/path starts when you figure out that life is not serious(it is "empty")... in reality. The word I usually like to use instead is "sincerity". How sincere are you in your search to realize?

Great video; A lot of the stuff he talks about here are touched on in his book "The Book" I really liked it. There is another video that is connected to this one that I really like as well:

LOL, agreed. I wish you a great meditation session!

It was to either of you. I agree with your perspective. One thing that I did want to add from my experience, is that nature is beautiful...(we even found a pattern in nature and beauty and called it the fibonacci sequence) but so is space, and humanity as a whole, and all the things we have created. With all our struggles, defeats, wins, discoveries, atrocities, hopes, etc... But with that view, is a sort of irreverent metta. Not sure of a different way of putting it. There is peace, calm, irreverence, acceptance, and appreciation all mixed into one state of being. I would not class that as "black" per se, nor "white". The word that sums it up is a happy "ok".

@Isle of View Yes, and something interesting to think about as well, and why some people that are on the path start to feel disenchanted with existence and seek nibbana, moksha, or "release"... Some realize that the self (ego) is an illusion. But it takes a bit to sink in that this is true for everyone as well (every other ego is an illusion, but is taken very seriously by people). Life is a chain in a process, a cause and effect chain, of simple, to less simple, to complex. And this process is true in nature, as it is true in the human (and other beings) psyche, and human (and other beings) culture. Conceptual proliferation, labeling is also part of this chain. Most people see themselves as a byproduct of the universe, instead of seeing themselves as the process of the universe. And since there is no "you", the cause and effect chain is also still in play. You(we) will act out an effect dependent on your knowledge, upbringing, culture, genetics and cause. There is some wiggle room, but it is not "free will" as we know it, it is more "Compatibilism". So, when atrocities happen, things like the holocaust, or ISIS, or whatever other event, all of that is done by us to us, or the universe is doing it to itself. WW2 started because germany and its people were pretty much humiliated (from their egoic perspective) after WW1, and the country went bankrupt. Among other causes this was what led to the start of the rise of Naziism, and Hitler. But you can go down the chain of events and can "blame" some other causes as the "real cause"... like that Germany formed at all. And you start dealing with absurdity. But then it dawns on you, the whole thing is a kind of absurdity. The whole thing falls apart when you realize that the reason you see events like this is because you are still thinking as an egoic "I". You are still living (at least on the conceptual level) in a duality of "I" and "them". Only as you move on this path you get there is no "them". It's only an illusion, "them" is as much "you" as "you" are part of the whole of existence. This is why the Buddhas/enlightened beings let themselves be slaughtered while sending Metta to the cause... (the other being, link in the process). Once you get it, self and the preservation of self, or the chasing of more, is all absurd; a being (awareness) playing with itself for eternity. There is a book that is forwarded by Alan Watts that is seldom taught or brought up by most people seeking enlightenment, but, in my opinion, one that should be read as part of the practice: The Secret Oral Teachings in Tibetan Buddhist Sects Paperback: http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Teachings-Tibetan-Buddhist-Sects/dp/0872860124 This is why I say the "heartwood" of Buddhism is liberation. The absurdity of playing a game of "hide and seek"(with yourself) is only fun till you figure out the game and find what you were seeking. Leo has brought this up in some ways as well, just a bit disjointed across a few videos, and a few posts made here saying the same thing about becoming a hermit...

I agree. As for what the author of that article said, I also agree with you, he cannot say who the teachings are meant for, or not. I think they are meant for everyone. But I think some people will stick to using it as ritual, and turning it into a religion, and others will see it for what it is... a teaching. His interpretation is not just his though, the Buddha did say that some people have too much dust in their eyes, he called beings like this "worldlings". What is wrong is attaching any kind of negative connotations to it. There is nothing wrong with embracing life, and at the same time not clinging to outcome/views, etc. (We also need to take it in the time the teachings were given, where people were looking for moksha/nirvana, a time where suffering was a lot more... pronounced than it is now.) And yes, the Suttas were written down after the Buddha died, thanks to Ananda and his eidetic memory. Incidentally, for those interested, the Buddha died from apparently eating tainted meat (food poisoning/dysentery), he was 80.

Incidentally, arguing the other perspective will be hard for either being to resonate with. If you are full, and someone is telling you how great all this food and restaurant is, and you should really eat more; will sound irrational to the person that is full. If you are hungry, a full person telling you how great it is to stop eating, and leave the restaurant, will sound irrational to the person that is hungry. But neither person is actually "wrong", it is all relative.

Most of the Buddhists I see in monasteries are stuck in ritual, merit, and worship. Granted I have not been to all monasteries in San Diego. The "insight" center I have been to (the ones that are part of the Insight Meditation Society of Joseph Goldstein) tend to be more psychology than Buddhism. Neither of these are "wrong" they cater to people that get value from them. But they do not resonate with me. After I got my "realization", and after I started meditating, the insights kept coming, and disenchantment soon followed. But, and this is just my intuition speaking, some people crave and cling to life, and some do not. If someone would ask me "do you not fear death?" I would answer "I do not cling to life". Here is a different perspective on what I am saying from a Zen follower: It is really hard to explain, but you can be really free, and happy without clinging to either death, or life. And at some point you get the realization that you are just tired of the rounds of existence. Of course as I mentioned, this will only be true for some people... some will fully embrace life, and "the world", and there is nothing wrong with that. It is the opposite side of the coin. One is emptiness, the other is fullness, and one cannot exist (and is meaningless) without the other.

Right, but we are talking about beings that do not look past concepts. The mundane path of Buddhism, is, you are correct the reduction of suffering. This is also the secular path that people in the west practice. But the ultimate goal is liberation. The Buddha called it "the heartwood" of his teachings. Can read the Sutta on this here: http://www.wisdompubs.org/book/middle-length-discourses-buddha/selections/middle-length-discourses-29-mahasaropama-sutta You can, and I do enjoy life... but at the same time I know it is ultimately meaningless beyond the meaning I give it, impermanent, and will come to an end, and with that suffering, disease, old age, etc. And ultimately it is unsatisfactory. All of these are part of life and I fully accept them. But that is also why I see material things as meaningless, or "empty". Each of the steps of the Noble Eightfold Path has a "mundane" and "supermundane"(this is the heartwood) goal. The Bodhisattva vow is taken, usually, by Tibetan Buddhists, Theravada Buddhists think this is foolhardy because only another Buddha can tell if you can actually fulfil the vow. What ends up happening, the theory goes, is that some people might become future Buddhas, but some will not, and they will be stuck in existence till they either break the vow, or meet another Buddha that will tell them "Hey, you don't have the muster to fulfill this path, drop it!" The Buddha we know, took 4 mahakalpas(which is the expansion and dissolution of four universes) to realize full enlightenment. Of course all of this is kind of conjecture as we do not actually "know" if any of it is "true". I do not remember my past rebirths, supposedly that comes as you remove more of the fetters, and become an Arhant.

Alan Watts, and Siddhārtha Gautama.

And so here is the paradox. Concepts and language are the things that propels society. But it is also the thing that keeps beings stuck in Samsara. It is a double edged sword. The more concepts we create and proliferate, the more interesting (relatively) life becomes and the more apt we are to get attached to existence and desire for more life. Look at it like playing a computer game where if you die, you start all over again in "now". If you really desire life, you will keep coming back in now for eternity, but "now" is relative as well, as is the universe, and the planet, and life. The Buddhist path is for beings that are tired of the game. They stop pressing "yes" to "continue".

This is right. "when in Rome, do as the Romans do", meaning words and labels have real world benefit. The computer, The internet, the car, etc, were all at some point concepts, and parts that came together to create what we know today. They have value, and are meaningful. The thing you have to remember, however, is that the words are not the "thing". It is just a pointer to the thing. And sometimes pointers are just representations, stereotypes, or "best guesses". So use them, but don't take them seriously. Because they will change, as all concepts do. For example: This is the first car: This is the state of the art car from today:

Yes, another funny way of looking at it, is taking the "car" out of a car. The ego, previous to you working on it, created habits, aversions and attachment to things it liked or disliked. You (and almost everyone else as well) took those things and created an identity around them. "I like computers, therefor I am a computer nerd, that is who I am". By taking the "car" out of a car, I mean, what part of a car is "car"? Is there a single part of it that is actually something that gives it the essence of "car"? Or is "car" just a concept we created out of a coming together of various things, like engine, body, wheels, chassis, seats, etc, and then agreed. "This is a car!". Your mind is just like that. It has created a concept of itself, a label, and attached it to all the things (memory, genetics, conditioning) you have as an organism. And says "this is who I am". Only there is no "I" in any of the individual parts.

So here is something a teacher once told me. "Wanting your ego to die, is the ego talking." Heh... it sounds kind of counterintuitive (and I actually fall into this trap as well). Think about it, if you want something to "die" it is because you have aversion to it. So your ego has an aversion to itself because it can see it is "wrong" at some level, or hurting you, or because you were told that "ego death" is a "good" thing, so you want it to happen. But the interesting thing is if I ask you "who wants it to die?", your answer would usually be something like "I do". "I" being the ego and its "I don't like it!" applying to itself. Only this will never work, it is like a dog chasing its own tail. The best thing you can do is spot the things in yourself that are actually harmful, based on Greed, Hatred, or Delusion, and correct those. When that happens the "ego" vanishes, like a balloon popping... no dramatic "death".

This is from a Buddhist perspective, so take it with that in mind, and discard it if it does not make sense: What he is describing is also the feeling I got after my experience. The content/peaceful feeling, and a big reduction in mind sticking to bad states and not accepting them. The contentment/wholeness is always present, even in time of high stress it is always accessible. However that is not the "end" of the path, but only the beginning in Theravada Buddhism. It is the start of the ariya path, which are people, (monks or laypeople) who have attained one of the four levels of awakening (stream-entry, once-returner, non-returner, arhant) . The 4th (Arhant) is a person who has torn out all Greed, Hatred, and delusion and other fetters by the root, and is than considered "fully" awakened, or "Fully Enlightened". The first step, which is what he seems to be talking about, is the state where you can see the ego entity as not "self" or not part of you. The illusion is spotted. You still know there is a lot of bad habits to break. But identifying the bad habits and changing them is made simpler because you are not attached to them as "this is who I am". He(or the video creator) is calling it enlightenment; personally, I think it's just the first step after you have realized that "you" were already enlightened from the start, but have forgotten due to having all the conditioning of society, parenting and nature layered on top of you from birth (and past existence). Enlightenment is not a destination, it is a realization of what you(and all of existence and nonexistence) have always been. Just my two bits.

Yeap, usually you will have some form of story about why you are doing something. Ignore it. The story is personal, and the ego asserting its point of view. It's an excuse to continue doing what you have been doing.

You do not need to be perfect. Once you can still the mind via meditation for longer than a few seconds, your focus and concentration is good enough to be used as an overlay on your everyday action. You don't need to suppress anything. But ask yourself what the motivation is behind an action. Is it out of anger? Is it greed? Is it some misunderstanding? If you can see it's not "good" find the trigger that brought up that reaction, and dissect it. At first you might only spot it a few times, but if you keep meditating, keep mindfulness going, you will improve. Remember that perfection is not a possibility in conditioned existence, we are dealing with approximations with all of our concepts, so do not beat yourself up for not being perfect, or even good. The secret is not giving up.

It really depends on the problem. If it's hate or anger, the antidote is practicing Lovingkindeness meditation. If it's greed, practice altruism, or letting things go. Basically first find the root of the problem, and than practice it's opposite. Wisdom plays into it as well, because by uncovering the root of the cause of the problem you can easily spot it if you are being mindful in everyday life. If you suppress the symptoms of the root, it will just manifest as something else. Find the cause, and release it, or diminish it, and the symptoms will fade by themselves.

I apologize for the short description, I am on my phone, so makes it a bit harder to expand the thought, etc. There is a book I really like called "Life is Meditation - Meditation is Life: A Practical Guide to the "Emancipation Proclamation" of the Anapanasati Sutta and Loving-Kindness Meditation" It has instructions for informal walking meditation, and applying it to everyday life. In short "mindfulness" is just observing the mind, and recognizing that it has strayed from its object of focus. Once you recognize that, you release the thought, or interruption, and bring mind back to its object. There are more steps to that, like tranqulizing the body, and bringing up a wholesome mind state (a smile or focusing on Metta), but on the whole it is just recognizing you are thinking, releasing it(take focus away from it, do not push or suppress it) and come back to the breath, Metta, or mantra, etc. The focus can be washing the dishes, Sweeping, cleaning, etc.